Talk:Copper Green

Military history: Middle East / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Comment[edit]

I removed some of the "alleges;" when it is clear from context that we are referring to Hersh's report, I don't think they're necessary.

I used this wording:

DoD Spokesperson Mr. Lawrence DiRita immediately issued a statement about the accusations, referring to them as "outlandish, conspiratorial, and filled with error and anonymous conjecture." Press accounts have generally characterized DiRita's statement as a "denial."

Here's why:

Although the press has generally been calling the statement a "denial," I think it is quite possible to read it as a "non-denial denial," see my remarks at Talk:Non-denial denial. For example, is DiRita saying that all the claims in Hersh's article are false, or only that certain claims are "dramatically false?" Since he doesn't say which claims are being denied, that leaves many loopholes open. The phrase "outlandish, conspiratorial, and filled with error and anonymous conjecture" certainly, to me, has the flavor of some of the Watergate non-denial denials. The specific one's I'm trying to think of are Mitchell's remarks along the lines of the Woodward-Bernstein stories being "ridiculous" and "the Washington Post's sources are a fount of misinformation." Dpbsmith 00:50, 18 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I realize I'm 13 years late to the party, but we don't need to have a statement from authorities stating "I deny the existence of Copper Green" to characterize the statements they have made as "denials". To imply that the statements that were offered are "non-denial denials" fall afoul of original interpretation (i.e. WP:OR). -Location (talk) 22:48, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 2[edit]

can we get some better sources, or, say, any sources?72.223.7.108 (talk) 21:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame there isn't enough information out there to expand this article and improve its sourcing. This is really the true story of what the majority of alleged abuse cases were at the prison, and Lynndie England was telling all the day this story broke until the Army threw her downa hole. Detainees were raping younger prisoners and starting riots, threatening them with the embarrassment of showing their family and friends photos of them in compromising situations was a good way to stop it. The media had no photos of the real torture cases, so bundled it all up in one story called "abuse" and ran with it.Batvette (talk) 12:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This whole thing is nothing but conspiracy theory junk. Is that what Wikipedia is about? This is hardly "encyclopedic", which is our goal. 155.213.224.59 (talk) 14:11, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Copper Green. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100302003647/http://www.defense.gov/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=7372 to http://www.defense.gov/Releases/Release.aspx?ReleaseID=7372

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 00:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

SaddamStatue.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]