This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article says --American security officials, described in an MSNBC article as members of a "black snatch team", came to Macedonia, and transported him to a covert CIA interrogation centre in Afghanistan known as "the salt pit". --- Even if Khalid is the source, and if he is accurate, the salt pit stuff is not sourced nor credible. Joaquin Murietta 06:10, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I take issue with Geo Swanremoval of the following entry by me Joaquin Murietta 00:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
I went to the effort of changing the Khalid El-Masri article to use the new {ref}-{note} pairs for the references. The thing about them is that if you re-arrange the order of the references, in the text -- as you did -- you have to put the order of the {note}s in the same order. When a reader clicks on the {ref} link it redirects to the reference section. But the reader relies on the number to determine which reference link they should follow. By rearranging the order of the {ref} tags in the text, without rearranging the order of the {note} tags, the notes bear the wrong numbers. I'd like to call on the person who made the first change to please fix the order of the {note} tags. -- Geo Swan 15:14, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I've changed the name to Khaled El-Masri (from Khalid El-Masri) since Arabic to English transliteration is irrelevant to a German citizen. The name in his passport (Khaled) can be seen, for instance, from the ECHR documents related to his case: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press?i=003-3838278-4407853. Perhaps someone could assist with changing the name of the article as well as I don't know how to do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.22.83 ( talk) 04:59, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
The article has been changed today from saying his name was similar to the al Qaeda suspect to saying his name was identical. -- Geo Swan 15:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Washington Post and other articles report his name as Khaled El-Masri, looks like this guy can't get a break with name confusion (links to sources: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120301476.html) 70.174.106.119 ( talk) 14:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
The article now implies that Macedonian authorities had independent reasons to believe El-Masri's passport was a forgery.
If his passport was really an obvious forgery, such that it could be detected by a Macedonian border guards, then it would not have taken the CIA a month to determine it was legitimate.
My reading of the various accounts of this controversy is that the only reason his passport was suspect was that it said he was a German, when the al Qaeda suspect was not a German. This article should not imply there was independent reason to suspect his passport was a forgery, unless there really were independent reasons to suspect it was a forgery. -- Geo Swan 15:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I merged the duplicate article into this one as this was the fuller article. I am not supposing that this is the best article title. I have made a number of redirects as different sources spell his English name differently. I have no objection to the article being renamed if considered appropriate. Nurg 23:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I take issue with Geo Swan's editing and deletion of my comments on this talk page. Joaquin Murietta 00:38, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
The biggest problem here is that there is too much subjective evaluation presented as fact. Let the reader decide if a cell is putrid, if the food is meager. What were the dimensions of the cell? What exactly did he eat, and how much of it did he get? 68.147.45.60 08:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)nameless.
This whole discussion is a hoax. El Masri is a victim of illegal human traffic so he shouldn't be in that cell in the first place. Otto 09:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
The article does not seem to mention anything about the search for Sam, the mysterious German who El-Masri claimed visited him in the prison. See for example http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,402289,00.html.
I also think it would be good if the article more prominently referenced material on Wikipedia about the ongoing investigation by the Council of Europe, which recently stated that Europe has become a "happy hunting ground" for foreign security services such as the CIA.
Filur 18:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the article on Khalid_al-Masri seems to have more information on Sam. In this article, the mysterious Sam is identified as Gerhard Lehmann. A Google search will reveal more information Filur 19:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
They are two different people, so a merger would be out of place. There would also be problems with categorys, since only one can be labeled Al Quaeda member. ROGNNTUDJUU! 10:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I am inclined to believe that El-Masri's story is true as stated. But it does nothing for Wikipedia's credibility - or for my credibility if I am presenting this story to others - for allegation and supposition to be stated as fact. Departure from NPOV policy does no favours to opponents of extraordinary rendition - we must clearly state the facts we can clearly demonstrate, and separate out the sources properly.— ciphergoth 21:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
"June 29, 1963) is a German citizen who was, in the course of the CIA's extraordinary rendition programme, detained, flown to Afghanistan, and interrogated and tortured by the CIA for several months as a part of the War on terror, and then released without charge."
All of this is allegation. Needs fixing. 59.167.20.22 11:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
According to Ben Wizner, El-Masri's attorney, El-Masri was denied entry into the U.S. for no apparent reason.
Can anyone else find more information on this? When did this occur? Obviously El-Masri's lawyer has his clients agenda at heart but that doesn't necessarily make him a liar. In the absence of a credible story from the government it looks as if he was sent away to avoid bad PR for the current administration. Funkyj 19:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
The December 4, 2005 Washington post article refers to El-Masri's case as a possible erroneous rendition. But El-Masri was sent to the salt pit, which was reportedly a place run by the CIA. My understanding is that " extraordinary rendition" (or " erroneous rendition") is a term used to describe transfers of people from US custody into the custody of other governments for imprisonment and/or interrogation. This does not sound like what happened here. It seems that he was captured by US forces in Macedonia, transported by US forces to Afghanistan, held by US forces in Afghanistan, and then dumped off by US forces in Albania. Since all of that involved US custody, how is that rendition? Is it the final drop in Albania that makes the term apply? But I thought the term applies only to handing people off from one captor to another—what happened in Albania was just letting the guy loose, so that doesn't really sound like rendition either. — Wookipedian 05:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
While it might have been plausible at one time to claim that this was a rendition, you seem to confirm that it in fact was not. I therefore have added a clarifying paragraph to the article. — Wookipedian 18:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
After further thought, I reverted my own edit. It is not clear to me whether extraordinary rendition actually implies a hand-over of control to an separate entity or whether just movement to a different place for purposes of trying to control the jurisdiction of actions is sufficient to meet the definition. I am not an attorney, and don't have detailed knowledge of such terminiology. — Wookipedian 18:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
There have been a series of unexplained edits.
Cheers! -- Geo Swan 18:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 1: Naturally, I can't speak for the whole world; but what I can say is that if one mentions the abbrevation "CIA" (in it's English pronounciation) here in Germany, everybody knows what you are talking about, and one can assume that's the same in the rest of Europe :-) But to be more serious: I don't see that creating a WikiLink to the US (at it was before) is helpful to the reader in any way; I was refering to this guideline when removing the link. Pruefer 00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 2: Here, I removed (as I recall it) redundant links, with respect to the same Wikipedia guidelines. Pruefer 00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 3: I used the style of quotation one gets if using the "cite book" template, i.e.:
Priest, Dana (2005-12-04).
Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake. Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-10-13.
However, until now, I did not realize that using the "cite web" template would give another result:
Priest, Dana (2005-12-04).
"Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake". Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-10-13.
Using "cite news" gives another appearence:
Priest, Dana (2005-12-04).
"Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake". Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-10-13.
So I'd better use those templates again, last time I simply was too lazy to do so :-)
Pruefer
00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 4: I did so because to my knowledge it is uncommon to use the subtitles when citing a paper. (At least, it is in German Wikipedia, You have my apologies if that's not the case in the English WP.) Pruefer 00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 5: :The contents in "DER SPIEGEL" and "SPIEGEL ONLINE" are not always identical, this might be the case (and in fact, it often is), but need not; as the citation appeared in SPIEGEL ONLINE first, in my opinion it is more correct to cite "SPIEGEL ONLINE" as source, rather than "DER SPIEGEL". Pruefer 23:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
The article said Dr Rice ordered his El-Masri's release. This was changed to say she requested his relase, becausne another editor couldn't imagine she had the authority to issue that kind of order. This is from MSNBC:
Cheers! -- Geo Swan 15:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Over a year ago I spent some time looking into the German reports that El-Masri had been a member of a radical militant group named " al-Tawhid". The claim is almost certainly bullshit -- based on confusion between Ahl al-Tawhid and Jama'at al-Tawhid wal Jihad.
We are supposed to assume good faith, so I will assume that insertion of the allegation that El-Masri was a member of a radical militant group into the introductory material was not POV-pushing.
But I think it was, at best, extremely careless. Whoever inserted that material didn't bother to read the whole article and see that the allegation had already been addressed.
When I looked, back in March 2006, I did not find any references that definitively said El-Masri was a Druze. So, even though it the most likely explanation, it would be a violation of WP:NPOV to insert it into article space.
The material I removed didn't even make sense. It is highly credible that El-Masri could claim asylum based on membership of an oppressed minority ethnic group, like the Druze, when his country was in the midst of a civil war. It is almost unbelievable to think Germany would extend asylum to someone based on their membership in a radical militant group, like Zarqawi's. In addition, El-Masri is old than Al-Zarqawi, and Al-Zarqawi hadn't yet founded his group when El-Masri claimed asylum..
I came across reports that El-Masri had been a squad leader in a local militia when he was a young man in Lebanon. But that is hardly surprising in a country in the midst of a civil war, when practically every military age male could be expected to be a member of one local militia or another.
Hopefully, no one will re-insert the clearly bogus claim that El-Masri had been a member of Al-Zarqawi's group.
Cheers! Geo Swan 13:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, found some links, MSN link doesn't work anymore, so check these: [1] [2]. So it is certain that he was a member of the Islamic Unification Movement in Lebanon.
Also, his name should be written Khaled el-Masri. Funkynusayri ( talk) 16:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
A report on 2006 March 2, claimed that El-Masri may have been a leader of the radical Sunni-Muslim Lebanese group "al-Tawhid al-Islami" during the early 1980s - the time of the Lebanese Civil War.[2] German reports assert that El-Masri reported his being a member of "El-Tawhid" or "Al-Tawhid" when he applied to Germany for refugee status, in 1985.
You seem to be ignoring my main points, which make clear that the Focus article can only be referring to the Islamic Unification Movement, as it is the only group with the word "tawhid" in its name which even existed in Lebanon during the 1980s (and which was and is known in Arabic by this one-word name alone and variations of it, "Tawhid", "al-Tawhid", "Tawhed", etc., see their website [6]), and the only one that matches the profile in the Focus article (check the Wikipedia entry of the group, it is well-sourced), so I'll repeat:
1: Only the Islamic Unification Movement has ties to the Muslim brotherhood, as it is a group which splintered off from the Islamic Group (Lebanon), which was founded as the Lebanese branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. [7]
2: Only the Islamic Unification Movement worked as a radical armed group during the Lebanese Civil War in the 1980s. [8]
3: Only the Islamic Unification Movement fought against Alawites in Tripoli, Lebanon during the Lebanese Civil War. [9]
All this excludes tawhid from referring to the Druze as a people, and any other group for that matter, due to the fact that the Druze are neither linked to the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood, or were "an armed radical group in Tripoli, which fought Alawites during the civil war". In fact, no Druze even live in the city of Tripoli. Furthermore, Druze wouldn't refer to themselves as simly "al-Tawhid", it wouldn't make linguisitc sense.
This also excludes the other Lebanese movement with tawhid in its name, the Druze-lead political party calle the "Lebanese Unification Movement", as this group was founded only two years ago. [10]
So the question is not whether the Focus article referred to the Islamic Unification Movmement when it mentioned "al-Tawhid" (it is pretty much indisputable that it did), but whether el-Masri himself referred to this group when he mentioned "al-tawhid". Funkynusayri ( talk) 20:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
"According to el-Masri was in the early 80s leading member of the radical movement al-Tawhid. The ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood organization related (bad bot translation, but means they were related to the Muslim brotherhood) fought primarily as un-Islamic sect of Alaviten force in Lebanon. The operational area of el-Masri and his troops should have been Tripoli."
That, not the "unrelated verifiable material" you mention, is what I based my conclusion on. Is that not verifiable?
I could easily find other sources than the blogs you complain about that state that the organisation known as al-Tawhid, or Harakat al-Tawhid al-Islami, fits the above description. But I don't think it would make a difference, as the full name of the organisation isn't mentioned in the German article above.
So well, as I doubt the full report on el-Masri will ever be published, all we have is that Focus article, which describes an organisation which can only be "Harakat al-Tawhid etc". I understand if you object to the Wiki article saying that the Focus article in fact does refer to this organisation, because they do not refer to the organisation by its full name (though it rarely is referred to by its full name anyway).
One thing I find strange though is that you accepted the mention of the Druze in this article, though it was unsourced, pure speculation, and extremely unlikely.
I may have taken for granted that some of the things I said were obvious, but I realise that I should maybe take it into consideration that some of this political info is a bit obscure to non-Lebanese.
So let me be entirely clear and simple:
1: The Druze are completely out of the question, due to them not being ideologically affiliated with the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood in any way.
2: The other Lebanese organisation with tawhid in its name is completely out of the question too, as it was formed only two years ago.
So I agree, the article should not say el-Masri is believed to have been a membver of the exact group I mention, but that it is probable that it is the group referred to in the article. I'll make the article reflect this and hope that you agree. Funkynusayri ( talk) 15:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
The article states that Rice was aware of the error and requested El-Masri's release, using an article from MSNBC to back that statement. However, reading several other press links I find that Rice denies this. Any thoughts on this? Gandydancer ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 16:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I undid a revision by Burpelson. Here is one paragraph as it stood:
He had actually requested extended therapy for his client shortly before the incident, as El-Masri felt threatened, believing to be pursued by cars and strangers. The act of arson was executed on impulse, entirely unprofessionally, and could not have led to a larger fire. While the courts recognized that El-Masri has never ever breached the law before his CIA abduction, and acknowledged that he has been traumatized, this did not now justify acts of violence. He received a suspended sentence.
The English here is just awkward, and it's making several assertions as fact (such as he "felt threatened", or this arson "could not have let to a larger fire.") when these are were actually unproven claims made by El-Masri himself. Also, the arson was done "entirely unprofessionally"? Is there a "professional" way to commit arson? That's why I changed it this way:
He had actually requested extended therapy for his client shortly before the incident, as El-Masri claimed he felt threatened and pursued by cars and strangers. He claimed that the arson was executed on impulse, and could not have led to a larger fire. The courts recognized that El-Masri had never breached the law before his CIA abduction, and ruled that he was traumatized, but this did not justify acts of violence. He received a suspended sentence.
I also changed some of the terms (like "file an appeal" instead of "apply for revision", because that is the more correct translation in English.
If there is "weasal wording" there, please point it out to me, or better yet, rewrite the paragraph yourself. Just avoid presenting El-Masri's claims as facts (especially since he is admittedly traumatized and/or mentally ill). BuboTitan ( talk) 23:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Recently one of the wikileaks cable that was released relates to discussions between German and American officials over the Al-Masri case, where the US is urging Germany to reconsider its decision to issue arrest warrants for CIA agents that abducted Al-Masri.
http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2007/02/07BERLIN242.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120806193.html
Could this fit in the frame work of the sources over the United States blocking attempts to investigate into the matter?
-- MercZ ( talk) 23:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
This has to be one of the most tragic stories of modern times - this poor mans life was ruined based on mistaken identity.
The supreme irony is, people are directed to "see Khalid al-Masri" by the subtitle of the article. As if still, they're somehow related! How awful. My suggestion is to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.68.236 ( talk) 07:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, there seems to be issues of people calling his torture "alleged" (his torture is not alleged, it's been proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt). There's also people that are cherry-picking the wording of his rape (saying that 'sodomized' is antiquated, or what-have-you, but this is the wording of the court-ruling guys. So I'll clip out these paragraphs from the ruling for people who are unclear on the facts.
I think that even if "sodomized" if the word the judge choose to use "raped" is a more appropriate choice of word. It clearly defines an assault an is free of antiquated or homophobic associations.
You changed the wording from 'sodomized' to 'sexually assaulted' him.
The court ruling says sodomized. Look it up. 193.239.220.249 ( talk) 12:00, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
I think that even if "sodomized" if the word the judge choose to use "raped" is a more appropriate choice of word. It clearly defines an assault an is free of antiquated or homophobic associations.
Have added content, quotes and cites related to 2012 ruling to establish context and significance - suggest implications for related cases. Parkwells ( talk) 17:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Khalid El-Masri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Khalid El-Masri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://today.reuters.com/PrinterFriendlyPopup.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=uri:2005-11-09T151654Z_01_SPI954973_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-GERMANY-USA.xml{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://today.reuters.com/PrinterFriendlyPopup.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=uri:2005-12-17T152129Z_01_MOL755200_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-GERMANY-USA.xmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
For the sake of greater accuracy and to avoid confusion, "Macedonia" should not be mentioned, but rather North Macedonia as it is now called, or being clear that it refers to the then-called FYROM 134.225.30.13 ( talk) 09:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
This sentence under "timeline of events" can't be true: "The BND (German intelligence agency) declared on 1 June 2006 that it had known of El-Masri's seizure 16 months before the German government was officially informed in May 2004 of his mistaken arrest." 16 month before May 2004 was January 2003. El-Masri's was kidnapped in January 2004.-- Querstrebe ( talk) 23:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article says --American security officials, described in an MSNBC article as members of a "black snatch team", came to Macedonia, and transported him to a covert CIA interrogation centre in Afghanistan known as "the salt pit". --- Even if Khalid is the source, and if he is accurate, the salt pit stuff is not sourced nor credible. Joaquin Murietta 06:10, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I take issue with Geo Swanremoval of the following entry by me Joaquin Murietta 00:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
I went to the effort of changing the Khalid El-Masri article to use the new {ref}-{note} pairs for the references. The thing about them is that if you re-arrange the order of the references, in the text -- as you did -- you have to put the order of the {note}s in the same order. When a reader clicks on the {ref} link it redirects to the reference section. But the reader relies on the number to determine which reference link they should follow. By rearranging the order of the {ref} tags in the text, without rearranging the order of the {note} tags, the notes bear the wrong numbers. I'd like to call on the person who made the first change to please fix the order of the {note} tags. -- Geo Swan 15:14, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I've changed the name to Khaled El-Masri (from Khalid El-Masri) since Arabic to English transliteration is irrelevant to a German citizen. The name in his passport (Khaled) can be seen, for instance, from the ECHR documents related to his case: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press?i=003-3838278-4407853. Perhaps someone could assist with changing the name of the article as well as I don't know how to do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.22.83 ( talk) 04:59, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
The article has been changed today from saying his name was similar to the al Qaeda suspect to saying his name was identical. -- Geo Swan 15:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Washington Post and other articles report his name as Khaled El-Masri, looks like this guy can't get a break with name confusion (links to sources: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120301476.html) 70.174.106.119 ( talk) 14:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
The article now implies that Macedonian authorities had independent reasons to believe El-Masri's passport was a forgery.
If his passport was really an obvious forgery, such that it could be detected by a Macedonian border guards, then it would not have taken the CIA a month to determine it was legitimate.
My reading of the various accounts of this controversy is that the only reason his passport was suspect was that it said he was a German, when the al Qaeda suspect was not a German. This article should not imply there was independent reason to suspect his passport was a forgery, unless there really were independent reasons to suspect it was a forgery. -- Geo Swan 15:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I merged the duplicate article into this one as this was the fuller article. I am not supposing that this is the best article title. I have made a number of redirects as different sources spell his English name differently. I have no objection to the article being renamed if considered appropriate. Nurg 23:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I take issue with Geo Swan's editing and deletion of my comments on this talk page. Joaquin Murietta 00:38, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
The biggest problem here is that there is too much subjective evaluation presented as fact. Let the reader decide if a cell is putrid, if the food is meager. What were the dimensions of the cell? What exactly did he eat, and how much of it did he get? 68.147.45.60 08:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)nameless.
This whole discussion is a hoax. El Masri is a victim of illegal human traffic so he shouldn't be in that cell in the first place. Otto 09:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
The article does not seem to mention anything about the search for Sam, the mysterious German who El-Masri claimed visited him in the prison. See for example http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,402289,00.html.
I also think it would be good if the article more prominently referenced material on Wikipedia about the ongoing investigation by the Council of Europe, which recently stated that Europe has become a "happy hunting ground" for foreign security services such as the CIA.
Filur 18:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the article on Khalid_al-Masri seems to have more information on Sam. In this article, the mysterious Sam is identified as Gerhard Lehmann. A Google search will reveal more information Filur 19:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
They are two different people, so a merger would be out of place. There would also be problems with categorys, since only one can be labeled Al Quaeda member. ROGNNTUDJUU! 10:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I am inclined to believe that El-Masri's story is true as stated. But it does nothing for Wikipedia's credibility - or for my credibility if I am presenting this story to others - for allegation and supposition to be stated as fact. Departure from NPOV policy does no favours to opponents of extraordinary rendition - we must clearly state the facts we can clearly demonstrate, and separate out the sources properly.— ciphergoth 21:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
"June 29, 1963) is a German citizen who was, in the course of the CIA's extraordinary rendition programme, detained, flown to Afghanistan, and interrogated and tortured by the CIA for several months as a part of the War on terror, and then released without charge."
All of this is allegation. Needs fixing. 59.167.20.22 11:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
According to Ben Wizner, El-Masri's attorney, El-Masri was denied entry into the U.S. for no apparent reason.
Can anyone else find more information on this? When did this occur? Obviously El-Masri's lawyer has his clients agenda at heart but that doesn't necessarily make him a liar. In the absence of a credible story from the government it looks as if he was sent away to avoid bad PR for the current administration. Funkyj 19:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
The December 4, 2005 Washington post article refers to El-Masri's case as a possible erroneous rendition. But El-Masri was sent to the salt pit, which was reportedly a place run by the CIA. My understanding is that " extraordinary rendition" (or " erroneous rendition") is a term used to describe transfers of people from US custody into the custody of other governments for imprisonment and/or interrogation. This does not sound like what happened here. It seems that he was captured by US forces in Macedonia, transported by US forces to Afghanistan, held by US forces in Afghanistan, and then dumped off by US forces in Albania. Since all of that involved US custody, how is that rendition? Is it the final drop in Albania that makes the term apply? But I thought the term applies only to handing people off from one captor to another—what happened in Albania was just letting the guy loose, so that doesn't really sound like rendition either. — Wookipedian 05:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
While it might have been plausible at one time to claim that this was a rendition, you seem to confirm that it in fact was not. I therefore have added a clarifying paragraph to the article. — Wookipedian 18:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
After further thought, I reverted my own edit. It is not clear to me whether extraordinary rendition actually implies a hand-over of control to an separate entity or whether just movement to a different place for purposes of trying to control the jurisdiction of actions is sufficient to meet the definition. I am not an attorney, and don't have detailed knowledge of such terminiology. — Wookipedian 18:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
There have been a series of unexplained edits.
Cheers! -- Geo Swan 18:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 1: Naturally, I can't speak for the whole world; but what I can say is that if one mentions the abbrevation "CIA" (in it's English pronounciation) here in Germany, everybody knows what you are talking about, and one can assume that's the same in the rest of Europe :-) But to be more serious: I don't see that creating a WikiLink to the US (at it was before) is helpful to the reader in any way; I was refering to this guideline when removing the link. Pruefer 00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 2: Here, I removed (as I recall it) redundant links, with respect to the same Wikipedia guidelines. Pruefer 00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 3: I used the style of quotation one gets if using the "cite book" template, i.e.:
Priest, Dana (2005-12-04).
Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake. Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-10-13.
However, until now, I did not realize that using the "cite web" template would give another result:
Priest, Dana (2005-12-04).
"Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake". Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-10-13.
Using "cite news" gives another appearence:
Priest, Dana (2005-12-04).
"Wrongful Imprisonment: Anatomy of a CIA Mistake". Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-10-13.
So I'd better use those templates again, last time I simply was too lazy to do so :-)
Pruefer
00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 4: I did so because to my knowledge it is uncommon to use the subtitles when citing a paper. (At least, it is in German Wikipedia, You have my apologies if that's not the case in the English WP.) Pruefer 00:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
ad 5: :The contents in "DER SPIEGEL" and "SPIEGEL ONLINE" are not always identical, this might be the case (and in fact, it often is), but need not; as the citation appeared in SPIEGEL ONLINE first, in my opinion it is more correct to cite "SPIEGEL ONLINE" as source, rather than "DER SPIEGEL". Pruefer 23:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
The article said Dr Rice ordered his El-Masri's release. This was changed to say she requested his relase, becausne another editor couldn't imagine she had the authority to issue that kind of order. This is from MSNBC:
Cheers! -- Geo Swan 15:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Over a year ago I spent some time looking into the German reports that El-Masri had been a member of a radical militant group named " al-Tawhid". The claim is almost certainly bullshit -- based on confusion between Ahl al-Tawhid and Jama'at al-Tawhid wal Jihad.
We are supposed to assume good faith, so I will assume that insertion of the allegation that El-Masri was a member of a radical militant group into the introductory material was not POV-pushing.
But I think it was, at best, extremely careless. Whoever inserted that material didn't bother to read the whole article and see that the allegation had already been addressed.
When I looked, back in March 2006, I did not find any references that definitively said El-Masri was a Druze. So, even though it the most likely explanation, it would be a violation of WP:NPOV to insert it into article space.
The material I removed didn't even make sense. It is highly credible that El-Masri could claim asylum based on membership of an oppressed minority ethnic group, like the Druze, when his country was in the midst of a civil war. It is almost unbelievable to think Germany would extend asylum to someone based on their membership in a radical militant group, like Zarqawi's. In addition, El-Masri is old than Al-Zarqawi, and Al-Zarqawi hadn't yet founded his group when El-Masri claimed asylum..
I came across reports that El-Masri had been a squad leader in a local militia when he was a young man in Lebanon. But that is hardly surprising in a country in the midst of a civil war, when practically every military age male could be expected to be a member of one local militia or another.
Hopefully, no one will re-insert the clearly bogus claim that El-Masri had been a member of Al-Zarqawi's group.
Cheers! Geo Swan 13:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, found some links, MSN link doesn't work anymore, so check these: [1] [2]. So it is certain that he was a member of the Islamic Unification Movement in Lebanon.
Also, his name should be written Khaled el-Masri. Funkynusayri ( talk) 16:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
A report on 2006 March 2, claimed that El-Masri may have been a leader of the radical Sunni-Muslim Lebanese group "al-Tawhid al-Islami" during the early 1980s - the time of the Lebanese Civil War.[2] German reports assert that El-Masri reported his being a member of "El-Tawhid" or "Al-Tawhid" when he applied to Germany for refugee status, in 1985.
You seem to be ignoring my main points, which make clear that the Focus article can only be referring to the Islamic Unification Movement, as it is the only group with the word "tawhid" in its name which even existed in Lebanon during the 1980s (and which was and is known in Arabic by this one-word name alone and variations of it, "Tawhid", "al-Tawhid", "Tawhed", etc., see their website [6]), and the only one that matches the profile in the Focus article (check the Wikipedia entry of the group, it is well-sourced), so I'll repeat:
1: Only the Islamic Unification Movement has ties to the Muslim brotherhood, as it is a group which splintered off from the Islamic Group (Lebanon), which was founded as the Lebanese branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. [7]
2: Only the Islamic Unification Movement worked as a radical armed group during the Lebanese Civil War in the 1980s. [8]
3: Only the Islamic Unification Movement fought against Alawites in Tripoli, Lebanon during the Lebanese Civil War. [9]
All this excludes tawhid from referring to the Druze as a people, and any other group for that matter, due to the fact that the Druze are neither linked to the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood, or were "an armed radical group in Tripoli, which fought Alawites during the civil war". In fact, no Druze even live in the city of Tripoli. Furthermore, Druze wouldn't refer to themselves as simly "al-Tawhid", it wouldn't make linguisitc sense.
This also excludes the other Lebanese movement with tawhid in its name, the Druze-lead political party calle the "Lebanese Unification Movement", as this group was founded only two years ago. [10]
So the question is not whether the Focus article referred to the Islamic Unification Movmement when it mentioned "al-Tawhid" (it is pretty much indisputable that it did), but whether el-Masri himself referred to this group when he mentioned "al-tawhid". Funkynusayri ( talk) 20:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
"According to el-Masri was in the early 80s leading member of the radical movement al-Tawhid. The ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood organization related (bad bot translation, but means they were related to the Muslim brotherhood) fought primarily as un-Islamic sect of Alaviten force in Lebanon. The operational area of el-Masri and his troops should have been Tripoli."
That, not the "unrelated verifiable material" you mention, is what I based my conclusion on. Is that not verifiable?
I could easily find other sources than the blogs you complain about that state that the organisation known as al-Tawhid, or Harakat al-Tawhid al-Islami, fits the above description. But I don't think it would make a difference, as the full name of the organisation isn't mentioned in the German article above.
So well, as I doubt the full report on el-Masri will ever be published, all we have is that Focus article, which describes an organisation which can only be "Harakat al-Tawhid etc". I understand if you object to the Wiki article saying that the Focus article in fact does refer to this organisation, because they do not refer to the organisation by its full name (though it rarely is referred to by its full name anyway).
One thing I find strange though is that you accepted the mention of the Druze in this article, though it was unsourced, pure speculation, and extremely unlikely.
I may have taken for granted that some of the things I said were obvious, but I realise that I should maybe take it into consideration that some of this political info is a bit obscure to non-Lebanese.
So let me be entirely clear and simple:
1: The Druze are completely out of the question, due to them not being ideologically affiliated with the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood in any way.
2: The other Lebanese organisation with tawhid in its name is completely out of the question too, as it was formed only two years ago.
So I agree, the article should not say el-Masri is believed to have been a membver of the exact group I mention, but that it is probable that it is the group referred to in the article. I'll make the article reflect this and hope that you agree. Funkynusayri ( talk) 15:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
The article states that Rice was aware of the error and requested El-Masri's release, using an article from MSNBC to back that statement. However, reading several other press links I find that Rice denies this. Any thoughts on this? Gandydancer ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 16:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I undid a revision by Burpelson. Here is one paragraph as it stood:
He had actually requested extended therapy for his client shortly before the incident, as El-Masri felt threatened, believing to be pursued by cars and strangers. The act of arson was executed on impulse, entirely unprofessionally, and could not have led to a larger fire. While the courts recognized that El-Masri has never ever breached the law before his CIA abduction, and acknowledged that he has been traumatized, this did not now justify acts of violence. He received a suspended sentence.
The English here is just awkward, and it's making several assertions as fact (such as he "felt threatened", or this arson "could not have let to a larger fire.") when these are were actually unproven claims made by El-Masri himself. Also, the arson was done "entirely unprofessionally"? Is there a "professional" way to commit arson? That's why I changed it this way:
He had actually requested extended therapy for his client shortly before the incident, as El-Masri claimed he felt threatened and pursued by cars and strangers. He claimed that the arson was executed on impulse, and could not have led to a larger fire. The courts recognized that El-Masri had never breached the law before his CIA abduction, and ruled that he was traumatized, but this did not justify acts of violence. He received a suspended sentence.
I also changed some of the terms (like "file an appeal" instead of "apply for revision", because that is the more correct translation in English.
If there is "weasal wording" there, please point it out to me, or better yet, rewrite the paragraph yourself. Just avoid presenting El-Masri's claims as facts (especially since he is admittedly traumatized and/or mentally ill). BuboTitan ( talk) 23:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Recently one of the wikileaks cable that was released relates to discussions between German and American officials over the Al-Masri case, where the US is urging Germany to reconsider its decision to issue arrest warrants for CIA agents that abducted Al-Masri.
http://wikileaks.ch/cable/2007/02/07BERLIN242.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120806193.html
Could this fit in the frame work of the sources over the United States blocking attempts to investigate into the matter?
-- MercZ ( talk) 23:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
This has to be one of the most tragic stories of modern times - this poor mans life was ruined based on mistaken identity.
The supreme irony is, people are directed to "see Khalid al-Masri" by the subtitle of the article. As if still, they're somehow related! How awful. My suggestion is to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.68.236 ( talk) 07:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, there seems to be issues of people calling his torture "alleged" (his torture is not alleged, it's been proven in court beyond a reasonable doubt). There's also people that are cherry-picking the wording of his rape (saying that 'sodomized' is antiquated, or what-have-you, but this is the wording of the court-ruling guys. So I'll clip out these paragraphs from the ruling for people who are unclear on the facts.
I think that even if "sodomized" if the word the judge choose to use "raped" is a more appropriate choice of word. It clearly defines an assault an is free of antiquated or homophobic associations.
You changed the wording from 'sodomized' to 'sexually assaulted' him.
The court ruling says sodomized. Look it up. 193.239.220.249 ( talk) 12:00, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
I think that even if "sodomized" if the word the judge choose to use "raped" is a more appropriate choice of word. It clearly defines an assault an is free of antiquated or homophobic associations.
Have added content, quotes and cites related to 2012 ruling to establish context and significance - suggest implications for related cases. Parkwells ( talk) 17:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Khalid El-Masri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Khalid El-Masri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://today.reuters.com/PrinterFriendlyPopup.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=uri:2005-11-09T151654Z_01_SPI954973_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-GERMANY-USA.xml{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://today.reuters.com/PrinterFriendlyPopup.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=uri:2005-12-17T152129Z_01_MOL755200_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-GERMANY-USA.xmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
For the sake of greater accuracy and to avoid confusion, "Macedonia" should not be mentioned, but rather North Macedonia as it is now called, or being clear that it refers to the then-called FYROM 134.225.30.13 ( talk) 09:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
This sentence under "timeline of events" can't be true: "The BND (German intelligence agency) declared on 1 June 2006 that it had known of El-Masri's seizure 16 months before the German government was officially informed in May 2004 of his mistaken arrest." 16 month before May 2004 was January 2003. El-Masri's was kidnapped in January 2004.-- Querstrebe ( talk) 23:37, 22 February 2024 (UTC)