Jump to content

Talk:Dick Cheney/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

I'm not knowledgeable enough to fix this but something is wrong...

The article says he's the 47th president of the united state and I think barak obama is like the 44th or something, it also says he's been the president from 2001 - 2009 which is also totally wrong... I don't know anything about dick cheney but if this information is wrong I wonder what else is... DreamWings (talk) 13:28, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: I think you're confusing president with vice president. Everything seems right to me. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Secret Service protection

Does anyone know in reputable sources if Cheney still has Secret Service protection and if not, when it was ended? 74.69.9.224 (talk) 23:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2013

Please keep "attended the University of Wyoming where he earned a BA in Political Science" Please change "attended the Univ. of Wyoming where he earned ..... an MA in Political Science" to Univ. of Wisconsin. This info is available in the the bestselling book "Angler" by Barton Gellman. 204.195.110.27 (talk) 06:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)GRW

Not done: A quick Google search gives me a great many sources that disagree with you, not to mention the source cited in the article which includes a quote from Cheney. --ElHef (Meep?) 02:40, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Add book review

saying a group is a "positive" influence is not the same as supporting the group

Nuff said -- the use of having him be quoted as saying that, among other groups, the Tea Party is a net positiove for the Republican Party is not sufficient by a mile to list him as "associated" with the Tea Party, nor is it sufficient to assert he "publically supports" it either. Collect (talk) 17:37, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Criticism/war crimes allegations

My recent addition was removed here, for BLP and recentism. I understand this is a high profile GA-class BLP article, but per WP:PRESERVE, I've included the deleted section here on the Talk page, in case elements of it might be deemed useful, by editors, in some other form?

Criticism of Dick Cheney
In August 2011, Lawrence Wilkerson, a former aide to Colin Powell, claimed that Cheney feared being tried as a war criminal, for his role in approving waterboarding and other controversial interrogation techniques.Grier, Peter (31 August 2011). "Might Dick Cheney really be tried for war crimes?". Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 24 September 2011. During an appearance on Fox News Sunday, Cheney dismissed Wilkerson's claim, while stating that he accepts that "there are a lot of people out there who don't like me, don't like what I did in public life, disagree fundamentally with my views."Jackson, David (4 September 2011). "Cheney: War crimes claim is 'cheap shot'". USA Today. Retrieved 24 September 2011.
In September 2011, prior to a visit by the former vice president to Vancouver, Human Rights Watch called upon the Canadian government to bring criminal charges against Cheney under the terms of the Convention Against Torture for the alleged torture of Canadian citizens Maher Arar and Omar Khadr."Prosecute Dick Cheney for torture, human-rights group tells Ottawa". Globe and Mail. Canadian Press. 24 September 2011. Retrieved 24 September 2011.

I see from the Talk page archives that there have been some other attempts or suggestions to add content on possible war crimes charges. I do believe that this issue isn't going to just go away, and like the issue raised in Henry_Kissinger#Controversy, it will have some kind of lasting notability, but I admit that may be WP:CRYSTAL on my part, for now. Thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:03, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Support - I agree with the need for this section, and applaud you for creating it. I hereby call for the return of the section to the article. This is not a matter of POV, it is a matter of fact. Jusdafax 02:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks but in fairness to Fat&Happy, I can see that undue weight and recentism have to be taken into account. Cheney is a public figure and has been criticized by many, and Wilkerson's claim is just that. Human Rights Watch's call for arrest is just a PR stunt: I doubt the Canadian government, which has been closely linked to Bush/Cheney, will even acknowledge it. Now, if a sovereign state actually charges him in absentia somewhere, I think there'd be no question of adding that. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:23, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Again, I agree. Jusdafax 03:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Re: "Canada's Official Opposition," a single MP i.e. Don Davies hardly strengthens the case substantially. – Lionel (talk) 11:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Davies is more than just a "single MP": he is the Official Opposition's Immigration Critic, which means that he is the Official Opposition counterpart to Immigration Minister Jason Kenney in the Official Opposition Shadow Cabinet (Canada), where he and his colleagues are responsible for "disseminating the party's policy positions." Just as Kenny speaks for the government on immigration matters, Davies will speak on behalf of the Official Opposition. I keep stressing the "official" part of that because as Official Opposition (Canada) states, "it is also generally viewed as the alternative government or "government in waiting". Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
First, a lot of editors have worked hard to keep criticism integrated into the whole of the article instead of starting a "Criticism" section, a practice that is discouraged by WP guideline, so I consider your original edit to be of poor quality and poorly considered, and revertable on that basis alone. Second, there is a lot, and I do mean a *lot*, of criticism about Cheney as a "war criminal", almost all of which is political rhetoric that has no place in a BLP. Any edit to introduce such language as this into a BLP must have impeccable sourcing from multiple RSs. So far as I understand the proposal, the report is political speech from an opposition party, and so far does not appear to be notable enough to rise to the standard of BLP reliable sources.Jarhed (talk) 17:11, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Also, I would appreciate an acknowledgement that you understand the gravity of the charge that is being made here. Forget this or that election, "war criminal" is a term reserved for some of the most monsterous acts in human history. This is a very high bar that you are trying to jump.Jarhed (talk) 17:15, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I do understand the gravity. And I can appreciate why this has been flagged with the activepol banner. I never stated that Mr. Cheney is a war criminal, only that I felt that the level of international accusations of same were approaching notability. I also felt that the article might be adapted to reflect what a divisive figure he is -- as Mr. Cheney himself admits in the Fox News quote. But I'm glad that this article is being watched by competent and mature editors, with the best interests of WP in mind, and I don't intend to pursue this. best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:52, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks and I assure you that I am doing my best to be an NPOV contributor to this article. I want Cheney's public actions to be thoroughly documented in accordance with WP guidelines and BLP policies.Jarhed (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
I also feel that international (and national) accusations against Cheney of war criminality have reached a point of notability for the article. Jusdafax 05:09, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I also understand the gravity. But since Cheney has been indicted (and even convicted in absentia), leaving this information out of the article seems partisan and US centric. See Canada, Belgium, Malasya, and the definition of warcrimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.152.37 (talk) 19:32, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Doesn't he have 7 grandchildren by now? 5 from his elder daughter and two from his younger daughter? cheers, erter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.188.24.13 (talk) 23:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Why is there no mention of his conviction in absentia? It might be controversial, if you consider the legality of this conviction, but it still happened and should be mentioned as a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.113.102.84 (talk) 20:35, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikiganda

Seriously. I understand that no one wants Wikipedia to devolve into libel and flame wars, but this man is widely considered by millions of people to be one of the most evil human beings of the last fifty years, and yet there is nary a mention of anything in this article. Likewise for figures like Donald Rumsfeld. They perpetrated a conflict that was unnecessary and resulted in the loss of millions of lives. Being fair and balanced is one thing, avoiding points of view is one thing. Denying humanity is quite another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.207.237 (talk • contribs) 13:13, August 12, 2014‎

Please feel free to make suggested additions with appropriate reliable sources. Then discussion can be had and hopefully consensus achieved on such changes. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Union of Opposites ‖ 17:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
lol, thinking Wikipedia is a credible source for ANYTHING beyond being a joke and a blog for fun edits. Get over yourselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.110.226.232 (talk) 17:58, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
I would have thought that the New York Times calling for his prosecution for war crimes would have been notable, but I guess not! fishhead64 (talk) 21:44, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
The Times' call meets the criteria under WP:NOTE in my book. Quite simply, the stand by the Times is historic, and I strongly think regardless of editors' views of Cheney that the information must be included. Not to do so is blatant censorship. Jusdafax 22:02, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
I'll wait a few days to see whether other editors either want to chime in on this subject, or whether someone more conversant with this subject wants to tackle expanding on this significant development in Cheney's biography. If not, I'm willing to tackle it myself, unless there are compelling arguments against the notability of the war crimes accusations. fishhead64 (talk) 03:39, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Okay, it's been a week since I initiated this discussion. I haven't time at the moment, but I'll attend to updating the article this weekend. Last call for a more knowledgeable editor! :) fishhead64 (talk) 07:05, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree. Setting aside the arguments about Iraq as a war of aggression, the calls for the prosecution of "the architects of torture" (and some specifically for Dick Cheney's prosecution for complicity in war crimes) have grown too numerous to justify excluding. For example:
Omitting the above would be a whitewash, not NPOV.-Ich (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

As "draft dodger", "chickenhawk", etc.

RS criticizing Cheney as a draft dodger[1], a “self-confessed draft dodger”.

Tam Dalyell, the Labour MP, father of the House of Commons and one of the leading rebel voices against war with Iraq, said: 'This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.
'This is a blueprint for US world domination -- a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing.'[2]

--Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 00:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

And your disdain for WP:BLP has been repeatedly noted. The term "chickenhawk" is a pejorative ascribable at most as "personal opinion". "Draft dodger" is a criminal charge, and forbidden under WP:BLP as such. Cheers. Collect (talk) 14:58, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Here is a peer-reviewd source that notes both Newsweek and The Nation with respect to the "chickenhawks" characterization, and also mentions avoiding the draft.War Beyond the Battlefield edited by David Grondin, Routledge, 2012
--Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 16:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Quotes on President Obama

During a recent interview, Cheney called President Obama "the worst president in [his] lifetime", among other strong quotes [3][4][5]. I feel this should somehow be incorporated into the "Views on President Obama" section. 69.73.10.197 (talk) 17:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

And the encyclopedic value is? Collect (talk) 21:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
None from a historical perspective.--TMCk (talk) 22:26, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Just seems to me if you're including the "In 2014 while being a guest on Sean Hannity show he called Barack Obama a "weak President" amid the Ukrainian unrest.", you should also include the general "the worst president in my lifetime" quote. Plus if you're including the random quote on the Ukrainian unrest, why not also include Cheney's "playing the race card" quote [6] while referring to Obama? Where do you draw the line and declare which quotes are worthy? 69.73.10.197 (talk) 06:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 March 2015

Self-proclaimed Vice-President of the United States when there is no such thing. 219.77.115.139 (talk) 10:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Pretty sure that position does exist. -- haminoon (talk) 11:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Live torture sessions ?

Is it true ?! http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/14752

Quote from 'The Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture is nothing compared to the Panetta Review':

'WMR has reported in the past that the sexual torture and humiliation of prisoners at Abu Ghraib; Guantanamo Bay; Afghanistan’s “Salt Pit” or Detention Site COBALT, north of Kabul; Stare Kiejkuty or Detention Site BLUE in northeastern Poland; and Detention Site BLACK at the Mihail Kogalniceanu airbase in Romania were video-streamed via an encrypted link to Vice President Dick Cheney’s office in the Old Executive Office Building, next to the White House, where Cheney and selected individuals amused themselves by watching live torture sessions, including sexual abuse. Some of the video-streaming of torture was, according to our sources, viewed not only by Cheney but by his close friend and confidante Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Vice Presidential Chief of Staff David Addington, and Vice Presidential counsel I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.38.104.214 (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Note: WMR refers to Wayne Madsen. Reading his Wikipedia page makes it pretty clear to me he does not qualify as a Reliable Source.-Ich (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Selective Service reference.

"Initially, he was not called up because the Selective Service System was only taking older men." What does this sentence mean? Initially, when? How old? The upper age limit was 26 at the time. Was it a policy or an informal practice? I know a number of men born within a year of Cheney who were selected as soon as they graduated from high school and reached their eighteenth birthday.Euonyman (talk) 14:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I have revised the section and added a citation. Cheney was exempted because he was a married man and, at the time, the draft did not encompass married men. When the draft was extended to include childless married men, he applied for various deferrals and was ultimately deferred due to his daughter being born, until he turned 26 and became ineligible.-Ich (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 October 2015

Please change Cheney voted against establishing a national holiday in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. to Cheney voted in favor of establishing a national holiday in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Source : govtrack.us https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/98-1983/h289 Alex4995 (talk) 00:10, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Not done: The article already says that he voted for it, after initially voting against it. RudolfRed (talk) 16:50, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Edit request on December 8 2015

Within the "Leadership"-section within the "Tenure"-section within the "U.S. House of Representatives"-section, the same source (http://www.si.edu/about/regents/members.htm) is cited twice for the same claim (The "In 1987, he was elected Chairman of the House Republican Conference. The following year, he was elected House Minority Whip"-claim). Isn't that redundant? Shouldn't one of them be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.23.43.88 (talk) 19:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Dick Cheney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:15, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dick Cheney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Cameo in the movie Talledega Nights

He played a cameo in the original, uncut, 2006 movie, Talledega Nights. Near the end of the movie, he is sitting in a luxury box, when he suggests that Halliburton is a good stock to buy into at the time.

Information of him in the movie is all but impossible to find on the internet. Years previous to this, one could find it.

It should be made public, as he was vice president at the time, and it was in a major Hollywood picture.

Thank You

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 153 external links on Dick Cheney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


Conflict of Interest

Fat&Happy reverted my edit that simply stated Cheney's conflict of interest via his financial ties to Haliburton (a major contractor in Iraq). So I propose the following, unfortunately much longer, version:

Although unexercised stock options and deferred salary "are among those benefits described by the Office of Government Ethics as 'retained ties' or 'linkages' to one's former employer", Cheney insisted that his unexercised stock options and deferred salary from Haliburton were not financial ties that constituted a conflict of interest while Vice-President of The United States of America.

That's using the same CBS citation as before. The other citation (from a video documentary) isn't really necessary but it already existed on the Cheney page before I touched it. Fat&Happy deems it not reliable even though it seems to meet the Wikipedia requirements for reliability. The director made Xanadu (yes, the movie starring Olivia Newton-John) but has gone on to make political documentaries. Any question of bias in these documentaries is irrelevant because Wikipedia states "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective".

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dick_Cheney/Archive_6&oldid=1146626315"