Talk:Hamburg cell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: `<!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. -->` `\|B-Class-1=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. -->` `\|B-Class-2=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. -->` `\|B-Class-3=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. -->` `\|B-Class-4=yes/no` `<!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. -->` `\|B-Class-5=yes/no`
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	United States military history task force

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)