Talk:Michael Yon

Controversies

We need to put some information on Michael about his controversial actions and beliefs of WWII atrocities such as Nanjing Massacre, Unit 731, and Comfort Women. Michael Yon should've gone deep with these Wartime atrocities carefully, there are documents that prove that the military has connections with these paid contractors, that they use people for their inhumane projects, and that Japan's racial supremacy theories have led to so many massacres in WWII. Yet he still refuses to look at them because he romanticizes Japan as a superior country over their former colonies. Today he still uses these issue to propagate hate in Japan towards everyone else who disagrees with him. Starting this day, wikipedia needs to include these controversies.

Michael Yon's Anti-Korean Sentiment and his hatred towards anything

I've been examining his Korean related posts on Facebook, and they were disgusting; he showed no remorse or sympathy to the Korean people when presenting them with tragic news articles related to them such as hazing, crimes, Mike Honda, the mistakes they made, etc. What's worse is that he did not demand the people on Facebook to rescind their Anti-Korean comments on his posts, I believe he's using their hatred to make him popular. He always demonizes them with baseless information for being liars, communists and swindlers of their own history (He doesn't know the potential of Koreans for one bit) while praising other nations (i.e. Japan and Thailand) for having so much development and honesty than Koreans to make good of himself. I'm not talking about the Comfort Women Issue because he believes that Koreans were an illiterate backwater (that means they did not invent the hangul or adopt Chinese Characters, the tripitaka koreana, they couldn't even invent their own stuff) before Korea's Annexation to Japan. Also, he believes that the majority of the Korean population was in favor with the Annexation treaty of 1910 and that they were treated as equals during their rule (which they weren't because of their Anti-Japanese sentiment), he denies the March 1st Independence Movement that was established to resist Japan's oppressive colonial rule peacefully (to me he knows that this movement is vital evidence to the fact that Koreans never wanted to be colonized and made up his insane story), and I believe he denies Korea's guerrilla resistance against Japan during WWII because he believes that Korean men make up most of the Japanese army (when Korean collaborators make up a small portion of it) and calls them cowards. I hope he does not have Anti-Korean Sentiment because soldiers like him know that he must stand with Korean American troops on the frontline. I don't know if he is affiliated with Japanese revisionists, or he's distorting Korean history and culture himself; he can deny the fact that the Asian women were coerced and forced to serve as sexual slaves, but he will never dare to deny Korea's overall history that made Koreans who they are while portraying them as the most inferior race in Asia. His views on Korea are indirect and they're going all over the place without any direct proof.

https://www.facebook.com/MichaelYonFanPage/photos/a.235978145664.135781.207730000664/10153045264840665/ please look at debate between Michael Yon and the dead banana Facebook icon.

https://www.facebook.com/MichaelYonFanPage/photos/a.235978145664.135781.207730000664/10153097062860665/ https://www.facebook.com/MichaelYonFanPage/posts/10152834100125665 These three links above are examples of his toleration towards anti-Korean Facebook members and his baseless facts about the current Korean people. Koreanidentity10000 21:48 19, September 2015

I'm going to make a section about his other affiliation with other organizations such as his former affiliation with Sakurai Yoshiko, and I expect some of you people to help me show the readers all sides his history and his affiliations, don't forget about Thailand. If you delete this section that I've made, give me a detailed reason. If it's the same 'defamatory' thing like I heard from the other user, 'JustForAll' who deleted my political views section, I will make it not defamatory and give you people a chance to help me, thank you for reading this. Also, if I were you I would find out why Michael Yon is harassing CJ Grisham and the other millbloggers by looking at Michael Yon Watch on twitter Koreanidentity10000 06:07 3 January 2015

Update

This entry needs serious editing and updating. The sources are mostly all Yon himself and I see his personal staff has been editing the page. For example the dispute with Lt Colonel Johnson is deeper than what's presented here. Some soldiers like Johnson seem to think very little of Yon, there is a debate over how he handles his money, what his real background is, accounts of some of his reckless actions in Iraq, etc. Right now this entry sems like a puff piece written by Yon staffers.

Well if you know somewhere to get better information, please do. What's there doesn't seem too biased to me, but I'd believe there are some relevant details skipped over... If there are serious critics of Yon they should be at least mentioned on the page. TastyCakes 19:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Yon has staff? I thought he was self and reader-funded and thus unlikely to have staff on his payroll. Could you point out where Yon staffers have been involved in the editing of this article? I'm also curious as to what questions have been asked of his background - apparently Yon has written a book about his past (ex-special forces, killed a man, etc.) - is this in question? Please provide sources for your claims. Thanks. 220.255.26.148 03:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The article appears to be consistent with the facts as I've heard them. I agree with most other people on this page that the page is still missing key facts. My understanding is that Yon does have a partner in the US, but no staff per se. Again, any referenceable sources are welcome if you think key facts are missing.

Wellspring 18:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Article needs to be updated to show resolution of Shock magazine legal battle, and 2006-7 reporting in Iraq. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 08:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I have been reading Yon for some time and he is pretty even handed, yet there is clearly an effort here to make him seem like a supporter of the left's point of view. The inclusion of his comments supporting the Times reporters and his comment on Obama are fine, but there are no similar comments either supporting Bush or criticizing reporters or Obama, all of which he's done. It just seems to be trying to selectively use him in this article to make left leaning points only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.110.81 (talk) 15:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Please feel free to add anything you think would help rectify this. TastyCakes (talk) 16:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

NYT Article

See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/business/21iraqblogger.html. 220.245.128.97 (talk) 05:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing References

I added some more citations of claims. Michael Barone, Joey Galloway and Duchess of Cornwall. More are needed. Discuss if you feel some claims should be removed and also discuss if you feel the citation tag should be removed. Arnabdas (talk) 18:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I wish we could find the specific quotes from the people cited as praising Yon. The source you found is good enough to justify the mention, probably - but it's a publicity bio and just says "high praise". Specificity would improve the article.

Also, I imagine there has been criticism of Yon that would be notable enough to include, given his relatively high profile and strong political opinions. But I don't know where to look for it. Kalkin (talk) 22:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Specific quotes of praise from people cited (Brian Williams, Joe Galloway, Michael Barone) as well as others not cited (Tom Ricks, Clifford May of the NY Times, and General Petraeus) can be found on the back of Mr.Yon's new book "Moment of Truth in Iraq". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluetesseract (talk • contribs) 13:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

"Success in Iraq"

Yon wrote in a blog post dated 14 July 2008 that:

"[B]y my estimation, the Iraq War is over. We won. Which means the Iraqi people won."

He later expanded on this claim in a New York Daily News article dated 20 July, "As Iraqis stop living in fear, end of Iraq war is at hand". I suspect these were among the first claims of victory in Iraq, and therefore worth recording in this article. I'm too busy to write this up properly just now; does anyone else want to tackle it? Thanks in advance, CWC 15:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

should be something on the battle where he picked up a gun

it was very newsworthy and also shows he is so close to the action that the lines got blurred on observer/participant. 72.82.52.106 (talk) 23:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Michael Yon/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 20:57, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Ref #26 is a dead link;  Done

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   I note that he has been in conflict with the US military and others. I feel balance would be served by including some detailed criticism.  Done

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

On hold whilst above concerns are addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:12, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I tried to address both issues. I'm wary of putting any more critical views into the article as it is right now since I don't want to give them undue weight (and this is a BLP, after all). The Squicks (talk) 03:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand your concerns and appreciate the efforts that you have made. I am now happy to pass this as a {{WPGood Article|Good Article]]. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:55, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

"One of the youngest" to pass Special Forces Assessment/Qualification

Yon has long used his 'experience' in Special Forces to establish his credibility. There is public question of how long he served in SF and speculation of the rank he attained in it. This needs to be established and reported in his bio. If he got out as an E5 as rumored, it needs explaination. A Special Forces ODA is composed of E6s, E7s, an E8, Warrant and Captain.

SF was busy in the 80's but if he took advantage of the training and then got out, why?

Yon has his detractors, including with others in the Milblogger space. See milblogging.com for some of the controversy.

Yon has indeed been at the center of two General Officers being fired. He is an unnamed source in the Rolling Stones article.

Questions that need to be answered: What dates did he serve in the Military? When did he complete SFQC? What was his MOS? Why was he not promoted to E6, as is standard in SF? Why does he generalize the experiences he has used to establish his "credibility" that has allowed him notoriety and financial donations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.90.18.3 (talk) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

It appears an individual is attempting to prevent the neutrality of this article. (AmericanVet (talk) 13:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC))

I agree. There is no controversy over Yon's service, though some of his detractors try to foment it. Yon served roughly five years on active duty, with three years on SF ODA's. I do not recall his MOS. I believe that it was either 18C or 18B. As I recall, Yon's rank at separation was SGT E5. He served on two or three separate ODAs in 10SFGA, including some time in Bad Tolz, Germany. There is no mystery over why Yon separated as a SGT. He did not remain on active long enough to get promoted to SSG. The poster above who claims that only SSGs and above are assigned to SF ODAs obviously never served on one, particularly in the early 1980's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.9.108.197 (talk) 04:52, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Yon v. "Milbloggers"

This dispute appears to have begun in 2010 and has in many ways defined his actions at several points since. While there are various definitions of what constitutes a "milblog," some of those definitions would include Michael Yon himself and many that accept the title "milblogger" were previously big supporters of Yon's work. If we are to present a neutral article on Yon, it will have to present both the views of his fans as well as his detractors.

The addition of this section also affords sourcing to non-Yon discussion, which is a previous concern on this page. The bulk of sourcing on this page is either Yon's own sites or articles written or influenced directly by him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanVet (talk • contribs) 19:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

No party in the conflict refers to the military veteran "bloggers" as "warblogs." The term "milblog" may have various definitions, but it is the widely accepted term for this segment of "bloggers." This needs to be rectified. (AmericanVet (talk) 00:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC))

Some of the recently added prose is not sourced, or poorly sourced. Per WP:BLP, which is a wikipedia policy they should be deleted. (Hohum ^@) 00:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit conflict: warblog and milblog are synonymous, but I do see that milblog is a more common term. (Hohum ^@) 00:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I beg to disagree. Warblogs were those blogs that were in favor of the war in Iraq (there were AntiWarBlogs, too, although that term was very little used); milblogs are blogs written by people associated with the military ( usually veterans, with some serving service members, and/or their spouses, fiancees, parents, and children) that deals in some way with aspects of military life or its consequences. A particular blog might be both (say) an antiwarblog and a milblog, or have expressed no opinion on wars, concentrating on some aspect of military or veteran life. htom (talk) 15:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hohum: You work quick and have clearly improved on what I had previously written in most areas. The citation on the Yon quotes threatening Grisham and "banning" fans is the "Just A Bully" article on Perspectives/War On Terror News. I'm not going to jump into the editing process while you're still working, but will discuss/edit later, as it would simply lead to conflicts in the saves. (AmericanVet (talk) 00:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC))

I'm done tweaking for the moment, so you can work without edit conflicts from me. (Hohum ^@) 00:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I noticed you removed the portion on the challenge to his integrity from the opening summary, but it appeared you had planed to move it to another section. Was this lost in edit or were there other reasons it wasn't moved into another section?

I've added several citations, though somehow screwed up the encoding on one, that were needed. I will have to find the "crazy monkey" citation again. I can't seem to find that link at the moment. I've seen it in several locations and will find it. I'll be back w/in next few days to correct more of those citations.

One last note. I didn't make any changes to it. Milblogs are the type and "Milbloggers" are the people that write them. I don't know if that would be considered nitpicking, as the overall concept is there. "Milkooks" is a phrase coined by Yon to label those milbloggers he is in conflict with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanVet (talk • contribs) 02:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea why the latest addition created a text box and I don't know how to get rid of it. Hohum, wanted to say thanks for your improvements to the article. (AmericanVet (talk) 14:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC))

Leading spaces on a new line cause the effect you noted.

I think the section is giving undue weight to the conflict. It doesn't need a blow by blow account of the insults, allegation, and counter allegations, and relies too much on the primary sources of the same. Instead, it should be summarized using secondary sources. (Hohum ^@) 16:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

You mean because there was a space between a character and the code? I'll consider how to condense the conflict, while providing the pertinence and properly sourcing. The ongoing nature is leading to the "blow by blow" effects you discuss, but will search for a source for an overview of the conflict. If one has not been created, surely it is coming soon. Previous criticism pointed to the lack of non-subject sources and overly one-sided praise without answer by "critics" of that story. I have found several sources that are not his site, but most of the sources in the previous portions, and those sources I've found praising him were also directly influenced by Yon, whether as the author or interviewee. Hope to have an improvement in accordance with your points in the next few days.(AmericanVet (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC))

I mean a space at the start of a new line.

like this

I suggest reading

• WP:RECENTISM especially the "ten-year test"
• WP:UNDUE especially "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources." (My emphasis.)
• WP:Identifying reliable sources

The Wired article gives an overview. (Hohum ^@) 17:17, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Got it.

Thanks. That is not even something I would have thought would cause that. And thanks for the references. I'll take a look. There seem to be all kinds of nooks and cranies to explain things on Wiki. It may take me a while to get the protocols down correctly. Appreciate the patience and mentorship.(AmericanVet (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC))

Looks like I'll need to refer to those resources a few more times. The one thing that jumped out at me (at the moment), is the majority/minority view discussion. In the current section, I would interpret that the conflict with milbloggers has had a major impact on the perception of his credibility and hence his readership. The milbloggers had previous helped build his prestige and it was the conflict with them that then diminished it. Conversely, he does still maintain very loyal fans. Looking at it from the outside in, it would appear to me that the views are probably equally divided and ardently argued by the two sides, with few in the middle. In short, he has become a very polarizing figure in the period since he took on BG Menard.

All of that to say, I'll be digesting the references you gave to properly moving the article forward. It will be a couple of days. Thanks again.(AmericanVet (talk) 19:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC))

Though, I have added some text and some references that may be less contentious, I have removed little. I welcome 3rd party suggestions on which portions and links afford greatest neutrality. (AmericanVet (talk) 18:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC))

Citing references from "War on Terror News" is a joke. It is not a news service (won't show up on Google news references, and they show everything). The owner, who seems to be "AmericanVet" simply copies news from legitimate sources, and uses most of his energy bashing Michael Yon, and does so anonymously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.107.22.106 (talk) 21:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

"AmericanVet" is "John" AKA "JT," the "Editor" of Waronterrornews, who libels Michael Yon from his house in Knoxville, Tennessee. He cites his own nonsense diatribe on this page, as if it were legitimate. It is not. He's a fraud and a liar, an internet vandal, a coward who hides behind the anonymity of the web and libels Yon. He takes DOD KIA notices, copies and pastes them on his site, and loads those pages up with advertisements, making money from dead U.S. military members. He claims that he pays proceeds to a number of military veteran charities, but he does not. He is also an internet beggar, asking for donations. Yon is a legitimate independent journalist. John is a fraud who could never produce anything original. His slander of Yon has been removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.116.227.219 (talk) 05:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

--You know guys, I've learned that he's been harassing and stalking other military bloggers such as CJ Grisham with baseless information and he's been using his personal life against him. Websites like Black five, asp.tacticalgear.com, the liberty zone and it ain't burning hell has been exposing him as a liar and a cyberbully.

Complaint about this page from Michael Yon

At http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/MichaelYonFanPage I find this posted about 18 hours ago:

Caution: My Wikipedia entry is incredibly inaccurate. My people have noticed and tried to correct but Wikipedia makes accuracy difficult. In other words, the entry is trash. Enemies have been created with my war work, and they try to exact revenge and have used Wikipedia to do so. They've set up fake websites, Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Michael Hardy (talk) 02:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be much indication of any recent attempts to correct the article. This issue has also been raised at WP:BLPN. I've done some aggressive editing of the milblogs section of the article, which, as already noted on this talk page a few months ago, relied extremely heavily on the blogs themselves as sources. I also found it wasn't neutrally phrased or structured. As an outsider unfamiliar with the topic area (and lacking the time to go digging for more and better sources) I have mainly removed what I regard as problematic and poorly sourced material; what's left may or may not constitute due coverage of the significant parts of the controversy. The section needs, firstly, to be based on reliable secondary sources not on repeating negative speculation from parties in the dispute; secondly, to avoid giving undue weight to the controversy according to its significance to his overall career (how much ongoing coverage does this controversy get in reliable secondary sources?); and thirdly, to be neutrally phrased. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Additional note - if Yon's "people" are indeed attempting to correct the article, it would be great if they could contribute to the discussion here, and make clearer which particular areas are inaccurate or otherwise a concern. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Yon also says on that same page that "Wikipedia is a for-profit publisher", which is puzzling. (Hohum ^@) 19:10, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the whole milblog section needed paring down. (Hohum ^@) 19:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I have made some efforts to persuade Michael Yon to post a list on this discussion page of his specific objections to the content of this article. I don't know what they are. I await his next step. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there any further update to this. It has been classified as a good article so if the accuracy is a problem then it should be delisted. This and this does not look like reliable sources. There are also citation needed tags in the article. AIRcorn (talk) 01:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Don't waste your time reasoning with him, I tried to reason with him on Facebook once about looking at all perspectives of any issue, I all I got was his bashing. He believes his written work and his articles are 100% accurate but we all know that all articles are based on a person's perspectives so there are some parts of his written work that can be wrong while most of them are right. So one perspective can be right, while the other can be wrong.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Michael Yon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081214034307/http://www.time.com/time/potw/2005_viewers_choice/vote.html to http://www.time.com/time/potw/2005_viewers_choice/vote.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:43, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Michael Yon. 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/20090722162449/http://article.nationalreview.com:80/?q=NDg5NDI4Y2ExZmVkM2E5NDZlNzJiMmRlMzE4NTA1MTE=&w=MA== to http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDg5NDI4Y2ExZmVkM2E5NDZlNzJiMmRlMzE4NTA1MTE=&w=MA==
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130121114800/http://www.michaelyon-online.com/a-hypothetical-interview-general-martin-dempsey.htm to http://www.michaelyon-online.com/a-hypothetical-interview-general-martin-dempsey.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620223308/http://vtol.org/f65_bestPapers/productSupport.pdf to http://www.vtol.org/f65_bestPapers/productSupport.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 14:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Michael Yon. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDg5NDI4Y2ExZmVkM2E5NDZlNzJiMmRlMzE4NTA1MTE%3D&w=MA%3D%3D
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977626521&nav=Groupspace&grpId=3659174697241980
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090816130257/http://podcasts.military.com/2009/08/michael-yon-live-from-helmand-province.html to http://podcasts.military.com/2009/08/michael-yon-live-from-helmand-province.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080315122159/http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmFmMjRhZDFmY2E1YjE4MWRhMWYzODE3Y2Y3YzI5NmQ%3D to http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmFmMjRhZDFmY2E1YjE4MWRhMWYzODE3Y2Y3YzI5NmQ%3D
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090213121549/http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2007/7/31/is-the-surge-working.html to http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2007/7/31/is-the-surge-working.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.michaelyon-online.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=109%3Alittle-girl&catid=61%3Aarchive-2005&Itemid=106
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090825034556/http://www.nypost.com/seven/01152009/gossip/pagesix/moore_misuses_war_picture_150182.htm to http://www.nypost.com/seven/01152009/gossip/pagesix/moore_misuses_war_picture_150182.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080621093422/http://instapundit.com/archives2/017889.php to http://instapundit.com/archives2/017889.php

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) 06:54, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Michael Yon. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.michaelyon-online.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=109%3Alittle-girl&catid=61%3Aarchive-2005&Itemid=106
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090711095411/http://www.onr.navy.mil/02/baa/docs/BAA%2008-011_ONRBAA%2008-011.pdf to http://www.onr.navy.mil/02/baa/docs/BAA%2008-011_ONRBAA%2008-011.pdf

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) 00:58, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

"Weaponized Migration"

This is a term that Michael Yon is using at the moment (May 2023).He claims many of these migrants coming to the US border are coming to literally kill Americans and he says that without exception. He is pushing this dramatic idea that these migrants will be given a house location via phone and then will go to that house in the US and kill all the occupants. Listen to the referenced video below. He is either correct or totally insane. Let someone else who wants to write up this deal with it. Has Michael Yon gone over the edge?

NaturalEquality (talk) 09:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

References

Controversial claims about immigration

Michael Yon recently claimed that Jewish organizations such as HIAS are funding "the terrorists crossing our border." [1] Should this information about him be added to the article? 174.130.221.145 (talk) 17:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)