Talk:World Assembly of Muslim Youth

WAMY was designated as one of the main Saudi charities involved in al-Qaida financing, by the United Nations in a report entitled "TERRORISM FINANCING Roots and trends of Saudi terrorism financing" The Report was prepared for the President of the Security Council, United Nations Dec. 19, 2002 by Jean-Charles Brisard (JCB Consulting)

The document is available online HERE. '' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mojotexas (talk • contribs) as of 16:10, 2004 December 18

Section deleted without discussion
The section heading and three paragraphs in italics, that I have pasted in below, were excised from this article, here, and here. I wrote about half that passage. I don't think my prose is sacred, or anything special. But I do like to see an explanation when a whole sub-topic is removed.

I have attempted to initiate discussions with wikipedia contributors who hold various points of view, in their personal lives, about material they excise. Over on the Talk:Tablighi Jamaat, a year and a half ago, I made many attempts to provide coverage of the fact, referenced from verifiable and authoritative sources, that there are strong elements within the counter-terrorism establishments around the world who assert there is a connection between TJ and terrorism.

Initially my correspondents on Talk:Tablighi Jamaat wanted to wholesale excise, to suppress all coverage of these allegations, justifying the suppression based on their perception that the allegations were flimsy, far-fetched, contradicted the stated principle that the TJ movement was non-political. My response was that so long as the coverage of the allegations conformed with the wikipedia's core policies, like WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:VER, it should stay. Suppressing coverage of material because, in the personal opinion of one, or several, wikipedia contributors, that the material is not credible, is a violation of WP:NPOV, when the material complies with the wikipedia's core policies.

I am going to wait a reasonable period of time, for the wikipedians who excised the material, or for someone who agrees with its excision, to offer an explanation why it should remain exicsed. And if I don't get one, I think it should be restored.

Cheers! Geo Swan 17:49, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Unreliable Sources
Many of the statements in this article give discoverthenetworks.org as the source, which is not reliable in itself, although it often draws its information from reliable sources. In addition, there are many direct quotations from this source. Someone with the time and interest (unfortunately not me) should replace those citations with citations to the original, reliable sources of the information posted. In the meantime I am flagging as unreliable. Jazzcowboy (talk) 13:18, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I've fixed some of these, but it still needs some work. Jazzcowboy (talk) 14:11, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I have removed material cited to discoverthenetworks.org. Snuish (talk) 21:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)