Talk:Nabih Berri

Untitled

This is very NPOV. Needs clean up.

Agreed. This is horribly POV. I don't know enough of the subject to clean it but it is ridiculous and someone needs to fix it.--75.43.218.71 16:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

An IP cut out a load of stuff and I tend to agree. Middle East Intelligence Bulletin seems like a poor source for this sort of thing. If anybody has better sources for this sort of thing, feel free to add them. Tombomp (talk/contribs) 09:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll second the POV tag. The MichaelTotten.com link is ridiculous, as well. Investigating it reveals that it is part of the Pajamas Media blogroll, a notoriously inflammatory and unapologetic rightist pop internet media source that doesn't let the facts get in the way of a good smear. I know a bit about Lebanese politics, so maybe I'll take a stab at improving this article in the future, but I'm afraid my own biases may come in to play. It will be interesting to see if, after the elections on June 7th 2009, which the Hizbullah/Harakat Amal opposition are predicted to win, Berri's coalition are still considered by this article and so many others to be the "non-legitimate government" of Lebanon. BostonFenian (talk) 20:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Over here!

This is where discussion takes place, not in edit summaries! :-p Xavexgoem (talk) 12:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

OTRS

Now fixed, and have indef semi-protected the article. Orderinchaos 23:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

it is a shame that when you write about this leader "Nabih Berri" you point out silly matters like someone's point of view in him being a puppet..if he were one,do you really think he'd be so successful?? by the way,under-estimating a person's intellegence is untolerable.Nabih Berri is definately a man who led with success,who brought pride to the people and who made Lebanon proud.till this day,he is still and will always be the dignity to the world.information about him stealing money from the south foundation is irrelevent.we are from the south..and we see our south become rich with his all-growing projects.since he took control,we have been blessed with a life no one has or will ever have..i do plead that those who write articles live the situation,live among the people,live in the country and base their information on facts not lies.whoever wrote this article should go back to school learn how to write with honesty and point out what is already crystal clear..may you see how brilliant this leader is..how about you call for an appointment and get to know him..??when u do that,come back and edit your article.i'm sure u will. written by Zeinab.A.Fawaz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.128.124 (talk) 15:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Ghaddafi

Ghaddafi is mentioned twice in the article. The first time it is said that Ghaddafi is thought to have been responsible for the disappearance of Musa al-Sadr. The second time it is said that Ghaddafi was in fact responsible for the disappearance of Musa al-Sadr. The first formulation is more correct. Ghaddafi is commonly suspected of having been involved, but this was never proven. The state of our knowledge on this has not changed since Fouad Ajami's book, The Vanished Imam. I don't see why this page can't be unlocked for editing. There are plenty of Wiki articles on other Lebanese leaders, and Berri is certainly not the most controverisal of them. Drphil500 (talk) 18:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Presidency of the transitory arab parliament, not !

I've found some info about this. They are apparently older sources (including older wikipedia pages) referencing Berri as the speaker for the parliament, but it appears that Berri has never been president of the transitory arab parliament, since in the first official meeting on the 27 décember 2005, it's Mohammad Jasem Al Saqr that was elected People's Daily Online -- Arab Parliament holds inaugural meeting.

But the 2003/2004 dates cited give a hint, and this source helps understand the truth : Arab legislators agree to disagree Gathering fails to issue clear call for united parliament. So Berri was actually, on the 3 June 2003, effective in March 2004, elected president of the Confederation of Arab Parliamentarians, and then organised the inaugural meeting of the transitory arab parliament where Al Saqr received the title of president of the newly officially created body. It's still obscure if Berri didn't have some title between the summit of Alger creating the parliament and the first meeting of december in Cairo electing Al Saqr. But I could find no source on that.

I'd appreciate someone with the correct rights to edit the page to reflect this corrected info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.68.92.104 (talk) 11:41, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Aitour, 23 June 2011

Please remove: According to a Wikileaks cable,[3] Berri is losing supporters due to his rampant corruption. Furthermore, prominent independent Shia leaders claim that Berri receives a US$400,000 a month from Iran for his political services.

Aitour (talk) 23:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Abhishek ^{Talk to me} 17:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 January 2013

In the Education section, please change Berri Went to School in to Berri attended School in Ghads (talk) 08:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:34, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

three core content policies violation

I've noticed that the same edits have been happening in a coordinated effort for the past couple of years to the article with an intent to distort the image of a Lebanese public figure using multiple accounts, edits made present a clear defamation of a living person and violates Wikipedia three core content policies. references used are not reliable and not published and mostly based on blogs and questionable websites, while the modification I made are referred to the Lebanese parliament official website as well as Lebanese newspapers. I strongly suggest the removal of the protection applied on this page and making sure that the edits comply with Wikipedia rules and policies, and now the page is protected so please {{Edit protected}} and remove the corruption part which is entirely untrue and very poorly sourced as well as the wikileaks diplomatic cables section which has been clearly denied by many newspapers and considered very controversial — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahda1986 (talk • contribs) 11:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I've edited the article so that it better conforms with the biographies of living persons policy. Unsourced, poorly sourced and non-neutral material has been removed, and the remaining controversies have been moved out of the "corruption" section and into the "Later political career" section. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:05, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring and sockpuppetry

Please note that the user above, who is attempting to remove all mentions of corruption and Wikileaks cables from this article, likely works for Beirut-based marketing agency AddBloom, two of whose employees attempted last year (and were consequently blocked) to alter the article in the same way. This is part of an effort by said marketing agency and by party members to whitewash this politician/warlord's online record ahead of upcoming parliamentary elections. Nabih Berri's corruption, aside from being public knowledge, is heavily documented in scholarly books and articles. Any attempt to remove such sources and replace them with links to the website of the Lebanese parliament, which has been headed by Berri since 1992, is outright dishonest and ill-intentioned and should result in the user getting blocked.

Callsfortruth (talk) 12:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 26 August 2014

I wish the following section could be added to the article.

"By Way of Deception" and reported Mossad links

• According to Victor Ostrovsky in his book By Way of Deception, Berri, who is presently a close ally of the Iranian and Syrian regimes, used to be on the payroll of the Mossad, and provided them with services, information and intelligence during the Lebanese Civil War. Source: Ostrovsky, Victor (1990). By Way of Deception: The Making and Unmaking of a Mossad Officer, p. 316.

Callsfortruth (talk) 12:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: This needs to be put in more context. The source says "Besides Gemayel, both the Jumblatt and Berri families were on the Mossad payroll." The Berri family isn't the same as Nabih Berri. And the way this is worded makes it seem like it was only Nabih Berri himself that was involved with this, whereas the source makes clear that Mossad payments were common among warring Lebanese families. Finally, you need to indicate where in the article you would like this to be placed, but the context issues need to be addressed first. You should be aware that Wikipedia's rules regarding biographies are very strict - see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:24, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

obvious violation of Wikipedia rules

hi

I'm someone editing using my phone and not a party member nor a digital marketing agency! the user above clearly states that he or she has been tracking this article for at least a year which proves what I mentioned before about distorting the image of a Lebanese public figure using multiple accounts in coordinated attempts, plus the user above can't ask admins to violate Wikipedia's three core content policies by adding untrue informations which doesn't adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the united states and all of Wikipedia's content policies, please I suggest {{edit protected}} and replacing the content with the official cv found on the official website of the Lebanese parliament on the following link: http://lp.gov.lb/admin/uploads/files/CV%20President%20Berry%20En.pdf

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahda1986 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Sorry, we can't replace the contents of the article with that CV. First, the material doesn't satisfy Wikipedia's content policies, and second, unless the CV is in the public domain or is available under a free licence, posting it here would be a copyright violation. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:10, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiLeaks and the corruption section

Moved from User:Mr. Stradivarius § Nabih Berri

 – — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Almost every corrupt politician's page has a section entitled Criticism or Allegations of corruption. Mentions of the Wikileaks cables are found throughout Wikipedia, why shouldn't this be the case here? Furthermore, Berri's sister-in-law having made a fortune from printing Gaddafi's books is not irrelevant, considering that Berri heads the movement that was founded by a cleric whose disappearance was caused by Gaddafi.

Callsfortruth (talk) 21:54, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Furthermore, being "universally derided as corrupt to the core", is quite different from "having problems with corruption" as you decided to word it, and you removed mentions of the half a million dollars that Berri receives monthly from Iran. Your behavior is quite suspicious. Also, I wish you could take into account the fact that attempts were made previously to alter the article by employees of a PR firm. Unfortunately, some people were raised with no integrity and are willing to compromise whatever principles they have for some petty cash, as the PR employees as well as others knowingly did. Callsfortruth (talk) 21:59, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Kindly restore all mention of Wikileaks cables in the article. You are not entitled to remove them, as they are mentioned throughout Wikipedia where relevant. Also, it is disturbing that this user is still able to edit Wikipedia, when checkuser has established that he is using sockpuppets. And I find it equally disturbing that when you did include the Wikileaks cables, you did not use the direct link to Wikileaks cables dealing with the Middle East. Kindly restore the edits.

Callsfortruth (talk) 22:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

@Callsfortruth: All of the removals I've made are mandated by the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy. This policy is very strict. I quote: "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Let's go through your points in turn, bearing this in mind.

1. The "corruption" section went against Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Balance. It was just list of allegations against Berri without any context, and looked designed to portray him in a negative light. It's not that we can't include criticisms about people, if those criticisms have appeared in reliable sources; it's that we need to cover the criticisms in a neutral way, both in regard to article structure and tone.
2. The Wikileaks diplomatic cables are primary sources, and the use of primary sources is discouraged by Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Avoid misuse of primary sources. We can't include contentious claims in primary sources that haven't been covered in reliable, secondary sources. Cables that have been mentioned in secondary sources can be re-added after they are appropriately cited.
3. The claim about Berri's sister-in-law is in a grey area. It is twice removed from Berri himself, which makes me skeptical that we should include it; however, if the connection to Berri is well-established in reliable sources, then we could include it. Are there any mentions of this with relation to Berri in any other reliable sources?
4. The wording "having problems with corruption" can be changed. We need to stick closely to the BLP policy, but there is no need to stick closely to my exact choice of wording. Feel free to suggest alternatives.
5. I've processed the sockpuppet investigations page that you created, and a number of the accounts involved have been blocked.

Hopefully this answers all of your questions, but feel free to ask if you have any more. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the wikileaks allegations, they were reported in other media, including here, here and here.

Regarding the Gaddafi book printing affair, it was mentioned here, in an article written for the Middle East Forum by Daniel Nassif, who is now the head of the Congress-funded Al-Hurra. The context clearly shows the link between Nabih Berri and his sister-in-law, which is common knowledge in Lebanon, and was intended to demonstrate that Berri works for his own interests and not for any specific ideals. Another source mentioning Berri's proximity to Samira Assi can be found here.

Berri's corruption is mentioned in scholarly books and these sources cannot by any standard be considered as either poor or unreliable. Simply running "Nabih Berri corruption" through Google Books can show the extent to which his corruption is mentioned and recorded. Furthermore, the article should include a criticism section, as is the case in many other biographies of living persons.

Lastly, regarding the sockpuppet, you have blocked him for a week, and I believe that he should have been blocked for a longer period, as one of his accounts had been blocked for edit warring and he immediately created another account to insert his edits, and his demonstrated knowledge of Wikipedia rules prove that he was aware of his violations, be it edit-warring or sockpuppetry. Callsfortruth (talk) 15:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

@Callsfortruth: The argument that "many other articles do X, therefore this article should do X too" comes up frequently on Wikipedia, but it isn't one that carries much weight - see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. The thing that carries the weight is Wikipedia policy, and in this case Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Balance is fairly clear that we should not have separate "criticism" sections. For example, I went to the biographies of Barack Obama and George W. Bush, who have both been reasonably controversial, but neither of them have a "criticism" section. Not even Adolf Hitler has one. Rather, the criticisms are interspersed throughout the other sections. I suggest having a quick read of those three biographies to see how they are structured - they could be a good model to use here. Also, could you give some examples of biographies of living people that have criticism sections? That would actually be very helpful, as they are probably in need of cleaning up. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

You discarded everything that I said and chose to focus on one particular issue. I won't focus on adding a criticism section, I have more important things to do than editing Wikipedia. Kindly reinsert the paragraphs regarding Berri's actions during the 2006 war, using the secondary sources that I provided, and the paragraph on his sister-in-law dealings with Gaddafi, as I believe it is highly relevant and well-sourced, as are the mentions of corruption that come up in the references that I provided. Eventually, I will have to ask other admins to oversee this, and they will probably look into your insistence on removing sourced mentions of criticism, your dubious rewording and the fact that this article is an established target of a marketing firm, which Berri has paid substantial money to in order to whitewash his image. Callsfortruth (talk) 17:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

@Callsfortruth: I was focusing on the criticism section issue because in these kind of situations it usually helps to talk through things point by point, rather than "firing on all cylinders", so to speak. The other thing that I was going to suggest is that you should put together a draft version of the article in a sandbox somewhere, perhaps User:Callsfortruth/sandbox. That way you can suggest changes without having to type "add X reference to Y sentence", etc., and it would also make it easier for me or other admins to review your proposals and copy them over to the article. However, if you include a criticism section in your draft, then I don't think many admins would accept it due to the BLP issues that I mentioned above. If you want other admins to review this, then please feel free to do so - this page could probably do with more eyeballs watching it. Probably the best way to make that happen is to make a post on the administrators' noticeboard asking for review of my actions here. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 00:31, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I have rewritten the article here User:Callsfortruth/sandbox1 in the manner that I think it should be presented. I backed every edit that I made regarding the cables with secondary sources (from newspapers, media outlets, think tanks, etc.) and I phrased edits that are already referenced by secondary sources in the way that they are mentioned therein.

Furthermore, I removed all edits that are referenced only by an online CV, as it is a primary source and cannot be considered as reliable.

Lastly, I did not add a criticism section, yet I added subsections, which do not mention corruption outright, but do mention that there are allegations. All of these are properly sourced, and edits that portray the person in a negative light, according to guidelines, should only be removed if they are poorly sourced or unsourced, which is not the case. If the article was devoid of any properly-sourced mentions of criticism, then it would be a hagiography, which I believe is not the purpose of an encyclopedia. Callsfortruth (talk) 11:51, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 4 September 2014

I wish the changes that I made here could be introduced in the article. All edits are backed by secondary sources. Callsfortruth (talk) 22:39, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

BLP violation and vandalisme

@Mr. Stradivarius: the user callsfortruth is clearly violating every rule of wikipedia especially regarding BLP and reverting properly sourced edits made by users

sources used by callsfortruth are unreliable to say the least especially when it's related to a biography of a politician where every political adversary can write whatever he wants to distort the image of someone... their fore this user should be blocked and his edits reverted

Dubious editing

User:Mr. Stradivarius has consistently removed heavily sourced paragraphs and kept replacing them, until just recently, with unsourced hagiography. The following are the sourced (which he maliciously calls unsourced) paragraphs that were removed:

• According to former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky, in his book By Way of Deception, the Mossad "was deeply involved with several other warring Lebanese families, paying for information, passing it between groups, even paying the gangs and some Palestinians in the refugee camps for intelligence and services. Besides Gemayel, both the Jumblatt and Berri families were on the Mossad payroll. Source: Ostrovsky, Victor (1990). By Way of Deception: The Making and Unmaking of a Mossad Officer, p. 316

• Berri is involved in corruption allegations regarding a 1996 coastal motorway in southern Lebanon. The contract for the motorway was won by a firm run by Berri's wife, Randa Assi, and was said to be overpriced by over three hundred million US dollars. Sources: Johnson, Michael (2001). All Honorable Men: The Social Origins Of War In Lebanon , p.236; Schwerna, Tobias (2010). Lebanon: A Model of Consociational Conflict , p.128.

• In 2004, Berri was mentioned in several of the diplomatic cables leaked by WikiLeaks. One cable said that Amal is "near universally derided as corrupt to the core", and that Berri was described by a relative of Musa al-Sadr as having provided social services in the south only through "wheeling, dealing, and stealing". Also according to the cables, Berri receives USD 400,000 a month from Iran, using a fourth of the sum to shore up his support and pocketing the rest. Sources: Gloria Center, Wikileaks cables.

• According to one source, Berri was considered by Rafik Hariri to be "irredeemably corrupt and unreliable", as well as an opportunist, and is thought to maintain his support base through access to state funds. Source: Blanford, Nicholas (2006). Killing Mr. Lebanon: The Assasination of Rafik Hariri and Its Impact on the Middle East , p. 118

• According to leaked diplomatic cables, during the 2006 Lebanon war, Berri, publicly an ally of Hezbollah, described Israel's attacks on Hezbollah to US Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman as being "like honey", and hoped that Israel would complete its mission against Hezbollah quickly. He suggested that the IDF "markedly improve its targeting intelligence to make air strikes more effective. Either that, or they would have to wipe Hizballah out of the south with a ground offensive." He also suggested that "if Israel succeeds in weakening Hizballah militarily, then he will be more willing to weaken them politically". Sources: Wikileaks cables, NOW Media, Aspen Institute, Middle East Online.

• Berri's sister-in-law and close business associate Samira Assi, is said to have made a fortune by getting a contract from Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi to print one million copies of Gaddafi's "Green Book". Assi's deals are seen as highly controversial, since the founder of the Amal Movement, Musa al-Sadr, is known to have been disappeared on the orders of Gaddafi himself. Sources: Middle East Intelligence Bulletin report, written by the current news director of Congress-funded Al Hurra.

Why should anyone bother to edit Wikipedia, when their efforts are compromised by the actions of such individuals as User:Mr. Stradivarius with dubious actions and intentions? I hope this could be referred to an arbitration or mediation committee that would decide upon restoring these sourced paragraphs in the article, and I hope that User:Mr. Stradivarius's actions could be thoroughly investigated, keeping in mind that this article was previously targeted by a Beirut-based PR agency. Callsfortruth (talk) 20:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

character assassination by Callsfortruth

hi

actually I don't agree with anything user Callsfortruth have mentioned and it's a clear character assassination and I note the following reasons:

• the mossad claim can't be taken into consideration since it's doesn't mention the name nabih, instead its the entire family so let's just go ahead and round up everyone with the last name berri, jumblatt or gemayel and accuse them of being on the mossad payroll!!! this can't in anyway be considered a reliable source. this is not to mention the countless fights between the two sides and the countless agents caught by his party during the war

• as for the corruption allegation, everyone can write and publish any book they like and mention anyone in it, this is why it's called a free world, what i could consider a reliable source is a court appearance that is archived and published in a newspaper or something regarding this matter and if it's commonly known why is this the only source you came up with!

• as for the berri receiving money from Iran allegation, i actually tried researching that a bit, what i found is that these allegations were done by 2 characters that have been fired from the party he represents in the mid 90's and therefore their claims can't be taken into consideration since they have personal issues with the speaker.

• going over newspapers in Lebanon from 1992 till 2005 you will notice that rafik hariri and nabih berri were never on bad terms, but actually on the contrary even the disputes they had like every politicians in any other democratic country were always solved in a civilised manner and again there is no reliable sourcing

• as for the 2006 leaked cable you're talking about, berri denied all what's mentioned so these are only allegation and nothing is proven and I don't see the point in repeating myself and talking about the resistance of isreal that he helped created.

• last but not least, what does his sister in law has to do with him, regardless if it's true or not (and from what Callsfortruth wrote before and his sourcing quality I bet it's not even close!) this can't in anyway be mentioned is his BLP simply because it's not related to him exactly like your mossad claim above.

finally and this is the most important part, keep in mind that NEUTRAL is a very important word in Wikipedia and everything Callsfortruth wrote above violates every rule in a BLP.

the user Callsfortruth should be blocked indefinitely because it appears that he or she are taking this matter personal which raises doubts of the purpose of it all!

thank you for reading. Rami2587 (talk)