Talk:Lutz Bachmann

"Now-discredited picture"

I have removed text stating that the photograph Bachmann posted on his facebook page is "now discredited." Neither newspaper used to source the information says anything of the kind, and merely states that Bachmann has maintained the photograph was a joke.

Here are what the two sources write, exactly:

The founder of Germany's anti-Islam movement Pegida has been forced onto the defensive after a photograph emerged of him posing as Adolf Hitler. Lutz Bachmann originally posted the photograph, in which he appears with a distinctive Hitler moustache and swept-across fringe, on his own Facebook page with the caption "He's back". Mr Bachmann insisted the picture, which was published by the Dresdner Morgenpost, a local newspaper in his native Dresden, had been "a joke". But it could prove damaging to his Pegida movement. The newspaper also published screenshots of a number of racist comments posted on Mr Bachmann's Facebook page under his name.

The Telegraph, [1]

And:

The leader of a German organization against the perceived "Islamization" of Europe, which has taken pains to distance itself from neo-Nazi groups, provoked a firestorm Wednesday after a picture surfaced showing him with a Hitler mustache and hair combed over like the Fuehrer. Top-selling Bild newspaper published the photo of Lutz Bachmann, co-founder of the Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the West, or PEGIDA on its front page. Bild quoted him as saying he had posted the picture on his Facebook page, apparently some time ago, as a joke. "One has to be able sometimes to make fun of oneself," he said. Bachmann did not respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press. If it was a joke, nobody was laughing.

Associated Press, [2]

It is clear from the language, "...if it was a joke..." and "Mr Bachman insisted the picture..." that the journalists do not endorse Bachmann's declaration, whatever its merit.

The Guardian is used to report the Sächsische Zeitung story stating that the photograph was doctored to add the mustache. However, the Guardian also does not report that the photo is a forgery:

The Sächsische Zeitung reported last week that the Hitler moustache on the now infamous photo had been added after the photo was taken – though Bachmann did not mention this when the photo went viral. “No one would have believed me at that moment,” he told the Guardian on Monday. “All the media in the world reported it. On the original photo, I did not have a moustache. Since then, it has been revealed as a forgery, but in that moment, it simply wasn’t possible to refute it, and in order to avoid damage I stepped down – but only as chairman. I never left the organisation.”

The Guardian, [3]

According to a story in the International Business Times, local (Saxon) media reported that the "photograph could be fake." WP:BLP policy requires that we be cautious and scrupulous in reporting on living persons, but not that we print false information, e.g., declaring that a source has demonstrated a photo is a forgery, when it says no such thing. -Darouet (talk) 00:53, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

"Is a criminal,"

I find Bachmann's political views abhorrent (if that's not evident from my comments above), but we must adhere to WP:BLP policies and treat Bachmann, a living person, with caution here at a free and online encyclopedia. For that reason, I'm removing the lead epithet stating that Bachman "a German criminal..."

For the record, the available sources, the AFP and the NYT, confirm that Bachman has been convicted of burglary, theft, and drug charges:

He was sentenced in 1998 to three and a half years in prison on charges including burglary and theft, fled to South Africa but was deported back to Germany and later convicted of drugs offences. — AFP [4]

The local Sächsische Zeitung newspaper recently reported that Mr. Bachmann had several criminal convictions — 16 burglaries, driving drunk or without a license and even dealing in cocaine... News of his record jars with his accusations that arriving foreigners spread crime, but Mr. Bachmann waved it off as a distraction. Yes, he told the crowd. “I, too, have a previous life,” he said, adding, “If it is better for our cause, I am ready to step out of the unwanted spotlight.” — NYT [5]

Perhaps it will be worthwhile to mention these convictions in the lead while also adhering to WP:NPOV. -Darouet (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

I too am in no agreement with Bachmann's political views. However, I do not believe his criminal past warrants a place in the lead. The introduction should be a summary of key encyclopedic information regarding the person, topic etc at hand. As far as I'm aware his crimes are not one of the main aspects for which he is known for. I still believe they should be included in the article as a whole, but not be part of the introduction. Helper201 (talk) 11:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Helper201, I agree with what you write. I think our current body text,

Bachmann has a criminal record for sixteen burglaries, dealing cocaine[11][12] and assault.[13] In 1998, after Bachmann had been sentenced to several years in prison, he fled to South Africa but was deported back to Germany.[7][8]

is well-written and sufficient for the article overall. -Darouet (talk) 15:25, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Counter-jihad

@Nillurcheier:, kindly refer to the category's main article, Counter-jihad. Plenty of academic sources associate PEGIDA with being part of the conspiratorial movement. Al-Andalusi (talk) 15:54, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Al-Andalusi: Hi, Could you please show some of the aforementioned sources? --Mhhossein ^talk 16:08, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

@Al-Andalusi:: Thanks for the hint. I misinterpreted the meaning of counter-jihad. After reading in detail, I agree with you edits. --Nillurcheier (talk) 18:29, 8 December 2018 (UTC)