Talk:Bernard L. Schwartz: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 08:56, 9 March 2014 editJimjilin (talk \| contribs)1,919 edits →Political Favors ← Previous edit		Revision as of 09:18, 9 March 2014 edit undoDr.K. (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers110,824 edits →Political Favors: replyNext edit →
Line 43:		Line 43:

	Any objections?] (]) 08:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)		Any objections?] (]) 08:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

			:All this is ] on your part. As I explained to you on your talk, multiple reliable sources are clear that Schwartz was exonerated. I added the reliable sources in the article with quotations.:
			: ] from the '']'' which says:
			:{{quotation\|We are pleased that the facts in this case have now been made public and that Mr. Schwartz and Loral are shown to be innocent of any wrongdoing, said Thomas B. Ross, a company vice president. Mr. Specter said in an interview that he did not realize at the hearing that Mr. Schwartz had been exonerated by the Justice Department because he had not seen Mr. La Bella's addendum.}}.

			:Google Book:
			:{{quotation\|<nowiki><ref name="Hirsh2003">{{cite book\|author=Michael Hirsh\|title=At War with Ourselves: Why America is Squandering Its Chance to Build a Better World\|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=jiM1ag9p8H8C&pg=PA150\|year=2003\|publisher=Oxford University Press\|isbn=978-0-19-515269-2\|pages=150–\|quote=Bernard Schwartz was exonerated of all wrongdoing when the Justice ...}}</ref></nowiki>}}
			:The book also mentions that the company paid the fine under protest since there were no clear guidelines as to what constituted technology transfers. Also ], deputy secretary of defence, testified at a senate hearing that he didn't believe that there was any improvement to Chinese ICBM capability due to any information transfer from Schwartz's company. It's all in the book.
			:And this book calls them "China-bashing pseudoscandals":
			:{{quotation\|<nowiki><ref name="Blumenthal2003">{{cite book\|author=Sidney Blumenthal\|title=The Clinton Wars\|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=vAxrr2fcO8AC&pg=PT1035\|date=20 May 2003\|publisher=Farrar, Straus and Giroux\|isbn=978-0-374-70629-6\|pages=1035–}}</ref></nowiki>}}
			:Overall, the negative information you want to add doesn't look strong enough to be included in Schwartz's BLP. The reliable sources are clear. Schwartz was exonerated, case over: This material is not going into this BLP. Let's wait now for other editors to chime in because it is apparent to me that you do not agree with my comments to you. I will also inform BLPN. ] <small><sup style="position:relative">]<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">]</span></sup></small> 09:18, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:18, 9 March 2014

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Bernard L. Schwartz be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Political Favors

Regarding the removal of the 1996 United States campaign finance controversy link, with the edit summary "rm odd link. has nothing to do with campaign finance": this article makes the connection seem like not much of a stretch. —Fleminra (talk) 17:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Dr. K your reference does not say "exonerated of any wrongdoing", please mirror the source. Also I did not attack you. I just added a well-sourced statement about Schwartz. And who is Jiimjilin?Jimjilin (talk) 15:23, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Loral agreed to pay a huge civil fine of $14 million. Is that "exoneration"?!

http://www.loral.com/inthenews/020109.html

And of course we can't ignore the findings of the House Select Committee.

For example: The rocket guidance system on which Loral and Hughes provided advice in 1996 is judged by the Select Committee to be among the systems capable of being adapted for use as the guidance system for future PRC road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles,

http://www.house.gov/coxreport/chapfs/app.html

And according to the Defense Technology Security Administration:

Loral and Hughes committed a serious export control violation by virtue of having performed a defense service without a license in the course of conducting an investigation for China of the failure of the February 1996 launch of the Long March 3B.

This activity also violated the U.S.-China Space Launch Technology Safeguards Agreement.

The defense service consisted of a full range of investigatory, engineering and corrective analyses to assist the Chinese in identifying the root cause of the failure and corrective measures.

The significant benefits derived by China from these activities are likely to lead to improvements in the overall reliability of their launch vehicles and ballistic missiles and in particular their guidance systems.

http://www.house.gov/coxreport/chapfs/ch6.html

I suggest: Loral under CEO Schwartz was accused of transferring sensitive missile technology to the Chinese government.

Loral under CEO Schwartz was accused of offering unauthorized assistance to China's ballistic missile program.

Any objections?Jimjilin (talk) 08:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

All this is WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH on your part. As I explained to you on your talk, multiple reliable sources are clear that Schwartz was exonerated. I added the reliable sources in the article with quotations.:

A citation from the New York Times which says:

We are pleased that the facts in this case have now been made public and that Mr. Schwartz and Loral are shown to be innocent of any wrongdoing, said Thomas B. Ross, a company vice president. Mr. Specter said in an interview that he did not realize at the hearing that Mr. Schwartz had been exonerated by the Justice Department because he had not seen Mr. La Bella's addendum.

Google Book:

<ref name="Hirsh2003">{{cite book|author=Michael Hirsh|title=At War with Ourselves: Why America is Squandering Its Chance to Build a Better World|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=jiM1ag9p8H8C&pg=PA150|year=2003|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-515269-2|pages=150–|quote=Bernard Schwartz was exonerated of all wrongdoing when the Justice ...}}</ref>

The book also mentions that the company paid the fine under protest since there were no clear guidelines as to what constituted technology transfers. Also Franklin Miller, deputy secretary of defence, testified at a senate hearing that he didn't believe that there was any improvement to Chinese ICBM capability due to any information transfer from Schwartz's company. It's all in the book.

And this book calls them "China-bashing pseudoscandals":

<ref name="Blumenthal2003">{{cite book|author=Sidney Blumenthal|title=The Clinton Wars|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=vAxrr2fcO8AC&pg=PT1035|date=20 May 2003|publisher=Farrar, Straus and Giroux|isbn=978-0-374-70629-6|pages=1035–}}</ref>

Overall, the negative information you want to add doesn't look strong enough to be included in Schwartz's BLP. The reliable sources are clear. Schwartz was exonerated, case over: This material is not going into this BLP. Let's wait now for other editors to chime in because it is apparent to me that you do not agree with my comments to you. I will also inform BLPN. Δρ.Κ. 09:18, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Categories: