| Revision as of 19:38, 29 June 2009 editDronkle (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers12,793 edits →India: r to RegentsPark← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:11, 31 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,304,891 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:State-sponsored terrorism/Archive 2) (bot |
| (500 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header|search=yes}} |
|
{{controversial}} |
|
{{controversial}} |
|
{{Calm talk}} |
|
{{Calm}} |
|
|
{{afd-merged-from|Saudi Arabia and state sponsored terrorism|Saudi Arabia and state sponsored terrorism (2nd nomination)|14 May 2013}} |
|
{{Archive box|'''List of acts labelled as state terrorism sorted by state''' |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1= |
|
*], ] |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject International relations|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=High|terrorism=yes|terrorism-imp=top}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Press |
|
{{Archive box|]}} |
|
|
|
| subject = article |
|
|
| author = Omer Benjakob |
|
|
| title = Revealed: The Four Articles That Got Misplaced Pages Banned in Turkey |
|
|
| org = ] |
|
|
| url = https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/turkey/revealed-the-four-articles-that-got-wikipedia-banned-in-turkey-1.6032214 |
|
|
| date = April 26, 2018 |
|
|
| quote = These demands pertained to two specific Misplaced Pages articles: “State-sponsored terrorism” and “Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War.”Both articles have subsections that address Turkey, and both contain claims that Turkey has supported ISIS. |
|
|
| accessdate = May 3, 2018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| author2 = Stephen Harrison |
|
==Jordan?== |
|
|
|
| title2 = Why China Blocked Misplaced Pages in All Languages |
|
Hezbollah is a major part of Jordan's government... |
|
|
|
| org2 = ] |
|
|
| url2 = https://slate.com/technology/2019/05/wikipedia-china-block-censorship-tiananmen-square.html |
|
|
| date2 = May 21, 2019 |
|
|
| quote2 = As Omer Benjakob reported for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Turkish officials reached out to Wikimedia several times in 2017 to request that content be changed in two Misplaced Pages articles: “State-sponsored terrorism” and “Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War.” |
|
|
| archiveurl2 = |
|
|
| archivedate2 = |
|
|
| accessdate2 = May 23, 2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| author3 = Mark Lowen |
|
== This Article is Worthless === |
|
|
|
| title3 = Misplaced Pages petitions ECHR over Turkey ban |
|
|
| org3 = ] |
|
|
| url3 = https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48386940 |
|
|
| date3 = May 23, 2019 |
|
|
| quote3 = Ankara complained about the content of two articles: on the Syrian war and on state-sponsored terrorism, demanding they be removed. In meetings with the Turkish authorities, Misplaced Pages bosses explained that articles could be edited - and that removing them contravened values of democratising knowledge. |
|
|
| archiveurl3 = |
|
|
| archivedate3 = |
|
|
| accessdate3 = May 25, 2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| author4 = Laura Pitel |
|
Wikipeida needs a new category that flags articles as worthless. This one could cut its entire list of countries, which is both incomplete and inaccurate, and not suffer. Belgium as a state sponsor of terror? That's inane. |
|
|
|
| title4 = Misplaced Pages takes Turkey to European human rights court |
|
] (]) 16:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| org4 = ] |
|
|
| url4 = https://www.ft.com/content/ff2bf0d0-7d5a-11e9-81d2-f785092ab560 |
|
|
| date4 = May 23, 2019 |
|
|
| quote4 = According to the Wikimedia executives, the ban followed a demand from the Turkish authorities to remove two articles: one about the Syrian civil war and another about state-sponsored terrorism. |
|
|
| archiveurl4 = |
|
|
| archivedate4 = |
|
|
| accessdate4 = May 25, 2019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| author5 = Stephen Harrison |
|
== Palestinian authority== |
|
|
|
| title5 = Misplaced Pages Has Been Unblocked in Turkey, Finally |
|
|
|
|
|
| org5 = ] |
|
The Palestinians aren't really part of a state (except maybe Israel, but that's streching it). Thus the "Palestinian authority" isn't a state like Afghanistan or the United Kingdom. It should be moved elsewhere.] ] 20:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| url5 = https://slate.com/technology/2020/01/wikipedia-ban-turkey-venezuela-china.html |
|
|
|
|
|
| date5 = January 29, 2020 |
|
I removed the following from the article per my comments above (and because it is completely unsourced).] ] 14:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| quote5 = As Omer Benjakob reported for Haaretz, Turkish officials had previously contacted the Wikimedia Foundation in the United States to request that content on articles such as “State-sponsored terrorism” and “Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War” be removed. |
|
|
|
|
|
| archiveurl5 = |
|
<blockquote>The ] has sponsored terrorism against Israel. Yasser Arafat's ] made an alliance with Hamas and Islamic Jihad and it contnued until the civil war, which was really a power struggle. Though, they made a unity government and had some clashes with the Hamas parliment. The Palestinian Authority has encouraged terrorism against Israel to destroy the state of Israel. Some groups that are part of and commanded by the rest of fatah such as ] were established in the ] and committed suicide bombings against Israeli civilians and have fought Israeli soldiers. Arafat, while he was president of the Palestinan Authority, was seen on PA TV publicly encouraging a jihad against Israel. But unlike al-Qaeda wich is commonly considered terrorist many muslims and muslim nations don't see these organisations as terrorist but as legitimate recistance.</blockquote> |
|
|
|
| archivedate5 = |
|
|
|
|
|
| accessdate5 = January 30, 2020 |
|
== Weasel List == |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
I belive the purpose of this list is to educate people about state-sponsired terrorism, not to make political statements. The Middle East is obviously home to many examples. On the other hand, the list shouldn't include such fallacies as the UK being indentified by Iran. It should be obvious that Iran uses this to retaliate against Europe and America. Therefore, the nations of France, the UK, and the US should be removed, since they are being accused of these crimes by the terrorist states themselves. What good is our list if we equally punish France with Iran, when France is a free, democratic country, and Iran is a dictatorship that does not respect human rights. Please discuss, (] 22:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)) |
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
:The sections you removed were sourced properly and meets our policies ] and ]. Removing them was against our policy on ]. Having these countries on this list is firstly, not a weasel list, secondly, does not constitute a political statement. ] <sup>] <span class="plainlinks"></span> ]</sup> 22:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
::My dear Canadian friend. I believe it is a weasel list. Please understand that nations which are regarded by the international community as supporters of terrorism, do NOT have the same credibility to accuse free, democratic nations of the same crime. If I call you a name, you cannot call me back one just because I did it. It must be supported by '''evidence'''. Iran is a terrorist-sponsoring nation. It may accuse the UK or the US of the same crime to retaliate, but the Misplaced Pages community should realize how foolish it is, and thus, disregard it. I hope you understand my logic. Let me know what you think. (] 22:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)) |
|
|
|
|counter = 2 |
|
:::Here at Misplaced Pages, we treat all states, nations and countries on the same level no matter what they have or haven't done. That means if it is notable and it is sourced, we added it. One being democratic and the other one not, does not give the democratic nation precedence over the other. ] <sup>] <span class="plainlinks"></span> ]</sup> 23:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 2 |
|
::::Besides that, France has more or less admitted to sponsoring terrorism in this specific instance. They called it terrorism when it happened and they latter admitted they were involved in planning it. If anything, France is probably the worst example anon could use since they are oen of the only ones who beyond any shred of doubt should be on this list even if what they did may seem minor to many of the other accusations ] (]) 18:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|algo = old(60d) |
|
==Controversial Statements== |
|
|
|
|archive = Talk:State-sponsored terrorism/Archive %(counter)d |
|
This article contains a number of controversial, unreferenced statements. The way to address these is to add citations or to remove these statements - simply removing the {{tl|fact}} tags that highlight ] issues is NOT the way forward ] (]) 11:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
==Alleged South African Sponsorship of Loyalist paramilitaries== |
|
|
The added this to support this allegation mentions a poor attempt by the South Africans to procure missile technology from the Loyalists (not the other way round). |
|
|
:"When three Loyalists were arrested in Paris in April 1989 in the company of a South African diplomat, in the subsequent court case the French judge treated the Loyalists leniently. He did so because what they had been handing over to the diplomat was just a display model of a Shorts missile and not anything that could have been of any value to the South African military." |
|
|
So this citation contradicts, rather than supports the statement in the article that "In the 1980s, the apartheid regime was alleged to have supplied arms to loyalist paramilitaries in Northern Ireland such as the Ulster Defence Association and Ulster Volunteer Force" |
|
|
] (]) 13:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::You're missing the actual section that the citation supports: |
|
|
:::''"I had been deliberately targeted by an agent of South African Military Intelligence. This agent had somehow got hold of the security-force file about Mr X and then changed the details, inserting my name and address. He had then shown the file to the Loyalists."'' |
|
|
] (]) 18:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::No, haven't missed it. That link you've mentioned does not mention or substantiate '''arms sales by South Africa'''. Please find a reliable source that backs up the '''sale of arms by South Africa''' to the Loyalists or the unsubstantiated statement to that effect in the article may be removed. |
|
|
|
|
|
''Please do not make further edits until this has been resolved.'' ] (]) 23:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::The second ref link is being a bit dodgy but the page is cached . Quote: "During this period, Nelson also travelled to South Africa at the behest of McMichael, to procure arms for the UDA. He was central to securing weapons in January 1988 including 200 AK47 assault rifles, 90 Browning pistols, 500 fragmentation grenades, 30,000 rounds of ammunition and 12 RPG 7 rocket launchers. |
|
|
|
|
|
::::Divided out among the UDA, UVF and Ulster Resistance, the weapons helped to fuel a loyalist murder campaignfrom1988 to1994in which more than 200 people died.The deal with SouthAfrican agents was known to Nelson's handlers and is thought to have been cleared by at least one unnamed British government minister. " |
|
|
|
|
|
Regards, ] (]) 19:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello, I don't see why you regard adding references to a section as being "controversial edits". While I appreciate that you are probably editing in ] your removal of references that support the material is starting to get irritating. I suggest you read the FULL source before removing it in future. Regards, ] (]) 19:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The reference did not support the statement - simple as that. Your was about an alleged assassination plot and attempt by SA to ''procure'' rocket technology and would therefore support a statement about SA ''buying'', not ''supplying'' arms. You can't make a claim, then back it up with an contradictory citation. I raised this issue here on the talk page specifically so that you could have the opportunity to resolve it. This is a controversial article, so reliable and verifiable references are required, even if you may find this "irritating". {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}} 21:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::I agree strongly with Socrates2008 and I have reverted the addition by GiollaUidir. The one reference does not work and the other does not support of even mention the supply of arms by any party. --] (]) 09:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== South Africa == |
|
|
|
|
|
I have once again had to correct this section. I would remind ] to refrain from adding POV content. The references to the South African Border War or political assassinations fall outside of the definition of terrorism or state sponsored terrorism. None of these activities ''targeted'' "non-combatants". --] (]) 09:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:I in turn have had to correct Deon's edits. Hopefully we can now put these issues to bed.] (]) 20:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Phase4 is a POV alias of ]== |
|
|
Phase4 is an alias of ] is for making POV edits non attributable to him. Please see the ] {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}} 02:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Fair use rationale for Image:Herald.jpg== |
|
|
] |
|
|
''']''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in '''this''' Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. |
|
|
|
|
|
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 17:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==POV and Patrick Haseldine== |
|
|
I have removed a bad case of POI, namely "''] ]''" This is opinion. I have changed it to fact, which is he was a diplomat. |
|
|
:That term was there because he is the chief proponent of an unproven ] about South African involvment in the ] bombing. Furthermore, his of his own ] suggests that he himself is happy with this term. {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}} 01:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::Labelling somone a conspiracy theorist is certainly POV:- it is a pejorative term used it discredit the theories expressed by that individual (and I'm not expressing support for SA involvment.) In contrast his position as a diplomat is fact. The link you gave in no way proves Patrick Haseldine is happy to be labelled a conspiracy theorist. All it shows is that someone who registered as PJHaseldine, and linked himself to this article, did not change the description. This is not support as anyone could claim on Misplaced Pages to be him, and it is policy that Misplaced Pages is not used as its own reference. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Discussion continued ] {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}} 10:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Fact tags and deletions== |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm familiar with most of the facts on this article, and will start to work to add references to support the claims. So please do not make any further deletions. One section on Chile about Operation Condor that user Raggz deleted as "OR," is actually not OR but well known, and there are many good sources to support the claim. So I'll restore that bit and expand on it with a source. An excellent source I have the supports the claims is from the journal ''Social Justice''. Article Title: ''Operation Condor: Clandestine Inter-American System'' by J. Patrice Mcsherry Volume: 26. Issue: 4. Publication Year: 1999. Page Number: 144. COPYRIGHT 1999. Thanks.] (]) 06:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== New sources required == |
|
|
|
|
|
This article is big on claims but short on citations in places. Some sections have no references at all, which is just not on. I have removed one paragraph from Belgium as that had been tagged for nearly a year. I won't remove any more for the moment, but quite honestly I could see entire sections going if good references don't appear. ] (]) 22:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:I guess you ignored my request above not to remove more items from this article as I am working on finding the best sources for these claims, and that these claims are valid. I hope this is not more of your wikistalking, JohnSmiths but its odd that you come here and delete right after I posted a message asking editors not to.] (]) 01:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::You posted your request over 12 hours before I made the deletion - that is hardly wikistalking, given I'd been editing for a lot longer last evening. I did miss it, but you can restore it very easily when you find your citations. ] (]) 12:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Fair use rationale for Image:Herald.jpg== |
|
|
] |
|
|
''']''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in '''this''' Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. |
|
|
|
|
|
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 23:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Fair use rationale for Image:Herald.jpg== |
|
|
] |
|
|
''']''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in '''this''' Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. |
|
|
|
|
|
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 06:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Fair use rationale for Image:Herald.jpg== |
|
|
] |
|
|
''']''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in '''this''' Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. |
|
|
|
|
|
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 12:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Soviet Union == |
|
|
|
|
|
An important part of this chapter is actually not concerned with "international" terrorism, as is claimed to be part of the definition in the heading. If the heading is not changed, that part should be deleted. As it is, this part is only there to push POV and support the existence of the "communist terrorism" articles. |
|
|
|
|
|
Clear examples of this "communist terrorism" POV: mentioning China as a country liberated by the Soviet Army. |
|
|
|
|
|
The main problem with the rest is (as has been pointed out in the other communist terrorist articles) that it is all based on the controversial statements of one man: Pacepa, who had a clear motive to claim these things. You need more substantiation, or else WP:UNDUE could be invoked. |
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously, as this article is a POV magnet, the other chapters suffer from similar problems. I have already and easily dealt with an anti-British fragment, but I am sure there must be more.--] (]) 10:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==India== |
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to remove for following reason: |
|
|
- Only one of the citations provided is working, which shows Musharraff blaming India for Balochistan separatism. Even if India did support separatists, there is no evidence in the links provided that these separatism in Balochistan(which is a completely lawless area in itself) can be classified as terrorism(ie, deliberate targeting of innocent civilians). ] (]) 08:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:It appears to be a hasty remark to blame India as a tit-for-tat for the Kabul bombings in which both India and US accused Pakistan's ISI for their involvement. Surprisingly indicates Pakistan countered by accusing US too of aiding terrorism in Balochistan, along with India of course, because these 2 nations were able to expose the Kabul terrorist attack. ] (]) 15:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::No he said it even before this Incident he is saying this since 2006.so i'm reverting it.another link Tariq Azeem this time if link doesn't work then here is the text "Arms supply to Bugti, Baloch rebels to be taken up with India, Afghanistan, says Tariq Azeem. |
|
|
|
|
|
Islamabad, September 05 (PPI): Minister of State for Information Senator Tariq Azeem has said that Pakistan would take up the issue of arms supply to Akbar Bugti and other Baloch tribal chieftains with India and Afghanistan at an appropriate time. In an interview, he said Bugti was not himself..." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is ample evidence to support this if it's not Internet this doesn't mean that India is not sponsoring terrorist. |
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
::: I reverted your edits for following reasons: |
|
|
|
|
|
::: It is immaterial who said and when it was said - support/sympathy for separatism(in itself) does not equal terrorism. Such support may result in armed conflicts between rival parties - but cannot be equated with deliberate and ruthless targeting of civilians like it happenned in Bombay or Karachi. |
|
|
|
|
|
::: Your links are mostly not working - You can't copy paste contents of the links to talk page and provide it as reference |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::: ''There is ample evidence to support this if it's not Internet this doesn't mean that India is not sponsoring terrorist.'' - Wiki doesnt publish OR. See ] ] (]) 15:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::This article is about sponsoring terrisot organzation.The link provided is working and if any link is not working copy it and search it in google.If you think they are not terroist see thislink I pasted that bcz in case that link didn't work but it's working fine.That or was just for the talk page. |
|
|
Many civilians haved been killed in attacks by these groups. |
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*Except the rediff link, the links in my talk page give a 404 error. btw, don't you find it a bit amusing that after India, Afghanistan, and most importantly Pak's ally in the "War on Terror", the '''USofA''' accused ISI for its involvement in the recent kabul blasts, we have pakistan reporting of these three nations' (including US) trying to support terrorism in Pakistan? This only proves that Pakistan is hell bent on accusing those who have criticised Pak by counter allegging them with state-sponsored terrorism. ] (]) 12:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::: Again we are seeing disruptive edits by ]. Seeing the amount of typos and comments in the user page, I even suppose that these could even be good faith edits by an inexperienced user. The user keeps on adding the OR "Pakistan has accused India of support to terroist groups within Pakistan". The user fails to provide one or more reliable, working links which states the above sentence or an equivalent sentence. I am not interested in an edit war, but if the user keep on adding this OR, this could be considered as vandalism and a WIki admin will have to look into his/her edits. |
|
|
|
|
|
::::: After providing a link which never works, there is no point in challenging other users to search in google and find themselves about the OR. ] (]) 15:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::All of these links are working and I will also check in a day or two if there is some problem with them.] |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::: OK here you go - 1)Statement - ''Pakistan has accused India of supporting terrorist groups such as BLA''.Citation - http://www.dawn.com/2006/07/18/top5.htm. I could never find the statement in the link provided - '''this is a pure OR''' |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::: 2)Statement - ''Suppling them with arms and ammunition''. Whether this is terrorism is debatable - try to discuss here if there is a dispute before you add something. |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::: 3) Statement - ''Indian Intelligences Agencies have also carried bomb attacks in 1990's''. Citation -'http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4789260.stm'. Again I could not find the statement you added in the link provided - '''this is pure OR constructed based on a different incident''' |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::: 4) Statement - ''Organizations such as Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization have been trained and supported by India.'' '''Pure OR - will be deleted''' |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::: Please dont vandalise by adding pure ORs with irrelevant or non functioning links, that too with full of typos. You are just making unconstructive edits that disrupt the quality of the article as a whole. I recommend that you try to use ] to experiment. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
:::::::Here is the reply |
|
|
::::::::1)The dawn link was only for proving that Bla is a terrorist group.The Hindu link was there to support that India is supporting them.The Asia times link mentioned that Bla was been supplied with arms by India |
|
|
::::::::2) This article is about States supporting terrorism.Whether it's through arms supply or being trained in that country. |
|
|
::::::::3)carrying out four bombings which killed 14 people in Pakistan in 1990. |
|
|
::::::::4)Pure Or then see this and what is this Pure OR it wasn't written by me |
|
|
I don't need sandboxes for such edits when I know that I'm doing it correctly.] |
|
|
::::::::: 200 typos in 1 sentence, non functioning links, links provided with no proper heading and pure Original Research - if someone read your edits about India, they would realize how desperate you are - oh wait, it is real ] edit indeed. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
::::::I'm always in hurry as right now I'm.] |
|
|
|
|
|
I understand that some people have concerns about certain statements and quotes in the India section. They, however, can easily be '''fixed''', only with some sufficient research and just rubbing out the whole section is totally '''pointless''' and yet also '''unconstructive.''' Also, I must say that just '''completely erasing''' everything about India has no reason. It is a fact that India '''has been accused and alleged''' of certain acts and trying to get India out of the article does not help. In that case, if you read the Pakistan section, apart from facts, there a a '''number of accusations''' such as Pak's so-called role in the Assam conflict. Shouldn't these be removed too, then? |
|
|
Furthermore, if some people are very keen on removing Indian content (mostly typical pro-Indian users), it would be better of you that you '''DO NOT REMOVE FACTS.''' India's involvement in events such as the Bangladesh insurgency of the 1970's, as well as support for the terrorist organisation '''Tamil Tigers''' were '''TRUE''' (read history if you are short of knowledge), and you can find some articles about this on the net too. If users are still concerned about the information, then '''perhaps you can help''' by doing research and adding correctly verified info to the India section. The fact that Indian RAW spies who were caught, such as ''']''', have no reason to be removed,and once again, I question: '''Why remove that?''' |
|
|
I hope that these irresponsible edits will be '''stopped'''. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 01:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
Additionally, as someone has listed that Pakistan supports the ], let me remind you that India in that case also funds the ] which is also a '''terrorist organisation.''', and there are '''accurate links''' provided for this in the article. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Very intersting material == |
|
|
|
|
|
However, many - including media reports from Pakistan, feel that these counter-allegations launched by Pakistan's President came in the wake of a war of words between India and Pakistan on the suicide attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul, which New Delhi has blamed on Islamabad-based Inter-Services Intelligence agency. Check the date of this article and compare it to the time of attack on Indian embassy in Afghanistan. |
|
|
|
|
|
See this before reverting any edits."The National" clearly mentions that concerns are being voice well before embassy bombing.] |
|
|
|
|
|
:There is ample evidence that the Pakistani accusations of india supporting BLA is directly linked with immediately preceding Kashmiri accusations of terrorism (a fact that even US has started supporting) even in the past and as well cited it has been used as a tit for tat accusation. I don't wish to say any further because these citations were also removed. whereas the issue on Sri Lanka and much of what's been included as sponsored terrorism is directly from the most biased and pakistan-military publication called "Defence Journal". Half of the info is original research trying to paste erstwhile support to LTTE when they were not banded as "terrorist" with current situations and producing a thesis in here. See ] for what I mean. |
|
|
|
|
|
:Presently the only ally that is being directly hounded in the war on terror is Pakistan. A cursory glance at the newspapers will reveal that Pakistan harbours terrors who spill over to Afghanistan that US troops bombs Pakistan and the latter is issuing ultimatums not to disturb the "peace". The ISI again has been accused by everyone from NATO, to Afghanistan, to even USA for their support to the terrorists and the user Yousaf465 only adds information on India as a weak and futile attempt to somehow avenge all the current happennings with articles dated from 1993 to paint India as the new sponsor of terrorism, when it's Pakistan which is under fire. Talk about timing. ] (]) 06:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Well if that is the case then why is dated 2006.I think Indian knew that a bombing will take place in 2008 ! .Whether India was sponsoring LTTE in 60 or 80 it doesn't matter what matter is that it was sponsoring thus it needs to included here. |
|
|
The were are other links,such as |
|
|
So read the article before slaughtering the facts.Remember the Jain Commission. |
|
|
Before it was just the embassy bombing now it moved to Kashmir.Are you going to stop or then it will be Hyderabad. If you have some reservation tag it as I have done it. ] |
|
|
|
|
|
== Introduction is a disaster == |
|
|
|
|
|
It should, at a minimum, attempt to state what state-sponsored terrorism is, per ]. ] (]) 02:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:I agree. However, it should be more than a definition (from something more than a dictionary) per ].''']''' <sub>]</sub> 04:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::That section applies to the article as a whole, not the first sentence. It is only good encyclopedic style to start with a definition of the topic. ] (]) 17:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Israel section and state terrorism vs state sponsored terrorism == |
|
|
|
|
|
The statement by the prime minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks about "state terrorism" NOT "State-sponsored terrorism". To include an Israel section please provide evidence of the State of Israel providing support for non state actors who undertake acts of terrorism. Otherwise the content belongs in a different article, if it belongs any where at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
I believe this artile and the ] article do a decent job of explaining the difference between the two concepts. Only the concept of '''State-sponsored terrorism''' is a legitimate accusation against a state. States can do massive damage but there are other words for that, and well recognised international definitions and concepts in international law. The entire concept of articles on specific states and listing allegations of "state terrorism" is not encyclopedic - any military action could be called "state terrorism" by someone. The forks from this article providing evidence of states funding, training or otherwise supporting non state actors who comit terrorist acts is a different story and worth having. |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 06:44, 28 January 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Important link india == |
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.alternet.org/audits/112761/india_has_to_take_a_look_in_the_mirror_to_understand_the_mumbai_attacks/?page=entire |
|
|
|
|
|
==India section removed== |
|
|
A user just removed the India section, saying this was in accordance with talk. Can someone point me to such a consensus?''']''' <sub>]</sub> 15:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::Here ] (]) 02:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:They call it consensus.then what is this .] |
|
|
:That is what one would call ].] (]) 11:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:We are not discussing religion here.] |
|
|
|
|
|
== Removing material on state-terrorism not state-sponsored == |
|
|
|
|
|
A fair bit of material in here seemed to be about state-terrorism on the part of Israel, Apartheid South Africa and the Soviet Union, not about their sponsoring terrorism. All the material on SA, for example, seemed to be about government agencies taking part in assassinations not their sponsoring other organisations (e.g. UNITA) to carry out terrorism. Similarly the allegations against Israel were about terrorist acts committed by Israeli government agencies not their funding other organsiations to carry out terrorism for them. The first half of the Soviet Union was again about government terror whilst the second half was more about their support for the PLO etc. which is appropriate.--] (]) 16:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:I agree with the distinction drawn above. However, if ] and the former ] practised ], shouldn't they appear in that article (Israel is already listed there)?---] (]) 16:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::Feel free to add stuff there, bearing in mind the sepecial need for referencing to reliable sources in battleground articles.--] (]) 20:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== NPov India == |
|
|
|
|
|
Npov has been added if somebody has some concerns they should discuss it here.] |
|
|
|
|
|
== Synthesis == |
|
|
|
|
|
If you feel that Indian section contains Or then you should discuss it here.Instead of removing it.] |
|
|
|
|
|
== Contast removal == |
|
|
|
|
|
LTTE and BLA are terrorist and both are/were being sponsored by India.AS Links support that.So edit it instead of removing it.See these links if you can't understand the edits.1. |
|
|
2 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
4.] |
|
|
|
|
|
== disputeed lines == |
|
|
|
|
|
India has also been extremely active in fomenting ethnic violence, breakdown of law and order and religious tensions in neighboring Pakistan. RAW agents have been caught by Pakistani security apparatus on a regular basis and put behind bars as India continues to ignore the existence of Indian nationals in Pakistani jails for fear of compromising its intelligence agency's actions.<ref>http://dailymailnews.com/dmsp0204/dmic02.html</ref> Two high-profile cases of Indian spies who languished in Pakistani jails have been those of ] and Sarabjit/Manjit Singh, with Kashmir Singh even acknowledging up on his handover to India that he was indeed a RAW-trained spy who had infiltrated into Pakistan to carry out sabotage & instigate ethnic violence while also claiming that 100 other RAW-spies remained behind bars in Pakistan.<ref>http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080043344</ref><ref>http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/I_was_an_Indian_spy_admits_Kashmir_Singh/rssarticleshow/2845628.cms</ref><ref>http://in.truveo.com/Kashmir-Singh-admits-being-an-Indian-spy/id/2244324847</ref><ref>http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/mar/07kashmir.htm</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even though India, via Indian Armed Forces & RAW financing of Mukti Bahini terrorists aided significantly to the creation of ]; RAW activities did not subside once that objective was achieved. RAW was assigned to increase its activities in post-independence Bangladesh so as to make sure a weak & subdued Bangladesh could not pose the same threat to Indian designs in the region as Pakistan did. RAW has been consistently been accused by successive Bangladeshi governments and defence analysts for financing and arming the 'Shanti Bahini' - an organisation that is fighting for the creation of an independent state named Jhumland in Chittagong Hill Tracts region of Bangladesh.<ref>http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/23261</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
Ad reflist: |
|
|
{{Reflist}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Dear reviewers, Kindly note the references contains an article by DAILY MAIL. Its actually ] and not ] (UK)! I was mislead by te name...hence added this bit of info fo others. --] ] 15:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::A question to Yousaf. How is the arrest of an Indian spy got anything to do with terrorism? --] ] 15:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::That is same as asking what role ] have in biological reactions.] |
|
|
|
|
|
::: Previous version..] |
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the sources provide the info that an Indian Spy was arrested. They say nothing about India supporting terrorism. The mediamonitor is just a paper clipping agency, they faithfully reproduced an article from ]. They have not done any additional fact checking. Thus, the only source for the info is ] that is not a particularly reliable source, does not explain the source of their exclusive information and comes from a country with a long history of conflict with India. While the information might be notable enough to include it into the ] article as an attributed opinion it is certainly not reliable enough to include it here as a fact unless much more reliable sources of information are provided. I would recommend ] to stop the disruption ] (]) 07:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:What is mentioned above has been "clipped" from the article because it's disputed.Removing that is disruption then I don't know what is going to happen to wikipedia. |
|
|
:On to main part,CFR confirms this see ,and for Indian support for LTTE see ] at ].And for ISPR's view see the latest here and . Remember that He is a soldier and can't speak in clear terms until ask to do so.] |
|
|
:For further reading see. |
|
|
1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3.Finally President himself speaking here .If you have doubt about ] see. |
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
*Thanks for the references. I am still not convinced that accusations by an involved party are reliable enough to include the allegations as facts into this article. Although they are strong enough to include into the ]. I would like to hear from other users to see their opinion and where the consensus is ] (]) 06:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
**This addition was an example of POV-pusing. How? Clubbing various references together to prove a point, where many references does not support the point. For example, check this part: "with Kashmir Singh even acknowledging up on his handover to India that he was indeed a RAW-trained spy who had infiltrated into Pakistan to carry out sabotage & instigate ethnic violence while also claiming that 100 other RAW-spies remained behind bars in Pakistan.", here ref 2(ndtv), 3(times of india) and 5(rediff) publishes the same news provided by PTI (Press Trust of India) and they say that Kashmir Singh acknowledged to be a spy and there are 100 others so in Pakistan and so; but the news story does not support/claim that they 'had infiltrated into Pakistan to carry out sabotage & instigate ethnic violence'. Spying is not terrorism and many countries have spies in other countries. I do not see how spying is found equivalent to terrorism by someone.--] (]) 06:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::Thanks for your reply.We can see other users other opinions also.] (]) |
|
|
*Come out of Kashmir singh.It's not about him that is why he has been removed from article.It's about indian support for LTTE and BLA. |
|
|
:1. |
|
|
:2.]. |
|
|
:3.] (]) |
|
|
:Another indian source.] (]) |
|
|
:::I would suggest that we keep the discussions contextual. This section discusses the text on two topics in two paragraphs and there is no mention of LTTE or BLA here. --] (]) 11:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Support for Mukti Bahini and BLA terroist link == |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for removing 'Support for Mukti Bahini' but you did made a mistake.The Dawn link labeling BLA as terrorist was to cite that this organization is indeed a terrorist organization.It wasn't for proving India's link with it.] |
|
|
|
|
|
== Rv blocked user == |
|
|
|
|
|
Other editors have also contributed their edits doesn't come under same heading. And stop reverting sourced material.There is enough evidence that it need a mention here.] |
|
|
|
|
|
== Recruited by RAW, trained by Army: LTTE == |
|
|
|
|
|
Even this is clubbing sources together ? .] (]) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== United States of America == |
|
|
Why this article doesn´t talk about the terrorism of the USA?--] (]) 12:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Why would the nation fighting the war against state sponsors of terror be on the list of state sponsors of terror? Are they fighting themselves? Try to make your contributions make sense next time. With an IP address out of Spain it is no surprise. |
|
|
|
|
|
:The answer is that someone removed without explanation the section dealing with allegations on this matter. I have now restored that section.--] (]) 12:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Pakistan == |
|
|
|
|
|
The Pakistan section is very big compared with the others. ] (]) 15:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:I agree... The information is a little out of order as well... It goes back and forth between the western and eastern borders... First Taliban, then kashmir then back to taliban then back to LET... It needs to be sorted out... The info should be a little more brief and to the point... ] (]) 15:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::I agree again. Potentially there are a lot more countries to be added. We should follow ] and have no more than three or four short paragraphs per country with separate article sfor those that have enough material to merit it.--] (]) 22:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== India == |
|
|
|
|
|
I have restored the Indian Section as follows... |
|
|
|
|
|
1) BLA has been noted to carry out various terrorist attacks in Pakistan such as carrying out Bomb blasts, Kidnapping, Assassinations e.t.c.... |
|
|
|
|
|
2) Newspaper clipings have been referenced in other sections as well, then why delete it from the Indian section... |
|
|
|
|
|
3) Lahore terror attack was a very big incident, its details are worth mentioning since it is alleged that Raw sponsored those attacks.... |
|
|
|
|
|
4) Regarding the paragraph of LTTE, the government not taking steps is not the important line, read the next lkine where it says that these government officails actually sponsered the terrorists.... |
|
|
|
|
|
I am open for corrections...Please give your constructive inputs....] (]) 04:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I can't actually see the restoration you report. Please bear in mind that we're wanting to control the size of country sections per the comments on the Pakistan section above, though I haven't seen that yet being reduced. Also please bear in mind that at certain periods Pakistan was under military dictatorship and various freedoms were reduced. Newspaper articles from those times are unlikely to be regarded as reliable sources except for how the regime wanted things to be seen. |
|
|
|
|
|
:It is probably best to argue here in detail for ther text you want included first as other editors seem keen to chop things out and we're going to have to achieve consensus through discussion in the end.--] (]) 18:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hahaha, so silly of me.... I forgot to edit the page... I guess I was too involved with another article... I am actually surprised that all the editors who chopped off the indian section were all Indians, it looks a bit like POV to me... Yet they seem a bit reluctant when editing out the unnecessary bits in other sections... BTW the Media in Pakistan is completely free as far as I know.... Calling it biased is untrue, and biased towards a dictator is a really a shocking remark... Dawn is actually the no.1 english newspaper in Pakistan and is pretty reliable.... Anyway, I don't know why the India section has to be so small when all the other sections are at least as long as three paragraphs... ] (]) 19:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Citation issue in "India" section == |
|
: Just a suggestion... Libya section is a pretty standard size section... I think we should take it as a standard when looking at the length of the sections from now on.... ] (]) 19:43, 28 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Section claims Sri Lanka has accused India of sponsoring terrorism but the linked citation shows exactly the opposite; an errant minister redacting his statement |
|
::That's the rough sort of size. BTW, I think that 8, or even 5, references is a bit excessive. I can see you might want to adopt a belt-and-braces approach when you think you might be reverted, but it does affect readability. Let's see what the initial response of other editors is and then look to trim the references once we reach a stable version.--] (]) 21:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==China is supporting northeast india terrorist group== |
|
:Misplaced Pages has problems with partisan editorship in articles related to all sorts of disputes. I've seen admins strongly suggesting that people ought to start ] in relation to another nationalist dispute - I think the Israeli-Palestinian one and ARBCOM have demanded an enforced resolution to both the dispute on the naming of the Ireland articles and on the use of the "Judea and Samaria" terminology. Sooner or later they will progress to other conflicts including the India-Pakistan one.--] (]) 22:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/chinese-agencies-helping-north-east-militants-in-myanmar-4468384/ |
|
(outdent) It may seem like a partisan editor problem to the two of you but the reality is that the sourcing for the material added to the India subsection is atrocious. Take for example the statement about Indian support for Balochistan rebels. It may well be the case that India is pumping arms and ammo into the region but the support provided in the article is as follows: |
|
|
# one article () that is presented as stating the pakistani government but really only says that a Sri Lankan paper says that RAW is supporting the Balochistan rebels. |
|
|
# one article () from an online news site (is this supposed to be ]) that attributes 'media reports' and a pakistani online news service (news international) for a mostly speculative story. How is one to interpret ''Media reports on Tuesday did not directly quote Musharraf, except saying he did not rule out a foreign hand in the developments in Balochistan,'' and ''it was alleged'' and ''not citing any source in particular''? Are we to conclude that unattributed speculative statements published in a single newspaper are to be given a hefty weight by wikipedia? |
|
|
#one source ( which is apparently a travel blog of sorts that says that a Sri Lankan paper is saying that ..... |
|
|
One hopes that your standards for inclusion of material in wikipedia is a bit higher than this. --] <small>(])</small> 17:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
: The third source actually cites the first. I've therefore removed the third and placed the first where it was as evidence of Sri-Lankan media making accusations. |
|
|
:The initials IANS at the end of the second source indicate that it is from the ], a reliable source. Googling on the title shows that this article is used by several services. Unfortunately the IANS archive requires a log in to read. So I can't cite the original. Given the next paragraph in our article contains multiple sources for further Pakistani accusations against RAW, I don't think that the vagueness is an important issue. |
|
|
:Oh and I carefully have not said that one side or the other is being partisan here. I did however find odd, given that the BLA is listed as terrorist not just by Pakistan but by the UK (and I think the US).--] (]) 19:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC) |
|
Section claims Sri Lanka has accused India of sponsoring terrorism but the linked citation shows exactly the opposite; an errant minister redacting his statement
