Talk:Hamburg cell

Ziad Jarrah
Other sources that led me to this article (most notably his own Wikipedia article), suggest that Ziad Jarrah cannot be proven to have taken part in the activities of the Hamburg Cell. I have noted this in the intro paragraph. While it would make sense that he associated with the other hijackers at this time, since he did live in Hamburg, he is the "sore thumb" hijacker who did everything differently from all the other hijackers, so it really can't be said for sure yet that he was conclusively involved-- at least, it seems to me. --Gloriamarie 19:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

t's pretty conclusive that Jarrah was involved or at least affiliated with Atta, alShehi and Binalshibh. He attended al Quds mosque, was seen in the wedding video with binalshibh and alshehi, he visited afghanistan and traind with them and was seen in a video in afghanistan with Atta as well as bin laden and other top al qaeda agenst. Although he attended a different school than Atta and alShehi, and was more outwardly western, the evidence is pretty convincing that he was a member of the Hamburg cell KarlJohannes 05:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I strongly disagree. There is no evidence they ever met in Hamburg. – Quadell (talk) (random) 13:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hm, I have to revise that. Since the 9/11 Commission Report states he was a part of the Hamburg cell, I'm adding references to him back in. Still, since he can't be confirmed to have met with the others (outside of a single wedding video), I have put his information in a separate section. – Quadell (talk) (random) 19:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Ziad Jarrah was a member of the Hamburg cell. I've done some research on this topic, and as far as I know, he was a member of the Cell. AdjustShift (talk) 03:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

wording
A previous version of this article refered to "future-terrorists Mohammed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ramzi Binalshibh". WhisperToMe, presumable objecting to the POV of calling them terrorists, changed it to "future-Islamic militants". But this has problems as well. First off, it looks like the article says they were militants who were soon to be Islamic, which isn't what you mean. But secondly, some of them already were Islamic militants. So should we say "future-hijackers"? – Quadell (talk) (help)  01:26, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

That'll do. :) WhisperToMe 02:12, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

i wouldnt agree with future hijackers as ramzi binalshibh did not hijack anything. Future terrorists would be more apt, or something different altogether, maybe a total sentance rewrite. KarlJohannes 20:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

No footnotes
Tag added—readers are unable to verify from where information came, which should be made clear, especially for controversial topics such as this one. momo ricks  04:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. Not a single citation in this whole article. I use Wikipedia to get an overview of a topic and to find sources to read. I'm disappointed. Dcs002 (talk) 07:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Alteration of Background Section in Relation to Mohamedou Ould Slahi aka Abu Musab
Through the Wikipedia page, List of Guantanamo Bay detainees, I was led to this entry. I suggest that the Background section of this entry be re-written to reflect the factual and documented involvement of Mohamedou Ould Slahi with the Hamburg cell members. While Slahi did provide lodging for one night to the members of the Hamburg Cell, excluding Atta, he was not a member of al-Qaeda at the time and was not involved with 9-11. . In short, I would like to update the background section to cite his actual participation with the Hamburg Cell, which is, essentially none.InterestedCanadian (talk) 17:18, 10 September 2015 (UTC)