Talk:Georges Sada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Contents 1 1990-2003 2 Sada and WMD 3 facts? 4 Piloting license 5 Phase? 6 Lack of skepticism

[edit] 1990-2003

so what did Sada do from the end of the Gulf War to the Invasion of Iraq ?

[edit] Sada and WMD

I've just added the statement noting that Sada was discharged in 1991. Previously, the article conveyed a misleading impression that Sada was still Saddam's general all the way up until the events that he allegedly witnessed (WMD's moving to Syria.) This appears not to be the case. For reference, see http://www.charismamag.com/a.php?ArticleID=12220. Kazim27 14:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

The article is ambiguous, leaving open the interpretation that Sada was "Vice Air Marshall" when the WMD are alleged to have been moved. Further, if the article is going to cite these allegations it ought to put them in proper context. The Deulfer report notes these kind of rumors and found no support for them in its investigation.64.74.106.225 16:40, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I agree with your comment. I see that you wrote the page. Congratulations. However, it seems to me that the most important thing he has done, as far as English readers are concerned, is to make the statements that he made on the WMD issue. Afterall, it was not an inconsequential statement. And he wasn't stating opinion. He was reporting what other pilots that he knew told him. While it is certainly hearsay, it bears repeating since most of what everyone else has said on the subject is repeating hearsay as well. I think that those quotes belong in the article because of the importance of what he is saying.Dawgknot 21:04, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather that the article focus solely on Sada, and not the controversy, and move his quotes to an article like "Iraq and WMD" (I can't find the exact link, but we do have a page by a similar title, that deals with what various people have said in each direction). But I'm more than a little overcautious since he is the only person who claims that he was "second in command", and "vice air marshal" has never appeared beside Sada's name until January 25th when his book was published. WP is also in the habit of making articles for books, so creating one for that, or a Wikiquotes page, would seem more acceptable than putting book excerpts into an encyclopedia article. Sherurcij ^{(talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject)} 00:05, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I have found links that go back earlier. I'm not saying that the Wiki is vouching for the truth of what he says. However, in the no original research policy, they make the point that the encyclopedia is less concerned with actual truth than with good sources and citations. It sounds a little odd, but I agree that on balance, we can't superimpose our judgment on the stated facts...until they are refuted. I suspect that there would be no reason for this guy to have an article in the Wiki if it weren't for what he has said in the book. In view of the nature of the debate on the subject, I don't see how we can avoid it. Maybe someday, we'll discover it's not true. Or then possibly we'll find out it is. Either way, it can't be ignored here. It would be like talking about OJ and leaving out the Nicole part.Dawgknot 00:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

That's how come we have O. J. Simpson murder case as a separate article, and I'd love to see Sada's book get its own article. But our role in his article is to discuss him, not the book. If you read Robert Louis Stevenson, it doesn't give a bunch of quotes about his book Treasure Island for example. Sherurcij ^{(talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject)} 21:40, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

True, but then he never wrote about a subject supplying a possible answer to a question that virtually the entirely world talks about: were there or weren't there WMD in Iraq? I'll bet that if Treasure Island had actually supplied a map that led to the origins of Bill Gate's fortune, it would be re-printed on both his and Bill's pages. Imagine if Jekyll and Hyde had turned out to be John W. Booth?Dawgknot 22:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, an author is an author, and if their book is notable enough to have its own article, it should not be instead in the author's article. Further, as an encyclopaedia, we should refrain from direct quotes as much as possible. I really do urge you to make an article for the book though :P Sherurcij ^{(talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject)} 18:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I certainly don't have strong feelings about it. Please edit it any way you think is best. I enjoyed the discussion.Dawgknot 20:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] facts?

http://www.myleftwing.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=F1352EC6DCC5DCA375A0FD98C3BBE16B?diaryId=5530

I'm unclear which points you're trying to address - is it a "fact" that it's phsyically impossible to move a WMD program out of a country with 56 flights...no, not really, it's just an estimate. shrugs Was there some particular part of that article you wanted to highlight? Sherurcij ^{(talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject)} 01:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Piloting license

Just a note, I haven't cited it in-article, but he discussed it during his interview on The Daily Show. Sherurcij ^{(talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject)} 19:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Phase?

I think it is a bit condescending describing Gen. Sada's experience as a "born-again Christian" phase? Perhaps his own testimony could be briefly stated, with necessary alternate point of view qualification?

212.18.229.195 18:18, 10 April 2006 (UTC)Rod

[edit] Lack of skepticism

This article takes Sada at face value, and fails to have a criticism section that is common to most Wikipedia articles. As of the the third week in October, this guy is touring the U.S., speaking out as a "born-again" Christian to churches across the Midwest. (New Life Tabernacle church, Sullivan, IL, Oct. 16, 2006) However, the actual content of his talk is to promotes his book and the idea that there really were weapons of mass destruction. In other words, somehow a member of Saddam Hussein's (and the current Iraqi) government has managed to get free access to the United States where he is essentially campaigning for pro-war Republicans by claiming the existence of WMDs. This seems controversial enough to be mentioned in this article. Also, the term "born-again" will lead a very large number of readers to suppose that Sada is a converted Muslim. This is not the case, he was raised in a Christian family and to any degree he was "born-again" it was in a switch from catholicism to evangelical protestantism (whatever that is).