Talk:Abdulaziz al-Omari

message: Rmherman, 
Thanks for all the additional info! But I disagree about something you state as a fact. I thought we could hash it out here. 
Based on the info in the 9/11 report, you claim that Abdulaziz al-Omari actually did all these things, and you removed the caveats that it might have been someone using that name. It seems possible to me, but far from certain, that there were two Saudis named Abdulaziz al-Omari with the same birthdate, when the "real" one had had his passport stolen years earlier. It seems more likely to me that the hijacker who called himself Abdulaziz al-Omari had a different birth name, and began using that identity after he received al-Omari's passport (possibly to erase suspicious information about his past, although that's just speculation.)
Anyway, I don't think it's accurate to say that al-Omari did these things, when it seems reasonable that someone using the name al-Omari did it. (I know this is bordering a philosophical debate -- if someone calls himself "Joe Blow", and has no other known name, is that really his name now?) But I think we should at least include the fact that that may not be the hijackers real name.
Now none of what I'm saying is valid if your statement is correct: "This individual was also not the same as the hijacker whose identity was later confirmed by Saudi government interviews with his family." But you don't provide a source, and I hadn't heard that before. 
This is similar to the changes you made on Waleed al-Shehri, but that's a different case, and I'll look into that tomorrow.
Quadell (talk) 20:49, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
:Well in a big world almost anything is possible. But why should we think that scenario is reasonable (more so than the Jews did it one, the U.S. did it to themselves, etc.) The facts presented are based on the 9/11 commission report which claims to be based on Saudi interviews with the families of hijackers. I haven't read the whole report yet but I have yet seen anywhere where it dicusses possible misidentification of the hijackers. It would have been the sort of mistake they would have loved to roast the FBI for making. All of the misidentification stuff I have read through dates back to days or weeks after the attack when we knew little and several mistakes in identification really were made which were subsequently corrected. Rmhermen 18:46, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
::I would suspect that the 1972 birthdate is actually that of the other al-Omari and was one of those initial mistakes. However the 9/11 report doesn't give ages except to say all the muscle hijackers were between 20 - 28 years old - meaning either date could be correct. Travelling under their own actual names seem to be a signature of this plot with at least two people having to be replaced when they couldn't get into the country (bin alshibh and al Khatani) and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has, according to the report, said that the hijackers were chosen because of the lack of criminal records or experience in forgeign jihad. (Although that might have been a quote from Tawfiq bin Attash). Rmhermen 18:56, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
This article says that the information the FBI released – including name, date of birth, country of origin, and occupation – matched an innocent person (whose passport was previously stolen), but the picture was of someone else (presumably the actual hijacker). For a thorough (if conspiratorial) summary of the evidence of mistaken identities, see here. Obviously, the 9/11 Commission has seen things we haven't, and they report that all the hijackers used their own identities. But that doesn't necessarily make it true. There's still room for a reasonable doubt, in my opinion. Quadell (talk) 19:04, Aug 2, 2004 (UTC)
"Only two photographs are known to exist of him in the U.S."  I like how the article says this, yet it shows three different pictures of him.
:He's not in the U.S. in the first picture. The two photos of him in the U.S. are shown. But I see how it's confusing. (It's not the two photographs that are in the U.S.; it's the settings.) – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 18:07, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
Want to move this to Alomari, since it has 2000% more google hits, any objections? Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 04:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I object, really, but see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Arabic) and the accompanying talk page. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 13:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Previous discussions without headers

message: :File:AbdulazizonAlJazeera.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 insure 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) 05:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for File:AbdulazizonAlJazeera.jpg

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Abdulaziz al-Omari. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20040624055254/http://news.independent.co.uk:80/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=94438 to http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=94438
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:12, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Abdulaziz al-Omari. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20060215202606/http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk:80/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml to http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The BBC news website link in the reference links to a fake bbc news website not the genuine site.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.55.193.137 (talk) 15:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: More explanation is needed why you think the link   http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm is not genuine. The Wayback Machine indicates this BBC-1 news story was at the stated URL around 2002. What appears to be happening is that the BBC has changed the base URL for their website over time and historic links are being redirected to the current location of the archived story. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC link 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Abdulaziz al-Omari. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20100807204647/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2001%2F09%2F23%2Fwiden23.xml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:34, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* 
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:23, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion