Talk:Freedom deficit

The term "Freedom Deficit" did not originate with Sec. of State Rice in her December 11, 2005 article, as it is in use long before then. I am not certain how it originated, but it can be found in a report from Morton Halperin of the Council on Foreign Relations, dated Sept. 19, 2002.

See Council on Foreign Relations: Addressing the 'Freedom Deficit' in the Arab World: the UNDP's

This line shows some bias:

"Ms. Rice most effectively explained the risks of the freedom deficit and the only means by which to protect the world from these risks in the following statement from the same article...."

She does not effectively explain the term, nor does she present the only means by which to protect the world form this supposed risk. Supposing that the term describes a real condition, which is debatable, nobody, certainly not Rice, has demonstrated that there is an infallible cure.

The text as it stands is incorrect and partisan.

chester

Natan Sharansky quote
I removed the following from the article:
 * Natan Sharansky, in a speech on Palestinian politics, noted that "The greatest barrier to Israeli-Palestinian peace is the lack of freedom and democracy on the Palestinian side, and any peace plan that overlooks that deficit is doomed."[ref][freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/966512/posts Sharansky: Freedom Deficit is the Real MidEast Problem]", Power Line, Free Republic, 08-19-2003.[/ref]

My concern is that the site, Free Republic, has just reposted a blog post, found at Powerlineblog.com. We all should know that for the most part, blog posts are not reliable sources. Searching the internet for the quote doesn't yield any more reliable sources. If someone has a better source, feel free to restore the content and replace the source. But until then, I think it's best to leave the quote out of the article because it is not verifiable in terms of a reliable source.-Andrew c [talk] 16:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://pugsleyblog.sovereignsociety.com/2007/02/the_trade_defic.html
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 17:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

✅ This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)