Talk:Ajmal Kasab/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2



What the hell is this. When i try to have a neutral point, im a accused of bias. Let all points be written..what the hell is going on here —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi! First you need to cite sources for what you write - there were three points in the controversy section: (link)
1. Saffron Wristband - The point is now moot as his identity has been established as a Pakistani Muslim. However, this sentence can probably go into the section discussing controversies about his nationality, perhaps. With sources of course.
2. Also owing to India's notoriously corrupt police... - This portion was total PoV, so it had to go.
3. Karkare's death and Indian political controversies related to it are totally irrelevant to Ajmal Kasab's biography.
My point is that a majority of this article is full of controversies so there is no need nor extra material left for a separate "controversies" section. —SV 19:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)


this article involve informaiton that injects a hatered among two countries. I request people to kindly enter the useful information instead of the words that show extremism . Practicing Peace is very essential and we must keep in mind that on earth exist all kind of people i.e kindhearted, educated, extremist, bad, poor, rich etc. Kindly try to educate the poor in order to be productive instead of showing blind a road to hell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


This page has been badly Vandalised. I'm new to editing entries. CAn someone put up a vandalism alert please? Thanks.Xmlsi (talk) 05:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Article reverted to an earlier version. -Unpopular Opinion (talk · contribs) 05:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


As far as my knowledge goes, Faridkot is not the name of any city in Pakistan, but it is a city in India. Suprah™ (talk) 12:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

There are several cities in Pakistan and India with share the same name, one ex: Punjab, Hyderabad. Bluptr (talk) 13:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Found a map here of . Bluptr (talk) 14:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Apparently it's in Pakistani section of Kashmir. (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Please remove link to Faridkot as it redirects to Indian District which has nothing to do with this attack. -- (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Faridkot is at the following location in Pakistan Farīdkot Multan, Punjab, Pakistan coordinates: 30° 16' 30" North, 71° 57' 30" East (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC) [1] (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Faridkot disambiguates in Pakistan to (from NE to SW, assuming that the individual wikipedia entries are correct):

The Hindu claims that Iman is from "the village of Faridkot in the tehsil of Dipalpur in [Pakistan] Punjab's Okara district.":

IMHO it sounds like The Hindu is at least self-consistent, and disagrees with the Multan/Khanewal village. Boud (talk) 01:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Okara city from wikipedia entry: Okara, Pakistan: 30 48 00 N 73 27 00 E. Boud (talk) 01:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • another useful link: Depalpur Tehsil. Boud (talk) 02:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Here's a google shot showing the whole region including the towns of Multan and Khanewal in the west and Pakpattan, Dipalpur and Okara in the east and slightly north, together with a pointer to the Faridkot that The Hindu claims is correct. Boud (talk) 02:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Reliability of confession

Do we have any independent way of confirming what the Indian police are saying? Their interrogation methods are notorious. I wouldn't be surprised if he claimed to be JFK after they were through with him. Also, this guy does not look punjabi; is there any information about his family/personal history available to see if they are Muhaajirun who moved to the Faridkot area from elsewhere? Are there any photos of him from after his capture? It seems rather convenient that the only attacker captured alive is also the one whose photo has been plastered all over the internet. لقمانLuqman (talk) 17:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Well His parents recognise him. I hope that you can confirm that and be happy. -XK —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:13, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Except he is not the only one photographed. His partner from the train station attacks was also photographed. They moved a lot in public, attacking several public institutions (railway station, hospital, drive by shootings).The other attackers holed up in private or semi-private facilities. This explains both the likelihood of Kasav and his partner appearing in photos and CCTV more than the other group members, as well as the higher likelihood of being captured alive (they were in a car). Also he looks as Punjabi as anyone.
I do agree that the way the leaked intoerrogation info is being presented seems to authoritative in the article. It isn't just draconian interrogation techniques (which this subject would be undergoing anywhere in the world) it is that the leakers themselves maybe getting the information third or fourth hand or may be exaggerating, misunderstanding or even intentionally misstating what Kasav has said. (talk) 16:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Re merging this person into the main article

Disagree with merging into November 2008 Mumbai attacks. This person, Azam Amir Kasav, is of major importance. How much less would the world know had he been killed. His contribution to our understanding of this event is deserving of an article. Don't merge this person into the main article - that makes him too obscure. What does it take to remove the "merge" banner? Can I just go and do it as it seems to have no support. -hydnjo talk 00:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, done. -hydnjo talk 01:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • No merge. The attacks page is large enough and doesn't need this clearly notable bio to take up more room. There is precedent for articles on mass killers. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • No merge. See the opening paragraph of this section for my rationale. -hydnjo talk 02:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
The merge banner has been reinstated after my deletion with the following edit summary: "leave it there for a while longer. it doesn't hurt. let editors come to a consensus." -hydnjo talk 02:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • No merge. the person has attained sufficient notability as the sole survivor/suspect.ajoy (talk) 07:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • No merge.There must be seperate article of this survivor/suspect. -Thanks. Jayanta Nath (Talk|Contrb) 07:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • No merge. As the sole surviving suspect for a mass murder/terrorist attack, he has attained notability. Shovon (talk) 07:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge. The man is insignificant, though his actions were significant. He is a small part of a large and awful event. We must not confuse horror, shock, patriotism, grief, and disgust for notability. This man was cannon fodder, and not inherently notable. Even his survival is not notable, just luck. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Comment. Please refer to pages like Mohammed Abdullah Azam, Hamdi Adus Isaac, Andrew Ibrahim etc. Now, I know that other stuff exists is not a valid criteria, but, it is generally agreed that a perpetrator of terrorism and/or mass murder becomes notable although they are (in)famous normally for a single event. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 12:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • No merge Agree with the reasons given above.-- (talk) 08:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • No merge Agree with hydnjo and rational provided above, especially he is the sole terrorist to be captured and has provided vital clues regarding the links with LeT -- Bluptr (talk) 11:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Don't merge Let this be seperate article. mumbai massacre article'll look too cluttered. (talk) 19:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I am removing the merge template for the following reasons:

1. There is a clear consensus against merging both here and at Talk:November 2008 Mumbai attacks.
2: The article November 2008 Mumbai attacks is currently 104 kilobytes long - well above WP's guideline for article size. -hydnjo talk 21:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Abu Ismail Dera Ismail Khan?

Dera Ismail Khan sounds like the name of a place in Pakistan and not a part of the person's name. 'Dera' is usually used before names of cities, such as dera ghazi khan, and I'm pretty sure I have heard of Dera Ismail Khan as well.

Almost without a doubt he would only know noms de guerre of most of his cohorts for purposes of operational security. (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't fully understand you, but I was suggesting that the guy's name is only Abu Ismail and Dera Ismail Khan is the name of the place that he comes from. That name (Abu Ismail Dera Ismail Khan) sounds odd. --digitwoman (talk) 15:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

BJP link?

Lots of people claim that Kasav's photos show him wearing a wristband that identifies him as a Hindu and/or as a member of the BJP.Shouldn't this be discussed? (talk) 22:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Please start signing your posts by typing ~~~~. This has been debated earlier also. It has not been proved that it was really a Hindu wristband or was a fashion statement. Moreover, nobody has claimed that the terrorists were intoxicated with Alcohol and LSD. And even if he were, who says Muslims don't drink alcohol? On usage of LSD and/or other drugs, please refer to the origin of the word Assasin. Also, for your kind information, Pakistan & Afghanistan are one of thr world's largest producer/trafficker of the opium related drugs [citation needed]. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 07:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
There are now reports in credible media sources that they did take drugs[1]. Please note that the Assassin intoxication allegation is disputed. In contemporary Muslim sources they were called Al Batiniya or Ismailia, not Hashasheen. It was I think Marco Polo who first quoted the intoxication allegation, referring to Crusader sources. KB (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
As for the question of BJP, unless there is a media report that we can quote, I would call it speculative at best. KB (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Citations?! Refer to Golden Crescent or any other article related to illegal production and trafficking of heroin and opium. Shovon (talk) 05:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I am talking about the historical meaning and the etymology of assassin. It is historically inaccurate. See, quoting Daftary "At the same time, within the crusading-culture of a pre- and early-modern Europe, the Syrian and Persian Nizaris took shape as Muslim mercenaries-cum-fanatics who murdered their victims while high on opium or hashish. If this propagandist concoction of a 'stoned' assassin fails to fit the complex reality of the discipline and training required for committing what was always an explicitly political act, the popular notion of Nizaris as a community of killers also denies their rich, multivalent culture." and "There is no mention of that drug [hashish] in connection with the Persian Assassins - especially in the library of Alamut ('the secret archives')." The book itself is here. Also, see here, and Encyclopedia of the Orient. Even the other Muslims who were targeted by the assassinations never attributed the myth of opium and images of paradise that Marco Polo mentioned, though their leaders were killed by that sect that is considered heretical. KB (talk) 04:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

he is not a hero why we need his background kill him — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:22, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Name errors: police mistranslation, Urdu translation, what short name?

Confusion in name: Maharashtra police not knowing Punjabi

i propose the following new version of the introduction paragraph and a subsection "Naming confusion" down below. Any objections or supporting or opposing evidence (reliable external sources)? If The Hindu is correct, then other newspapers should start using the correct version of the name.

TODO: Please someone else correct the Urdu - i've put mohammad ... amir for the moment.

TODO: IMHO maybe we should delete most of the long list of alternative names, though i'm not sure. Two arguments against deleting it are:

  • the person discussed here is historically important and many people may want to analyse newspapers etc which have used (or will continue to use) the incorrect versions;
  • the list contains many references, some of which may be re-cited elsewhere in the article - we should not delete these references without checking if we need to re-insert them elsewhere where someone refers to them indirectly.

i've put my signature here so that people can edit the two paragraphs below while waiting some reasonable delay before putting them into the main article. Boud (talk) 00:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

some blog copies of similar articles by the same author, Praveen Swami. Boud (talk) 03:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed new version of introductory paragraph

Mohammad Ajmal Amir, son of Mohammad Amir Iman[2] (Urdu: محمّد ... امیر) (also Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman; many incorrect versions of the name have been used; apparently due to a linguistic error by police officers, many early versions of the name erroneously included Kasab, Kasav, Kamaal, Qasab or Qasav as a surname, e.g. Azam Amir Kasav) (born July 13, ...

Proposed subsection somewhere appropriate lower down

Naming confusion

Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman was arrested in Mumbai, which is located in the state of Maharashtra, where the main language is Marathi. Officials are expected to have some degree of basic communication skills in English and Hindi. On 6 December 2008, the newspaper The Hindu reported that the police officers who interrogated him did not speak his language, Punjabi, and misinterpreted his caste origin "kasai", meaning butcher, to be a surname, writing it as "Kasav". Various officials made minor corrections they thought were needed to the latin alphabet spelling. Eventually, native Hindi and Punjabi speaking police officers talked to him and discovered the error.[2] The Hindu reports the correct version in the latin alphabet to be either "Mohammad Ajmal Amir, son of Mohammad Amir Iman" or "Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman".

Some of the various incorrect versions of his name which have been published include Azam Amir Kasav, Ajmal Qasab[3], Ajmal Amir Kamal[4] Ajmal Amir Kasab[5], Azam Ameer Qasab[6], Mohammad Ajmal Qasam [7], Ajmal Mohammed Amir Kasab,[8] or Mohammad Ajmal Amir Kasar[9], or Amjad Amir Kamaal [10].

Yes, it appears The Hindu broke the story of his name. [2] Brian Pearson (talk) 02:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Automatically generated reference list for the talk page

  1. ^ Mumbai attacks Terrorists took cocaine to stay awake during assault
  2. ^ a b Swami, Praveen (2008-12-06). "Terrorist's name lost in transliteration". The Hindu. Retrieved 2008-12-06. 
  3. ^ . Sky News. 2008-12-01 Retrieved 2008-12-02.  |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help); Missing or empty |title= (help)
  4. ^ "Three Lashkar fidayeen captured". The Hindu. 2008-11-29. 
  5. ^ "Arrested terrorist says gang hoped to get away". Economic Times, India. 2008-11-29. 
  6. ^ Indian Express: we trained in Lashkar camps, arrested terrorist
  7. ^ Business Intelligence Middle East
  8. ^ Times of India: 10 terrorists have entered Mumbai
  9. ^ Gulf News: Lone surviving gunman reveals operation details
  10. ^ The Hindu: Pakistan now holds the key to probe: investigators

Urdu name wrong

The Urdu name given is wrong. عزم امیر قسب. Most of the names mentioned are derived from Arabic, but due to transliteration and approximate pronounciations from Arabic to Urdu, it is hard to say exactly which ones they derive from. For example Azam can be عزام () or أعظم (most great) but can never be عزم, similarly, Amir/Ameer can be أمير (prince or leader) or, عامر an ancient Arab name. Also Kasab/Qasab can be قصاب (not قسب) which means butcher in Arabic, but I would be surprised if that trade-name is used in Urdu. KB (talk) 16:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. azimsultan (talk) 21:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
So what do we do? It is ambiguous even if the English transliteration comes out accurate and they finalize on one spelling. I doubt Indian police will come up with a unified Urdu rendering of the name. Should we delete it, or put some variants, or link to this discussion? KB (talk) 04:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
"...I would be surprised if that trade-name is used in Urdu." Your comment here is consistent with the The Hindu claim about the name. Boud (talk) 01:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I have corrected the Urdu name in view of the new info emerging (basically Mumbai police botched the name). It is now believed that Mohd Ajmal Amir (or Ameer) is his name and Iman is given as the father's name. The thing I am not sure of, is whether Amir is أمير or عامر. Ameer points to the former, but Amir can be either. The Iman part is something I have not heard in Indian/Pakistani Muslim names. Could it be Amin instead of Iman? Someone from Pakistan/Punjab, please verify if Iman is used as a male name there. KB (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

What short name should we use?

What short name should we use? "Iman" as the Hindu uses? (i assume that the newspaper is correctly following naming traditions here). For the moment i've mostly used "his" and "he". Using "Kasav" certainly sounds like an error if The Hindu is right. Boud (talk) 00:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The Independent on 6 Dec, based on the The Hindu article, has started using "Iman/Kasab". Boud (talk) 18:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Redirect etc.: what long name?

Before doing stuff like redirects, better that we have a good consensus on the name. The The Hindu article implies that Mohammad Ajmal Amir, son of Mohammad Amir Iman would be correct, or this The Hindu article suggests Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman. My interpretation is that "Iman" is not the fellow's "own" name, but for identification purposes, that can be used since it's his father's name. A sort of pseudo-patronymal system.

We could also use just Mohammad Ajmal Amir. That gives us at least 3 choices which seem to be what might be correct - any preferences among these? My suggestion is the second.

  • Mohammad Ajmal Amir, son of Mohammad Amir Iman
  • Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman
  • Mohammad Ajmal Amir

Boud (talk) 18:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Mohammad Ajmal Amir is the name to be used. In short it should be Ajmal Amir--ISKapoor (talk) 01:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I have made some of the the changes. However article is being edited by others at the same time. Please replace the name by Ajmal Amir in the article.--ISKapoor (talk) 01:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Nice work by everyone who participated! i haven't been so active in wikipedia culture recently, but it seems to me that wikipedia culture is maturing on the pages that i happen to be motivated to work on. Boud (talk) 23:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

LeT and ISI

"Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, a senior commander of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, which has close tie up with the Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan from its inception., reportedly offered to pay his family Rs.150,000 for his participation in the attacks."

There are multiple issues with this statement. First it tries to say too much in one sentence. Second, LeT's ties to ISI do not need to be mentioned here. That relationship is well documented at Lashkar-e-Taiba, and it adds nothing to this section about Kasav's background. I propose that we remove this clause from the sentence to clean up the grammar and because it is out of context.-RDavi404 (talk) 14:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Training - number of trainees?

The training section at first states that Kasav was among a group of 24 trainees and then later says that he was among a group of 25 men. Which is it? We need to have the same number to make it consistent. I believe the actual source of the second number says "about 25."-RDavi404 (talk) 14:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Ajmal Amir's capture photos

Someone can upload these images detailing Ajmal Amir's capture [from a Skoda] I am not sure about the copyright stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pravictor (talkcontribs) 16:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Original research

Wikipedia is not a bulletin board. It is an encyclopaedia. It is not the place to pontificate, hypothesise, or conduct any form of original research.

Terrorism is not an excuse to allow an article to descend into a marsh of original research, uncited pseudo-facts, and populist drum beating. The article quality is currently appalling in parts and good in others. I have flagged many of the areas of original research, each of which needs a severe rewrite or wholesale removal. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Removal of OR

I am about to remove all of the uncited OR and the comments. Sufficient time has elapsed for experts to change this and nothing has happened.

When there are citations and when written in NPOV style, then it may go back. This article is currently awash with opinions and justifications. It is not a valid Wikipedia article.

Since these remain in the article history I will not be "moving them to the talk page". The deleted stuff may be retrieved form the history and worked on, but needs full citations prior to reinstatement.

a "Comments" section is, by definition, original research and must go.

My edit summary will simply refer to the talk page. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

This gross diff shows my removals, performed in sections.
We have a duty to keep the quality of our articles high. This is perhaps even more important when the topic is controversial. Speculation and original research must not be tolerated. If it is to be included it must be cited, and entered in accordance with our consensus of style and content. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
i suspect those subsections were added by people relatively new to the wikipedia. To those new wikipedians: the basic idea is that you can summarise the information in external sources (not the exact style of wording) and put those summaries in the article, but you need proper referencing. Please read original research for more detail. A "comments" section is totally excluded. You can cite comments by external, verifiable, "notable" commentators, if this is useful. But our own opinions on the situation as wikipedians are essentially irrelevant to our work on the article. You might wish to briefly mention your point of view on the talk page so that others can help reduce the chance that your edits will be biased by your point of view, but it's not required and most people don't do that. It's certainly not acceptable to put a comments-by-wikipedians-or-anonymous-people section in the article itself! It was surprising that nobody removed that immediately... Anyway, don't be afraid to try again, but please try to read the guidelines and get to understand wikipedia culture at the same time. Boud (talk) 18:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
BTW, there are a few references down the bottom of the gross diff - it might be good (if someone wants a "mechanical", non-creative task to do) to check that the same references were not used elsewhere. We don't want to have missing references because of the removal. Boud (talk) 18:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure that someone will retrieve them should they be relevant. I took the draconian approach to see, in part, if any of the contributors actually cared about quality. From the lack of outcry and lack of reinstatement it appears that each wanted to add something, but no-one cared particularly about the article itself.
The article itself is pretty poor, still, but the initial flurry of "gosh I must add a bit, too" seems to be over. It still looks to me as if a total rewrite is required, I fear. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Letter to the Pakistani High Commisioner

Ajmal Amir wrote a letter to the Pakistani High Commissioner stating he and other 9 terrorists are from Pakistan and requested Pakistani help after Indian lawyers refused to take his case. Can some1 put another headline on this issue? Source : Source : —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Page move

I've been bold and moved the page to Ajmal Kasab. Almost all news organizations call him "Ajmal Kasab" or "Ajmal Amir Kasab", so I thought that the title should reflect this usage. Anyhoo, the intro and the section on naming confusion explains in detail what the issue is. Regards, Max - You were saying? 13:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC) PS: I've fixed all double redirects created as a result of the move.


Someone added the date of birth category, then was reverted. I disagree with the reversion and reverted accordingly. This is a biography, and a BLP at that, categorization according to birth is warranted and needed. I do not understand the revert.--Cerejota (talk) 09:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad. Was in a hurry and thought that his birth date was not confirmed yet. Have put that in the lede now. Thanks for the message. - Max - You were saying? 11:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Racism against Pakistan

The deaths of two Israeli hostages during the Mumbai attack have caused India to break off relations with Israel.It would end in racial discrimination against the Pakistani people.The people of India might call them 'puny,worthless people'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gtalosangeles (talkcontribs) 07:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

muslim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

"Alleged" abuses

Psychological: Indoctrination and brainwashing via continuous exposure to Islamist propaganda, including compiled footage of Indian atrocities in Jammu & Kashmir, and imagery of the atrocities suffered by Muslims in India, Chechnya, Palestine and across the globe.

This section previously said the atrocities were 'alleged'. This is akin to calling the Holocaust 'alleged'. Just because Muslims don't have a powerful lobby and voice in the world as the survivors of the Holocaust do, does not mean it is right to walk all over them. Editors, especially Indians, please put your Hindutva and Jai Hind war cries aside for a moment and reflect on the truth of the matter, which is simply that war exists all over the world, certainly in the previously named localities, and the overwhelming majority religion of these places is Islam. Thus it cannot be "alleged", which for your Indian-educated English speakers, means "declared but not proved", that these atrocities happened, they did, and continue to happen. (talk) 00:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

References substantiating the occurrence of abuses by the Indian Army in the state of Jammu and Kashmir

Here are some references to Indian atrocities in Jammu & Kashmir [3] [4] [5] [6]

There are reports from International observers such as the Human Rights Watch as well as the Indian Press which demonstrate that the atrocities are not "alleged" but actual. I hope these references are specific and reliable enough for the editors of this article to consider for inclusion. Reeshtya (talk) 21:31, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

There have been numerous attempts by unregistered users to repace 'actual' back to 'alleged', 'speculated', 'supposed' etc. Several references have been added to the list of citations (see citation number 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39) to prove the actuality of the events. Reeshtya (talk) 21:31, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Unregistered users have been attempting to revert this edit, and have asked not to include hate blogs such as as references. Having verified their claim, I have removed those links but ensured there are still independent references (such as the report from Human Rights Watch) to back up this edit. These 'editors' have 'not shown the minimum courage' (to quote Joy1963) to register themselves on Wikipedia and engage on the discussion page and go about editing this section without reason. If the purpose of this article is to provide verifiable facts about Ajmal Qasab, I ask all contributors to respect the rules and not include fallacies. Reeshtya (talk) 08:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Baseless anti-Indian propaganda

It seems user: knows abosolutely nothing about India. The war cry "Jai Hind" has nothing to do with Hindutva. It was raised by Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose and his Indian National Army comprised the personalities like Shah Nawaz Khan and Habib-ur-Rahman. Though, he talked about the atrocities suffered by Muslims in India, but he has not provided any reliable specific reference in favour of his statement and lastly he has not shown minimum courage to register him with wikipedia. There is no reason, why his edit should not be reverted.Joy1963 (talk) 05:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia actually has a policy on use of this word. See WP: ALLEGED.--RDavi404 (talk) 02:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Ages of Kasab's siblings

I have removed the ages mentioned, because they are irrelevant to the article, and they, of course, keep changing. Please feel free to revert if anyone feels strongly that they should be mentioned. Maybe they can be mentioned as 'born circa....'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hanged Citation?

It says that, "On Thursday 6 May 2010, he was sentenced to death by hanging .[95]" However, the citation listed, "^ "Indian court convicts Pakistani for Mumbai siege". The Associated Press.," mentions nothing about his hanging and is reported a day or two before his apparent hanging. Can someone find a source that confirms this? Also, are there pictures of his hanging or some other verifiable evidence? (talk) 05:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC) -Stexe

The line says "sentenced to hang" not "hanged". I have added a BBC News ref now.--Sodabottle (talk) 06:37, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Wrong Birthday

While the article quotes a news source mentioning Sep 13 as the birthday, numerous other sources mention July 13. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Twitter rumour and confusion edit war going around that Kasab's birthday was not today. Probably mostly caused by this report by the Hindustan Times.

However, most likely that the HT got it wrong - what appears to be a genuine scan of the interrogation document of Kasab does list today as his birthday, as do a number of other reports... --Naimless (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Considering sensitivities involved and the rumour mill going overdrive, perhaps best to fully lock this page because of the back-and-forth edits about Kasab's birthday (not that it should matter whether it's his bday or not). Or to acknowledge on the page that there is some uncertainty about his birthday? What say? --Naimless (talk) 17:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Many of the news reports mentioning the birthday "13 July" were published today, and are most probably sourced from the rumors. The Times of India link provided by has already been taken down by the publishers. The Scribd document linked by Naimless was uploaded today -- there's no evidence to believe that it's authentic.
Multiple reports published before today (not just the HT one) mention the date of birth as "13 September".
On the other hand, there are several reports published before today which mention the date of birth as "13 July".
Maybe both should be added to the article?
utcursch | talk 17:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Check out the police interrogation report for his date of birth. It clearly mentions as 13-July [1]

I wrote a blog about this arguing that it is impossible to verify the truth at this point from what is in the public domain. Maybe Wikipedia page should acknowledge that and not have an edit-war between the two dates for now? It just helps to fuel the fire and mistrust on Twitter... Why Kasab's birthday is impossible to know: an analysis by Schrodinger’s cat — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:59, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Great, just see this had been done and both dates are mentioned... However, right now there is also a third date (13 June) mentioned, which does not appear to have a valid source... --- Scratch that, just see that it has been reverted again. Can someone lock the page for a while and keep both birthdates in the infobox until facts can be established? -- (talk) 22:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

According to latest reports by Indian Express and IBNLive, the "13 July" date is wrong:
But, IBNLive simply says "Kasab's interrogation report puts Kasab's date of birth as July 13, there are no other official documents publicly available to confirm Ajmal Kasab's actual date of birth." It doesn't provide any source for 13 September being the right DoB. Indian Express discusses Wikipedia edits, but doesn't say anything on September 13 being the right date of birth.
I guess the confusion will be cleared soon, when some journalist gets access to the original investigation reports. utcursch | talk 03:26, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

The Mumbai police have confirmed that it is September 13. Updated the article.  Jackol  ๏̯͡๏﴿ 09:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^


Under this headiing the following sentence is irrelevant

"The hanging also came two days after India supported a United Nations General Assembly resolution against capital punishment.[112]"

This article is not about the stand taken by India on Capital Punishment or an article on Capital Punishment. Its an article on one Terrorist Individual.

Therefore, condier removing the above sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I have looked at this request, and also at the original edit. I see the addition as good faith, but have concluded that it synthesise original research and fails to adhere to Neutral point of view, so I have removed it. However that does not mean we should not discuss the removal and consider any form of replacing this text. I suggest we reach consensus below. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Some Neutral sources

For improving the article are

  2. --DBigXray 22:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

BBC, a "neutral" source? Laugh, I nearly paid my license fee!! (talk) 10:49, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, BBC would be considered neutral as it is neither Indian nor Pakistani but British. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Two issues!

  • Article body says he was hanged at 7.30 a.m., infobox says 7.25 a.m. Both are sourced! I think 7.30 is the correct one!
  • Do we really need to name the section "Execution"? We can use the formal "Death" too! --Tito Dutta (talk) 14:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
The first one has been resolved by me. --Tamravidhir (Jiva is Shiva!) 14:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Now that you mention it, Execution sounds better. Or even Hanging. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
In a sense Rsrikanth in right. --Tamravidhir (Jiva is Shiva!) 15:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

The section on the execution

I think a pragmatic approach to this section is to allow much of the editing that has followed the execution to remain provided it is WP:NPOV and not WP:OR, and, in a few days, seek to distill the most neutral and reliable elements from it. This is an area that raises much passion, and some emotional leeway should be allowed while the execution is raw and while the events that were perpetrated have a renewed raw edge.

Excesses, though, those should be removed, but without berating those who add the excesses in more than a cursory manner. Our standards, though for citations, must be retained. Uncited material should either be cited or flagged with a request for citations. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

As part of my thoughts on this section, I feel there is a danger of it taking greater prominence than the actions that brought him to notice in the first place. I have thus flagged it as a section which is given undue weight in the article. I am hoping that this will be reduced once the current genuine newsworthiness of the event has turned into the cold eyes of history. Fiddle Faddle (talk)


This article seems extremely long, giving the subject far more notoriety than he deserves. I don't think, in the thousands of WP articles I've read and edited, I've ever seen this degree of minutia, not to mention the usual duplication of the same information over and over again. I think even the best of the heavy lifters among the WikiFauna would be discouraged from trying to help out, due to the sheer size of the task. I'd want to start over, using the existing article as a reference source. IMHO, of course. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I share your view. I suspect that more than a few days should elapse since the execution, though, because feelings are naturally high in all the various directions that one might expect. I would expect an eventual article to contain perhaps 15% of the execution segment and less than 50% of the remainder. Fancy having a go in a couple of weeks? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Mentioning President's rejection in lead.

IS Mentioning the President's rejection in lead really necessary? I don't think it is. What do you guys say? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:49, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

No. It is an issue to do with the minutiae of his execution, and has a place only in that section. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Singing in the cell

The times of India has published a rather interesting Article about Kasab singing in his cell the previous night. Is it relevant? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I shall add a single statement about this with a ref in the execution section. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:40, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Why should this be mentioned at all? IMO, like most of the article, this minute detail is not at all encyclopedic. This stuff may belong in a screenplay, not an encyclopedia. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Line on RR Patils' warning.

I have added a line about Patil warning that anyone attacking MH would meet the same fate. The source also mentions other stuff about jail authorities pay. I've also added a bit about him commending two women officers. All are from the same article, which, if necessary can be reused: --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:16, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Why should this be mentioned at all? IMO, like most of the article, this minute detail is not at all encyclopedic. This stuff may belong in a screenplay, not an encyclopedia. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Mistake in background

The article states that Kasab's father is a dahi puri vendor. As per the references, the fact is that he is a vendor of dahi wada and not dahi puri. Both are different snacks. Please correct the fact on the page. (talk) 18:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

One source says Dahi Puri and one says Dahi Vada. I think I'll change it to snacks. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 19:41, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Adding dahi puri and dahi vada. Hope that's fine. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 19:42, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 19:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Why should this be mentioned at all? IMO, like most of the article, this minute detail is not at all encyclopedic. This stuff may belong in a screenplay, not an encyclopedia. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Changed it to 'runs a snacks cart' . Fine? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

(which is punishable by the death penalty)

This phrase is odd in the intro. It should be a minor detail in the body of the article, but sounds sensationalistic or defensive in the intro.

From someone who lives in the United States and has no connection to India or Pakistan or any of the religions mentioned, much of the article sounds like a 14 year old boy telling a story wide-eyed and defending every item in advance against criticism, rather than a neutral factual news article. The insertion of how yet another accusation carries the death penalty, in the intro of the article, is an example of this viewpoint of the article.

Also the use of terms like "quite", "very", "a lot", "severely" and "a few" are vague, meaningless phrases that should be deleted in all Wikipedia articles.

"ruling out this being a suicide mission" is out of place in the article. No reference is made to the fact that people thought it was or was not a suicide mission. Why is a conclusive argumentative statement made in the middle of the article, interrupting the flow? Throughout the article it seems like there is an underlying argument going on that is irrelevant to the information.

"Assistant sub-inspector Tukaram Omble, who was armed only with a lathi, was killed when the police charged the car.[42] Omble took five bullets, but held on to Kasab's weapon, enabling his colleagues to capture him alive." The order of these two sentences should be reversed. As it reads now, Omble dies, then Omble holds onto Kasab's weapon enabling Kasab's colleagues to capture Kasab alive. A doubly confusing sentence.Markewilliams (talk) 05:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Markewilliams Markewilliams (talk) 05:53, 25 November 2012 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Markewilliams (talkcontribs) 05:40, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Be Bold and edit it if you think it's wrong. This article requires people with other backgrounds to edit it. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I did edit it, it took me an hour, and someone immediately reverted the article to the original bad writing.Markewilliams (talk) 00:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I have looked back over the history and I can;t see the diff where you made the edit. I was hoping to find a clue about why your changes had been reverted. Can you enlighten us further, please, ideally with diffs? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/Markewilliams shows no edits to the article in the recent time period, just to the talk page. So I am further perplexed. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I see you have now made (remade?) the edit. I can see why it took you a long time to craft. I believe most of it will be accepted by consensus, but time will tell. It looks like a good attempt to 'flatten' the article. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Excellent work markewilliams. Although I do just want to let you know that I personally feel that keeping the (an offence punishable by death) in the lead might help the reader understand on what charge he was executed. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Minor section "Stages of training"

This section appears to me to be peripheral to this article. I hesitate with making a bold removal, but suggest very strongly that it be removed. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 01:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I believe it should be merged with it's parent section. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I feel it should go out of this article entirely. I do not see it as an attribute of the person, but as an attribute of the atrocity. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I think it has some relevance, just to give a background to how and what happened. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I am not convinced. If I cannot convince you I feel we need other views. I feel the extended background is part of other articles and adds no value to the biographical article on the offender. How do you suggest we proceed? I'd rather reach consensus in advance of removal and re-addition ping pong, which I am not suggesting! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:04, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Sure. Let's wait for further consensus to build. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

We can shortly mention about the training he received, but the content in this article needs to be present in the 2008 Mumbai attacks article, not here. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 18:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Despite agreeing with you I feel we should leave it for more time to allow true consensus to develop one way or the other. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

We need A picture or a Video of him being hanged!

Why we the public have no picture or evidence that he was hanged? attest a Video clip can help us rest in peace! Saddam prosecution was shown why not his? there are many conspiracy's going on. We need proof! was he a member of Mossad? was he setup by our government? if not we need proof! just by saying he was killed and we had taken picture of his attacks by a person who appears to have acted in telgu movies wont help us any more!

ףףף — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

No need of remarks in reaction section

There are certain entries related to notable people about the reaction of the death which does not go with the article and I feel it is not needed at all and should be removed. MAShaikh (talk) 10:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure you are correct. However you paint with a very broad brush. Please be more specific here. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
After studying the section carefully I have removed a newly added paragraph. It was a lot more hype than substance. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk page archiving

This talk page has become lengthy and most of the discussion is now well in the past. Therefore I am setting it up to archive, leaving a minimum of 10 threads in place, and only archiving discussions that are over 10 days old (date of last dated reply). I have chosen these settings at random, feeling that they are reasonable. Others may change these values freely. The code I am inserting at the head of the page is as follows:

|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|counter = 1
|minthreadsleft = 10
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(10d)
|archive = Talk:Ajmal Kasab/Archive %(counter)d
{{Auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot I |age=10 |units=days}}
{{Archive box|auto=yes|search=yes}}

As it stands the first archive is not yet created. I am relying on the next run of the bot to create it. I undertake to monitor this and to make corrections if that happens incorrectly.

Editors requiring detailed knowledge of the mechanism of operation of the bot should visit User:MiszaBot/config to obtain a full briefing. If you disagree with my taking this bold step please feel free to revert all the changes with care, including reassembling the talk page to a pre-archived state. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Reverting archive edits and commenting out spam blocked url which was probably causing the archive to fail. Will monitor the output of the next run Fiddle Faddle (talk) 01:17, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
And, while I am about it, reducing the size of individual archives to 75. 150 is far too large. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 01:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
All has worked as intended. We now have an archiving scheme for this talk page Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ajmal Kasab/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The article is definitely well-sourced, but going through it, I noticed several redundancies and prose errors, such as the part about Kasab's definition of Jihad. I consequently changed the article to C-class. Have a good day! WhaattuSpeakwhat iDone 14:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 14:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 14:10, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Death due to dengue???

An IP user has cited the ref of Pakistani press to assert Kasab died of dengue. This is contrary to the widely held belief, and not confirmed by independent sources. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 06:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC).

This need more than just your statement. You need to show that the reference cited is not a reliable source to back your discussion. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Radical Paki Press doesn't look like a reliable source. Its claims are contradicting the reliable sources. Therefore, I support removal of fraudulent claims. withdraw comment — Forgot to put name (talk) 16:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
The point, I think, is that this article makes a statement about a sentiment that may be relevant to the article, or it may not. There are thus two linked decisions to make:
  1. Is the statement notable as shown in reliable sources (which may be yet to be identified)
  2. Should this statement, if notable, be included in the article
The issue is more than simply "do we like or dislike it" Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
It's a confusion whether Ajmal Kasab died of dengue or he was hanged as per multiple reliable sources. (e.g Daily Bhaskar, Indian Express (as per history)). So I think it's worthy of inclusion in this article. I withdraw my comment that it was a fraudulent claim. — Forgot to put name (talk) 18:00, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I would like to see more discussion. I want to record that I support inclusion cited by reliable sources, but not given more than a passing mention. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Post about Amitabh Bachchan that was recently removed from this article.

Eminent personalities in India welcomed Kasab's execution. Noted Bollywood actor [[Amitabh Bachchan]] said the execution of Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Amir Kasab had brought relief to those who suffered in the 26/11 Mumbai attack.<ref>{{cite web|url=|title=Kasab hanging: Amitabh Bachchan feels it is a relief for the attack victims||accessdate=January 09,2012}}</ref>. It may be noted that in 2009, [[Amitabh Bachchan]] posted a comment on his blog that Ajmal Kasab is the "safest person" in the country. [[Maharashtra]] Chief Minister [[Ashok_Chavan|Ashok Chavan]] disapproved this comment but according to media reports, [[Maharashtra]] Government had till that time spent rupees 31 crores to protect Kasab.<ref> {{cite news|url=|publisher=[[Zee News]] |title=Maha CM disapproves of 'Kasab most safe' comment: PTI |accessdate=January 09,2012}}</ref>

Amitabh Bachchan is an eminent personality. Secondly, it is not a blog post but the news that triggered from it which is quoted. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 06:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC).

"Eminent personalities" are words we tend to avoid, along with "Noted ... Actor". In general one does not have the right to have one's opinion quoted because one is some form of celebrity. Such opinions are interesting in the popular press and unimportant in an encyclopaedia. This is why I removed the paragraph. If consensus determines that the item should go back then that is fine. We need to be careful of giving reactions both for and against the execution undue weight. The article is about the person. I agree that a certain amount of reaction to the execution is appropriate, it is simply a case of quantity. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:20, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
1. I am not against re-posting the text with any articulation from anyone including you. 2. I doubt whether this talk will gather much traffic to build consensus either way. Instead, can you not suggest a noticeboard for this purpose? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 14:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC).
This talk page is well patrolled, you know, as is the article. The list of Wikiprojects at the head may have people who have an interest in contributing further. We obviously need more than the pair of us discussing the mater. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Amitabh Bachchan is a good actor and a failed politician. Unfortunately, despite his failure, he is pretty much the "go to" man for rent-a-quotes. His opinion is worthless in this context, as it has been in practically every other non-movie context. And there lots of them. - Sitush (talk) 15:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
While this is not a 100% conclusive consensus, I feel it militates more against the paragraph than for it. Sitush makes a persuasive point, one he will back with data if required, I am sure. I would be happy to see more discussion, though. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Sitush making good point here. Amitabh Bachchan's opinion here is worthless. Forgot to put name 18:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Including info on security expenditure


Maharashtra Government had till 2009 spent rupees 31 crores to protect Kasab. <ref> {{cite news|url=|publisher=[[Zee News]] |title=Maha CM disapproves of 'Kasab most safe' comment: PTI |accessdate=January 09,2012}}</ref>

Section on Training

I have made the suggestion at The Mumbai Attacks page that the section we have here on Training, a section I believe gives undue weight to a topic that is not a direct part of the article on Kasab, be migrated there. That article appears to me to be the natural home for this information, not this one. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:41, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done I have made that edit, linking to the correct section in the target article. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:35, 5 April 2013 (UTC)