Talk:John Walker Lindh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
 |
John Walker Lindh was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: February 21, 2007 |
[edit] Name of non-white American Taliban
(In contrast, at least one non-white American Taliban fighter has been held in incommunicado detention or interned in a US military brig as an enemy combatant by presidential order, instead of being tried, in a similar way to José Padilla).
- who is this person where are they now? Philip Baird Shearer 19:13, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- See Salim Hamdan. Martin | talk • contribs 03:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- I think the original quote probably referred to Jose Padilla. Salim Hamdan is not an American, as Padilla and Yasser Himdy are. Concerning Padilla's race... worthless concept. But, FWIW, I doubt whether most people to whom this matters would question calling a hispanic guy non-white.
-
- Bush Presidency spokesmen have been trying to spin that guys originally described as Taliban were really members of al Qaida -- David Hicks, "the Austalian Taliban", Omar Khadr, "the Canadian Taliban" being other examples. Geo Swan (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Unreferenced
The article is good, but the #Trial section needs a lot of citing. Kilo•T 22:18, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
The Nation, February 14, 2005. Source: Lindh's lead lawyer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.113.94 (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] In the news, request for reduced sentence
Here is a news story regarding said request. Perhaps this information could be made into a sentence or two for the article?-Andrew c 22:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Speculation
The two paragraphs in the Trial section starting "The court scheduled..." strike me as highly speculative. The content deals with evidence suppression and the motivation behind a plea deal. There are no references for this material; can someone offer sources to clarify exactly why the players chose to offer/accept the plea? Gerta 19:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Jihad Johnny"
If this appellation is at all noteworthy, which I doubt, then it belongs in the body of the article, not boldfaced in the lede. The term gets 54 Google News Archive hits, compared to 9,430 for "walker lindh" and 4,760 for "american taliban"; furthermore the majority of the 54 hits are found in letters to the editor, press releases from rightwing groups, or even mainstream papers criticizing its use on FOX news, etc. Eleland 13:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wrong statements
<<Editors: the introductory sentence is clearly incorrect. The body of the story includes the list of criminal charges against Lindh in federal court. None claim that he was a fighter in any way at all and it is reasonable to believe that, had he been a fighter, one or more charges would have mentioned that. He certainly was a Taliban sympathiser. The Taliban was at the time, the government of Afghanistan. -- Warriga 08:22, 17 October 2007
- That he was a Taliban sympathizer is of little note. The United States government sympathized with the Taliban, having given them 4 million dollars in March of 2001. Also, being captured by our "allies" does not make the detainee an enemy. -- 22:17, 22 October 2007 22:17, 22 October 2007
<<As well, the claim that he was captured in November 2001 is clearly mistaken, as the body of the story shows. He was captured by the Northern Alliance in October, and handed over to US forces in November. >> -- Warriga 08:22, 17 October 2007
[edit] Lindh didn't "fight with the Taliban"-- see the official US charge sheet reproduced on this page. And the gay section seems a slur
1. The introduction to this page claims that Lindh fought with the Taliban. There is no evidence to this effect. He certainly did not fight against US or other Coalition forces, because he had been captured by the then-Northern Alliance forces before any Coalition units were anywhere in the area. The US federal charges against Lindh. cited in detail on this page, include no suggestion that Lindh fought against anybody.
2. The entire section on Lindh's "'alleged homosexuality'" seems a pointless and overwritten slur that should be removed or at least, edited sharply. Cited as references for the idea are stories in TIME magazine and the Guardian newspaper of London, England. The TIME story was published in the issue cover-dated October 7, 2002 and the Guardian daily newspaper article is dated October 7, 2002 and obviously sourced from the newspaper's Washington correspondent. That citation is worthless.
As to the TIME assertion, the alleged homosexual acts would have been between Lindh and a Pakistani businessman named Hayat. The assertion is a claim by the article's authors and is not supported by the quotes from Mr Hayat, which the Wikipedia page suggests. Hayat is quoted at some length in the TIME article and is seen to have limited and childlike English. He says that Lindh loved him very much but says nothing to suggest there was any sexual liaison between them. According to TIME, Hayat had made Lindh's acquaintance as part of a delegation of Muslim missionaries to California in 1999. Later (the lengthy TIME account does not say when), Lindh wrote and phoned him to ask him to find a place in a Moslem religious school in Pakistan -- which Hayat did. It does not seem homosexual for a religious man, which Hayat clearly is, to say that Lindh loved him very much. He certainly felt love for a foreigner who had left his home and family to study the beliefs of his religion.
3. The TIME piece was researched in depth and bears six separate reporters' bylines. It makes no mention whatsoever of Lindh bearing arms against anybody. He did once in Pakistan loose off a couple of AK47 rounds during a bird hunt, to no harm to any bird. The AK47 is freely available in Pakistan, and held by many Pakistanis for household protection and hunting. Lindh left the gun behind when he went to Pakistan, and the TIME story -- written after Lindh had been found guilty of a federal offense and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment -- made no mention of his ever having his hand on any other firearm at all.
Warriga 09:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ADMAX transfer
The article says he was kept in a medium security prison but then transferred to a Supermax facility. Why? The way the article is written it sounds as if it was a punishment for being the victim of an attack. 70.15.116.59 (talk) 05:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
He was transferred for his own protection. {atriotic prisoners wanted top beat him u, thus proving the superiority of the American Way. One got through in the original institution, and injured him. 121.44.113.94 (talk) 20:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality dispute
Whoever added the neutrality dispute tag: Exactly what is under dispute, and what part of the talk page discusses that dispute?
As far as I can tell, while the article is missing some facts (how he got from school in Pakistan to fighting for the Taliban forces against the Northern Alliance), those that are there are presented neutrally. None of the common unsubstantiated allegations from either side are presented as facts, and most aren't even mentioned. The homosexuality rumor is presented only to be debunked. His interment and interrogation are described dispassionately, without using loaded words like "torture" except to describe his claims. There's no attempt to tar his family as "hot-tub hippies," or to attack Spann's family or the Bush administration for using him as a scapegoat.
In short, the article seems as NPOV as could reasonably be expected. Since there's no explanation for why the tag is on the article, and no documentation for the dispute on the talk page, it should be removed. --76.200.101.233 (talk) 01:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I feel the neutrality of the article is definitely questionable. Characterizing him as a "scapegoat"for the Bush administration is surely a biased statement. Spann was portrayed in the article as a bully and his murder was mentioned but it was made to appear as if the only person that said Lindh was involved was discredited. He was part of the uprising and Spann was brutally murdered. There is nothing negative about Lindh whatsoever in the article without it being mentioned that the allegation was "proven false". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melissaky (talk • contribs) 03:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Without Parole?
The article states that Lindh was sentenced to 20 years in prison without parole. As far as I know, parole has not existed in the Federal Prison system for several years. Does anyone else have any insight on this? Illinois2011 | Talk 05:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Father is A Homosexual
Why was this left out of the article? The father dumped the mother for his gay lover, and almost immediately after that John Walker started searching out the Islamic stuff and went off the deep end. And the father's lover at the time (dunno if they are still together) was allegedly the owner of a gay bathhouse. Ruth E (talk) 22:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
