Talk:Abu Hamza al-Masri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Egypt Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Egypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
Islam
Islam Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Islam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] News article

this news story might be of help for more specifics and more info:

cheers, Kingturtle 05:39, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Benefits

What kind of benefits was he recieving? The vaugeness of this statment could be misread as POV? For exemaple, he only has one hand (having lost it in the Afghan war with Russia), so most likely as a resident he was entitled to some kind of diability benefit. The implication of the text is that he was recieving unemployment benefit while working, or perhaps some benefit fraudulently acquired? --Salimfadhley 12:54, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


"Getting benefits" is not in itself a crime, and therefore it is pretty much an irrelevant point to make in a description of an individual. The statement appears to have been made purely to imply that Hamza must have been getting the benefits fraudulantly, or to imply that giving benefits to such a horrible person is waste of "tax payers' money". I would suggest that the author of the article has no knowledge of the facts regarding any benefits that Hamza may or may not have received, and is simply regurgitating shock-horror headlines from tabloid newspapers. (unsigned)

I'm going to remove "Abu Hamza was at one point gaining £1,030.65 a week in benefits." as it's not sourced, and seems very unlikely. There is nothing wrong with claiming benefits you are entitled to and the figure is way in excess of the benefits amounts people actually receive. The government hasn't charged him with benefit fraud as far as I know. Secretlondon 16:28, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

The point is, of course, that Hamza, who is relying on the British govt not to extradite him to the USA, and is funded by the UK taxpayers, uses his position to attack his host country. Or so it is alleged.

Exile 18:03, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Well having worked in benefit office, it is possible that he was claiming that much benefit a week. It is a sad case whilst now he is in prison that it is costing the tax payer £25,000 a week to protect him.

Whilst most of you would not appreciate my view, he should be deported and tried for past crimes in any country that can provide evidence that he has commited any sort of crime.

If he hated this country so much, why did he stay here?

It's comfortable, and he likely saw it as a way to bring down the enemy from within. Which is, after all, the Islamists' best chance of destroying the West (and could be working). We all know how they'd fare in any form of open combat.

Because we are mugs here, and always will be. He should have been bundled onto the next CIA flight to pass through the UK the moment the US asked for him.

I feel that the first few lines of the 'State support' section should be further reworded to be more factual and less POV. Perhaps also this section should be moved to further down the article, taking its place after more significant information. The current wording and position suggests priorities slightly more akin to the Daily Mail than Wikipedia. 194.73.118.78 19:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)CA

I would like an update to the status of his second wife and her further entitlement to social housing (after the original property was bought under the buy to let scheme and another property brought with the proceeds transferred ownership and then rented out in the private sector). It would be good if the following article was verified and not mere heresay. I can understand the need to be factual rather than Daily Mail speculation but there is a social housing crisis in the country and it is human interest to understand if this scarce resource has been fairly and legally allocated. It is alleged that she qualified for further social housing because of the breakdown in her relationship with her husband but this is disputed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=409997&in_page_id=1770&ct=5

[edit] Extradition

The statement "However, as part of the European Union the United Kingdom is party to an agreement whereby extradition should be refused to any country which has the death penalty." is slightly incorrect.

EU countries do extradite to the USA, however, they insist that the recieving country does not pass a death sentance. CS Miller 12:37, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect from Abu Hamza

I think this redirection should be replaced by a disambiguation, since there are (where) two notorious Abu Hamzas. Besides Abu Hamza al-Masri, there is also Abu Hamza Rabia, an Al Qaida commander killed in Pakistan on the 03-Dec-2005. --Pinnecco 11:44, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wife?

There are two different names given for his wife in the article, "Valerie Fleming" and "Valerie Traverso". Either one is incorrect or it's not clear he was married twice to different Valeries.

Yhwman 00:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)yhwman


It looks like Valerie Traverso is now known as Valerie Fleming, but the details in a number of sources are a bit inconsistent (e.g. year of marriage)...

--Leigh 17:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] People_of_the_Book

Should there be a mention about this, and his preachings of Jews/Christians being enemies of Islam? Sceptre (Talk) 17:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arabic spelling

In the Arabic spelling of Abu Hamza's name, the alif on the far left should be on the far right, to the right of the ba' (before it in Arabic !). I have tried to move it but the font defeats me.

Versions of Microsoft Internet explorer have problems editing right-to-left text mixed with left-to-right punctuation in some cases. I fixed it by replacing the raw Unicode text with HTML entities (as I did a while back when there was the same problem with Hebrew text in the "Land of Israel" article). AnonMoos 22:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources?

Could we get sources for the Sky News amputation story and his Columbia remarks? Also, any ideas on how to make it more clear he is referring to Palestine, Texas? My first thought was "gee, this guy is dumb". (Then I hovered over the link and felt dumb myself.) crazyeddie 23:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

In addition, the comparison to Nick Griffin should be sourced or removed, there are plenty of claims made there, without any citations to back them up. Rockpocket 06:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The comparisons to Nick Griffin should definitely be removed. This section is rambling and off-the-point. I'm not saying that it is completely irrelevant to this article, but it should be no more than an observation that accusations of double standards in British Law have been fuelled by comparisons between the court cases of Abu Hamsa & Griffin. And then only if sources can be provided. Beerathon 11:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Added cleanup tag due to above problems. Kyaa the Catlord 10:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The article needs severe trimming, it currently reads like a collection of red-top tabloid factoids (and we all know how honest tabloids are) - I would do it, but to trim back to only leave what is sourced would mean an article (that is currently linked to front page) looking particularly thread bear. It is also going to be difficult to get exacting sources on much of this stuff anyway, given the controversial nature of the man subjectivity in source material tends to goes out the window, and hence the sources themselves would be fairly useless in providing validity to the article.SFC9394 14:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Trimming would just be a start. The structure of this article is a mess. Someone needs to spend a bit of time knocking this into shape. If I can spare a bit of time I'll take a crack at it this weekend. Beerathon 15:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comparison to Nick Griffin

I cannot find any sources that prove the existence of a substantial debate regarding double standards in British Law that directly relates to the Hamsa/Griffin cases. I've heard people alluding to the idea on TV a couple of times, but I cannot find any particular focus on the issue (except in this article). Reviewing the article's history, it appears that once the section was added, it was jumped on by numerous users who have expanded on and edited without regard to being relevant article's core subject. The result is a load of usubstantiated waffle and conjecture. If someone can locate some source material on this subject then maybe we can reconsider its inclusion in some capacity (see my comments in the Sources? section above). In the mean time I am going to remove the section. Beerathon 12:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Sources here and here put comparisons in with Nick Griffin, but no more than that. Sapient 12:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
OK. I have noted comparisons with Griffin under the section covering Hamza's court case, but I did not make specific reference to the idea that it has sparked a debate over racial bias in the British Courts System. The BBC source shows that the Chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission believes that the differing verdicts may suggest 'that controversial figures in one community might get treated differently than others', but this does not constitute any kind of formal accusation. Beerathon 15:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
This comparison I think is pretty superficial. The main charges against Hamza were incitement to murder - a markedly different thing to incitement to racial hatred. Griffin was acquitted on only half of his charges and faces a re-trial. The charges he was acquitted on related to a speech about Stephen Lawrence. Most people would find what he said was objectionable and racist, but the law is not against racist speech per se. The jury must have felt that the crucial element of incitement was missing - at least thats how I read it. It should also be noted that Hamza was acquitted on a few charges of the same offence. Chris 11/02/05

[edit] Image

Let's get a more NPOV image, and one that doesn't say "haha, look at the drugged-out man with the hook!", he's not a pirate. Yes, he has a hook, no, we wouldn't show that odd pose as somebody's main pic if they weren't handicapped.

http://www.gunculture.net/images/uploads/captain_hook.jpg looks good to me (ignore file name :P )

http://www.voanews.com/persian/images/ap_muslim_cleric_Abu_Hamza_al-Masri_file_150.jpg isn't bad except the man behind him somewhat screams "terrorist" in Western minds

http://www.ouwho.co.uk/fark/abu_hamster.jpg could be cropped (as much as I love his new toy)

Your pick, just pick one Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 12:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

But I like this one, he looks like a pirate. Kyaa the Catlord 13:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, the line in the article stating "He apparently enjoys provoking outrage and has readily posed for photographs holding his "hook" right hand to his eye" appears to be true. See this BBC profile photo. If he is indeed a pirate (heck, there have been well documented Somali Pirates attacking ships, and Somalis are by-and-large Muslim), then that may mean there's an entirely new breed of seafaring terrorists for the world to deal with. Now, while I know President Bush might prefer to simply send out a fleet of submarines to sink these dasdardly Islamo-fascist pirates terrorists of the high seas, I would suggest using different, eons-old arch-nemesis of pirates: the Ninja. ---Bobak 23:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, it is definately hard to call a picture of him showing off his "hook" as POV since it is his claim to fame. I'll send my crack squad of busty lesbian ninja pirates to aid the efforts in Somalia. :D Kyaa the Catlord 11:41, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Compared to Nick Griffin I thought he was harmless.

[edit] Statistics

According to a POPULUS survey from December 2005, Muslims in Britain oppose his views by a factor of two-to-one; however, among the age group 18-24, the figures are reversed, and 2 out of 3 who expressed an opinion agree with his views. [1]

Presumably that refers to "Younger Muslims are also more likely than those in general to agree with Abu Hamza (by 27% to 13%)" in the reference. But that isn't what those numbers mean. The 13% is the %ge of all who agree, not the %ge of 18-24 who disagree. The latter figure is not given.

Thanks to whoever changed the reference, which now bears this out

[edit] Sued?

The article states:

In 2004 while remanded in prison, he sued for a further £200 per week in benefits [2].

Yet the source quotes a Daily Mirror report that he "is to sue welfare officials for thousands of pounds (dollars) in extra state benefits". There are plenty of examples of tabloids reporting things that are going to happen, yet never do. I can find no evidence that he ever sued, thus i've changed the article accordingly. If anyone can find a source confirming he did sue, go ahead and revert.Rockpocket 21:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hand and eye missing

Does anyone know for sure how his hand and eye were lost? Merecat 04:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I believe it is both hands -- said to be a war injury. -- Geo Swan 23:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
The BBC's just broadcast a special "I was a spy within al-Qaeda" Newsnight programme. The featured spy said he was present when Abu Hamza lost his hands, and that it was an accidental nitrogycerin explosion. This happened while they were together in a training camp in Afghanistan. If anyone's interested the programme should be available on the BBC's website for a while. aLii 23:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Demining project in Afghanistan [3] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Moonlight Mile (talk • contribs) 00:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Cleanup

This article is in desperate need of a cleanup - at points the article becomes frankly unreadable. There have obviously been some recent edits which are extremely badly written. I note for example the references to abu hamza's bigamy. The article is becoming an embarrasment.

Reviewing the changes made this morning, to what was a pretty decent article, i can find no improvements. For that matter, aside from the confusing explanation of bigamy and occasional ?notes to self?, there was little new information added. Thus i reverted back to the version, in place this morning, that has been stable for weeks. Rockpocket 21:42, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] al-Masri redirect

I think there should be a disambig for al-Masri, or an introductory note. There are a number of guys with that moniker: this here guy, then Khalid al-Masri who drew some strings pre-9-11, Khalid El-Masri who got on the CIA's wrong side, and the guy who quite probably will draw al-Qaeda's strings in Iraq (although that might be an individual called "Abdullah bin Rashed al-Baghdadi" instead) is given as Abu al-Masri. Then you have Mohammed Atef AKA Abu Hafs al-Masri, killed NOV-16-2001 in Afghanistan and head of the local chapter of Ansar al-Islam. Certainly, a nondescript moniker like "al-Masri" - "the one from (Islamic) Egypt" - fits many people, and as such it is a nom de guerre of Egyptian-born jihadists - or just ordinary Khalids - that we'll see over and over again.

[edit] Not neutral

This man is notorious for his levels of state support and yet this article doesn't mention them. Every article on Hamza mentions it. THerefore this article completely fails to comply with NPOV as it does not mention this issue, which is one of his best known attributes

Here are som references

http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/news/individual_tin_news.php?news_id=133

'Hamza had snapped up the flat for £75,000 under "right-to-buy" laws and then gave it to his son after the council moved him to a bigger property nearby.

But despite the deal, which generated a £150,000 windfall, British-born Mostafa is still demanding his £200-a-month Jobseeker's Allowance.

Mostafa, 24, who served a jail sentence for terrorism in Yemen, attended a job centre in Wembley, north-west London, to sign on for his money.

Last night politicians demanded an investigation into Mostafa's finances.

Hamza, jailed earlier this month for incitement to murder and race-hate offences, is estimated to have cost taxpayers more than £4million in state handouts, police costs and legal aid.

Tory MP Greg Hands said:

"The son sounds like he is exploiting our benefits system in the same way that the father did."

Mr Hands, whose Hammersmith and Fulham constituency covers the area where Hamza and his family live, added: "This family have been doing this for years. '

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006060382,00.html

"Housing benefit pays the rent for their £550,000 five-bed council home in Shepherd’s Bush, West London — while the £34.61 weekly council tax is covered by another allowance.

Nadjet, who wed Hamza in 1984, receives income support of £379.46 a week, child tax credits worth £200 a week and £62.60 child benefit. Her children are 18, 17, 15, 12, ten, nine and six."

"Abu Hamza al-Masri, currently in British jail on incitement to murder charges, plans to sue the government for the £200 a week in welfare he says he is owed for almost three years. According to the Sun, which broke this story, Abu Hamza already is getting plenty of other benefits:

£2 million of taxpayer funds to pay for his now-seven-year legal battle against deportation; Special help in jail to bathe, dress, and eat due to his disabilities, as well as a personal nurse who visits him daily; and A new hook (on which, see the Oct. 20, 2004 update of this entry)" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.9.39.187 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

While this info should perhaps be mentioned in the article, the fact that it is not does not make the article non-neutral. I have therefore removed the npov tag. Perhaps you should try writing a new section for the above information? aLii 23:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Inapropriate Language

Removed the word "paki" where it said paki citizenship. Will keep an eye on this page to check for any further vandalism.81.213.125.244 11:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The last line of the Quotations section seems suspiciously like vandalism, but I'm not an expert in the field. Guille (talk) 15:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More detail

The real debate about Hamza is concerning his status as a citizen, as a possible refugee and about his status under international and domestic law. Perhaps someone with some knowledge of these issues could write about them. For this, of course, more detail will be required: when, and under what circumstances did he enter the UK. What was his status then and now? How does his case link up with broader debates about leave to remain in the UK and political activity etc.? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.86.148.142 (talk • contribs).

I've just read a profile of Abu Hamza on the BBC website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4644960.stm) which seems significantly more helpful than the current Wikipedia content specifically the brief detail on his life up to now and not just his media fame since '99. I have no knowledge on the subject so don't want to mess with what's here but maybe it could be of use in getting the article more encyclopedic... extraordinary 15:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name

His name was Mustafa Kamel at birth, but he goes by Abu Hamza now: where did that come from? His son's name is given as Mohammed Mustafa Kamel, did he perhaps have another son named Hamza that would explain the name ("father of Hamza")? --Saforrest (talk) 20:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Kingdom

Is it worth mentioning that in the 2007 movie The Kingdom, the head terrorist in the film was also called Abu Hamza? I mean, that can't be just a coincidence, right? Additionally, while he's a touch short of the full hook, he had fingers missing from one of his hands (which indicated to the protagonists in the film that he was a bomb-maker.) 88.109.54.255 (talk) 21:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sheikh?

Was he a Sheikh? Can this be verified? What entitled someone to be given this title? Officially? 81.156.13.254 (talk) 13:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)