Talk:Andijan massacre: Difference between revisions
TheColdTruth (talk | contribs) |
→Title - Andijan Massacre: not the issue |
||
Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
:Regardless of whether we believe the unrest was by terrorists or innocent civilians, multiple governments have alleged that it was terrorists who were responsible for the violence. ''Mosnews'' labelled it a terrorist attack[http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/08/04/uzbeksuspects.shtml], the Uzbek government convicted 15 individuals who took part in the unrest on charges of terrorism,[http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2005/11/uzbek-court-issues-guilty-verdict.php] one of the leaders involved even threatened to start a "campaign of terror" against the government.[http://jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2370123] The writer in the last article is Igor Rotar, the leader of [[Forum 18]], an organization that has faced a ruthless campaign of harassment from the Uzbek government. He's one of the most respected writers in Central Asia. [[User:KazakhPol|KazakhPol]] 04:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC) |
:Regardless of whether we believe the unrest was by terrorists or innocent civilians, multiple governments have alleged that it was terrorists who were responsible for the violence. ''Mosnews'' labelled it a terrorist attack[http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/08/04/uzbeksuspects.shtml], the Uzbek government convicted 15 individuals who took part in the unrest on charges of terrorism,[http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2005/11/uzbek-court-issues-guilty-verdict.php] one of the leaders involved even threatened to start a "campaign of terror" against the government.[http://jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2370123] The writer in the last article is Igor Rotar, the leader of [[Forum 18]], an organization that has faced a ruthless campaign of harassment from the Uzbek government. He's one of the most respected writers in Central Asia. [[User:KazakhPol|KazakhPol]] 04:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC) |
||
*OK, KazakhPolice you have altered the title of this article, now you want to change it entirely by saying that the entire event was a clash between two terrorists clans?! Please see numerous pages some already listed on the article, about the event. The human rights organizations are far more credible than few Russian newspapers. Note that the governments of Russia and Uzbekistan have very close ties. Now the human rights organizations say that the civilians were protesting when government officials surrounded and killed them. The government says that it was terrorists, that is what you expect them to say, they won't confess, and Russian government will support them since they are allies. US used to be allies with Uzbekistan, but when US officials started criticizing Karimov's actions, and requesting foreign investigations, Uzbekistan ended all its relations with US. This is all already listed in the reference links, or you can google Andijan Massacre, and you'll find vast amount of more of these links. All western countries say it was a massacre done by government, Russia, China, and Central Asian Countries(all of them have close ties, and this is all referenced ) say that it was terrorists, and that it was you are saying too. That's all I want to say for now. If you need further references of what I said, I'll force myself, to google for you. Thank you. [[User:TheColdTruth|TheColdTruth]] 04:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC) |
*OK, KazakhPolice you have altered the title of this article, now you want to change it entirely by saying that the entire event was a clash between two terrorists clans?! Please see numerous pages some already listed on the article, about the event. The human rights organizations are far more credible than few Russian newspapers. Note that the governments of Russia and Uzbekistan have very close ties. Now the human rights organizations say that the civilians were protesting when government officials surrounded and killed them. The government says that it was terrorists, that is what you expect them to say, they won't confess, and Russian government will support them since they are allies. US used to be allies with Uzbekistan, but when US officials started criticizing Karimov's actions, and requesting foreign investigations, Uzbekistan ended all its relations with US. This is all already listed in the reference links, or you can google Andijan Massacre, and you'll find vast amount of more of these links. All western countries say it was a massacre done by government, Russia, China, and Central Asian Countries(all of them have close ties, and this is all referenced ) say that it was terrorists, and that it was you are saying too. That's all I want to say for now. If you need further references of what I said, I'll force myself, to google for you. Thank you. [[User:TheColdTruth|TheColdTruth]] 04:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC) |
||
:I dispute nothing you just said, but you are missing the point. It has been labelled as terrorism. People involved in the unrest were convicted ''of terrorism''. Therefore it belongs in [[:Category:Terrorism in Uzbekistan]] in the same way that those who write about terrorism, such as [[Zeyno Baran]], are put into Terrorism X country categories. [[User:KazakhPol|KazakhPol]] 04:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:50, 4 March 2007
Central Asia Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Disaster management Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism Unassessed | |||||||||||||
|
Casualties
On the main page, the first point on the news claims Uzbek troops kill over 300 but on the article it is perhaps 300, this means the actual number is unknown, just estimated. It disturbs me because lies and false claims to fix impact on a title, are for the news media not for Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia Mexaguil 07:42, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- Many other news sources (just check Google news) are reporting at least 500 dead. --Berkut 08:44, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
that re-enforces my point, my point is: wikipedia should not fall into the trap that news media does and have vague claims Mexaguil 10:32, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
- The reason why claims are vague is because it's very difficult to get factual information on this: reporters were forced out of places where confrontations occured, the government does not release true counts, hospitals release no numbers at all, and so on. In any case Wikipedia has to relly on "news media" simply because wiki doesn't have a reporter in every place on Earth to bring factual info. --Berkut 11:23, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
You are both right, which is why "X is true" in a case like this should be "x is true" says (reference) preferably as an exact quote preferably linking to an internet source. 4.250.201.173 14:21, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
I've seen several media outlets in Norway who've started operating with (estimated) figures up in the 1000 to 2000 dead civillians. Nothing confirmed, naturally, but I'm upping the maximum estimated bit in the article intro to 1000 based on this. Also, I've seen a quote where the Uzbek government admits to having killed 160-something "militant extremists" several days after the massacre, despite sources in the army saying "at least 500". I can't find sources for any of these, though, as I mean to have picked them up from the text-TV of Norwegian NRK and TV2... so I'll just leave it in here, for now.--TVPR 07:43, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Anti-Uzbek bias
This article shows an over whelming anti-Uzbek bias and goes against the basic tenets of Wikipedia. [unsigned]
- You'll have to be specific. It seems pretty well reflective of documented sources. - Reaverdrop 01:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- I think what you mean is "an over whelming anti-Uzbek" GOVERNMENT bias. I think we should be biased against corrupt governments which kill their own people and offer ridiculous and hate-filled propaganda, such as that of Islam Karimov.
Lack of neutrality and factual accuracy
This article is highly inaccurate and has a pervasive anti-Uzbek pov. I will try to correct this as best I can. Ya ya ya ya ya ya 20:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean "anti-Uzbek"? Don't you realize that it is because of a few very brave Uzbeks (many of whom are wanted by their government now) that we have any of this information at all? When you say "anti-Uzbek" pov, you mean "anti-Karimov Regime".
Removing neutrality warning
Other than complaints from anonymous users and Sock puppets, do we have any other complaints of NPOV?
Djma12 13:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Re-writing introduction
The previous introduction was confusing in chronology and also introduced ancillary issues that occured after the events of May 13th. The "Islamic state" portion, for example, was an isolated incident that occured afterwards and had marginal connection to the intent of the original protestors. Hope this clarifies the topic.
Djma12 14:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Title - Andijan Massacre
Who changed the title? I think it should be changed back to Andijan Massacre, since thats what you call an event like this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KingFace (talk • contribs) 17:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC).
- If you are unfamiliar with this event then please refrain from making controversial changes to this article, much less editing it at all. KazakhPol 18:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- You know KazakhPol, just b/c someone disagrees with your viewpoints doesn't automatically make them "unfamiliar with the events." This is the 3rd/4th time I've seen this issue raised on this page and the discussion has always been summarily slapped down by this brusque statement. I think enough people have voiced concern that this requires serious debate. After all, the page was unilaterally renamed without any real consensus or discussion. Djma12 01:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- See the meaning of the word "massacre," here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre. Thank you. 74.116.92.202 22:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
The consensus among Central Asian experts is that this was an inter-clan conflict between the Interior Ministry and the clan running the police department of Andijan. This is not the third or fourth time this issue has been raised, this is the only time it has been raised. Dont manufacture discussion that never took place. KazakhPol 02:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- See [1]. It was between the Samarqand Inoyatov clan and the Almatov Interior Ministry clan. KazakhPol 02:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- * Even the citation you provide refers to the incident as the Andijan Massacre, not "civil unrest." Djma12 02:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Who are these "Central Asian experts" to whom you refer? The only citation you provide (above) does not mention the Samarqand Inoyatov clan, the Almatov Interior Ministry clan, or back up any of the claims you make. Until real citations are provided, these statements violate WP:CITE and WP:NOR.
- Check the article's edit history. You've used the phrase If you are unfamiliar with this event then please refrain from making controversial changes to this article, much less editing it at all to justify unilateral edits. Acceptable rationales involve citation and discussion, not ad hominem attacks.
- And yes, you unilaterally moved the article without even a peep of discussion. This is grossly inappropriate.
Djma12 02:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- The article I provided clearly states that it was an inter-clan conflict. The role of the clans in the conflict is irrelevant to the page title. If you opposed the page move it is odd that you did not note this move until now. Can you provide recent citation indicating this was not a clan conflict? KazakhPol 03:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Untrue. Your citation refers to a "local power struggle" in the opening sentence, but in no way mentions inter-clan conflict, much less the Samarqant Inoyatov clan or any other of your claims.
- Yes, this page fell off my radar, then my life got busy. This does not justify an unilateral move without discussion.
- First of all, the burden of proof is one YOU, since you're the only one bringing up the inter-clan conflict. Secondly, the Human Rights Watcharticle clearly implicates the government in the affair.
Djma12 03:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, the HRW watch implicates the government. This is part of my point. The clans are based on government positions.
- "Thus, for example, the Samarqand regional elite compete with the Tashkent and Ferghana groupings, or devotees of Rustam Inoyatov, head of Uzbekistan's National Security Service, unite against supporters of Zakir Almatov, Uzbekistan's former Interior Minister, so as to win the center’s attention and material largesse."[2]
- If you do Crtl+F on the first source I provided searching under "clan" you will see: Karimov personally attended the legislative session on May 25, 2004, during which Obidov was sacked. "The whole city was cordoned off by the militia and there were [security officers] in masks in jeeps, along with army soldiers," the source said. "Karimov was obviously worried. ... Obidov had ruled [in the region] for a long time: he was part of the Ferghana clan and he had lots of supporters." The new hokim, Begaliyev, had close political ties to the central government. Prior to coming to Andijan, Begaliyev had served as minister of agriculture and water. In late 2004, Karimov appointed Begaliyev’s successor as agriculture and water minister, Ikromkhon Nazhmiddinov, as the governor of Ferghana Province. The moves suggest that Karimov was intent during the last half of 2004 on boosting his political influence over the restive Ferghana Valley. Once installed in Andijan, Begaliyev wasted little time in launching a purge of all Obidov allies. "Criminal proceedings were started against many of his [Obidov’s] administration members," the source said. "The new hokim also decided to re-divide the businesses in the province; he cracked down on the entrepreneurs who had been supported by Obidov. They were told to sell their businesses for a pittance either to him [Begaliyev] or his people, or face legal proceedings." When the 23 businessmen tried to resist, the hokim ordered their arrest, the source said. They were officially charged with being members of Akromiya, and engaging in extremist activities." So you see, while the national government put down the businessmen and their allies, it was not based on a desire to repress the people but one clan's desire to take power from another. KazakhPol 03:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think the conversation is getting a bit muddled at this point. Regardless of the motivation or the local government's tribal affiliations, the point remains that government forces cordoned off protesters and killed hundreds, if not thousands of civilians. There was definitely "civil unrest" preceding and following the event, but the event itself definitely qualifies as a massacre. Djma12 03:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Regardless of whether we believe the unrest was by terrorists or innocent civilians, multiple governments have alleged that it was terrorists who were responsible for the violence. Mosnews labelled it a terrorist attack[3], the Uzbek government convicted 15 individuals who took part in the unrest on charges of terrorism,[4] one of the leaders involved even threatened to start a "campaign of terror" against the government.[5] The writer in the last article is Igor Rotar, the leader of Forum 18, an organization that has faced a ruthless campaign of harassment from the Uzbek government. He's one of the most respected writers in Central Asia. KazakhPol 04:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- OK, KazakhPolice you have altered the title of this article, now you want to change it entirely by saying that the entire event was a clash between two terrorists clans?! Please see numerous pages some already listed on the article, about the event. The human rights organizations are far more credible than few Russian newspapers. Note that the governments of Russia and Uzbekistan have very close ties. Now the human rights organizations say that the civilians were protesting when government officials surrounded and killed them. The government says that it was terrorists, that is what you expect them to say, they won't confess, and Russian government will support them since they are allies. US used to be allies with Uzbekistan, but when US officials started criticizing Karimov's actions, and requesting foreign investigations, Uzbekistan ended all its relations with US. This is all already listed in the reference links, or you can google Andijan Massacre, and you'll find vast amount of more of these links. All western countries say it was a massacre done by government, Russia, China, and Central Asian Countries(all of them have close ties, and this is all referenced ) say that it was terrorists, and that it was you are saying too. That's all I want to say for now. If you need further references of what I said, I'll force myself, to google for you. Thank you. TheColdTruth 04:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- I dispute nothing you just said, but you are missing the point. It has been labelled as terrorism. People involved in the unrest were convicted of terrorism. Therefore it belongs in Category:Terrorism in Uzbekistan in the same way that those who write about terrorism, such as Zeyno Baran, are put into Terrorism X country categories. KazakhPol 04:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Unassessed Central Asia articles
- Unknown-importance Central Asia articles
- WikiProject Central Asia articles
- Unassessed Disaster management articles
- Unknown-importance Disaster management articles
- Unassessed Crime-related articles
- Unknown-importance Crime-related articles
- Unassessed Terrorism articles
- Unknown-importance Terrorism articles
- Terrorism task force articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles