Difference between revisions of "Salem al-Hazmi still alive?"
Latest revision as of 12:01, 29 June 2012
Soon after the attacks, reports began to appear suggesting that some of the alleged hijackers included on the first FBI list were incorrect. And these reports are still cited today as evidence that they are "still alive", although when you look at the details they're rarely convincing. Here's what the Telegraph wrote about Salem al-Hazmi, for instance.
This man has a different name, al-Hamzi instead of al-Hazmi (although that could be a typo, it's a mixup we've made frequently). He also has a different age, has never been to America, and doesn’t mention the allegations about his brother, Nawaf. Perhaps he doesn’t have a brother of that name?. Not exactly convincing proof that he’s the same person.
A Washington Post article is of little help:
Now we have a full name, and it doesn't match that provided for the hijacker. Whether the Saudis found that "persuasive" or not, it doesn't help the case for them being the same person.
Meanwhile other articles appear to suggest there was a hijacker, another person altogether, who had a brother Nawaf, and has gone missing.
Here the Saudi Information Agency talk about the hijacker as having the correct name, and the right age, with a brother Nawaf, who had left the country “in the past two years”. But what about his family?
The main concern here appears to be the photos, but the odd thing is that the FBI didn’t release their full photo list until a few days after this report. So what is Muhammad Salim Al-Hazmi commenting on? Were some of the images released earlier, and the FBI list on the 27th was just an official release of the complete set? Or did he see images that were obtained by the media, possibly in error, as happened with the case of Said al-Ghamdi?
We don’t know the answer to that, however what’s more relevant to this claim is that both of these reports appeared at more or less the same time. If the first Al-Hamzi is still alive, then why is his father talking as though both his sons are missing? And not pointing out that they (or at least one of them) have never been to the US? The simplest explanation, as previously, is that the two reports refer to different people, and there’s certainly no real proof that the individual alleged to be the hijacker is still alive.
And sure enough, some months later Saudi Arabia finally accepted that the list of hijackers was correct: