Talk:Global Relief Foundation

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Finance & Investment Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islam: Islam and Controversy Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Islam and Controversy task force.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: FBI Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject FBI (assessed as Low-importance).

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Global Relief Foundation[edit]

I saw you created Global Relief Foundation. I changed the way it references your source. Is the Foundation's ties to terrorism really established, in a court of law, for instance?

The Treasury Department answers to the Attorney General I believe. And the Attorney General in 2002 was John Ashcroft. Ashcroft was not an honest official. He distorted various other terror cases. He claimed, for instance, that his Department helped thwart a plot to blow up Federal buildings in Ottawa. That plot turned out to be a complete fabrication on the part of intelligence officials.

The idea of "six degrees of separation" should be required reading for all US counter-terrorism intelligence officials. -- Geo Swan 14:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geo, to be honest, I don't know how the case shook out or if charges were ever pressed. A small point: I don't think Treasury answers to Justice and even if they did, we can't really say "Oh, Ashcroft is horrible, everything he does is suspect," even if it's true (and believe me, I am no fan of the guy). An even smaller point: I really don't like ref tags. I noticed you put them on the Hawash article, and here. You might check out policy on those tags. IronDuke 14:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{pov}}...[edit]

Another contributor recently addedd a {{pov}} tag to this article. But, although the instantiation of that tag tells readers to look to the article's talk page for a more detailed explanation, the person who placed the tag didn't offer one.

They didn't even state whether they thought the article was biased in favor of the US government, and against Global Relief Foundation -- or vice versa.

I am going to ask them to leave an explanation for their concern here. Geo Swan (talk) 02:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is that, although the article is short, 90% of the article is about the treasury departments freezing of it's assets. To balance the article we really need more about the org itself and it's history etc and the 'counter opinion'.--neon white talk 02:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added some more countering of the allegations. --neon white talk 02:50, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I disagree that an article lapses from compliance with WP:NPOV if it neutrally covers all of the WP:RS. If the "other side" of the story is covered in less detail, because of a lack of WP:RS, this is not a lapse from WP:NPOV. Geo Swan (talk) 23:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't really covered at all despite it being reported, regardless an article still needs to maintain a neutral bias. I think the issue is resolved for now. It's possible that further info may become available, i believe the case remains essentially open. --neon white talk 02:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]