Talk:Sami Abdul Aziz Salim Allaithy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Law Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
???	This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military biography task force

[edit] Terminology

In this edit Allaithy's status was changed from "innocent" to "no longer enemy combatant".

I disagree with this edit. I don't think it is wikipedia policy to collaborate with spin-doctors. The reason DoD spin-doctors chose that term for the men who the CSRTs determined had been innocent, after all, was for the "optics" if they sued for unlawful imprisonment. The term "nlec" implies, incorrectly, that they had once been enemies, and had had a change of heart.

Justice Robertson mocked the DoD's use of this deceptive phrase.

Since Allaithy was innocent, let's say he was innocent, and refrain from doing Karl Rove's dirty work.

Alternatively, we could add a paragraph, or more, whatever was needed, to explain the context of this controversial weasel phrase, and the criticism it has drawn.

Since Al Laithy is unquestionably innocent, I would prefer the simple approach of just saying he was innocent, and avoiding any mention of the deceptive phrase altogether.

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 18:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the term NLEC is, perhaps deliberately, misleading. I almost changed it to "no longer [considered to be an] enemy combatant" to make its meaning clearer (which is why the link is a self-pipe) (one of the other Guantanamo articles does have a similar explanation). However I think we should report what the forum found, not our interpretation of it. If they had found he was a blue crosseyed duck we should report that. Further more, by saying he is "innocent", we imply that an "enemy combatant" is "guilty" - without saying of what in either case. The decision is actually one of jurisdiction, not innocence or guilt. I felt that the quote marks and the hyperlink draw attention to the fact that the jargon term needs context, however I have now added a parenthetical note, hope that clears it up. Rich Farmbrough, 18:58 8 February 2007 (GMT).