Talk:Eric Moonman

Problems
This article is poorly written and uses citations in the "After Parliament" subsection in an apparent attempt to discredit the subject without triggering overt language markers of bias.

For example, footnote 24 refers to a publication from 2004, which mentioned that the subject became a consultant on terrorism to ITN after editing and contributing to a 1987 book.

This article then begins the next paragraph with the words "In fact," and a claim that a search of ITN material placed on Getty Images found a first appearance on ITN as a terrorism expert in 2002. But 2002 is, of course, after 1987, and television news programmes became particularly interested in terrorism after 2001.

A far better way to state this would be to write that the subject came to be popularly seen as an expert on terrorism after 9/11.

This is but one example from a section that seems to use extensive citations and references to tangential material to suggest subject was part of some obscure conspiracy. But the subject's associations were publicly known, and the attention and slant given by this Wikipedia article to subject's activism on behalf of the State of Israel and media appearances as a terrorism expert seem far out of proportion to subject's actual involvement and influence.