Talk:Black September Organization

message: The article states, "According to American journalist Charlie Cranston John K. Cooley, the BSO represented . . . " Which was it? Was it Charlie Cranston or John K. Cooley? Or both? It seems that Cooley authored the quote, but I am somewhat ignorant of the subject. Can someone fix this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by William Rehtworc (talk • contribs) 19:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: American Journalist

message: The links provide evidence of the links, or at least claims of links.  Why is Alberuni deleting them? Is every single source that says something Alberuni doesn't like "biased"? Jayjg 19:54, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that you mention it, yes.  --Viriditas 20:27, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: "Claims of links"? This is an encyclopedia not a forum for right-wing Israeli speculation and disinformation. If you are going to make political claims of terrorist links to Yasser Arafat you should be able to provide more substantive and reliable historical references than Sports Illustrated, Sony Pictures or World Net Daily. If it is a fact instead of right-wing speculation or book/movie promotion then why isn't this information provided in history books? --Alberuni 20:32, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Other links have been provided in the Yasser Arafat article. Jayjg 20:33, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, they are the same spurious sources. --Alberuni 20:36, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Who says they are spurious? --Viriditas 21:15, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's factual history that Arafat led Black September and was responsible for the Munich massacre, you should be able to find a citation from a reliable historical account or text better than World Net Daily and Sony Pictures. If you can't, then it just shows how spurious the speculation is. Only those with a pro-Israeli POV would accept such speculation as fact because it reassures them that their biases are accurate. --Alberuni 21:45, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: None of these sources support the claim in the article that Arafat controlled the group. The memoirs are being misquoted. Abu Daoud never claimed that Arafat controlled the group --Alberuni 06:13, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely it was not the cell structure which "offered plausible deniability to the Fatah leadership? Wasn't it simply that Fatah didn't in fact control Black September, and that it was a separate organisation?203.184.41.226 (talk) 21:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black September-Fatah links 

message: The document linking Arafat and the PLO to Black September is likely a forgery. It purports to be a poor quality reproduction of a "secret" State Department telegram from 1973 that the Jewish Virtual Library cites as coming from WorldNetDaily, a notoriously biased site. The supposedly secret document has no provenance indicating how WorldNetDaily came into its possession and there is no validation of its contents from any official verifiable source. If this is not the official position of the US government, why is Wikipedia perpetuating unsubstantiated Zionist hasbara propaganda? Deleted.   --Alberuni 16:45, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think you're the arbiter of source reliability. Jayjg 18:46, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: WorldNetDaily is no more worthy of being an encyclopedia source than Jew Watch. If there is one independent, non-partisan, or official government source to verify this allegation, please point it out. If there is no independent verification, it does not belong in an objective encyclopedia; maybe its suitable for Jewish Virtual Library, but this isn't Ziopedia. Try to remember that as you curb your POV. --Alberuni 21:06, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Despite being uncivil about it, Alberuni's got a good point.  World Net Daily is truly notorious, and can certainly not be considered a reliable source. - Mustafaa 21:22, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: "Notorious" in what sense? I don't know that much about it, do other sources Talk: about Worldnetdaily? Jayjg 21:25, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  WorldNetDaily is not a reliable source 

message: Regarding Arafat/Munich: Alberuni's NPOV version above is not accurate, in my view.  Journalist Alexander Wolff did not write that Abu Daoud simply believed the Munich operation had the endorsement of Arafat (as though he wasn't sure whether it did or not). Rather, this journalist (and many others) reported that Abu Daoud stated, very clearly in his autobiography, that the operation did have Arafat's endorsement. Abu Daoud was in a position to know and he wrote in his book that he did know, not that he merely believed it. He was a primary source and what he said therefore has to be quoted, not interpreted. The phrase "had the  endorsement of" does not mean "would have endorsed it had he known about it." It means "did endorse it" which of course means he knew about it.
Alberuni, I feel you may be flogging a dead historical horse here. Arafat never denied he was involved in Munich, so far as I know. There's no Middle East journalist that I know of who claims Arafat was not involved, even if only as an "endorser." My own feeling is to say he only endorsed it is already a charitable interpretation of history in favor of Arafat. Slim 01:51, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
:A dead historical horse?  :-)  Slim 07:19, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
:Arafat denied involvement in the Munich operation. Wolff claims that Doaud said that "the operation had the endorsement of Arafat," although Arafat wasn't involved in planning or conceiving of it. If Sports Illustrated's translation of Arabic and quote are accurate, which I doubt, it means that Arafat generally endorsed attacks on Israel and BSO took it upon themselves to plan Munich. If Arafat knew of it in advance, they would say he helped plan it.  --Alberuni 05:42, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another proof of the PLO "influence" is right in the article: "After the March 1973 attack, the organization was disbanded, apparently under pressure from the PLO, which believed that terrorist acts were damaging public perception of the Palestinian cause." But, if Arafat denied it, we have no choice but to trust him, even though all the evidence and participants say otherwise. And Alberuni, you are so right to doubt the correctness of SI, after all they are just another outlet of Hasbara world conspiracy. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 06:52, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: "apparently under pressure from the PLO" Apparent to whom, I wonder? I have no doubt that Sports Illustrated is the most intellectual reference on Middle East politics that you have ever used. --Alberuni 07:17, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Re: Request for comment/Arafat and Munich

message: It is a hasbara propaganda channel. The quotes taken from there and Worldnetdaily will be deleted. This isn't Ziopedia. Get neutral sources and leave the hasbara at home.
Palestine Facts is a project of the Jewish Internet Association. 
Israel and the Jewish people are under attack in one of the front line battles of the war between peaceful Western nations and hostile forces that seek to destroy our civilization, our freedom and way of life. Every channel must be utilized to resist and convert others to our defense and support. In the 21st century, the Internet is one of the battlefields of that war and JIA is determined to hold the line. - Jewish Internet Association  --Alberuni 05:34, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Alberuni, your entire argument is fallacious.  This article is about Black September.  NPOV policy is about presenting both sides, even if you disagree with the claimants.  Your disputes with the POV in question have nothing to do with the organization, and everything to do with your inability to adhere to NPOV policy.--Viriditas 05:39, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The sources are biased Zionist sources. They are being used as sources for claiming that Arafat is the chief BSO terrorist, which is typical for Zionists to believe that about Israel's arch-enemy. They are unreliable and they admit that they should utilize every channel to convert others to their way of thinking. Hasbara! Should I quote Jew Watch on articles about Israel? --Alberuni 05:45, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review my user page: "If you can finally pin them down in Talk:, they insist that you provide evidence for every statement of fact you make, and when you do, they insist that all your sources are "unreliable" or "biased". Jayjg 06:12, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe you should learn to find and use independent, unbiased sources instead of your usual POV neoconservative hasbara. --Alberuni 06:16, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not produce these sources, and you are definitely not the arbiter of what sources count as "biased". Jayjg 06:18, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: When a Zionist propagandist says "Every channel must be utilized to resist and convert others to our defense and support," it;s pretty obvious that they are biased. --Alberuni 06:21, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: However, it says nothing about falsifying facts.  On the contrary, the Palestinefacts website states "Every fact and assertion on this web site is backed-up by elaborate documentation hyperlinked right into the materials presented or available in the supplemental references. If you question anything, follow the links for more and more in-depth discussion and information. The most authoritative sources were sought and are presented for each topic. Lies and propaganda are excluded." Jayjg 06:25, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: When a propagandist says "Every channel must be utilized to resist and convert others to our defense and support," and also "lies and propaganda are excluded," that means that they are feeding you pure unadulterated bullshit. And, by the way, the documentation is not hyperlinked into the page about the Munich attack. I guess they expect us to believe their "authoritative sources," read Dore Gold and the IDF. --Alberuni 06:43, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why PalestineFacts is not a reliable source 

message: I correct myself, looking over the record that's actually 5 reverts in one day for you, Alberuni.  I strongly encourage you to respect Wikipedia policies, of which you are well aware. Jayjg 06:36, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly encourage you to get a life. --Alberuni 06:40, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review Wikipedia:No personal attacks Jayjg 06:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I reviewed it but I didn't find anything in there that could help you get a life. --Alberuni 06:47, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  5 reverts in one day, Alberuni 

message: There should be something on there about the after math of the munich games with the following facts:
1) The leaders of it were tracked down and killed.
2) Part of the operation included Barak going into lebanon
3) During one of the assasinations of an alledged black sepetermber person they killed the wrong person in i believe norway, that cuased a bit of a raw between israel and normay (I believe it was some european country) Since Israel wanted its spy back.
I dont have the source on me, i saw it on a special on the history channel. But its relavent to it.
:Most of that information is found in the Munich Massacre article. Jayjg 19:14, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Munich Games Aftermath 

message: When I looked up Black September, the 2nd entry directed me to a page about a "terrorist" organization.
Why is the word "terrorist" surrounded by quotation marks? { unsigned} 
Lead in paragraph describes them as "militant organization". I think this is a mislabeling based on the era (time Frame) of their operation. If they operated after 2002 they would be called a "Terrorist organization". Why are they labelled as inactive status - and no mention of how /why classifed such Wfoj3 (talk) 11:17, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "terrorist" 

message: :Recent remarks by Abu Daoud, the alleged mastermind of the Munich kidnappings, deny that any of the Palestinians assassinated by Mossad had any relation to the Munich operation, this despite the fact that the list includes 2 of the 3 surviving members of the kidnap squad arrested at the airport
Has it been clearly established that the people killed/murdered/assisinated by Mossad were indeed the people arrested? Given the covert nature of such an operation as well as the covert nature of the people involved, establishing a clear link between the two would seem rather difficult, especially in 1973... Nil Einne 15:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  People murdered/assisinated 

message: In the Movie Munich the CIA is said to support Black September financially. Is this true? Anyone have any sources? Tchadienne 16:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CIA

message: Why was the group called "Black September" instead of being named after a month of the islamic calendar? 193.171.121.30 20:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the English name. The Arabic name apparently refers to aylul, which is the Arabic name for September. It's a secular organization, which is probably why they did not name themselves after the Islamic month.--Doron 20:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Western month as a name?

message: The image :Image:Khartoum hostage crists.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Khartoum hostage crists.jpg

message: In the Global Terrorism Database, I see there's a group called "Black September II", which had several attacks, including 4 fatalities and dozens of injuries, and in one case, it targeted Jordanian diplomats (Azmi Al-Mufti, Bucharest, Romania, 1984). Should the operations of this organization be included in this article or make a new one? bogdan (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black September operations after its official end? 

message: why is Black September not called a terrorist organization, they clearly fit all criteria, kidnapping and killing a group of civilians is clearly terrorism  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.175.17.21 (talk) 16:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  why not terrorist 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Black September Organization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120429154347/http://www.trophort.com/001/159/001159176.html to http://trophort.com/001/159/001159176.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:13, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The usage and primary topic of Black September is under discussion, see talk:Black September in Jordan -- 70.51.200.96 (talk) 03:43, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "Black September"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Black September Organization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040626080910/http://www.sonypictures.com:80/classics/oneday/html/blacksept/ to http://www.sonypictures.com/classics/oneday/html/blacksept/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There were a lot of Wikiprojects - I removed some that were only relevant to Munich like Germany and Olympics. The main attack makes sense for those Wikiprojects, but this article doesn't seem like a good fit.Seraphim System (talk) 18:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiprojects