Talk:Muhammad Ahmad Hussein

Dubious citation
Judging from the fact that the controversial statement by Muhammad Ahmad Hussein has not been recognised by any major news agencys, I find this citation deeply problematic - especially as the exact same citation has been attached to his predecessor Ekrima Sa'id Sabri. Could anyone please provide other sources and/or more context for verfication?! Regards, Daniel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Gallulus (talk • contribs) 07:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Where has the "exact same citation" been attached to Sabri? If you read the linked-to article, it clearly refers to Hussein, not Sabri. It was from an exclusive interview given to Media Line, so it's not surprising other media news agencies did not report it. It also wasn't as explicit an endorsement as some have suggested it was. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your fast answer! Sabri was quoted in Ha'aretz, December 9, 2001. Your comment that Muhammad Ahmad Hussein didn't make an explicit endorsement seem to indicate that the citation may need some further information regarding the interview in Media Line (espacially as the link to the Media Line article doen't work). Many regards, Daniel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Gallulus (talk • contribs) 09:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The link to the article that is currently cited works for me. And it's available in multiple places on the Internet: e.g., . What's included in the article right now is a direct quote. I doubt very much that Ha'aretz quoted Sabri saying the exact same thing. Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Controversy
I noticed that all authors and/or sources of publication either have Jewish names or are Israeli. Even though all the material might be perfectly true, it should be balanced with another perspective. Crispulop (talk) 22:44, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * What do you suggest? Your comment is on the verge of sounding like an allegation of a "Jewish worldwide media conspiracy". Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:55, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * My comment certainly does not want to make that allegation. I merely noted that an article on what seems to be an important Palestinian had a controversy section with references made primarily from Jewish/Israeli authors. Noting the controversy always surrounding the topic that might come across as not providing a balanced view. My suggestion is to lessen that impression by providing references to sources that can not be "claimed" by either side in the conflict, such as the Reuters one. Crispulop (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand, and I believe your suggestion is a helpful one. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any (how do you say this ...?) non-Jewish sources for the section on the controversy. The Reuters article doesn't mention it. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:29, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I will try to search for some other sources as well in the coming days. Maybe this source is useful http://pri.org/stories/2012-02-03/shocking-speech-muslim-leader-jerusalem or this one http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/insideisrael/2012/January/Palestinian-Authoritys-Grand-Mufti-Kill-the-Jews/ Although I must say that the last one does not provide as much context and response as the current New York Times source. It might be wise to add the mufti's response to the article (see last paragraph of New York Times article). Crispulop (talk) 15:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I added the PRI dot org source. It comes from WGBH, a "non-Jewish" source. If anyone has other WP:RS, WP:NPOV non-JEwish sources, please feel free to add them to the article. I am going to remove the bias tag from that part of the article.--FeralOink (talk) 16:03, 3 February 2024 (UTC)