Talk:Sami Mohy El Din Muhammed Al Hajj

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Africa This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Africa, which collaborates on articles related to Africa in Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Sudan. See also The Sudan Portal.

Contents

[edit] Scoffing at Qu'ran flushing appropriately placed? Sources don't substantiate assertion.

An unnamed contributor place a skeptical comment about Qu'ran flushing, in the middle of a summary of Al Hajj's lawyer's account of his experiences. That unsubstantiated assertion was, in my opinion, inappropriately placed. I removed it. No reasonable person would question that a place could be found for quoting a credible source that expressed skepticism about the Qu'ran flushing. The middle of the summary of Smith's account is not the right place. And the original unnamed contributor didn't provide a source. Another contributor felt they should restore the oriignal skeptical comment, in its original inappropriate place. They added three links, which they say substantiate skepticism as to whether it was possible to flush a qu'ran.

I still believe the location is inappropriate. And those three sources are not credible sources that substantiate the original assertion.

  • The more credible source is Fox News. But the Fox story doesn't substantiate the assertion. It merely says that Newsweek stepped back from saying that their anonymous official source had confirmed that a classified official inquiry had confirmed the story.
  • The other two links [1] [2] look like non-notable blog sites. And I don't see them substantiating the original assertion that flushing a qu'ran down a toilet is impossible.

By all means add skeptical comments to the article, but in a more appropriate place. And those skeptical comments shouldn't attribute the skepticism to "some critics". Further links that are said to substantiate the assertion should actually substantiate it. -- Geo Swan 19:29, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Can I suggest that we get some news source links other than Al Jazeera? In the context of the article it seems... inappropriate. --DDG 20:46, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

According to the prisoner 345 page, owned by al jazeera, "The Qu’ran was thrown in the toilet in front of him." [3] It doesn't say it was flushed, for what it's worth.71.246.241.195 (talk) 18:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My recent edit made the references and external links disappear

Sorry about that. Not sure how it happened but the code is still there. Can anyone fix it?

Fixed.

Did you mean to use a link to one of Al-Jazeera's Arabic pages as a reference? [4] When a reference doesn't include the title and date it makes it impossible to look for a mirror, if the main link goes dead. So, I tried the link to find the title and date. But, I don't speak Arabic.

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 06:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flushing a Koran down the toilet is Physically Impossible!

Guantanamo Koran hanging in a surgical mask.
Guantanamo Koran hanging in a surgical mask.
A Guantanamo toilet.
A Guantanamo toilet.

It's so obvious that this was part of the propaganda campaign unleashed against the Western World.

Has anyone ever tried to FLUSH A BOOK DOWN THE TOILET? It would be physically impossible, as books are larger than the pipes in a toilet.

This allegation in the article should be listed as such: an unfounded allegation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.131.184.152 (talk) 05:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

If you take it LITERALLY, yes, it seems to be not possible. More probably the guards have torn out the pages, throwing them piece for piece in the toilet. You see, more funs for the Marines who run this "prison". --84.141.50.97 (talk) 10:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, some people are eager to take the words "flushing a book down the toilet" literally, simply to discredit the facts and put some dense fog over them. There is so much video and photographic evidence on the net where a Koran is abused, that this incident seems true. What I am missing in this article: Bush and his camarilla are planning to give themselves and others immunity for each war crime (like this) committed in Iraq. But my English is not good enough to work that out. --84.141.33.125 (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] rm -- see talk

I clipped a comment. It was in a section that quoted from the 2005 Summary of Evidence (ARB) memos. It was made to look like the factors from that memo. Innocently, no doubt, but also innappropriately.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 00:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] removing wikidates from quoted material

Wikidates are great, in general. But I believe correcting quoted material to use them is a mistake. Quoted material should be left "as-is". Readers may want to search the web on it. If so using wikidates can cause those searches to fail.

That is bad.

So I removed the wikidating.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 01:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Identity section

The fact that transliteration of Arabic symbols to the Latin alphabet is imprecise and often produces many possible results suggests to me that Section 1 (Identity) would be at best reduced to 2 possible spellings of Hajj's name (as at Taj El-Din Hilaly). There is no source given for any confusion over Hajj's identity only sources for different latinizations of his name. And this doesn't deserve a section to itself. SmithBlue (talk) 05:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)