Talk:Operation Rescue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Removal of {{NPOV}} tags 2 lack of creditable references 3 further response 4 needs rewrite

[edit] Removal of {{NPOV}} tags

I have removed the {{NPOV}} tags from the article for several reasons. First, as the tag refers to, there should be a discussion on the talk page about why the tags were added. If there's a feeling that the page is biased, an explanation of those views should be added on this page. Second, it is not necessary to use multiple {{NPOV}} tags on a page, one will suffice. If anyone feels they should be re-added, do so only after offering an rationale for why on this talk page. Thanks. --MZMcBride 03:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Please note that Youth Ministries (dba Operation Rescue West) has had its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status revoked by the IRS as of September, 2006. See http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/a2006_69.pdf for more information.

[edit] lack of creditable references

For what it is worth I surfed into this Wikapedia "Operation Rescue" article while researching another matter and supplied a reference as an edit to the loss of tax exempt status. That is an article in the New York Times which makes no references to money laundering. A thorough Google search reveals that all references to money laundering at least from the internet are credited to this Wikapedia article or a document called "The Newman Report" available from maggotpunks.com for $10.00. The Maggotpunks are hardly an unbiased source. An excerpt from thier mission statement on thier homepage proclaims that they are athiests pro choice and are actively fighting the groups bombing clinics and killing doctors:

"The purpose of the Maggot Punks is to preserve reproductive freedoms, maintain the absolute separation of state and church, oppose the proliferation of creationism, put religious terrorists in prison, catalogue the crimes and actions of fundy fanatics, work with other progressive organizations to increase their effectiveness in promote positive social change."

While this being the only source casts doubt, it does not disprove that money laundering took place. I am not recomending deletion or anything. Just asking, "Where is the reliable research?"

D.S. Khalsa Pocatello Idaho Dec 25,2006

If you have the article, I suggest that you put in information from that article and delete what you can't find evidence for there. WP:BB; statements that can't be verified are un-Wikipedian. See WP:V. --Alvestrand 02:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

"Dr. Tiller was cleared of any charges of medical neglect in the death of Christin Gilbert."

This sentence is incomplete. If you are going to mention the charges, at least give a synopsis of why the charges were brought up. Otherwise, I think it should be deleted. Jbliz 12/28/06

[edit] further response

obviously well sourced information doesn't work, i was posting further terrorist incidents to this page that were backed by well over ten sources in the MSM. Please see my user comments on the user page for further info, i was only now directed to this page.

All POV references of "Pro-Life" are going. there is no negotiation on this. "Pro-Life" is quite clearly a propaganda term from people who don't give a damn about the living. Anti-Choice is a proper description of their stated beliefs, and actions. Anti-Choice is also neutral in that it doesn't attribute anything to the group other than what it openly and publically states itself. "Pro-Life" is inappropriate usage, and pure POV, these people are not pro-life in any form or fashion, other than their own.

I'm a bit peeved about posting well-sourced information repeatedly, and watching some Jihadist (if the sh*t fits, wear it) delete it repeatedly.

People wanna play the POV game, well, I contest the use of "Pro-Life" as being pure POV and only used as a term for political and religious propaganda purposes, because it bears no semblance to their actual beliefs when it comes to the living. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.69.113 (talk) 02:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Please sign your comments. "Anti-Choice" is also not a descriptive term. I have substituted "anti-abortion" for "pro-life" as that properly describes their form of advocacy. Your wordy pontificating and name-calling here is not appreciated and is not helpful. Mike Doughney (talk) 02:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

• The problem is that you are writing inherently POV text, and you are not providing any links to sources to back up anything you say. I could see a section in this article about terroristic activities of Operation Rescue, but you just write things like "(SF Examiner)" which tells us nothing. "Anti-choice" is a POV term. Like it or not, the word wars on this issue ended long ago and "Pro-choice" and "Pro-life" won the day. Like it or not. Wikipedia is not the place to re-fight this war, although you are welcome to expand the terminology section on the political framing article, although it is already covered on the pro-choice and pro-life articles. --David Shankbone 02:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] needs rewrite

This article is confused and should be rewritten.

The first sentence ought to clearly introduce the topic. Instead, it reads:

Operation Rescue (formerly Operation Rescue West) is a pro-life group and offshoot of Operation Rescue, a group now known as Operation Rescue/Operation Save America

Say, what? That's completely inscrutable. Core of this sentence is, Operation Rescue... is an offshoot of Operation Rescue... which makes no sense and the rest of it doesn't help either.

The first section is labeled Operation Rescue West, so one might think it would start with a description or definition of Operation Rescue West. No such luck. It starts thus:

Operation Rescue was founded by Randall Terry in the late 1980s.

Wait a minute, isn't that the other organization? What are we talking about, here?

There's a second section labeled *Operation Rescue* which duplicates some of the first section. Sentence from section 1 Operation Rescue West:

In 2002, Newman moved the headquarters to Wichita, Kansas, to focus its efforts on George Tiller and in 2002 dropped the “West” from its moniker.

Sentence from section 2 Operation Rescue:

In 2002, Newman moved his Operation Rescue West headquarters to Wichita, Kansas, to focus its efforts on abortion provider George Tiller, and dropped the "West" from its moniker.

Once again, the section header and group names don't match. And what are we doing with a section called Operation Rescue anyway in an article with the same name? The whole article is about it, we don't need a section named that, too.

Maybe the two sections should be renamed with their from-to dates or something, or maybe "the California group" and "the Wichita group" or whatever makes it clear to the reader.

Given the multiple organizations with confusingly similar names, some attention to a brief timeline history or box carefully delineating name changes or splitting off of groups would be helpful to put the rest of the article in context.

These comments refer to version 192138731 of 17 Feb 2008. Mathglot (talk) 07:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)