Hassan bin Attash (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Hassan bin Attash" in English language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank English rank
1st place
1st place
low place
low place
low place
low place
7th place
7th place
low place
low place
34th place
27th place
low place
low place
9,939th place
6,377th place
729th place
650th place
low place
7,978th place
1,367th place
1,176th place
low place
low place
310th place
208th place
12th place
11th place
41st place
34th place
low place
low place
8th place
10th place
1,634th place
1,093rd place
696th place
428th place
4,633rd place
2,753rd place

alertnet.org

amnesty.org

web.amnesty.org

andyworthington.co.uk

bbc.co.uk

news.bbc.co.uk

boston.com

brookings.edu

cageprisoners.com

christusrex.org

documentcloud.org

dod.mil

hrw.org

justia.com

docs.justia.com

nyt.com

int.nyt.com

  • "JTF-GTMO Detainee Assessment" (PDF). Department of Defense. 2008-06-25. Retrieved 2022-11-12.

nytimes.com

nytimes.com

projects.nytimes.com

prs.mil

reprieve.org.uk

theguardian.com

  • Richard Norton-Taylor, Duncan Campbell (March 10, 2008). "Fresh questions on torture flights spark demands for inquiry". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 2008-03-17. Flight plan records show that one of the aircraft, registered N379P, flew in September 2002 from Diego Garcia to Morocco. From there it flew to Portugal and then to Kabul. Passenger names have been blacked out. However, Reprieve, which represents prisoners faced with the death penalty and torture, said that in Kabul the aircraft picked up Al-Sharqawi and Hassan bin Attash, two suspects who were tortured in Jordan before being rendered to Afghanistan and flown to Guantánamo Bay. Those rendered through Diego Garcia remain unidentified. In a letter to Miliband, Clive Stafford Smith, Reprieve's legal director, said: 'It is certainly not going to rebuild public confidence if we say that two people were illegally taken through British territory but then refuse to reveal the fates of these men.'

usatoday.com

  • "U.S. military reviews 'enemy combatant' use". USA Today. 2007-10-11. Archived from the original on 2007-10-23. Critics called it an overdue acknowledgment that the so-called Combatant Status Review Tribunals are unfairly geared toward labeling detainees the enemy, even when they pose little danger. Simply redoing the tribunals won't fix the problem, they said, because the system still allows coerced evidence and denies detainees legal representation.

washingtonpost.com

web.archive.org