| Revision as of 20:23, 17 November 2004 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 18:39, 4 January 2025 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,672,063 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 5 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with unknown parameters)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion |
| (540 intermediate revisions by 83 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
], please say in the edit box what you have changed, as otherwise it makes it impossible to keep track. I disagree with your addition of the strange article on the Tavistock. If you read the article, you wil see that it is full of nonsense, even just small things like Freud being given a mansion in London. That alone shows that the writer has no specialist knowledge of Freud. If you are a LaRouche supporter, I hope you will abide by the arbitration decision that LaRouche supporters are not allowed to engage in LaRouche-related advocacy. I also see you deleted the reference to Dr. Tannenbaum. Please say why. ] 14 Nov 2004, 01:25 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{Article history| action1 = AFD |
|
|
| action1date = 20 March 2006 |
|
|
| action1link = Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jeremiah Duggan |
|
|
| action1result = speedy keep |
|
|
| action1oldid = 44687760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| action2 = AFD |
|
:] I checked the information on Tennenbaum. Duggan's mother has told reporters that Tennenbaum said this to her during a meeting she had with him. I have therefore restored it making clear that she is the source. |
|
|
|
| action2date = 6 October 2009 |
|
|
| action2link = Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jeremiah Duggan (2nd nomination) |
|
|
| action2result = keep |
|
|
| action2oldid = 319852839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| action3 = PR |
|
:You added that the Tavistock ran the Psychiatric Division of the British Army during WWII. This is a LaRouche claim. I will check again to see whether it is authentically part of the Tavistock's history. If it is, I will delete that it's a LaRouche claim. ] |
|
|
|
| action3date = 10:00, 25 March 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
| action3link = Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Death of Jeremiah Duggan/archive1 |
|
|
| action3result = reviewed |
|
|
| action3oldid = 349198340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| currentstatus = |
|
::SlimVirgin, the ''EIR'' article cites a source: ''The Shaping of Psychiatry by War'', by Dr. John Rawlings Rees. I have modified Colden's edit to reflect this. |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|listas=Duggan, Jeremiah|blp=no|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject United Kingdom}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Germany|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Law|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Death|importance=low}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|
|counter = 3 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Death of Jeremiah Duggan/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Notable Citation|Baroness Sarah Ludford, Member of the European Parliament: "MEP urges investigation of Jeremiah Duggan's death"}} |
|
:::Herschel, please don't insert anything from the EIR without full attribution. It is a LaRouche publication. Misplaced Pages must not be used for LaRouche advocacy. Slim |
|
|
|
{{LaRouche Talk}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
__TOC__ |
|
::::This issue may have to be referred for arbitration. You are inserting material that is simply made up. The conference, for example, was NOT organized to oppose the Iraq war and was not about the Iraq War. I don't have time to argue each and every pro-LaRouche point. Therefore, I feel we should refer to the arbitration committee that made the decision about LaRouche-related material the last time. I have reverted to the previous version -- but I will insert any material from the other versions if it is in the form of a defence against the allegations from a LaRouche spokesperson, or a relevant fact that can be sourced to a reputable publication. ] |
|
|
|
==Main sources== |
|
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=Death of Jeremiah Duggan}} |
|
|
In the order they appeared: |
|
|
{{refbegin}} |
|
|
*Kirby, Terry (2003). , ''The Independent'', 28 August 2003. |
|
|
*Midgley, Carol (2003). , ''The Times'', 7 November 2003. |
|
|
*Samuels, Tim (2004). , BBC ''Newsnight'', 12 February 2004. |
|
|
*Smith, David James (2004). , ''The Sunday Times'', 18 July 2004. |
|
|
*Kirby, Terry (2004). , ''The Independent'', 21 July 2004. |
|
|
*Witt, April (2004). , ''The Washington Post'', 24 October 2004. |
|
|
*Townsend, Mark (2004). , ''The Observer'', 31 October 2004. |
|
|
*Townsend, Mark (2006). , ''The Guardian'', 17 September 2006. |
|
|
*Townsend, Mark and Doward, Jamie (2007). , ''The Observer'', 25 March 2007. |
|
|
*Nugent, Helen (2007). , ''The Times'', 28 March 2007. |
|
|
*Nordhausen, Frank (2007). , ''Berliner Zeitung'', 4 April 2007. |
|
|
*Degen, Wolfgang (2007). , ''Wiesbadener Kurier'', 19 April 2007. |
|
|
*Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court of Germany) (2010). , 4 February 2010; . |
|
|
*Taylor, Jerome (2010). ''The Independent'', 27 February 2010. |
|
|
*BBC News (2010). , 20 May 2010. |
|
|
*Taylor, Jerome (2010). , ''The Independent'', 21 May 2010 |
|
|
*Wardrop, Murray (2010). , ''The Daily Telegraph'', 21 May 2010. |
|
|
{{refend}} |
|
|
] <small><sup>] ]</sup></small> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== External links modified == |
|
I think that this article is largely propaganda. Duggan was not a member, nor an activist in the LaRouche movement. He just showed up at a conference. You might as well blame the restaurant where he had breakfast. It seems pretty clear to me that Ms. Duggan is being manipulated by people who are indifferent to her personal tragedy. --] 16:03, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians, |
|
:How come ]'s talk page is identical to ]'s? |
|
|
::Please take note of the fact that the messages on my talk page are messages ''to'' me, not ''from'' me. Ms. Colden evidently received the same message of welcome when she first began editing. ] 00:17, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have just modified one external link on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: |
|
: I am going to revert to the previous version because you have inserted LaRouche propaganda into this article. (1) You cannot possibly have personal knowledge of when the mother started her investigation. She says it was 18 months ago; I would say it started when she flew to Wiesbaden after her son's death to speak to senior Schiller Institute managers, which was over 18 months ago; (2) You also cannot have personal knowledge of whether the mother's inquiries began only after she was encouraged by Baroness Symons. This is the Executive Intelligence Review position. The EIR is a LaRouche publication. Don't insert its material into Misplaced Pages's articles without attribution; (3) Why did you delete that Duggan had personally heard LaRouche give an address? (4) What difference does it make that Duggan wasn't a LaRouche activist? He bought a LaRouche newspaper and was persuaded to attend a LaRouche conference in another country with a group of LaRouche activists. A week later, he phoned his mother in a state of panic, sounding terrified. Forty-five minutes later, he died in odd circumstances. After his death, police found a Schiller Institute manager to be in possession of Duggan's passport. What is the difference to this chain of events that this was, or was not, Duggan's first involvement with the LaRouche organization? Please note the Misplaced Pages arbitration ruling that LaRouche supporters are not to use Misplaced Pages for LaRouche advocacy. ] 20:19, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090106112310/http://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2005/2005_10-19/2005_10-19/2005-11/pdf/40-42_11_intduggan.pdf to http://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2005/2005_10-19/2005_10-19/2005-11/pdf/40-42_11_intduggan.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. |
|
I have gone over C Colden's edits and attributed them properly. Do the press accounts that you are using suggest that LaRouche's speech somehow damaged Duggan psychologically? If not, you need to establish how it is relevant to the article. Also, SlimVirgin, please cite some sources for this paragraph: |
|
|
:<small>The LaRouche organization is regarded by many as an extremist, anti-Semitic cult. Erica Duggan has told reporters that, when German police broke the news of her son's death, they said: "Go nowhere near these people. They are dangerous." (See political views of Lyndon LaRouche.) A Scotland Yard report describes the LaRouche organization as "a political cult with sinister and dangerous connections."</small> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} |
|
Since it looks like this is going to be a somewhat contentious editing job, I would like to request that all participants edit items individually, with appropriate edit summary memos, rather than resorting to wholesale reversion. --] 21:37, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 03:48, 25 December 2017 (UTC) |
|
:Herschel, I also don't like the idea of wholesale reversion either, but it is not acceptable for LaRouche propaganda to be allowed to insert itself into this article, for obvious reasons. The source for the paragraph above (what the German police said and the Scotland Yard report) is the coroner's inquest. I will make that clear. I think we should refer this for arbitration/mediation, rather than continually reverting, if the dispute continues. The arbitration committee has ruled that Misplaced Pages must not be used for LaRouche advocacy, and that ruling must be adhered to. Please do not insert any material from the LaRouche Executive Intelligence Review unless it is directly relevant and fully attributed. Also, if you do make any such additions, ADD the material: do not delete something else and replace it. Finally, why are the discussion pages of C Colden and Weed Harper identical? Are they the same person? ] 22:27, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Please familiarize yourself with the Misplaced Pages ] policy: it is the foundation for settling disputes. Both sides of a controversy must be presented in an article, with proper attribution. If you feel we need mediation, I would suggest contacting ], who successfully mediated the last round of LaRouche-related edit conflicts. Meanwhile, I went to the trouble of painstakingly attributing each item from EIR, and I would ask that you do me the courtesy of responding to individual edits, rather than reverting extensive work at one stroke. I will do you the same courtesy, and it will make this much more pleasant. |
|
|
|
|
|
::Regarding Colden and Harper, look again. They both have the same welcome message from Sam Spade, but there is much more discussion on Harper's page. Slow down a bit, and read more carefully. --] 22:28, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: To ], I have lost track of what your various changes are, because you don't list them in the edit summary. Herschel, I AM familiar with the NPOV policy. That is why I feel LaRouche claims should not be inserted here without full attribution and only if they are directly relevant. For example, how does Weed Harper (or the EIR) know that the mother started her investigation in July 2003? How do they know she had a "change of heart?" This is pure propaganda. SHE says she started her investigation when her son died. SHE is the only person who can know this, and is therefore the only primary source for the claim. I am referring this issue to an arbitrator. Slim |
|
|
::::All versions of the story reflect the fact that Mrs. Duggan met with Schiller Institute personnel after her son's death. The assessment of those persons, that her attitude was different then than later, is therefore relevant. --] 15:53, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Note: I removed the quote from the German newspaper article only because it was such poor English and made no sense. Does anyone have the original German, so we could do a proper translation? Then I'd be happy to have it back in. Slim |
|
|
|
|
|
To ]: When a sentence says eg. "The court heard that the police relied on statements from the Schiller Institute that turned out not to be true," you can't change that to "are now said to be untrue." That is not what the court heard. The court heard that the statements turned out not to be true. That is what is on the record; and that court record, as reported by the Guardian, Times and Independent, is the source of the Misplaced Pages entry. When the record is updated e.g. by the German police re-opening their investigation and obtaining new information, or by them deciding not to re-open their investigation; or by the LaRouche organization or the family or the lawyers making more statements, then the Misplaced Pages entry can be updated. But we cannot change what has been said to reflect our own views. ] 00:51, 15 Nov, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
SlimVirgin, I am not aware of any charge by the LaRouche publications that the Tavistock Institute is working for the CIA or British Intelligence. If you insert that characterization again, please provide a source. --] 15:53, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Also, please be a bit more careful in characterizing the LaRouche Organization's views -- they do not assert that Tavistock "ran" the psychiatric division, they say that, according to Tavistock's director, their staff was absorbed into the psychiatric division during the war. You are entitled to have a POV that is hostile to LaRouche, but then it becomes incumbent upon you not to let your POV lead you into sloppy editing. --] 16:08, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Herschel, this is becoming insane. I was not the one who added the relationship between the Tavistock and the British Army's psychiatric division (and I still don't see the relevance of it). It was one of the other apparent LaRouche supporters who inserted that allegation, either Weed Harper or C Colden. |
|
|
:Also, please keep an eye on the grammar of your insertions. Yesterday, you added: "LaRouche supporters cite the Nov. 11, 2003, edition of the Wiesbadener Kurier newspaper, which published a story on the Duggan affair, under the headline "Why British Media Probably Wrongly Doubt the Investigations of the Wiesbaden Police." The article featured official statements from a spokesman for Chief Prosecutor Dieter Arlet, and began with a question: "Did a student from London really jump in front of a car with the intention of committing suicide? British newspapers have publicized doubt about this description of the Wiesbaden Prosecutor's Office and base this on the conclusion of a coroner. But that judgment is in fact different than the way it is reported in Great Britain." |
|
|
:This is not good English, so I have deleted it. Please supply a proper translation; or put the original on this page and I will translate it myself. |
|
|
:Today, you added: "One of the claims of the Lyndon LaRouche organization is that the highly respected Tavistock Institute, which according to the LaRouche organization is itself involved in ]; they cite the book by Clinic head Dr. ], ''The Shaping of Psychiatry by War'', which details how virtually the entire staff of Tavistock had been absorbed into the Psychiatric Division of the British Army during ]." |
|
|
:There is a clause missing and one of the tenses is wrong. In terms of its relevance, what is the relevance of this book to the allegation that the Tavistock is involved in mind control? |
|
|
:I have deleted that paragraph for those two reasons. I want to make clear that I am happy for the information to be included, but it must be properly written and must be relevant to the mind control claim e.g. there should be a direct quote from the book, and another citation showing the Psychiatric Division was involved in mind control, or something like that. Or if you can't find a direct quote, a quote from a secondary source quoting the book. ] 21:09, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Also Herschel, regarding your change to the Helga Zepp-LaRouche page, here's why I deleted it. You wrote that the family wants a second German police investigation because the first investigation exonerated the Schiller Institute. But it didn't. There was no first investigation, except to measure tire marks on the road, because the police thought they were dealing with a straightforward traffic accident. It appears that they didn't know about the LaRouche link. I therefore changed your addition to the family is pressing for a "proper" police investigation. Please don't add material indicating that the Schiller Institute has been cleared when no such thing has happened. |
|
|
:Could I ask you please not to make any more additions or deletions about the details of the Jeremiah Duggan case until you have read the inquest transcripts and to make sure you fully attribute all your additions? I will do the same. If we both do that, it should go some way to resolving our differences. ] 21:17, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Adding this page to the "LaRouche Template== |
|
|
|
|
|
I reject AndyL's edit, adding this page to the template of "LaRouche-related persons and organizations." I think it is a highly dubious proposition to assert that Jeremiah Duggan has anything whatsoever to do with Lyndon LaRouche. He was not a member, an activist, nor did he have any sort of ongoing relationship -- he was a casual attendee at a conference, at which there were several hundred other attendees, none of which went crazy. Therefore I will not accept the argument that his story is an integral part of the history of the LaRouche movement, any more than I would accept the argument that the gal who says she was raped by Bill Clinton is essential to the story of his presidency -- although the rape charge is mentioned in the Misplaced Pages article on Clinton. --] 05:14, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Herschel, I disagree. Jeremiah Duggan was a new recruit of the ], a movement started in 1999 by Lyndon LaRouche, of which he has stated he has tremendous hopes. The allegation made in the British coroner's court is that Jeremiah Duggan may have died as a direct or indirect result of mind-control techniques designed to persuade him to commit himself to the organization. These techniques were espoused by Lyndon LaRouche in his work Beyond Psychoanalysis, which he wrote under the Lyn Marcus pseudonym. Mrs. Duggan has sold her home, cashed in her life savings, has the support of the British government and has hired a well-known Berlin lawyer to find out exactly what happened. Therefore, it seems likely that this issue is not going to go away, and will become part of the LaRouche movement's history -- possibly an important part. ] 06:53, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::I've just found the bad translation of the German newspaper article you inserted. You took it word for word from the LaRouche publication, Executive Intelligence Review, but without attribution. I understood we had agreed that wouldn't happen. ] 07:10, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
The issue is not whether Duggan was a member of the LaRouche movement or whether or not the LaRouche movement considers him "one of them". It is whether or not the article should be considered part of the series on LaRouche and his movement. Given that the contents of the article are entireliy related to the LaRouche movement I cannot see how anyone can argue that it doesn't belong in the series. The test is this, if you remove the LaRouche related material would there still be a viable article?] 13:49, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Your "test" cuts both ways, Andy -- if LaRouche's ''political'' opponents, in this case Baroness Symons, had not seen in the Duggan family's private tragedy a cynical opportunity to smear LaRouche, would there be an article? If there were a Baroness Symons template, it might be appropriate to include this article. As it stands, I have put up the NPOV dispute tag until this issue of the template is resolved -- not because of SlimVirgin's article, but because of the template, which is there for the sole purpose of implying that this is a story about LaRouche, which it is not. --] 15:12, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
If there were a Baroness Symons template than the Duggan article would be listed in it *and* the LaRouche template. Anyway, calling a template POV is somewhat absurd. I'm sorry but this is not a promotional service for the LaRouche movement, articles are included in the template if they are largely to do about the LaRouche movement whether or not they are complimentary. Unless you contend that the Duggan case (which is what this article is actually about) has nothing to do with the LaRouche movement your objection is absurd. ] 15:43, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Herschel, this IS a story about LaRouche. If Jeremiah Duggan had died on that road after spending six days with his family, his death would not be something Misplaced Pages would want to record. What happened during and subsequent to those six days has become a matter of legitimate public interest only because he spent that time with the Schiller Institute and the LaRouche Youth Movement (LYM), and because LaRouche has talked about how LYM is recruiting more young people than ever before. |
|
|
:I'm going to revert to AndyL's previous edit because a user with just an IP address has added a long section in the middle of the article quoting from some of LaRouche's written work. I feel it's a bit long to have sitting in the middle of the article and although parts of it are attributed, it's not clear in other parts whether the writer is quoting LaRouche or not, so I'd like time to rewrite it a bit. ] 20:23, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC) |
|
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
