Talk:Saud bin Saqr Al Qasimi

Recent Edits
This is a well funded campaign to smear Sheihk Saud. I just removed this addition:

Kuwaiti news sources reported recently that “…the Iranians have real foothold in the UAE, particularly in Ras al-Khaimah. Iran has cultivated close business relations with Crown Prince Saud bin Saqr al-Qasimi and his close associate, Lebanese Shiite businessman, Massad Khater. According to these sources, this is not merely an innocent business relationship. Khater is a partner in a ceramics factory called Ras al-Khaimah Ceramics. This factory, the sources claim, directly aids Iran's weapons and missiles industry. The factory even has a branch in the Iranian city of Natanz, where parts for Iranian warheads are produced.”

This is not even a remotely reliable source. For those who do not know what is going on here, Saud's brother Khaild bin Saqr al Qasimi was removed from power in 2003. He is funding an online battle to smear his replacement. Getting desperate bc his father is not well and he wants to return to power. The best way to do that was to try to link RAK to Iran. Nothing but half truths and innuendo. Well funded innuendo. I request a clean up and a neutral edit for tone.

Sexal Assault Arrest & Allegations
I reverted the latest try at sexual assualt as it was not exactly wp:npov and if this is the only mention of it then it is also wp:undue. Also Eventiin i posted on your talk page about wp:3RR any further reverts by you will lead to a block, please stop now mark nutley (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Just a note that I realize I was wrong about the link not supporting the claim, the link does give one sentance coverage - but charges were not pressed and we do not list peoples arrest records for things they are not proven guilty of. Active Banana   ( bananaphone  19:42, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * There is a new attempt to reinstate previously removed BLP violations by User:RenamedUser5 Tag: possible BLP issue or vandalism. Not neutral in tone, and the case mentioned was dropped, unsubstantiated and immaterial. Removed them as per previous attempts. Lucastar78 (talk) 11:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * This is not apart of some 'smear' campaign. I don't even know this guy and never heard of him before this.  I am from Rochester, Minnesota, and this arrest and incident received widespread attention here and all across Minnesota.  To say that this is "unsubstantiated and immaterial" is simply not true.  The guy is the head of a country.  If Obama or Bush had been arrested for rape, do you not think it would be worthy of mention or material / relevant, or should it be covered up?  How was the edit not neutral?  I used the term "allegedly."  And the facts are the facts.  The woman said what she said.  The suspect told several different stories before finally admitting that he groped or touched her breasts without her permission (which is the very definition of sexual assault - at least in this country).  All of this was recorded on tape and the police reports are publically available.  So the facts are what they are.  If you think you can do a better job of adding this information, then do so.  But simply trying to erase it and pretending it didn't happen is unacceptable and is a lie. User:RenamedUser5 (talk) 17:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Even if the allegations were or are false, simply the fact that he was arrested is notable. Just like the Chappaquiddick incident and Ted Kennedy.  While Kennedy was not convicted of murdering or causing the death of that woman, the incident and allegation is notable.  For Active Banana to say above "we do not list peoples [sic] arrest records" is false  for several reasons.  First, he does not speak for ALL of Wikipedia.  Secondly, while being arrested is not the same thing as being convicted, it is still a notable event - especially for a high profile figure such as a head of state or sports athlete (like the Ben Roethlisberger rape allegation - and he wasn't even arrested, just accused ), or a movie star like David Copperfield.  All of the sexual assault allegations are mentioned in their articles, so why not here, too?  This guy is no more special or different than anybody else. User:RenamedUser5 (talk) 18:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

There are several issues with your argumentation: First - there is the BLP guidelines: Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives, and the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to BLPs, including any living person mentioned in a BLP even if not the subject of the article, and to material about living persons on other pages.[3] The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia rests with the person who adds or restores material.

Further to this, the incidents you cite above, Roethlisburger and Kennedy are different from this unsubstantiated allegation (no charges were pressed and the case was dropped). Roethlisburger was sanctioned by the NFL and the Steelers for his actions. Therefore, perhaps the events were relevant to his career, team, etc. As for the Ted Kennedy incident, Ted is no longer with us and therefore no longer under the BLP rubrik. Moreover, someone died and the event made national headlines. It was a primary reason Teddy did not run for president until the eighties. Therefore, it was a key point in the trajectory of his career and biography.

As is the case here, we have an allegation which was dropped. It is also telling that here you refer to it as a sexual assault, but you more titillatingly lable the section as "arrest for rape." One cannot be "arrested" for rape, only charged. He was never charged.

Finally, this subject has been dealt with on the BLP notice board on two occasions. The community has deemed it to be in violation of BLP Guidelines.Lucastar78 (talk) 23:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Why can't you be arrested for rape? Ever since the 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case of U.S. v. Watson, warrentless felony arrests based on probable cause have been authorized as long as the arrest is made in a public place, which is what happened here.  I have arrested lots of people for rape (or sexual assault) and not all of them with warrants. User:RenamedUser5 (talk) 06:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The previous two "BLP notice board" conclusions are erroneous. Of course this incident should be mentioned on this page. Not only was he arrested, but in his police deposition he admitted to groping the hotel maid in his hotel room, after which she fled in tears and reported it to her supervisor (which prompted al Qasimi's arrest). That oral deposition is available on the internet, you can listen to him in his own voice and words. As the user above points out, even though al Qasimi immediately left the US and the charges against him were not pursued, for a public political figure this is worthy of mention in an article. To not include it suggests a deliberate whitewash (perhaps paid for by public-relations agents of this "Sheikh"?), and does a disservice to our readers, which is not worthy of Wikipedia. Benefac (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)