Talk:Babar Ahmad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


This needs tidying up and better citation than "". For example, the allegation that he was tortured while in the custody of the British police. 22:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, please feel free to help! Robert C Prenic 22:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I've added the relevant cleanup tags, and will try and tidy up the article over the next few days. Scholarcs 23:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Death penalty[edit]

I have edited the remark that he may face the death penalty; as a matter of law that is simply wrong. Due to the European Convention of Human Rights Britain cannot extradite if there is a chance that the death penalty will be useddfutter 11:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

List of edits[edit]

  • Changed "British Citizen and Muslim" to "British Muslim".
  • Removed "'alleged'". He is not 'alleged' to be a suspect - he is a suspect.
Just to clear this up - he is either an "alleged Islamic terrorist" or an "Islamic terrorist suspect" - he is not an "alleged Islamic terrorist suspect", as this phrase would imply that his status as a suspect is in doubt. His status as a suspect is not in doubt, so this phrase would be extremely confusing to include. I've left it as "Islamic terrorist suspect" for now. Scholarcs 03:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Removed "without trial or charge", as he was charged with terror crimes two months later by a US court.
I have stated that British authorities has not charged him or given him trial althogh still hold him in custody. It came later that the US wanted him so they are keeping him arrested in US charges not British. It needs to remain "without trial or charge" from the British police and only LATER did the US charge him. Robert C Prenic 07:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Removed "– a position many see as a violation of his human rights" as it is POV and unreferenced.
Human Rights groups hold rallies and everything for him, check their websites in the UK and also BBC News for sources. I will add later. Robert C Prenic 07:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
If we want to include such information, it should include who sees it as a violation of his human rights - ie "his supporters and *relevant Human Rights group (reference)* see this as a violation of his human rights". "Many" is too ambiguous and does not tell the reader who holds this opinion. Scholarcs 11:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Removed duplicate "Islamic Shariah Council", and have listed it as a "Muslim organisation" rather than a political party or human rights campaigner, as it is neither. Scholarcs 03:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Removed "He was severely beaten and tortured." as there is no evidence of this apart from an allegation on his supporters' websites - extremely biased and unreliable sources. The Independent Police Complaints Commission has a report on his complaints, I will include details later in the article.

More to come... Scholarcs 00:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I have revamped this part including the alleged photographic evidence, BBC reportings on this assault, the IPCC reference and the BBC article where it was rejected. I hope this covers it. Robert C Prenic 07:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I've cleared up some spelling and grammar here, and also rewritten it so it doesn't include "photographic evidence" - as this term implies it provides definitive proof of the alleged torture. Scholarcs 11:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Removed "The family have always paid their taxes and served the community as law-abiding British citizens." This is completely irrelevant and reads like propaganda.
  • Removed "However, during his arrest is was severely beaten and tortured." Again, see above.
Put this alleged incident into its own area. See above Robert C Prenic 07:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Removed "He was popular at school; well liked by teachers and fellow pupils. Like any other British boy, he thoroughly enjoyed all sports, especially football and cricket. His school reports would always highlight that he was helpful, well-behaved and popular." If we're going to include something like this, it needs to have a better source than "". It was simply copied from this site.
  • Removed "August 19th 2007 was the 3rd anniversary of Babar’s incarceration without trial or charge." First, if someone wants to find out how long he had been in custody on that a certain date, they can work it out. Second, he has been charged, so this is inaccurate.
  • Added detail surrounding allegations of torture and resulting IPCC report and reference to report.

Will be adding detail surrounding his website, alleged links to Mazan Mokhtar and Shamil Basayev, alleged possession of classified routes of US naval battle group, and alleged attempts to buy sulpher phospate. Scholarcs 05:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


Also - is there a reason this article is listed under "United Kingdom religious figure" stub and the "Muslim preachers" catagory? I know he is a Muslim - but I cannot find anything, even on his own website, which indicates he was a preacher or religious figure. Scholarcs 11:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Have removed the "UK relgious figure" and "Muslim preachers" catagory until we can clear this up. I'm sure the website would include any status as a preacher or imam if he held this position. Scholarcs 03:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

Would it not make more sense to call the article "Babar Ahmad (terrorism suspect)", rather than "Babar Ahmad (terrorist suspect)"? "Terrorist Suspect", implies to me a suspect who is a terrorist, whereas terrorism suspect would imply someone who is suspected of terrorism, which is more accurate, less POV, and matches the normal term for someone suspected of any other crime, such as "murder suspect", rather than "murderer suspect".

I know the BBC and others use the "terrorist suspect" form, but it still seems quite wrong. There's an article about the use of this phrase at Sorsoup (talk) 18:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion I would suggest instead naming the article "Babar Ahmad" as we have no other persons of that name with articles and it is not Wikipedia practice to add descriptions to article names where no disambiguation is needed. If in the future there are other articles about persons of the same name a less POV description would be "computer expert". (talk) 18:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that makes sense to me. I think my account is still to new to move pages, but maybe I can do it tomorrow. sorsoup (talk) 08:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC). Now moved to "Babar Ahmad". sorsoup (talk) 12:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


This article has been tagged for over a year as not being neutral and being factually disputed. Can someone please state which parts of the article there is a problem is so that the tags can eventually be removed? Tags should only be a temporary measure and as I can't see what there is wrong with the article. If there are no comments within a month then I will remove the neutrality and factual accuracy tags. Smartse (talk) 21:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

As it's almost 5 months since I posted the above and no problems have been identified I'll remove the tags. Smartse (talk) 16:16, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Reliable source[edit]

Is a reliable source? TIA --Tom (talk) 16:00, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

It depends what information is being used from it, for some information primary sources are useful but they shouldn't be used to reference anything controversial or any opinions. If a different source can be used to reference a statement then that is better. Are there any particular cites of the cite you think are inappropriate? Smartse (talk) 16:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I removed a citation for the 3rd sentence. And added the dead link tag. Is there a better source for material? --Tom (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Public school[edit]

The article says he attended a "Public School". In the UK this means a private school, in the US this means a state run school. Will someone please clarify? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Extradition to the United States[edit]

Section is not very impartial. Use of emotive language "bundled" and unverified statements "without a chance to say goodbye to their families".

The BBC new website source listed does not support much of this section. Either another source should be provided or the unsourced material should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:43, 7 October 2012 (UTC)