text:
Talk:Seal of the Prophets/Archive 1

untitled comments
"In religion, the Last Prophet is the final interpreter or spokesperson of a deity. A prophet's statements on behalf of a deity are sometimes called revelation." - It resembles as if we are teaching children. People already know these things and thus are unnecessary to put in here.

"Muslims believe that ..." is much better than "According to the Islamic tradition ..." if you consider NPOV.

"the term was used in Manichaeism" is a gross statement and is not reflecting NPOV. Thus it should be replaced by something like "Mani claims that ..." or "followers of Mani claim that ..."

Hiwamy 12:35, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure I see what you mean by "the term was used in Manichaeism" being POV. Likewise with "According to the Islamic tradition...".  It's pretty factual.  Such a tradition is generally accepted in Islam, so why is it NPOV?  I'm not arguing, by the way - I just don't see what you are seeing, but you've got me curious. -- Christian Edward Gruber 03:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I wish to refute the lie that Mani claimed to be "seal of Prophets". This is completely false:

http://books.google.com/books?id=ThDJMif8T5sC&pg=PA237&lpg=PA237&dq=seal+of+the+prophets+mani&source=web&ots=M1E84ReYFV&sig=4o9_dksWN7d9zRYayytfWhIk2tk&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct=result#PPA237,M1

^^^checkout footnote # 3. Its shows that the clearl islamic term "seal of prophets" is not used in any Manichean literature itself. If anything followers of Mani may have ascribed this to him using islamic influence since the term "seal of prophets" originates with Mohammed. But before him there is no record of the term —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.238.191.48 (talk) 18:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Mysticism-Generally
A statment that Muslims can agree on and other faiths can agree that Muslims believe:

"The Seal of the Prophethood is invested in Mohammad (PBUH)"

This statement is a great point of pride and/or vanity among the millions of Muslims world wide. Of course it causes an equally distasteful reaction in non Muslims. What is the "truth" of this statement as we can discern it from study, investigation and applied common sense?

Note that this is the textual understanding of a novice in Islam and in Arabic. My sincere apologies for any errors in interpretation. All errors are mine and God knows best.

In Arabic the word "Seal" is "Khatim". It does not mean last, more properly it means "the greatest" or "the best". For notes on this term in Arabic, you can look at this page.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/1340/khatim4.htm

One might even say that the term has connotations of "completion" (which is why the term is sometimes translated as "last"). Now, objections may still arise over the term "best" rather than "last" but let us continue to investigate and we might be surprised to discover a few things...

1. It is accurate to translate it as "last" 2. It is accurate to translate as "best" 3. It is accurate to translate it as "complete" 4. NONE of these translations actually MEAN "superior".

According to general Sufic teaching, Stations are determined by God. These Stations are Known. Those nearest to God are the Messengers (Rasul) and Prophets (Nabi). Next is the Station of Sainthood (Wali). There may be more in descending order, but this suffices for our purposes.

All of these Stations become manifested in material form and in temporal existence. More simply said, these stations to come into human form and are subject to what we call "time". We must keep in mind however, that our material/worldly existence is vastly different than other realms. So, although Jesus the Christ (PBUH) was born in 5 BC of our calendar, he existed in the beginning at the creation of souls. The same can be said of Moses and Mohammad (PBUT). All three occupy the Station of Messenger or Rasul (and there are others mentioned and/or alluded to in the Qoran).

The Greatest Master, Ibn Arabi (AS) himself claims the status of "Seal of Sainthood". Similarly then, there are a number of Saints who occupy or share a Station with Ibn Arabi (AS). Like Messengers and Prophets, there is not a fixed list of names we are given to refer to, but many are said to be "hidden" from the people.

The very instant that the discussion moves from the human form of the Messenger, Prophet or Saint to the STATION of the soul, we must consider that our material, earthy notions will be at least inadequate to express that Truth.

Imagine when the Divine Plan or Design of Creation was initiated. Each Station, once completed, was then "Sealed", just as one seals an envelope when a letter is completed or seals a box when the contents are "complete". Just as one uses paper to seal a box or glue to seal an envelope, in the material realm a seal is represented by a single human being manifested in time. For the Station of Sainthood, ibn Arabi (AS) stands in that position while for the Station of Messenger, Mohammad (PBUH) stands in that position.

Now, to clearly illustrate the problem of language limitation, I will try to offer an example that may demonstrate.

Imagine that it is your best friend's birthday in two weeks and she lives in another state. You plan the purchase of the gift and mentally begin writing a short note in a card not yet purchased. Over the course of the week you find the gift, purchase the wrapping and card and arrange everything in front of you for preparing to send.

You put the gift in the box, write on the card and seal the envelope, place the envelope in the box and then wrap or seal the box for posting.

Now, when you were planning and even shopping for these items and this project, you did not know precisely what sort of envelope would come with the card and you did not know precisely what color/texture/form the wrapping paper would take.

The IDEA/concept/notion/plan of the wrapping paper in the "imaginal realm" and the envelope in the "imaginal realm" represent "seals" generally, in an un-manifested form. Neither have color, texture or dimension.

It is only when the idea/plan comes into actual material manifestation that it MUST take the particulars of form.

In other words, someone must be named as the seal, just as you must eventually decide on only ONE seal for each package type (I.e. envelope or box).

So, in the context of this discussion, is the gift (of the Message) important or the wrapping that seals it? Is the card (Sainthood) important or the envelope that seals it?

With this we can see that even the most "important" theological disputes and issues are almost always focused improperly. Thus, whatever conclusion they arrive at will be irrelevant at best and absolutely wrong at worst. Consider.....

Remember I said that we would discover a few things?

1. Of course "last" is a proper translation since it is the "last" act on your part to complete the given project (card or box)

2. Of course "best" is a proper translation since you ended up choosing that particular paper/envelope as opposed to some other one. Whatever you chose was the "best" and most appropriate to your project needs.

3. Of course "complete" is a proper translation since, when a project is "complete" it is also sealed.

4. Perhaps there were "superior" wrapping papers and envelopes. You could have commissioned them gold embossed, trimmed in diamonds. Is there any indication that you did such a thing? Is there in indication that you would do such a thing?(i.e. is that rational?) By the same line of reasoning, is there any indication that God did such a thing with his "seals"? That he would?

--Oriontriquetra 18:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

God/Allah Nonsense
Netscott, this is your first ever edit to this article. Are you now intending to go through the Jewish articles adding "(YHVH)" after every reference to God, or are you just wikistalking Aminz? "God" is a translation of "Allah"; your edits suggest that there is a necessary distinction to be made, which is highly POV to say the least. — JEREMY 07:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Sound Logic! --Aminz 07:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Jeremy, are you a native speaker of English? Netscott 08:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Jeremy, can you please post your argument in this talk page as well. -Aminz 07:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello Aminz Jeremy and Netscott,

Can anyone explain to me the nature of the problem in more detail? I couldn't really understand the objections from these comments.

sorry, oriontriquetra

 * It was a long story. Have a look at . --Aminz 21:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

______________________________________________________________________________________________ I guess this answers your query.

The definition of Allah (SWT) from the Qur’an, from Surah Ikhlas, Ch. No. 112, which says...(Arabic)... ‘Say he is Allah, one and only’ ...(Arabic)... ‘Allah, the absolute, the eternal’ ...(Arabic)... ‘He begets not nor is he begotten’ ...(Arabic)... ‘And there is nothing unto him like in this world’. But the Qur’an also says in Surah Isra, Ch. No. 17, Verse No. 110, it says...(Arabic)... ‘Say you call upon him by Allah or by Rahmaan. By whichever name you call upon him, to him belongs the most beautiful names’. The same message that to Allah belongs the most beautiful names, is mentioned in the Surah Araf, Ch. No. 7, Verse No. 180, in Surah Hashr, Ch. No. 59, Verse No. 24, as well as in Surah Ta Ha, Ch. No. 20, Verse No. 8, it says... ‘To Allah belongs the most beautiful names’. But the name should not conjure up a mental picture. It should be a beautiful name. Why do Muslims prefer calling God Almighty as ‘Allah’ then the English word God, because the Arabic word ‘Allah’ is a pure word. The English word God, it can be played around with. If you add an ‘s’ to God, it becomes ‘Gods’, ‘plural of God’. You can not add an ‘s’ to Allah. There is nothing like plural Allah. Allah is one...(Arabic)... ‘Say he is Allah one and only’. If you add a ‘dess’ to God, it becomes ‘Goddess’, ‘a female god’. There is nothing like female Allah or male Allah. Allah has got no gender. If you have a god with a capital ‘G’, it becomes true God. If you have a god with a small ‘g’ it becomes fake god. In Islam we have only one true Allah. We do not have any false Allah, only true Allah. If you add father to god, it becomes ‘godfather’. He is my godfather. He is my guardian. You can not add an abba to Allah or a father to Allah. There is nothing like ‘Allahabba’ or ‘Allahfather’ in Islam. If you add a mother to god, it becomes Godmother. You can not add a mother to Allah or an ‘ammi’ to Allah. There is nothing like ‘Allahammi’ in Islam. If you put a tin before God, it becomes ‘Tingod’, ‘fake God’. In Islam there is nothing like ‘Tin Allah’. Allah is pure. It is unique, you can call him by any name, but it should be a beautiful name.```` RFR

The term "Ahmadiyya" vs the term "Ahmadiyya Muslims"
The sentence "....this phrase has been a common source of contention between Ahmadiyyas and Muslims" implies that Ahmadi's are not Muslims - a POV issue. Hence the reversion. This issue is discussed in more detail in the Ahmadi article.

Nazli 03:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Nazli, is it correct to say "Since the split in the Ahmadiyya community" as opposed to "Historically"? I believe the contention as it applies to the meaning of "seal of the prophets" was even made during the time of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, prior to the split. -- Sohail Mirza 06:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * You are correct. However in that case the term to use in the sentence is Ahmadiyya Muslims, rather than the specifying only the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. Nazli 06:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I am sorry that was not very clear. This contention between the two Ahmadiyya point of views started (openly atleast) before the split but after the death of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Since there was only one party at that time you could say that the contention was between the Ahmadiyya sect and other Muslims as well. However after the split, the Lahore branch adopted the traditional interpretation of the verse and hence any contention after that would primarily be between the Ahmadiyya Muslims Community and other Mulims. Nazli 06:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

About the Second Age - Reconciling the scriptures of Islam and Christ
Excuse me for inserting at this point, but the responses are very long, and I will be brief. Please, very briefly respond, indenting to make clear to whom you reply? In Revelation 10 an authority to "prophesy" to every tongue, nation and peoples is assigned to John its author. Please accept my authority on this as author of UUNIS.org, that this refers to our current day -- the "Latter Days" of the prophecy. Accepting that this means a "prophet" -- which I take to be a teacher or a messenger per Arabic use of the term -- of the coming age. That is the story of the Latter Days prophecies that they concern the events unfolding to a Second Age of Christianity, where God dwells on Earth, and many improvements come. Where followers of Islam and Jews are called together with Christians to become one in understanding. The events to look for are that John will not come resurrected but this spirit will manifest in an avatar. That is my conclusion. Bodily (?) resurrections come in 1,000 more years. I will ignore the other questions regarding Jesus or if the Christ is to return in spirit. Please see web site for that. Now, Point 1: it seems clear to me that the Qu'ran scripture of "the Seal of the Prophets," specifically does not say "Seal of the Messengers." With respect messengers is factually, specifically excluded. Point 2: Given the different meanings of context -- I say Revelation 10 means a messenger will come, not a prophet. Follow? Some being used for authority lack this distinction in Arabic uses. Point 3: In my opinion now -- I have thought for some time on this -- perhaps Mohammad could be the seal of the prophets per-se. That is, of the authority of writers of prophecy from God, as these in the Bible have written? Conclusion that I offer to you: This would lead to agreement between the texts, all other things being equal. Please your thoughts. It is the actual text -- do not be confused by those who overlay mythical idealism of Jesus onto every fact. They are uneducated in the Second Age. Please visit me regarding this. The school will be published in October 2009. Xgenei (talk) ________________________________________________________________________________________________

Brother has asked a very good question and these questions are mainly posed by the missionaries. Christian missionaries. I do not know whether he is one and he gave some two-three examples that Islam speaks about Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him) and he says that Qur’an says that... Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him) was raised up alive. Prophet Muhammad (May peace be upon him) was not. Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him) was born of a virgin birth. Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) had a mother and a father. Who is greater? The mind gives the answer. Who is greater? Jesus. And then he says and there are many such questions and he also says... it says... that Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him) is mentioned 25 times. Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) only 5 times by name, who is greater? And they pose question, they pose questions as a Muslim and our mind thinks. Ah! Who is greater, Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him) so he wants me to throw some light on Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him). Brother, Islam is the only non-Christian faith which makes an article of faith to believe in Jesus (May peace be upon him). We believe that he was born miraculously without any male intervention which many modern day Christian do not believe. We believe that he gave life to the dead with Gods permission. We believe that he healed those blind with Gods permission. But there are parting of ways. We do not believe that he is God Almighty. We do not believe that he is begotten son of God. We believe he is the messenger of God. Coming to your question if the Qur’an mentions that Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him) was raised up alive, Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) died. Who is greater? That does not indicate that if there is someone after God. It has to be who? If someone has to slaughter someone. If someone has to sacrifice, they have to sacrifice the best person and according to them the best person is Jesus Christ (May peace be upon him). According to the Qur’an he was not crucified. ...(Arabic)... ‘They killed him not neither did they crucify him’. We agree, but according to your Bible, according to... according to the false reading. Bible also says he was not crucified... that the Jews crucified. Most of the people did not accept him to be a messenger of God Almighty. They went to extremes. The Qur’an says... (Arabic)... Qur’an says in Surah Nisa, Ch. No. 4, Verse No. 171, it says that...(Arabic)... ‘O people of the book’ ...(Arabic)... ‘Do not go to extremes in your religion’. What extreme... two extremes, Jews said he was an imposter and the Christians said that he was God Almighty. Extremes, speak not of God ought but the truth, speak the truth. There is only one God. He was raised up because there was misconception. In his Second Coming he will not teach us anything new. Qur’an says in Surah Maidah, Ch. No. 5, Verse No. 3... ‘On this day I have perfected your religion for you and have chosen for you Islam as the way of life’. We Muslims, we believe he will come, but he will not teach us anything new. He will not teach us anything new. He will come to clarify the misconception and he and he will tell to Allah (SWT), Ya Allah bari taala, you be my witness that I never told them to worship me. I never told them to call me the begotten son. He will come for the Christians not for the Muslims. We believe he will come. You say that he was born of a virgin birth. If suppose, if suppose a person does not have a father and you claim because he does not have a father he is God Almighty, Qur’an gives the answer in Surah Imran, Al-Imran, Ch. No. 3, Verse No. 59, similitude of Jesus in front of Allah is the same as Adam. They were created from dust and said ‘be’ and it was Adam (May peace be upon him) did he have a father. Adam (May peace be upon him) had no father. He had no mother. If you say a person who does not have a father is God Almighty, Adam (May peace be upon him) is a bigger God, your Bible, it is not the Qur’an, it is the Bible. Bible speaks about another super human - King Malchisedec. King Malchisedec, he had no accent, no decent, no beginning, no end. He is bigger than even Adam (May peace upon him) is mentioned by name 25, Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) only 5 times. Why? Because there were allegations against Jesus Christ (May peace upon him). There was no allegations against Muhammad (May peace upon him) and when the Qur’an was revealed, prophet Muhammad (May peace upon him) was present. So if I have to address a person, I just have to say... He, He, O Nabi, O Prophet. I need not take his name always. But if I am referring to my friend who is not here, I have to take his name, that Mr. XYZ. So since Jesus (May peace upon him) was not there when the Qur’an was revealed, his name had to be taken. In that, in that way Qur’an mentions the name of Musa (Alai salaam) 132 times. Does it mean he is greater than prophet Muhammad and Isa (Alai Salaam) both? No, because they were not present, when any example is given of them, their name has to be taken. For a person who is present, the name need not be taken. I hope that answers the question. RFR

More on the Seal of the Prophets
In choosing an expert I offer my services as having written a book which; Allah willing! will soon be published when I finish the final edit. The problems we face can best be seen in the argument of our friend "RFR" above when to counter claims he finds inaccurate he has to descend to making statements like "Adam had no father". Why then did Allah tell the angels to worship him and thus find out who the unbelievers were; namely Iblis and his angels who followed him? This is well documented in the Qur'an; in fact it is Islam's refusal to worship Jesus as the Son of God which is identical with Iblis's refusal to worship Adam; the problem being that few understand the nature of the Test in the Trial of God at the End; which is precisely where we stand now. It is Muhammed who said that God had given him the book by which He would test all those who called themselves believers; the fact that at the End Muhammed arrives and quotes Jesus by saying "Jesus said: "Worship God": do not worship he who comes in the Name of Christ Jesus! And be not faithless but believing!"; and then Jesus arrives and quotes Muhammed by saying "Muhammed said that God told the angels "Worship Adam"; therefore worship he who comes in the Name of Christ Jesus as my heir and be not faithless but believing as equal unto the angels; O children of the Resurrection!" Thus will the final test be; few will survive it; for the Last Judgment has more to do with Islam than at first might be seen: namely that the "Messiah of Islam" and the "Mahdi of Christianity" are one and the same: as can be seen at Fatimah in Portugal in 1917 when the Sun of Fatimah who is the Son of Maryam al-Kubra came down as the Prescence of the Lamb. That 30,000 or so people saw the sun fall our of the sky and come down to the earth in the prescence of the Lady of Light or Fatimah al-Zahra with the 3 children is therefore where the Door of Faith opens: for Muslim, Jew or Christian alike. The "Son of Mary" is therefore the Mahdi: the Greater Mary: Fatimah. That God avenges her miscarriage as the Miscarriage of Justice proves that Fatimah's status was as the Islamic equivilent to the Virgin Mary; and God avenges this by revealing the Messiah to Islam at the End; so that they will be put to the Test as the Jews were before them: something they never considered; except a few enlightened sufis who are the Elect chosen by Allah; the Lamb of Maryam al-Kubra or Fatimah makes the Rod of Iron the Mahdi/Christ or Messiah of Islam; this Iron Rod being the Islamic Christ itself conceptually. That Fatimah was a center for pilgrimmage for devout Muslims is one of the resons that Allah picked the 3 children whose mystic "height" is that of the triple-tiered "Door of the Ark" which Noah built: the Ark of Salvation which only the "new believers" will enter; open to all; and a test to all. It is a fact that the 3 sons of Noah are represented by those who see Ham as being the father of the Hamitic race or Egypt; Japeth the elder as being the father of the Ayuranic race or Assyria; and Shem being the father of the Semitic race or Israel; thus Isaiah said when he quoted Allah these words: "Egypt my people; Assyria the work of my hands; and Israel my inheritence"; pointing to the 3 sons of Noah directly in their descendents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unicorn144 (talk • contribs) 12:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Islam not Jainism
the article is about Islam not Jainism like it was mentioned on top of this talk page, so i hopefully corrected it the right way by replcing "WikiProject Jainism" by "WikiProject Islam", if there should be another thing to do, please instruct me. Khaled.khalil 00:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

seal o profits

 * This article should be renamed "Muhumid (spelling may be wrong) the profit", as there is no real evidence to prove that he was the seal of prophets apart from what he said about himself that is supposedly written in the koran. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. (talk) 01:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

modern academic views
According to the German scholar Christoph Luxenberg, the author of the book The Syro-Aramaic Reading Of The Koran, the expression Khatim-an-Nabiyyin is a mis-pronounced Aramaic expression meaning not "seal of the prophets" but "witness to the prophets (who came before him)".

Since Luxenberg's thesis is gaining popularity in the academic world, it should be mentioned in here. 82.83.141.39 (talk) 07:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Bahá'í view
I happened to be reading the Kitáb-i-Íqán today and came upon the actual explanation by Bahá'u'lláh of the Bahá'í perspective on "seal of the prophets" Notwithstanding the obviousness of this theme, in the eyes of those that have quaffed the wine of knowledge and certitude, yet how many are those who, through failure to understand its meaning, have allowed the term "Seal of the Prophets" to obscure their understanding, and deprive them of the grace of all His manifold bounties! Hath not Muhammad, Himself, declared: "I am all the Prophets?" Hath He not said as We have already mentioned: "I am Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus?" Why should Muhammad, that immortal Beauty, Who hath said: "I am the first Adam" be incapable of saying also: "I am the last Adam"? For even as He regarded Himself to be the "First of the Prophets" -- that is Adam -- in like manner, the "Seal of the Prophets" is also applicable unto that Divine Beauty. It is admittedly obvious that being the "First of the Prophets," He likewise is their "Seal." (Bahá'u'lláh, The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 161-162) The current version doesn't seem to illustrate the actuality of the belief very well, it's quite vague and uncited. I was wondering whether it would be practical or encyclopedic to include the bulk of the quote or a slightly abridged version. Thoughts? Peter Deer (talk) 06:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree. More can be found on this subject, for example on, and  Wiki-uk (talk) 14:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Jesus is the Seal
I know "seal" may not mean last, but most Muslims think so. If so, isn't Jesus the Seal because (most think) he will return to live, preach, and die? Or, if Seal means Greatest, then isn't Jesus greater than Muhammad:

 * Jesus performed many miracles - Muhammad only did one, the Qur'an
 * Jesus raised the dead
 * Jesus is the Messiah, the only one who can save the Jews
 * Jesus will preach to every nation (Jews and Christians now live in every nation) - Muhammad preached to a dozen(?) nations
 * Jesus has lived in heaven for 2000 years - Muhammad went for 1 night

I'm not looking for a debate! It seems like the Muslim belief in Jesus should have a portion of this article. --Ephilei 18:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

 * My friend,

 * Jesus and Mohammad was both brothers, and prophets and messengers of Allah.

 * If we are discussing in scriptural reasoning concept.

 * We have:

 * In the last chapter of last book of Bible God informed that the prophecy should not be sealed by John:
 * "And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.(Rev 22:10)"
 * In Quran this is informed that Mohammad is the seal of prophets.(Qur'an 33:40)
 * We don't know is there a possible position for the seal of messengers or not?
 * We should not distinct between messengers of God.(Qur'an 2:285)
 * The position of some messenger is higher than the others in God point of view(Qur'an 2:253)
 * We should not fight with each other but to focus our efforts to attract better position in Gods point of view(Qur'an 5:48)
 * We should not discuss about what we don't know with each other:

 * "' Behold! you are they who disputed about that of which you had knowledge; why then do you dispute about that of which you have no knowledge?' And Allah, knows while you do not know(Qur'an 3:66)"

 * So in my point of view your concept maybe true or false and I don't want to deny or prove it! But we have no direct scriptures in Quran or Bible to prove it.

 * But it may cause us to fight with each other which is for sure neither the target of Jesus nor Mohammad!
 * --تسلیم (talk) 06:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Mistranslation
actually خاتم الأنبياء means the complementing (~last of series) of prophets, where خاتم is driven from the verb خَتَمَ means finish. yes, خاتم also refers to seal, just because the sealing is the last step after a letter is enveloped; but the seal of prophets is just senseless, seems to be auto-translated causing the mistake. however, i can't rename/move the article, if someone can help, then please don't forget to link this page to the new one (the complementing of prophets (?)) as redirection because it might confuse many people by translation mistake. Khaled.khalil 22:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

HOw do you distinguish a true prophet of God?? The answer is...for what he says will come to pass...Therefor, if Jesus Christ is noted in the Q'ran as a prophet of God...born of a virgin Mary (   because He is Holy- without sin), performing miracles, and raised from the dead...All that He said would be truth.. considering he is by the Q'ran's standard, and belief of Islam to be a prophet of God. Well, my friend, if you have read scripture..Christ himself says, The only way to the Father is through the Son.. I am the way,the truth and the light..no one comes to the Father but by me....He was baptised and God spoke ,,this is my Son, who I am well pleased... He said, God shall not live by bread alone but by every Word that proceeds out of the mouth of God...He claims,(Not to be a prophet)but to be the Son of God. This is why he was crucified..He claimed to be the Son of God and we Crucified Him. He then rose from the dead.. and walked the earth to reveal this truth..By Grace we are saved, it is not of ourselves, should anyone boost... Grace, given something I donot deserve. God so loved the world that He sent, HIs only begotten Son that whomsoever beliefth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. He offers salvation to anyone that accepts that fact. Thank you Jesus. Thank you Jesus. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

 * The scripture that you quote about what Jesus, peace be upon him, said was corrupted by men. Quran was send through Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessing be upon him, to correct the corruptions made by men and to reveal the truth. So your arguments are pointless in the eyes of Muslims. 94.41.30.49 (talk) 05:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Dear Friends, The word "Theos" in Greek or "Aloha" in Syriac which is Equivalent to Hebrew Elohim and Jesus Used in Gospels about himself and his father is totally different that "Allah" that is used in Quran! And we mistakenly translate both "God" and this guide to differences between Muslims and Christians! Please refer to Elohim article. The Equivalent of Elohim in Quran is not "Allah" But Angels!--تسلیم (talk) 07:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

This article should be in the Ahmiddya category so I will remove the Islam banner 90.192.59.155 (talk) 12:56, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Deserves to be in Islam category too.Peaceworld111 (talk) 09:18, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Try to use the chronological details as per time of the scholars and do not repeat the sentences again by rephrasing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatom2k (talk • contribs) 19:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

 * It is best to separate it into two sections as I did earlier. Chronological order is difficult to determine although better.Peaceworld111 (talk) 20:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

آخر unambiguously means "last" ?
See آخر as Arabic adjective on Wiktionary

About خاتم : http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=%D8%AE%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%85&fulltext=1
 * --Jerome Potts (talk) 21:15, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * خاتم doesn't really imply last, I think it is a biased statement. Many of edits have been motivated behind a very (over 100 years) long debate between the Ahmadis and the mainstream muslims about the meaning of the word خاتم which appears in the Quran. I wouldn't like to open a debate here. However both parties agree on the best English translation Seal and I suspect that this is the reason why the page was initially created. Now the mainstream muslims would assume that the word seal implies some sort of closure, ie. last whereas the Ahmadis claim that it best implies a form of certification, authority or attestation, like the Great Seal of the United States. Yes, as you pointed out خاتم on wikitionary comes up with ring as the closest meaning and that is actually can be confirmed by doing a quick search on Google Arabic, which reveals that خاتم signifies some sort of a relationship with ring, like a wedding ring.Peaceworld111 (talk) 22:23, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Manichaeans
While the article mentions the Bahai besides the more conventional Islamic currents ascribing to the idea of a 'seal of the prophets', I'm surprised that there is no mention of Mani and his use of the term 'seal of the prophets'. Especially considering the fact that Mani's use of the title predates Mohammed's by some 400 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.50.3.16 (talk) 09:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Seal of the Prophets/Archive 1


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KonsoleKalendar

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled KonsoleKalendar.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to keep the article.

This incredibly terse article sounds like a product promotion. Besides its incomprehensible English, its main function appears to be a referral to someone's Website. -- Jeff Q 12:38, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * It's not, it's part of KDE. Mark stub and keep, adding a note to Talk:KDE that it needs some special loving attention - David Gerard 15:40, May 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've just put a note on Talk:KDE to this effect - David Gerard 15:54, May 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * I guess it depends on your definition of product promotion. It doesn't seem like an ad to me. Keep, but needs lots of cleanup. Abigail 15:43, May 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: unremarkable program. KDE is notable, but it is composed of dozens or hundreds of parts, not much of which deserves a separate article. Wile E. Heresiarch 19:28, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I think the stub is progressing nicely and will be a reasonable article by the end of the VfD period - David Gerard 23:08, May 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Recent work on the article hasn't even tried to demonstrate its notability. Cleaned up or otherwise, it's still insignificant. It's too bad that Jeffq has withdrawn his vote. Mine stands. Wile E. Heresiarch 21:57, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I withdraw my vote for deletion. The article is much more comprehensible and no longer sounds like a promotion, though it's still a bit sparse. I suggested on Talk:KDE possibly moving its content to a currently-nonexistent KDE applications article to avoid both its stub form and overburdening the KDE article with app details, but I'll leave that to the KDE crowd to debate. -- Jeff Q 23:21, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
1983–84 snooker world rankings

The World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association, the governing body for professional snooker, first published official world rankings for players on the main tour for the 1976–77 season. Before this, for each tournament the defending champion was seeded first, and the previous year's runner-up second.

A ranking list for the 1983–84 snooker season was issued by the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association (WPBSA) following the 1983 World Snooker Championship. Players' performances in the previous three World Snooker Championships (1981, 1982 and 1983) contributed to their points total. For 1981 and 1982, the World Champion gained five points, the runner-up received four, losing semi-finalists got three, losing quarter-finalists got two, and losers in the last-16 round received a single point, while for 1983 the points were double this. For the first time, tournaments other than world championship were taken into account, with the 1982 International Open and 1982 Professional Players Tournament both at the same points tariff as the 1981 and 1982 World Championships. Players with no ranking points were ranked on the basis of their performance in the 1983 World Championship. A revised ranking list was issued following a vote by the WPBSA board to amend the rules so that players without any ranking points, which were those ranked lower than 28th, would receive one "merit" point if they had reached the last-32 of the World Championships in scope and half a merit point if they had reached the last 32 of the 1982 International Open or the second round of the 1982 Professional Players Tournament.

Steve Davis was the top-ranked player for the first time, displacing Ray Reardon who moved to second place. Cliff Thorburn retained third place from the previous year, and Tony Knowles rose from fifteenth up to fourth. Perrie Mans and Willie Thorne both dropped out of the top sixteen, which meant they would need to enter the qualifying rounds of the 1984 World Snooker Championship rather than be seeded into the main event. Tony Meo and John Virgo moved into the top 16.

In her book Cruel Game: The Inside Story of Snooker, published in April 1983, Jean Rafferty wrote that "The world rankings are calculated with such little regard for the synchronisation of achievement and reward that they must be seen as creative rather than informative."

Rankings
The rankings including players with merit points (which are indicated with a symbol) are shown below. In the original list there were 32 players; Mike Hallett was 29th, followed by Eugene Hughes, Les Dodd and John Campbell.

title: 1983–84 snooker world rankings


text:
Hematoma

A hematoma, also spelled haematoma, or blood suffusion is a localized bleeding outside of blood vessels, due to either disease or trauma including injury or surgery and may involve blood continuing to seep from broken capillaries. A hematoma is benign and is initially in liquid form spread among the tissues including in sacs between tissues where it may coagulate and solidify before blood is reabsorbed into blood vessels. An ecchymosis is a hematoma of the skin larger than 10 mm.

They may occur among and or within many areas such as skin and other organs, connective tissues, bone, joints and muscle.

A collection of blood (or even a hemorrhage) may be aggravated by anticoagulant medication (blood thinner). Blood seepage and collection of blood may occur if heparin is given via an intramuscular route; to avoid this, heparin must be given intravenously or subcutaneously.

Signs and symptoms
Some hematomas are visible under the surface of the skin (commonly called bruises) or possibly felt as masses or lumps. Lumps may be caused by the limitation of the blood to a sac, subcutaneous or intramuscular tissue space isolated by fascial planes. This is a key anatomical feature that helps prevent injuries from causing massive blood loss. In most cases a hematoma as a sac of blood eventually dissolves; however, in some cases it may continue to grow due to blood seepage or show no change. If the sac of blood does not disappear, then it may need to be surgically cleaned out or repaired.

The slow process of reabsorption of hematomas can allow the broken down blood cells and hemoglobin pigment to move in the connective tissue. For example, a patient who injures the base of their thumb might cause a hematoma, which will slowly move all through their finger within a week. Gravity is the main determinant of this process.

Hematomas on articulations can reduce mobility of a member and present roughly the same symptoms as a fracture.

In most cases, movement and exercise of the affected muscle is the best way to introduce the collection back into the bloodstream.

A misdiagnosis of a hematoma in the vertebra can sometimes occur; this is correctly called a hemangioma (buildup of cells) or a benign tumor.

Types

 * Subdermal hematoma (under the skin)
 * Intramuscular hematoma (inside muscle tissue)
 * Skull/brain:
 * Subgaleal hematoma – between the galea aponeurosis and periosteum
 * Cephalohematoma – between the periosteum and skull. Commonly caused by vacuum delivery and vertex delivery.
 * Epidural hematoma – between the skull and dura mater
 * Subdural hematoma – between the dura mater and arachnoid mater
 * Subarachnoid hematoma – between the arachnoid mater and pia mater (the subarachnoid space)
 * Othematoma – between the skin and the layers of cartilage of the ear
 * Breast hematoma (breast)
 * Perichondral hematoma (ear)
 * Perianal hematoma (anus)
 * Subungual hematoma (nail)
 * Rectus sheath hematoma

Degrees

 * Petechiae – small pinpoint hematomas less than 3 mm in diameter
 * Purpura (purple) – a bruise about 3–5 mm in diameter, generally round in shape
 * Ecchymosis – subcutaneous extravasation of blood in a thin layer under the skin, i.e. bruising or "black and blue", over 1 cm in diameter

Etymology
The English word "hematoma" came into use in 1826. The word derives from the Greek αἷμα haima "blood" and -ωμα -oma, a suffix forming nouns indicating a mass or tumor.

title: Hematoma


text:
1973 Chilean coup d'état

The 1973 Chilean coup d'état (Golpe de Estado en Chile de 1973) was a military overthrow of the democratic socialist president of Chile Salvador Allende and his Popular Unity coalition government. Allende, who has been described as the first Marxist to be democratically elected president in a Latin American liberal democracy, faced significant social unrest, political tension with the opposition-controlled National Congress of Chile, and economic warfare ordered by United States president Richard Nixon. On 11 September 1973, a group of military officers, led by General Augusto Pinochet, seized power in a coup, ending civilian rule.

Following the coup, a military junta was established, and suspended all political activities in Chile and suppressed left-wing movements, particularly communist and socialist parties, such as the Communist Party of Chile and the Socialist Party of Chile, as well as the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR). Pinochet swiftly consolidated power and was officially declared president of Chile in late 1974. The Nixon administration, which had played a role in creating favorable conditions for the coup, promptly recognized the junta government and supported its efforts to consolidate power. During the air raids and ground attacks preceding the coup, Allende delivered his final speech, expressing his determination to remain at Palacio de La Moneda and rejecting offers of safe passage for exile. Although he died in the palace, the exact circumstances of Allende's death are still disputed.

In 2000, the CIA admitted its role in the 1970 kidnapping and killing of René Schneider (then Commander-in-chief of the Chilean Army), who had refused to use the army to stop Allende's inauguration. 2023 declassified documents showed that Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and the United States government, which had branded Allende as a dangerous communist, were aware of the military's plans to overthrow Allende in the days before the coup d'état.

Chile had previously been regarded as a symbol of democracy and political stability in South America, while other countries in the region suffered under military juntas and caudillismo; the Chilean period prior to the coup is known as the Presidential Republic (1925–1973) era. At the time, Chile was a middle-class country, with about 30% or 9 million Chileans being middle class. The collapse of Chilean democracy marked the end of a series of democratic governments that had held elections since 1932. Historian Peter Winn described the 1973 coup as one of the most violent events in Chilean history. It led to a series of human rights abuses in Chile under Pinochet, who initiated a brutal and long-lasting campaign of political suppression through torture, murder, and exile, which significantly weakened leftist opposition to the military dictatorship of Chile (1973–1990). The internationally supported 1989 Chilean constitutional referendum held under the military junta led to the peaceful Chilean transition to democracy. Due to the coup's coincidental occurrence on the same date as the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States, it has sometimes been referred to as "the other 9/11".

Political background
Allende contested the 1970 Chilean presidential election with Jorge Alessandri Rodríguez of the National Party and Radomiro Tomic of the Christian Democratic Party. Allende received 36.6% of the vote, while Alessandri was a very close second with 35.3%, and Tomic third with 28.1%, in what was a close three-way election. Although Allende received the highest number of votes, according to the Chilean constitution and since none of the candidates won by an absolute majority, the National Congress had to decide among the candidates.

The Chilean Constitution of 1925 did not allow a person to be president for consecutive terms. The incumbent president, Eduardo Frei Montalva, was therefore ineligible as a candidate. The CIA's "Track I" operation was a plan to influence the Congress to choose Alessandri, who would resign after a short time in office, forcing a second election. Frei would then be eligible to run. Alessandri announced on 9 September that if Congress chose him, he would resign. Allende signed a Statute of Constitutional Guarantees, which stated that he would follow the constitution during his presidency trying to shore up support for his candidacy. Congress then decided on Allende. The U.S. feared the example of a "well-functioning socialist experiment" in the region and exerted diplomatic, economic, and covert pressure upon Chile's elected socialist government. At the end of 1971, the Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro made a four-week state visit to Chile, alarming American observers worried about the "Chilean Way to Socialism".

In 1972, Economics Minister Pedro Vuskovic adopted monetary policies that increased the amount of circulating currency and devalued the escudo, which increased inflation to 140 percent in 1972 and engendered a black market economy. In October 1972, Chile suffered the first of many strikes. Among the participants were small-scale businessmen, some professional unions, and student groups. Its leaders – Vilarín, Jaime Guzmán, Rafael Cumsille, Guillermo Elton, Eduardo Arriagada – expected to depose the elected government. Other than damaging the national economy, the principal effect of the 24-day strike was drawing Army head, General Carlos Prats, into the government as Interior Minister, an appeasement to the right wing. replacing General René Schneider, who had been assassinated (Schneider had been shot on 22 October 1970 by a group led by General Roberto Viaux, whom the Central Intelligence Agency had not attempted to discourage, and died three days later.) General Prats supported the legalist Schneider Doctrine and refused military involvement in a coup d'état against President Allende.

Despite the declining economy, President Allende's Popular Unity coalition increased its vote to 43.2% in the March 1973 parliamentary elections; but, by then, the informal alliance between Popular Unity and the Christian Democrats ended. The Christian Democrats allied with the right-wing National Party, who were opposed to Allende's government; the two right-wing parties formed the Confederation of Democracy (CODE). The internecine parliamentary conflict between the legislature and the executive branch paralyzed the activities of government.

Allende began to fear his opponents, convinced they were plotting his assassination. Using his daughter as a messenger, he explained the situation to Fidel Castro. Castro gave four pieces of advice: convince technicians to stay in Chile, sell only copper for US dollars, do not engage in extreme revolutionary acts which would give opponents an excuse to wreck or seize control of the economy, and maintain a proper relationship with the Chilean military until local militias could be established and consolidated. Allende attempted to follow Castro's advice, but the latter two recommendations proved difficult.

Chilean military prior to the coup
Prior to the coup, the Chilean military had undergone a process of de-politicization since the 1920s, when military officers had held cabinet positions. Subsequently, most military officers remained under-funded, having only subsistence salaries. Because of the low salaries, the military spent much time in military leisure-time facilities (e.g., country clubs) where they met other officers and their families. The military remained apart from society and was to some degree an endogamous group as officers frequently married the sisters of their comrades or the daughters of high-ranked older officers. Many officers also had relatives in the military. In 1969 elements of the military made their first act of rebellion in 40 years when they participated in the Tacnazo insurrection. The Tacnazo was not a proper coup, but a protest against under-funding. In retrospect General Carlos Prats considered that Christian Democrats who were in power in 1969 committed the error of not taking the military's grievances seriously.

Throughout the 1960s, the governments of Brazil (1964), Argentina (1966), Peru (1968), and Bolivia (1969) were overthrown in US-backed coups and replaced by military governments. In June 1973 Uruguay joined the coup d'état wave that swept through the region. The poor conditions of the Chilean military contrasted with the change of fortune the military of neighboring countries experienced as they came to power in coups.

During the decades prior to the coup, the military became influenced by the United States' anti-communist ideology in the context of various cooperation programs, including the U.S. Army School of the Americas.

Crisis
On 29 June 1973, Colonel Roberto Souper surrounded La Moneda presidential palace with his tank regiment and failed to depose the Allende Government. That failed coup d'état – known as the Tanquetazo tank putsch – had been organized by the nationalist "Fatherland and Liberty" paramilitary group.

In August 1973, a constitutional crisis occurred; the Supreme Court publicly complained about the government's inability to enforce the law of the land. On 22 August, the Christian Democrats united with the National Party of the Chamber of Deputies accused the government of unconstitutional acts and called upon the military to enforce constitutional order.

For months, the government had feared calling upon the Carabineros national police, suspecting them of disloyalty. On 9 August, Allende appointed General Carlos Prats as Minister of Defense. He was forced to resign both as defense minister and as the Army commander-in-chief on 24 August 1973, embarrassed by the Alejandrina Cox incident and a public protest of the wives of his generals at his house. General Augusto Pinochet replaced him as Army commander-in-chief the same day. In late August 1973, 100,000 Chilean women congregated at Plaza de la Constitución to protest against the government for the rising cost and increasing shortages of food and fuels, but they were dispersed with tear gas.

Resolution by the Chamber of Deputies
On 23 August 1973, with the support of the Christian Democrats and National Party members, the Chamber of Deputies passed 81–47 a resolution that asked "the President of the Republic, Ministers of State, and members of the Armed and Police Forces" to "put an immediate end" to "breach[es of] the Constitution . . . with the goal of redirecting government activity toward the path of Law and ensuring the Constitutional order of our Nation, and the essential underpinnings of democratic co-existence among Chileans".

The resolution declared that the Allende government sought "to conquer absolute power with the obvious purpose of subjecting all citizens to the strictest political and economic control by the state ... [with] the goal of establishing a totalitarian system", claiming it had made "violations of the Constitution ... a permanent system of conduct". Essentially, most of the accusations were about the government disregarding the separation of powers, and arrogating legislative and judicial prerogatives to the executive branch of government. Finally, the resolution condemned the "creation and development of government-protected armed groups, which ... are headed towards a confrontation with the armed forces". President Allende's efforts to re-organize the military and the police forces were characterised as "notorious attempts to use the armed and police forces for partisan ends, destroy their institutional hierarchy, and politically infiltrate their ranks".

It can be argued that the resolution called upon the armed forces to overthrow the government if it did not comply, as follows: "To present the President of the Republic, Ministers of State, and members of the Armed and Police Forces with the grave breakdown of the legal and constitutional order ... it is their duty to put an immediate end to all situations herein referred to that breach the Constitution and the laws of the land with the aim of redirecting government activity toward the path of Law". The resolution was later used by Pinochet a way to justify the coup, which occurred two weeks later.

Salvador Allende's response
On 24 August 1973, two days after the resolution, Allende responded. He accused the opposition of trying to incite a military coup by encouraging the armed forces to disobey civilian authorities. He described the Congress's declaration as "destined to damage the country's prestige abroad and create internal confusion", and predicted: "It will facilitate the seditious intention of certain sectors." He observed that the declaration (passed 81–47 in the Chamber of Deputies) had not obtained the two-thirds Senate majority "constitutionally required" to convict the president of abuse of power, thus the Congress was "invoking the intervention of the armed forces and of Order against a democratically-elected government" and "subordinat[ing] political representation of national sovereignty to the armed institutions, which neither can nor ought to assume either political functions or the representation of the popular will."

Allende argued that he had obeyed constitutional means for including military men to the cabinet at the service of civic peace and national security, defending republican institutions against insurrection and terrorism. In contrast, he said that Congress was promoting a coup d'état or a civil war with a declaration full of affirmations that had already been refuted beforehand and which in substance and process (directly handing it to the ministers rather than directly handing it to the president) violated a dozen articles of the then-current constitution. He further argued that the legislature was usurping the government's executive function.

Allende wrote: "Chilean democracy is a conquest by all of the people. It is neither the work nor the gift of the exploiting classes, and it will be defended by those who, with sacrifices accumulated over generations, have imposed it ... With a tranquil conscience ... I sustain that never before has Chile had a more democratic government than that over which I have the honor to preside ... I solemnly reiterate my decision to develop democracy and a state of law to their ultimate consequences...Congress has made itself a bastion against the transformations ... and has done everything it can to perturb the functioning of the finances and of the institutions, sterilizing all creative initiatives." Adding that economic and political means would be needed to relieve the country's current crisis, and that the Congress was obstructing said means; having already paralyzed the state, they sought to destroy it. He concluded by calling upon the workers and all democrats and patriots to join him in defending the Chilean constitution and the revolutionary process.

Preparations
In mid-July, a month before the resolution of the Chamber of Deputies, there was general agreement in the heart of the Army's high command on the desirability of terminating the Unidad Popular "experiment." How to do it was still nebulous. The constitutional generals, gathered around Army Commander-in-Chief General Carlos Prats, were facing pressure from an increasingly hardline anti-Allende faction within the Army. Prats had coined the idea of an Allende–Armed Forces government, including a "political peace treaty" with the Christian Democrats and restricted participation of the Chilean Communist party and a group of Socialists. Prats argued that "only thus will we prevent the extremist workers from rebelling." This idea had the support of Generals Joaquin Lagos Osorio, Herman Brady Roche, Washington Carrasco Fernandez, Hector Bravo Munoz, Mario Sepulveda Squella, Guillermo Pickering, and Orlando Urbina Herrera, but with variations. While Lagos Osorio and Urbina Herrera did not object to the Prats plan, the other five generals thought the Allende–Armed Forces government ought to be "transitional" and of "short duration," to prepare conditions for a "purely military government including the military police." The hardline faction, consisting of Generals Oscar Bonilla, Sergio Arellano Stark, and Javier Palacios formed another group, joined by Augusto Pinochet, which posited that the Allende–Armed Forces phase was not necessary.

On the day of the coup, the only high-ranking military officers to remain loyal to Chile's Constitution were Admiral Montero of the Navy and General Sepúlveda of the Carabineros.

United States
Many people in different parts of the world immediately suspected the U.S. of foul play. In early newspaper reports, the U.S. denied any involvement or previous knowledge of the coup. Prompted by an incriminating New York Times article, the U.S. Senate opened an investigation into U.S. interference in Chile. A report prepared by the United States Intelligence Community in 2000, at the direction of the National Intelligence Council, that echoed the Church committee, states that: "Although CIA did not instigate the coup that ended Allende's government on 11 September 1973, it was aware of coup-plotting by the military, had ongoing intelligence collection relationships with some plotters, and—because CIA did not discourage the takeover and had sought to instigate a coup in 1970—probably appeared to condone it." The report stated that the CIA "actively supported the military Junta after the overthrow of Allende but did not assist Pinochet to assume the Presidency." After a review of recordings of telephone conversations between Nixon and Henry Kissinger, Robert Dallek concluded that both of them used the CIA to actively destabilize the Allende government. In one particular conversation about the news of Allende's overthrow, Kissinger complained about the lack of recognition of the American role in the overthrow of a "communist" government, upon which Nixon remarked, "Well, we didn't – as you know – our hand doesn't show on this one." A later CIA report contended that US agents maintained close ties with the Chilean military to collect intelligence but no effort was made to assist them and "under no circumstances attempted to influence them."

Historian Peter Winn found "extensive evidence" of United States complicity in the coup. He states that its covert support was crucial to engineering the coup, as well as for the consolidation of power by the Pinochet regime following the takeover. Winn documents an extensive CIA operation to fabricate reports of a coup against Allende, as justification for the imposition of military rule. Peter Kornbluh asserts that the CIA destabilized Chile and helped create the conditions for the coup, citing documents declassified by the Clinton administration. Other authors point to the involvement of the Defense Intelligence Agency, agents of which allegedly secured the missiles used to bombard the La Moneda Palace.

The U.S. Government's hostility to the election of Allende in 1970 in Chile was substantiated in documents declassified during the Clinton administration, which show that CIA covert operatives were inserted in Chile in order to prevent a Marxist government from arising and for the purpose of spreading anti-Allende propaganda. As described in the Church Committee report, the CIA was involved in multiple plots designed to remove Allende and then let the Chileans vote in a new election where he would not be a candidate. The first, non-military, approach involved attempting a constitutional coup. This was known as the Track I approach, in which the CIA, with the approval of the 40 Committee, attempted to bribe the Chilean legislature, tried to influence public opinion against Allende, and provided funding to strikes designed to coerce him into resigning. It also attempted to get congress to confirm Jorge Alessandri as the winner of the presidential election. Alessandri, who was an accessory to the conspiracy, was ready to then resign and call for fresh elections. This approach completely failed in 1970 and was not attempted again.

The other approach of the CIA in 1970 (but not later), also known as the Track II approach, was an attempt to encourage a military coup by creating a climate of crisis across the country. A CIA telegram sent to the Chile station on 16 October 1970 stated:

"It is firm and continuing policy that Allende be overthrown by a coup. It would be much preferable to have this transpire prior to 24 October but efforts in this regard will continue vigorously beyond this date. We are to continue to generate maximum pressure toward this end utilizing every appropriate resource. It is imperative that these actions be implemented clandestinely and securely so that the USG and American hand be well hidden.'"

False flag operatives contacted senior Chilean military officers and informed them that the U.S. would actively support a coup, but would revoke all military aid if such a coup did not happen. In addition, the CIA gave extensive support for black propaganda against Allende, channeled mostly through El Mercurio. Financial assistance was also given to Allende's political opponents, and for organizing strikes and unrest to destabilize the government. By 1970, the U.S. manufacturing company ITT Corporation owned 70% of Chitelco (the Chilean Telephone Company), and also funded El Mercurio. The CIA used ITT as a means of disguising the source of the illegitimate funding Allende's opponents received. On 28 September 1973, the Weather Underground bombed ITT's headquarters in New York City in retaliation.

According to an article written by lifelong CIA operative Jack Devine, although it was widely reported that the CIA was directly involved in orchestrating and carrying out the coup, subsequently released sources suggest a much reduced role of the US government.

United Kingdom
In September 2020, John McEvoy, writing in Declassified UK, asserted that the UK government had interfered in Chile's democracy as well:

Under the Labour government of Harold Wilson (1964–1970), a secret Foreign Office unit initiated a propaganda offensive in Chile aiming to prevent Allende, Chile's leading socialist figure, winning power in two presidential elections, in 1964 and 1970.

The unit – the Information Research Department (IRD) – gathered information designed to damage Allende and lend legitimacy to his political opponents, and distributed material to influential figures within Chilean society.

The IRD also shared intelligence about left-wing activity in the country with the US government. British officials in Santiago assisted a CIA-funded media organisation which was part of extensive US covert action to overthrow Allende, culminating in the 1973 coup.

Australia
An Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) station was established in Chile at the Australian embassy in July 1971 at the request of the CIA and authorised by then Liberal Party Foreign Minister William McMahon. Newly elected Labor Prime Minister Gough Whitlam was informed of the operation in February 1973 and signed a document ordering the closure of the operation several weeks later. It appears, however, the last ASIS agent did not leave Chile until October 1973, one month after the coup d'état had brought down the Allende Government. There were also two officers of Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), Australia's internal security service, who were based in Santiago working as migration officers during this period. The failure of timely closure of Australia's covert operations was one of the reasons for the sacking of the Director of ASIS on 21 October 1975. This took effect on 7 November, just four days before Prime Minister's Whitlam's own dismissal in the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis with allegations of CIA political interference.

In June 2021, Clinton Fernandes, a former intelligence analyst, announced that he was trying to confirm the rumours of Australia's involvement in the coup by fighting for the declassification of key documents. On 10 September 2021, the day before the 48th anniversary of the coup, declassified documents confirmed that McMahon did indeed approve the CIA's request to conduct covert operations in Chile. According to the files, ASIS set up a surveillance unit in Santiago as part of the wider CIA campaign to discredit the Allende government.

Military action
By 6:00 am on 11 September 1973, a date chosen to match a historical 1924 coup, the Navy captured Valparaíso, strategically stationing ships and marine infantry in the central coast and closed radio and television networks. The Province Prefect informed President Allende of the Navy's actions; immediately, the president went to the presidential palace with his bodyguards, the "Group of Personal Friends" (GAP). By 8:00 am, the Army had closed most radio and television stations in Santiago city; the Air Force bombed the remaining active stations; the President received incomplete information and was convinced that only a sector of the Navy conspired against him and his government.

President Allende and Defense Minister Orlando Letelier were unable to communicate with military leaders. Admiral Montero, the Navy's commander and an Allende loyalist, was rendered incommunicado; his telephone service was cut, and his cars were sabotaged before the coup d'état, to ensure he could not thwart the opposition. Leadership of the Navy was transferred to José Toribio Merino, planner of the coup d'état and executive officer to Adm. Montero. Augusto Pinochet, General of the Army, and Gustavo Leigh, General of the Air Force, did not answer Allende's telephone calls to them. The General Director of the Carabineros (uniformed police), José María Sepúlveda, and the head of the Investigations Police (plain clothes detectives), Alfredo Joignant answered Allende's calls and immediately went to the La Moneda presidential palace. When Defense Minister Letelier arrived at the Ministry of Defense, controlled by Adm. Patricio Carvajal, he was arrested as the first prisoner of the coup d'état.

Despite evidence that all branches of the Chilean armed forces were involved in the coup, Allende hoped that some units remained loyal to the government. Allende was convinced of Pinochet's loyalty, telling a reporter that the coup d'état leaders must have imprisoned the general. Only at 8:30 am, when the armed forces declared their control of Chile and that Allende was deposed, did the president grasp the magnitude of the military's rebellion. Despite the lack of any military support, Allende refused to resign his office.

At approx. 9:00 the carabineros of the La Moneda left the building. By 9:00 am, the armed forces controlled Chile, except for the city centre of the capital, Santiago. Allende refused to surrender, despite the military's declaring they would bomb the La Moneda presidential palace if he resisted being deposed. The Socialist Party along with his Cuban advisors proposed to Allende that he escape to the San Joaquín industrial zone in southern Santiago, to later re-group and lead a counter-coup d'état; the president rejected the proposition. According to Tanya Harmer, Allende's refusal to lead an insurgency against the coup is evidence of his unrelenting desire to bring about change through non-violent methods. The military attempted negotiations with Allende, but the President refused to resign, citing his constitutional duty to remain in office. Finally, at 10:30 am, Allende gave a farewell speech, telling the nation of the coup d'état and his refusal to resign his elected office under threat.

Leigh ordered the presidential palace bombed but was told the Air Force's Hawker Hunter jet aircraft would take forty minutes to arrive from their base at Concepcion. Pinochet ordered an armoured and infantry force under General Sergio Arellano to advance upon the La Moneda presidential palace. When the troops moved forward, they were forced to retreat after coming under fire from GAP snipers perched on rooftops. General Arellano called for helicopter gunship support from the commander of the Chilean Army Puma helicopter squadron and the troops were able to advance again. Chilean Air Force aircraft soon arrived to provide close air support for the assault (by bombing the Palace), but the defenders did not surrender until nearly 2:30 pm. First reports said the 65-year-old president had died fighting troops, but later police sources reported he had committed suicide.

Prior to Allende's suicide, he addressed the nation one final time and stated hope for Chile in the future and wishing for the people to stay strong willed and overcome the darkness. In his own words he said: "Workers of my country, I have faith in Chile and its destiny. Other men will overcome this dark and bitter moment when treason seeks to prevail. Keep in mind that, much sooner than later, the great avenues will again be opened through which will pass free men to construct a better society. Long live Chile! Long live the people! Long live the workers!"

Casualties

In the first months after the coup d'état, the military killed thousands of Chilean leftists, both real and suspected, or forced their "disappearance". The military imprisoned 40,000 political enemies in the National Stadium of Chile; among the tortured and killed desaparecidos (disappeared) were the U.S. citizens Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi. In October 1973, the Chilean songwriter Víctor Jara was murdered, along with 70 other people in a series of killings perpetrated by the death squad Caravan of Death (Caravana de la Muerte).

The government arrested some 130,000 people in a three-year period; the dead and disappeared numbered thousands in the first months of the military government. Those include the British physician Sheila Cassidy, who survived to publicize in the UK the human rights violations in Chile. Among those detained was Alberto Bachelet (father of future Chilean President Michelle Bachelet), an Air Force official; he was tortured and died on 12 March 1974, the right-wing newspaper, El Mercurio, reported that Mr Bachelet died after a basketball game, citing his poor cardiac health. Michelle Bachelet and her mother were imprisoned and tortured in the Villa Grimaldi detention and torture centre on 10 January 1975.

After Gen. Pinochet lost the election in the 1988 plebiscite, the Rettig Commission, a multi-partisan truth commission, in 1991 reported the location of torture and detention centers, among others, Colonia Dignidad, the tall ship Esmeralda and Víctor Jara Stadium. Later, in November 2004, the Valech Report confirmed the number as fewer than 3,000 killed and reduced the number of cases of forced disappearance; but some 28,000 people were brutally beaten, arrested, imprisoned, starved and tortured by the army. Sixty individuals died as a direct result of fighting on 11 September, although the MIR and GAP continued to fight the following day. It has been put forward that, in all, 46 of Allende's guard (the GAP, Grupo de Amigos Personales) were killed, some of them in combat with the soldiers that took the Moneda. However, a report of 1999 published by an organization of ex-GAP which survived the events around the coup d'état, says that no one among the GAP members were killed in La Moneda combat. The source affirms that there were only 50 members of the GAP at that time, totally. The same information about the number of GAP members was later confirmed in an academic publication.

Allende's Cuban-trained guard would have had about 300 elite commando-trained GAP fighters at the time of the coup, according to a book of 2005 by Jonathan Haslam, but the use of brute military force, especially the use of Hawker Hunters, may have handicapped many GAP fighters from further action. Which was the case of some GAP members during the Hawker Hunters attack against Allende's residence in Tomás Moro.

According to official reports prepared after the return of democracy, at La Moneda only two people died: President Allende and the journalist Augusto Olivares (both by suicide). Two more were injured, Antonio Aguirre and Osvaldo Ramos, both members of President Allende's entourage; they would later be allegedly kidnapped from the hospital and disappeared. In November 2006, the Associated Press noted that more than 15 bodyguards and aides were taken from the palace during the coup and are still unaccounted for; in 2006 Augusto Pinochet was indicted for two of their deaths.

On the military side, there were 34 deaths: two army sergeants, three army corporals, four army privates, two navy lieutenants, one navy corporal, four naval cadets, three navy conscripts and fifteen carabineros. In mid-September, the Chilean military junta claimed its troops suffered another 16 dead and 100 injured by gunfire in mopping-up operations against Allende supporters, and Pinochet said: "sadly there are still some armed groups who insist on attacking, which means that the military rules of wartime apply to them." A press photographer also died in the crossfire while attempting to cover the event. On 23 October 1973, 23-year-old army corporal Benjamín Alfredo Jaramillo Ruz, who was serving with the Cazadores, became the first fatal casualty of the counterinsurgency operations in the mountainous area of Alquihue in Valdivia after being shot by a sniper. The Chilean Army suffered 12 killed in various clashes with MIR guerrillas and GAP fighters in October 1973.

While fatalities in the battle during the coup might have been relatively small, the Chilean security forces sustained 162 dead in the three following months as a result of continued resistance, and tens of thousands of people were arrested during the coup and held in the National Stadium. An estimated 40,000 Chileans were tortured under the Pinochet regime in the years following the coup.

Allende's death
President Allende died in La Moneda during the coup. The junta officially declared that he committed suicide with a rifle given to him by Fidel Castro, two doctors from the infirmary of La Moneda stated that they witnessed the suicide, and an autopsy labelled Allende's death a suicide. Vice Admiral Patricio Carvajal, one of the primary instigators of the coup, claimed that "Allende committed suicide and is dead now." Patricio Guijon, one of the president's doctors, had testified to witnessing Allende shoot himself under the chin with the rifle while seated on a sofa.

At the time, few of Allende's supporters believed the explanation that Allende had killed himself. Allende's body was exhumed in May 2011. The exhumation was requested by members of the Allende family, including his daughter Isabel who viewed the question of her father's death as "an insult to scientific intelligence." A scientific autopsy was performed, and the autopsy team delivered a unanimous finding on 19 July 2011 that Allende committed suicide using an AK-47 rifle. The team was composed of international forensic experts to assure an independent evaluation.

However, on 31 May 2011, Chile's state television station reported that a top-secret military account of Allende's death had been discovered in the home of a former military justice official. The 300-page document was found only when the house was destroyed in the 2010 Chilean earthquake. After reviewing the report, two forensic experts told Televisión Nacional de Chile "that they are inclined to conclude that Allende was assassinated." Two forensics experts said they believed he was shot with a small-calibre weapon prior to the AK-47. One expert, Luis Ravanal, noted the lack of blood on his collar, sweater and throat suggested someone else fired the AK-47 when he was already dead.

Allende's widow and family escaped the military government and were accepted for exile in Mexico, where they remained for 17 years.

Installing a new regime

On 13 September, the Junta dissolved Congress, outlawed the parties that had been part of the Popular Unity coalition, and all political activity was declared "in recess". The military government took control of all media, including the radio broadcasting that Allende attempted to use to give his final speech to the nation. It is not known how many Chileans actually heard the last words of Allende as he spoke them, but a transcript and audio of the speech survived the military government. Chilean scholar Lidia M. Baltra details how the military took control of the media platforms and turned them into their own "propaganda machine". The only two newspapers that were allowed to continue publishing after the military takeover were El Mercurio and La Tercera de la Hora, both of which were anti-Allende under his leadership. The dictatorship's silencing of the leftist point of view extended past the media and into "every discourse that expressed any resistance to the regime". An example of this is the torturing and death of folk singer Victor Jara. The military government detained Jara in the days following the coup. He, along with many other leftists, was held in Estadio Nacional, or the National Stadium of Chile in the capital of Santiago. Initially, the Junta tried to silence him by crushing his hands, but ultimately, he was murdered. Immediately after the coup the military sought television host Don Francisco to have him report on the events. Don Francisco declined the offer, encouraging the captain that had approached him to take the role of reporter himself.

Initially, there were four leaders of the junta: In addition to General Augusto Pinochet, from the Army, there were General Gustavo Leigh Guzmán, of the Air Force; Admiral José Toribio Merino Castro, of the Navy (who replaced Constitutionalist Admiral Raúl Montero); and General Director César Mendoza Durán, of the National Police (Carabineros de Chile) (who replaced Constitutionalist General Director José María Sepúlveda). Coup leaders soon decided against a rotating presidency and named General Pinochet permanent head of the junta.

In the months that followed the coup, the junta, with authoring work by historian Gonzalo Vial and Admiral Patricio Carvajal, published a book titled El Libro Blanco del cambio de gobierno en Chile (commonly known as El Libro Blanco, "The White Book of the Change of Government in Chile"), where they attempted to justify the coup by claiming that they were in fact anticipating a self-coup (the alleged Plan Zeta, or Plan Z) that Allende's government or its associates were purportedly preparing. Historian Peter Winn states that the Central Intelligence Agency had an extensive part to play in fabricating the conspiracy and in selling it to the press, both in Chile and internationally. Although later discredited and officially recognized as the product of political propaganda, Gonzalo Vial has pointed to the similarities between the alleged Plan Z and other existing paramilitary plans of the Popular Unity parties in support of its legitimacy.

A document from September 13 shows that Jaime Guzmán was by then already tasked to study the creation of a new constitution. One of the first measures of the dictatorship was to set up a Secretaría Nacional de la Juventud (SNJ, National Youth Office). This was done on 28 October 1973, even before the Declaration of Principles of the junta made in March 1974. This was a way of mobilizing sympathetic elements of the civil society in support for the dictatorship.

Continued violence
The newspaper La Tercera published on its front page a photograph showing prisoners at Quiriquina Island Camp who had been captured during the fighting in Concepción. The photograph's caption stated that some of the detained were "local bosses" of Unidad Popular" while others were "extremists who had attacked the armed forces with firearms". The photo was reproduced 2013 in The Indicter, identifying among the 'local bosses' Fernando Alvarez, then Concepción Province's head authority appointed by Allende (executed one month thereafter); and among the fighting 'extremists', Marcello Ferrada de Noli, one founder of MIR and then professor at the University of Concepción.

This is consistent with reports in newspapers and broadcasts in Concepción about the activities of the Armed Forces, which mentioned clashes with "extremists" on several occasions from 11 to 14 September. Nocturnal skirmishes took place around the Hotel Alonso de Ercilla in Colo Colo and San Martín Street, one block away from the Army and military police administrative headquarters. A recently published testimony about the clashes in Concepción offers several plausible explanations for the reticence of witnesses to these actions.

Besides political leaders and participants, the coup also affected many everyday Chilean citizens. Thousands were killed, went missing, and were injured. Because of the political instability in their country, many relocated elsewhere. Canada, among other countries, became a main point of refuge for many Chilean citizens. Through an operation known as "Special Movement Chile", more than 7,000 Chileans were relocated to Canada in the months following 11 September 1973. These refugees are now known as Chilean Canadian people and have a population of over 38,000.

The U.S. view of the coup continues to spark controversy. Beginning in late 2014 in response to a request by then Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin, United States Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) William J. Perry Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies (CHDS), located at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C., has been under investigation by the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. Insider national security whistleblower complaints included that the Center knowingly protected a CHDS professor from Chile who was a former top advisor to Pinochet after belonging to the Dirección de Inteligencia Nacional / DINA state terrorist organization (whose attack against a former Chilean foreign minister in 1976 in Washington, D.C., resulted in two deaths, including that of an American). "Reports that NDU hired foreign military officers with histories of involvement in human rights abuses, including torture and extrajudicial killings of civilians, are stunning, and they are repulsive", said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, the author of the "Leahy Law" prohibiting U.S. assistance to military units and members of foreign security forces that violate human rights.

Roberto Thieme, the military leader of Fatherland and Liberty, who was imprisoned on 11 September was shocked to hear about the degree of violence the coup was carried out with. Despite being an arduous opponent of Unidad Popular he had expected a cleaner coup.

International reaction
President of Argentina Juan Domingo Perón condemned the coup calling it a "fatality for the continent". Before the coup Perón had warned the more radical of his followers to stay calm and "not do as Allende". Argentine students protested the coup at the Chilean embassy in Buenos Aires, where part of them chanted that they were "ready to cross the Andes" (dispuestos a cruzar la cordillera).

Legal impact
A number of cargo shipments involving trade with Cuba were affected by government policy decisions, and subsequently performance of the trade contracts underlying the shipping deliveries was made illegal under Cuban law. The Chilean company Iansa had purchased sugar from the Cuban business entity, Cubazukar, and several shipments were at different stages of the shipping and delivery process. The ships involved included:
 * Playa Larga (delivery in Chile was underway but was not completed before the ship left)
 * The Marble Island (the ship was en route for Chile but was diverted elsewhere)
 * Aegis Fame (hire was cancelled before the cargo had been loaded).

The shipping contracts used c.i.f. trade terms. Iansa sued Cubazukar for non-delivery. The High Court (in England) ruled that IANSA was entitled to damages in respect of the undelivered balance of the Playa Larga cargo and to restitution of the price paid for the Marble Island cargo. Subsequent appeals by both parties were dismissed. In regard to the Aegis Fame shipping, the contract was frustrated and therefore Cubazukar were not in breach.

Commemoration
The commemoration of the coup is associated to competing narratives on its cause and effects. The coup has been commemorated by detractors and supporters in various ways.

On 11 September 1975 Pinochet lit the Llama de la Libertad (lit. Flame of Liberty) to commemorate the coup. This flame was extinguished in 2004. Avenida Nueva Providencia in Providencia, Santiago, was renamed Avenida 11 de Septiembre in 1980. In the 30th anniversary of the coup President Ricardo Lagos inaugurated the Morandé 80 entrance to La Moneda. This entrance to the presidential palace had been erased during the repairs the dictatorship did to the building after the bombing.

40th anniversary
The 40th anniversary of the coup in 2013 was particularly intense. That year the name of Avenida 11 de Septiembre was reversed to the original Avenida Nueva Providencia. The Association of Chilean Magistrates issued a public statement in early September 2013 recognizing the past unwillingness of judges to protect those persecuted by dictatorship. On 11 September 2013 hundreds of Chileans posed as dead in the streets of Santiago in remembrance of the ones "disappeared" by the dictatorship.

The centre-left opposition refused to attend the commemoration event organized by Sebastián Piñera's right-wing government organizing instead a separate event. Osvaldo Andrade of the Socialist Party explained that attendance was not viable as Piñera's government was "packed with passive accomplices" of the dictatorship. Some right-wing politicians also declined the invitation. Presidential candidate Michelle Bachelet planned to spend the day visiting Museum of Memory and Human Rights. President Piñera held an unusual speech in which he denounced "passive accomplices" like news reporters who deliberately changed or omitted the truth and judges who rejected recursos de amparos that could have saved lives. People who knew things or could have known things but decided to stay quiet were also criticized as passive accomplices in Piñera's speech.

A number of new films, theatre plays, and photography expositions were held to cast light on the abuses and censorship of the dictatorship. The number of new books published on the subject in 2013 was such that it constituted an editorial boom. The Museum of Memory and Human Rights also displayed a collection of declassified CIA, FBI, Defense Department, and White House records illustrating the U.S. role in the dictatorship and the coup. Conferences and seminars on the subject of coup were also held. Various series and interviews with politicians on the subject of the coup and the dictatorship were aired on Chilean TV in 2013.

50th anniversary
Ahead of the 50th anniversary of the coup in 2023, the United States under the Biden administration finally declassified President Nixon's daily briefs related to Chile from 8 to 11 September 1973. The document for 8 September read: "A number of reports have been received… indicating the possibility of an early military coup. Navy men plotting to overthrow the government now claim army and air force support." It further noted that the far-right paramilitary group, Fatherland and Freedom "has been blocking roads and provoking clashes with the national police, adding to the tension caused by continuing strikes and opposition political moves. President Allende earlier this week said he believed the armed forces will ask for his resignation if he does not change his economic and political policies."

The week before the anniversary, Chilean President Gabriel Boric, along with all four living former presidents—Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle, Ricardo Lagos, Michelle Bachelet, and Sebastian Piñera—signed an declaration titled "Commitment: For Democracy, Forever", stating that it should "confront the challenges of democracy with more democracy" and it should defend and promote human rights. The right-wing opposition called it "biased" and refused to sign it.

On the day of the anniversary, Boric, Bachelet, and many world leaders, including Mexico's Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Portugal's António Costa, Colombia's Gustavo Petro, Bolivia's Luis Arce, and Uruguay's Luis Lacalle Pou attended an commemoration in La Moneda presidential palace to commemorate the coup and its aftermath. Others who attended were former Uruguayan president José Mujica and lead Rage Against the Machine guitarist Tom Morello, who said that the United States "shares responsibility" for the coup.

At the commemoration, Boric said:

"A coup d'état or the violation of the human rights of those who think differently is never justifiable. It is crucial to clearly state that the coup d'état cannot be separated from what came afterward. Human-rights violations of Chilean men and women began right from the moment of the coup [...] It was a dictatorship until the end [...] Reconciliation is not achieved through neutrality or distance but by unequivocally standing with those who were victims of the horror. Reconciliation, dear compatriots, does not involve attempting to equate the responsibilities between victims and perpetrators."

Surveys showed that 60% of Chileans surveyed were not interested in the commemoration, while another poll claimed that nearly 40% believed Pinochet "modernised" the country. Other data found that more than a third of Chileans believed the coup was justified.

Films and documentaries

 * Bear Story
 * Bestia
 * Chicago Boys
 * Colonia
 * Ecos del Desierto
 * Invisible Heroes
 * Machuca
 * Missing (1982 film)
 * ¡Nae pasaran!
 * No
 * ReMastered: Massacre at the Stadium
 * The Battle of Chile
 * The Black Pimpernel
 * The House of the Spirits

title: 1973 Chilean coup d'état


text:
Talk:Platonic epistemology

Untitled
appears to be total nonsense, or at any rate off topic. m.e. 12:46, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Please tell me you're being ironic. Uriah923 05:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Removing stub
I added quite a bit of content to the site and think it's worthy of removing the sub designation now. Uriah923 05:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I think this should be enough to remove the stub status. I think the next step should be quoting/citing specific references to the Meno and other dialouges.  I can put that on my to do list, but I won't get to it for a while.  I wouldn't object to someone else doing it.Dayleyj 20:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

plato's doctrine of recollection
as I recall, and i'm no expert, plato's epistemology more or less just is his doctrine of recollection, so I don't see why the articles shouldn't be merged Killtacular 03:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that it could be kept. Maybe it could be renamed or at least redirected from/to "Plato's Doctrine of Recollection."Dayleyj 20:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Read the Timaeus.--MWAK (talk) 07:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Source
While I am neither an expert nor terribly familiar with the works of Plato overall, the information presented in the article seems quite sound and well phrased. For confirmation, though, I recommend someone look to Plato's complete works as presented at classics.MIT.edu 99.65.212.249 (talk) 07:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC) J Lau

A good source
A book reviewing Platonic epistemology: --Signimu (talk) 21:12, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Platonic epistemology


text:
User talk:Salv236

Welcome
Hello Salv, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful in editing pages or creating new ones: How to edit a page, Tutorial, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should probably read our policies at some point too.

But don't feel you have to read every policy document before you do anything. Dive in, be bold in editing, and if you do anything wrong, someone will be quick to correct it and let you know (hopefully, politely!)

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

You may have already noticed that you can sign your name using three tildes, like this:. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too, as I've done below. This is mostly useful, and is considered good wikiquette, on talk pages. But be aware that the actual wikipedia articles should never be signed - they belong to the community, rather than the individual who created them.

Again, welcome! --Elk 12:49, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Salv236


text:
User:John Cross

Welcome to my user page.

Articles I started
Source: http://toolserver.org/~soxred93/pages/index.php

UK Constitution and law

 * Companies Act 1985
 * Courts Boards
 * Education Act
 * Electoral Administration Act 2006
 * Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925
 * House of Commons Commission
 * List of Chancellors of the Duchy of Lancaster
 * Queen's Consent (was a redirect previously)
 * Royal prerogative in the United Kingdom
 * Sheriffs Act 1887

UK public sector

 * Combined Online Information System
 * General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland
 * List of Joint Committees (UK Local Government)

Bodies/organisations/companies

 * Association of Learning Providers
 * Access to Information Central Clearing House
 * National Postgraduate Committee

People

 * Francis Irving
 * Thomas J. Martin

Places

 * Earlsdon, Coventry
 * Macclesfield
 * Two Mile Oak Cross

Science and Mathematics

 * Hausdorff paradox
 * Master of Mathematics
 * Playfair's axiom
 * Parallel postulate
 * Thermalisation
 * Vitali theorem

Other/not classified

 * CONPLAN 8022-02

My Wikimedia User Pages

 * Meta Wiki
 * Wikibooks
 * Wikimedia Commons
 * Wikinews
 * Wikiquote
 * Wikisource
 * Wikispecies
 * Wiktionary
 * Wikiversity

Useful Guidance Pages/Lists

 * List of WikiProjects

Sandbox

 * /sandbox

title: User:John Cross


text:
Talk:1973 Chilean coup d'état

This is a coup led AGAINST Allende, not BY Allende, correct?
The opening line:

"The 1973 Chilean coup d'état was a military overthrow of the Popular Unity government in Chile led by the democratic socialist Salvador Allende as president of Chile." Andrew whicker (talk) 14:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

 * That's proper English, the government is what was led by Allende. XeCyranium (talk) 03:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:1973 Chilean coup d'état


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Platonic epistemology

 * Delete. Delete fast.  Delete ruthlessly.  (this has nothing to do with the bible-babble, but I can't stand it when people use "principal" when they mean "principle") Dukeofomnium 13:03, 28 May 2004 (UTC) As rewritten, keep Dukeofomnium 16:32, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Content appears to be about why Christianity is better than Plato. May be a class assignment. At a minimum, needs a change of title and lots of wikification. m.e. 13:04, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. No amount of wikification can save this.--Bwmodular 14:58, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Possible copyvio --- see sig at end.  Platonic epistemology deserves an article, but I can't see anything here helpful to someone who wishes to write a real one.  Smerdis of Tlön 15:11, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Abigail 15:44, May 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Cleanse it with fire. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:53, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Possible copyvio, definite bible-babble and hopelessly POV. Reads like a Jack Chick comic gone bonkers.  Delete. - Lucky 6.9 17:44, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Thue 18:34, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Really looks more like a class assignment. Completely unreadable but no reason to bother wikifying it. POV. I would rather say the sig belongs to someone who wants to spread his propaganda. Lev 19:03, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I give it an F. Oops, I mean, delete. -- Matty j 23:00, May 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Should have been speedy deleted.  RickK 19:31, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This ranks among the most idiosyncratic and tangled pieces of writing I have ever seen here. Denni 21:44, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Looks like copyright vio and wouldn't be encyclopoedic even if it weren't. The subject does deserve an article, but you can't get there from here. --Christofurio 01:22, May 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Masi27185 11:16, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I've nuked it and replaced it with a stub that I think is broadly accurate... The Land 20:37, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
 * New version looks fine. Keep.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ordain

Seems like a dicdef to me. Wiktionary? Fredrik 13:04, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Ordination is a sacrament for lots of religions, and there could almost certainly be an article on it. I'll move to ordination and make into a stub. I say keep. Meelar 13:52, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Whoops, ordination is a redirect to Holy Orders. this should go there as well. Meelar 13:54, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect will probably do. Fredrik 14:01, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ordain