Talk:Ziad Jarrah

Contradict Tag

The introductory paragraph states:

... although the release of the cockpit transcript revealed that Saeed al-Ghamdi had in fact been flying, and the claim of Jarrah's participation has been the subject of much controversy.

however, in the The Attack section, Jarrah is always referred to as being the pilot, and taking orders from "a fellow hijacker". which was it? --Storkk 17:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The cockpit transcript did not reveal who was flying the plane. No names were used. The statement in the introductory paragraph is incorrect. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 02:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Au contraire, actually, tthe trancript clearly shows Saeed al-Ghamdi being given orders to roll the plane, pitch it forward and steer erractically. In fact, he is the only hijacker mentioned by name throughout the transcript. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 11:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow. I'm going to need to investigate this more closely. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 14:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Questions about Possible mistaken identity section

"The sudden cropping of the lease has lead some to speculate that the surname was originally spelled differently"

Who is speculating and why do they think this? --Sloane 14:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

It should link to who suspects it. I'm not sure who. FYI, some of the incriminating evidence spelled the name "Ziad Jarrahi" or "Zaid Jarrahi" and he apparently didn't write an i at the end of his name (though they are both valid transliterations of his Arabic name into Roman letters.) It's a rather weak point, but some people care. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Who? We should be avoiding using weasel words here. --Sloane 15:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Right. I changed the caption. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

"On October 23, 2001, John Ashcroft claimed that Jarrah had shared a Hamburg apartment with Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi, though the Los Angeles Times then announced that none of Jarrah's three apartments in Hamburg had been remotely connected with any of the other hijackers."

How is this an authority inconsistancy? Did Aschcroft or an other government instance say something different later? The LA Times isn't an authority, right? --Sloane 14:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The LA Times doesn't usually print false information, and when it does, it usually retracts it. This is a case of a major newspaper contradicting Ashcroft's account. It's noteworthy. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Upon researching: the LA Times based their assertion on authorities in Germany. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I just thought the authority inconsistancy is meant for cases when government instances contradicted themselves or eachother. --Sloane 15:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Authorities in Germany contradict U.S. authorities. Check out the new LA Time source. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Further, this section is extremely poorly sourced. This is a featured article, everything should be properly sourced or else taken out.--Sloane 14:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

It ought to be well-sourced. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've sourced it all, I think. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 15:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Ziad Jarrah correct name seem to be Ziad al-Jarrah. He is the cousin of Ali al-Jarrah and Yussuf al-Jarrah who where both arrested in Lebanon for spying for Israel en 2008. (see Ali al-Jarrah wiki page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_al-Jarrah) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.129.24.249 (talk) 04:24, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Part 2

Sloane flagged the parts of the "Authority Inconsistencies" section that were unsourced. I managed to source (or revise and source) most of them. There are two I couldn't.

1. I can't find any evidence that "FBI and German authorities had initially reported that Jarrah attended another school". Even if they did, I don't see how it's important, since it's easy to get facts mixed up in something like that. If they did report his school incorrectly, they later set the record straight. I'm all for removing that paragraph as unnotable and unsourced.
2. I can't find a source for the assertion that "Jarrah's family has indicated they would be willing to provide DNA samples to US researchers", so I think I'll revise that sentence.

I also think the "Possible mistaken identity" and "Authority Inconsistencies" sections should be merged and reorganized. Any objections? – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 19:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I support adding a {{fact}} tag to the first claim which seems mildly believable, but removing the second claim. I do strongly support merging the two sections Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 18:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Part 3

Well the Jarrah / Atta video [1] should put to rest the mistaken identity claims. The section should be minimized and written such that for a while there were these claims, the 9/11 commission concluded differently and on Sep 27th 2006, a video will with Atta was released casting further doubt on such claims. Barneygumble 14:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

That's fascinating. What does Jarrah say on the video? Does anyone know? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

In different personal afganistan video Jarrah makes statements justifying a war against America - As this video did have sound as opposed to no sound like the 2006 video mentioned in other comments. Only small snippets of this video were released and a document online shows a transcript of what Jarrah said in the video. Furthermore his voice matches the transmissions from UA93. Jastarrun (talk) 09:31, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

o.O Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 05:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

• ' It has been pointed out that...the passengers reported three and not four hijackers. However, the October 2006 emergence of a “martyrdom” video shot on January 18, 2000, along with Mohamed Atta has cast heavy doubt on such claims. '

Very enigmatic. Does this mean that the video (made more than a year and a half prior to the crash) strongly evidences Jarrah's participation in the subsequent hijackings and should be deemed more reliable than eyewitness accounts? Beingsshepherd (talk) 00:36, 21 September 2013 (UTC)Beingsshepherd

Jarrah's voice was heard on air recordings and he was sat in 1B Jastarrun (talk) 10:29, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Questions

• a) I have no idea if Ziad grew up in an Arabic-speaking household or not, or whether his natural name is in fact Arabic. I have no idea whatsoever, any idea if he was actually named Ziad Jarrah or زياد سمير جراح?
• b) The only reference I can find to a Le Segasse school in Beirut is a law school, not a private high school. I also notice that it is properly named [Collège de la Sagesse and it seems likely therefore that Ziad spoke French? "Founded in 1875, La Sagesse University in Beirut belongs to the archdiocese of Beirut." Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 18:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Pilot?

The article mentions the possibility of Saeed alGhamdi as the pilot. I understand the CVR transcript could indicate that, but i believe it is far to vague to make such a bold assertion especially weighed against the evidence that Jarrah did attend flight school, was a member of the Hamburg cell, as were two of the other pilots, i believe there is too much evidence supporting the conclusion that Jarrah was the pilot, if you could please explain to me how you reached that conclusion, and if there is any other source aside from the trranscript. i am very interested as it is quite crucial to the history of the events.KarlJohannes 05:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• I've rewritten that bit a little. Like it? --Sloane 05:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Well there is plenty of compelling sources and information that confirms jarrah was on the plane and the main voice in the cockpit beside the other hijacker. Are you still interested in the answer? Jastarrun (talk) 10:21, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

how do you know they are refering to the pilot when they say saeed? that is what i was getting atKarlJohannes 06:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

They tell Saeed where to steer the plane. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 07:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Note that Saeed was also trained as a pilot, and that Jarrah was not really a member of the Hamburg cell. (He lived in Hamburg when the others did, but only saw them rarely, apparently.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 13:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, my guess is that Jarrah would have flown the plane into the Capitol -- but al-Ghamdi was at the controls temporarily during the disturbance (for whatever reason). But that's just a guess. We can't really ask them. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 18:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The hijacker who with Jarrah had used flight simulators so only on Jarrah's instruction he would know what to do Jastarrun (talk) 10:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Was Jarrah in the Hamburg cell?

the hamburg cell does not refer simply to atta, al shehi and binalshibh who inhabited 54 marinestrasse but rather those 4 terrorists who visited afghanistan, trained in the camps, and afterwards took part in the conspiracy to attack the united states. Jarrah was most definatley a part of that, all doubts should have been erased with the release of the martyrdom video a few weeks back, i dont understand how you can still argue that he was not a member of the core group of conspirators? Either way this article does have a big discrepancy, stating Jarrah is not a member of the cell but then in talking about the video that he was, even if my suggestion above is not heeded, something has to be done about that inconsistency.KarlJohannes 19:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

regardless, i dont know who thought that it was a video of them together in Hamburg, all the sources state that the video was mad in AfghanistanKarlJohannes 19:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

The term "Hamburg Cell" refers to the location in Hamburg where many 9/11 planners met, and the people who frequented there. Said Bahaji, Zakariya Essabar, Mounir el Motassadeq, and Abdelghani Mzoudi were all members, along with the other three pilots you mentioned. The term "Hamburg Cell" does not refer to the core conspirators; it refers to the people who met together in Hamburg to conspire, whether they were major players or not. Although the Hamburg Cell article claims Jarrah was a member, I think that's misleading. Jarrah was certainly one of the main four terrorists, and he definitely lived in Hamburg, and he trained in Afghanistan like the other three. But he never is known to have visited the Marienstraße building, and never (apparently) met with any of the others while in Hamburg. (Except for the wedding video at the al-Quds mosque.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 13:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

So then we are expected to believe that it was a coincidence that he lived in hamburg and happened to arrive in Afghanistan at the same time as the others and took part in the same conspiracy but was not a member of this group? A terrorist cell is not a location, it is a group of terrorists who conspire to commit terrorist acts. You claim that it refers to the location as well as the people who met together to conspire, dont you think that they would consciously try to distance themselves from each other to avoid drawing suspiscion? If anything the Hamburg Cell is just a moniker established after the attack to refer to the four core conspirators and their associates. If the only source cited is the commision report, then you must include him unless you provide another source stating he was not a member of what the commission refers to as 'the hamburg contingent' Regardless of where Jarrah lived or who he visted, he is most definatley within that group. KarlJohannes 15:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

None of the terrorists except Jarrah "consciously tried to distance themselves from each other to avoid drawing suspiscion". They lived with each other and were often seen together. They conspired together, in a cell. Jarrah lived in the same city, and no, it was not a coincidence, but he didn't appear to associate with each others. Perhaps they didn't get along (there's evidence of that), or perhaps KSM didn't want the secular Jarrah to rub off on the others. Whatever the reason, there's no evidence that they conspired together. Jarrah was given orders, and he followed them. He isn't known to have conspired with anyone. I think it's misleading to say that Jarrah was a part of a "cell", when there's no evidence he met with them (outside of a single event at a wedding) in Hamburg. He was told to stay in Hamburg, and he did, and he was told to go to Afghanistan, and he did, but he was conspicuously separate from the others.

On the other hand, I checked the 9/11 Commission Report, and it does list Jarrah as part of the Hamburg cell. I think that's misleading, but it does say that, unfortunately. It also implies (but does not state directly) that he lived at or frequented the Marionstrasse building. (There's no evidence that he was ever there.) In fact, all the references about the Hamburg cell that 9/11 reports uses either don't mention Jarrah, or else they refer to classified reports by German intelligence -- but German intelligence has stated that they do not believe there was any connection between Jarrah and the others. So I'm not sure why the Commission included Jarrah.

So either the 9/11 Commission Report sloppily included Jarrah in with the others, assuming that he must have met with them, despite the lack of evidence -- or else they saw evidence that's secret (so they couldn't cite it) that shows Jarrah was there and conspired with them. I don't know which. I do know, however, that if Jarrah was in the Hamburg cell, he hid it well, and none of the other hijackers did. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 18:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I changed the text in question to the following:

The 9/11 Commission Report states that Jarrah was a member of the Hamburg cell, along with Atta and the others. He did not live with any of the others, however, and can only be confirmed to have met with any of them in Hamburg on a single occasion: that of Said Bahaji's wedding at the al-Quds Mosque. The closeness of his connections with the others is not known.

Is this acceptable? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 19:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes i suppose this will do, i was not aware this was such a point of contention, perhaps someone else could weigh in, this is too much one on one KarlJohannes 20:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it's fine, but isn't Atta part of the Hamburg cell? Cause with the martyrdom tape that would make two connections.--Sloane 01:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

yeah the article addresses that KarlJohannes 01:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

It's worth noting that that video was made in Afghanistan, after all 4 pilots moved away from Hamburg on their way to the U.S. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

The Men Who Stare At Goats

Page 82- has information on Ziad and his connections with Bert Rodriguez.Bronayur 15:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Image-Attavideo.jpg

Image:Image-Attavideo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Work needed

Hello everyone! This article currently appears near the top of Wikipedia:Featured articles/Cleanup listing, with four cleanup tags. Cleanup work needs to be completed on this article, or a featured article review may be in order. Please contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. Thank you! Dana boomer (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Category issue

Category:Lebanese mass murderers was removed twice on the grounds that the article is "already in Participants in the September 11 attacks category". I must respectfully disagree with this rationale. Category:Participants in the September 11 attacks has no connection whatsoever in the category tree with Category:Lebanese criminals or Category:Lebanese murderers, so I fail to see how the inclusion of both creates a redundancy. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:06, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Stasi/Libyan Ties Claim

I have deleted the information regarding the alleged connection of the subject's connection to Stasi for the following reasons. First, as far as I can see the Associated Press article entitled "Germany reportedly investigates Stasi past of hijacker's uncle", which is cited, does not exist. All I found was a posting with that title on a forum called "FreeRepublic". The source "Saddam's Ties to Al Queda" is not a reliable source. It seems like a vanity book published by a cartoonist. The author's description of himself in the cover is as follows:

Sam Pender is an American frustrated, sickened, and embarrassed by the acts and effects of the Monica Lewinsky Affair, the 2000 national election debacle, the attacks of 9/11, the political polarization of America, and the apathetic indifference of an American people who often forget they are at war with terrorists.

He is a husband, father, and author of seven novels and two non-fiction works; all under a different name.

Sam Pender is just another, average, American-like you.

The third source claims that the Stasi ties are as per a Der Spiegel article. The original Der Spiegel article (in German) is here. It contradicts the claims made. It states that Assem Jarrah may be the second cousin (not uncle) of Ziad Jarrah; It states that this being investigated by the German government; It states that information is missing and unclear; It states that the investigation is ongoing; And there is nothing claiming that Assem Jarrah was close to Ziad Jarrah. There was no follow-up to the article, presumably because nothing came of the investigation.Poyani (talk) 21:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Ziad Jarrah. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028flt93mainstoryp7.asp
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/thepilot/timeline.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/thepilot/note.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/092701hjpic.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:28, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ziad Jarrah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6LAVEpJ9L to http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/images/04/12/flight93.transcript.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100807204647/http://www.gpoaccess.gov//911/index.html to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

footnote 9 link doesnt work

footnote 9 link doesnt work — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.114.4.30 (talk) 20:52, 26 April 2019 (UTC)