RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Excerpt: "The complaint, filed in US court, states that without official Saudi sponsorship, 'al-Qaida would not have possessed the capacity to conceive, plan and execute the Sept. 11 attacks.' In other words, absent Saudi support, the Twin Towers would still be standing - along with nearly 3,000 Americans."

From left: King Abdullah, Prince Naif bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, Osama bin Laden, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki. (photo: Vanity Fair)
From left: King Abdullah, Prince Naif bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, Osama bin Laden, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki. (photo: Vanity Fair)

FOCUS: Lloyd's Sues Saudi Arabia for 'Funding 9/11 Attacks'

By Investor's Business Daily

22 September 11


ustice: A new 9/11 lawsuit portrays the Saudi government as having more control over al-Qaida charities before the attacks than it (or the US) has admitted. Let's hear the truth.

Lloyds of London seeks $215 million in damages from the kingdom to recover claims it paid 9/11 victims and their families. The suit charges that the Saudi government funded al-Qaida through its banks and charities.

The complaint, filed in US court, states that without official Saudi sponsorship, "al-Qaida would not have possessed the capacity to conceive, plan and execute the Sept. 11 attacks." In other words, absent Saudi support, the Twin Towers would still be standing - along with nearly 3,000 Americans.

We're impressed by the documentation cited in the 156-page complaint by Cozen O'Conner, a major Washington law firm. It's much more detailed than the lawsuit brought on behalf of 9/11 families, which a federal judge dismissed for lack of evidence. This one might have a shot. It points to new intelligence, including recently leaked diplomatic cables.

Among the findings:

  • Senior Saudi officials and Saudi royal family members - including Saudi Interior Minister Prince Naif - either served as executives of suspect charities or sat on their boards while the charities were used to launder money to al-Qaida; and they knew of the activities.

  • The Saudi charities themselves often provided not only money but employment cover, ID badges and logistical support to al-Qaida operatives.

  • For example, the Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya (SJRC) allegedly was used as a cover by several al-Qaida operatives, including two men acting as directors of the charity.

  • Between 1998 and 2000, SJRC allegedly diverted more than $74 million to al-Qaida members and loyalists affiliated with its bureaus.

  • At the time the SJRC was under the control of Saudi Prince Naif, who after 9/11 denied that Saudis were among the hijackers and hinted that Jews carried out the attacks.

  • Each of the dozen branches of the Saudi-based International Islamic Relief Organization, one of the charities Osama bin Laden used to finance his terror camps, is overseen by a Saudi royal; and a Philippines office was founded by bin Laden's brother-in-law.

  • The Saudi royal family used its national bank to channel funds to bin Laden, and the family's longtime banker, Khalid bin Mahfouz, allegedly "is also a primary financier of al-Qaida."

  • "Bin Mahfouz has acknowledged making a $270,000 contribution to bin Laden contemporaneous with the establishment of al-Qaida," the claim says. And it alleges that he and his "handpicked" bank partner, Yassin al-Kadi, now a wanted terrorist, "necessarily were aware of the terrorist activities."

As interior minister, Naif placed employees inside the Saudi embassy as well as consulates throughout the US before 9/11. Some Los Angeles consulate officials and a San Diego-based Saudi intelligence agent have been linked to the hijackers and other terrorists.

In addition, computer hard drives seized in a post-9/11 raid of the offices of the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a suspected al-Qaida front, included: materials for forging US State Department ID badges; files on pesticides and crop-duster aircraft; photos of the bombed US embassies in East Africa and the bombed USS Cole; and before and after photos of the World Trade Center.

Of course, Saudi officials have repeatedly denied any ties to 9/11 or al-Qaida. But the plaintiffs in this case have assembled in one place the most extensive record yet of Saudi government involvement.

The federal judge hearing the case should not be quick to dismiss it, no matter how many Saudi-bought lawyers and lobbyists argue otherwise. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+96 # fredboy 2011-09-22 16:34
Finally! We've been waiting a decade for someone to have the balls to seek recompense from the Saudis. Amazed how Bush and company repeatedly kissed their asses after their people attacked our nation and killed 3,000 souls here. Let's hope the federal judiciary reviews the claim objectively.
+33 # RLF 2011-09-23 05:24
Leave it to the Brits to have some balls...US has lost theirs to Jesus.
+10 # TGMisanthrope 2011-09-23 21:04
"Amazed how Bush and company repeatedly kissed their asses after their people attacked our nation and killed 3,000 souls here."

Why are you amazed, fredboy? The Bush clan and the House of Saud have strong ties based on over 30 years of business dealings. W. might not be the brightest bulb in the fixture but he surely knows enough to avoid biting the hand that feeds him and his (and if he doesn't then Daddy will certainly keep him in line).
-18 # William Bjornson 2011-09-23 21:06
As you may have already discovered, this is crap propaganda. Why the literally incendiary picture at the top? There is a hidden agenda in this entire page. Marc?
+82 # lindyb 2011-09-22 16:38
If we were going to attack another country, we should have at least picked the right one.
+9 # Activista 2011-09-22 22:52
Why you would attack Saudi Arabia?
Because AIPAC told you so?
Compared to killed by US militarism - 911 anti-Arab propaganda - 3000 is like 1%.
+24 # madams12 2011-09-22 16:41
Not sure I understand the reason for this article as INSURANCE JOURNAL published a couple of days ago that Lloyds has WITHDRAWN this suit.. I also have questions about the lawyer who filed the suit and what his motivations are...other than money, of course. (Steven Cozens attorney).
that article online:

Lloyd’s Syndicate Withdraws 9/11 Lawsuit Against Saudi Arabia
Lloyd’s London’s Syndicate 3500 filed a notice on Monday, Sept. 19, to voluntarily dismiss its federal lawsuit against Saudi Arabia over 9/11 claims.
+21 # John Talbutt 2011-09-22 21:01
Under the table settlement?
+14 # NanFan 2011-09-23 04:22
Quoting John Talbutt:
Under the table settlement?

Duh! Ya think?

Scum with money, and no one will get them or Bush/Cheney. Many have been trying for 10 years!

+15 # psadave 2011-09-22 16:42
I wonder if GW Bush ever got to hold hands with Prince Naif? Or only the king. It certainly was helpful!
+15 # madams12 2011-09-22 16:55
what happened to the WITHDRAWAL as reported earlier this week by INSURANCE JOURNAL?? Lloyds had withdrawn this alleged suit.
+45 # cycleman60 2011-09-22 17:07
Bush, Chaney and the whole gang of war mongers, including weapon manufacturers were very much aware of Saudis financing the al-qaida. Remember, Bush made certain all family members (ove3r 24) were flown out of the U.S. within 24 hours after the attack so that family members would not be targeted. The Saudi family continued to show 'clean hands' but the dirt is all over their faces.
+11 # KittatinyHawk 2011-09-22 21:02
I am glad someone remembers. It is funny last week everyone wanted Bush and Cheney to own up..Here we are glad to see Saudis charged. Whose next?
See why this Country has the problems it does...texting is all people know how to do
+40 # cycleman60 2011-09-22 17:28
Bush's gang of White House nuts were very much aware of Saudis al-qaida financing but chose to keep iut under wraps to protect special interest (oil). Within 24 hours after the towers came downh Bush gave the order to fly, over 24 Saudi family members attending schools, out of U.S. CIA and FBI was annoyed that these members could not be questioned about the attack. The priority was to protect special interest such as the weapons producers. Remember, Chaney was part of this combine and receiving profits from Enron for his part in negotiating partnership with U.S. government in suppying war materials.
+28 # DurangoKid 2011-09-22 17:57
This is one suit that will never be allowed to go forward. No telling what 'discovery' might discover.
+21 # Billy Bob 2011-09-22 18:13
When you go after bush jr.'s boss you'd better be well insured as well.

Do any of you remember the movie, "Network"? It was supposed to be a political farce.
+33 # X Dane 2011-09-22 18:20
Prince Bandar had a grand old time in Washington as Ambassador. He was playboy,
and the way he and other Sauidi royals was living it up was incredible. Trough Garret Air reserch Terminal my catering company was hired to deliver food to their private planes. Tons of expensive food.....and lots of alcohol...which they are certainly not supposed to drink.

After 9-11 Prince Bandar suddenly had to go home??? I wonder why.
+37 # nancyw 2011-09-22 18:33
"...- along with nearly 3,000 Americans." What of the many innocents that we've slaughtered in Iraq, Afghanistan and with the daily bombings in Iran? What about all the arms we've sold around the world that continue to kill women, children and men? We owe much more.
+28 # reiverpacific 2011-09-22 19:13
Quoting nancyw:
"...- along with nearly 3,000 Americans." What of the many innocents that we've slaughtered in Iraq, Afghanistan and with the daily bombings in Iran? What about all the arms we've sold around the world that continue to kill women, children and men? We owe much more.

Here-here with knobs on!
And don't forget that sneaky roundup of the Saudi select and the flight under the radar from Bluegrass Field in Lexington KY, while the rest of the country was "Grounded"!
If there are no Bush dynasty and K.B.R./Haliburt on/Cheyney fingers in this pie, then I'm a blackbird.
I mean, when exactly did the planning of the biggest US Embassy (The "Green Zone" in central Baghdad) in the world begin -and all the stuff that precedes and follows the planning; -conceptual, preliminary, final, design, contractor bidding (OK -this was a no-bid; even more nepotism) construction and security for all this? Hell it can be seen from space!
Just another aspect to stitch or patch into the tapestry of deceit and collusion which crossed borders but respected none, in this "sorry tale of sorry deeds" to relate!
+33 # Vardette 2011-09-22 18:35
I am happy to see that there is some accountability where there has none. I'm sure Bush and company knew about this since they were so close to the Saudis. What would the Saudis alone have to gain from 911? But Bush and his gang have made tens of billions at our expense. This event gave the military industrial complex and corporations like Boeing and arms manufacturers an enormous opportunity. So they conveniently attacked the wrong nation as they lied to us about the threat and now we are subjected to unheard of civil rights abuses becasue of this and endless war. So any accountability is welcomed but also implies that the Bush gang might have been part of facilitating this awful event. Why was so much of thte 911 report censored?
+26 # Dion Giles 2011-09-22 19:00
Saudi involvement in the WTC murders is plausible, but it would be much easier for elements within official America to co-ordinate the attacks and the motivation much more compelling. The Reichstag fire over again, right down to the victimisation of patsies, the suppression of inquiry (less brutal than in Germany but very effective), the burial of evidence and the immediate ready-and-waiti ng exploitation of the event.
+8 # hmisbell 2011-09-22 19:02
According to a news item in Business Insurance 21 Sept 2011, Plaintiff's attorney withdrew the action (without prejudice) noting that it could be refiled later. No explanation given.
-15 # readerz 2011-09-22 19:09
One problem: I clicked on a few red "thumbs down" buttons, and it came up as a plus. So, look at the low numbers on some comments, and think: these may include some people who tried to click on the "thumbs down" button.
+18 # Lloyd Wagner 2011-09-22 21:47
Or, it could easily be that you're voting on a hot topic, and while you were voting a thumbs-down, two other people voted a thumbs-up.
Many times I've voted a thumbs-up and the number has jumped 2 or even 3, on a hot topic.
Or, alternatively, you could vote, and the number could conceivably stay the same.
None of that necessarily means your vote hasn't been counted.
+26 # purple haze 2011-09-22 19:44
Why do you think Bush waged war against Iraq ? It wasn't over "weapons of mass destruction". It was to cover up the real enemies of this country, THE SAUDI GOVERNMENT. Bush, Chaney, their oil rich, war profiteering friends, were all in on this. Protecting their profits at any cost including those who died in the 911 holocaust, and all our young men and women who died in Iraq, and continue to die now. It's criminal. When will it stop?
+20 # Smiley 2011-09-22 19:58
I know it may sound picky, but I do think it is important to note that there were almost 2,000 Americans killed in the twin towers on 911 and 1,000 foreign nationals.
+7 # Activista 2011-09-22 23:14
and zero children. Compare this to US bombing in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya - million killed? 911 is like 0.001% - please check my math.
+13 # Erdajean 2011-09-22 20:18
If indeed this suit has been withdrawn, then somebody please tell us why -- and under the coercion of WHOM? We can only guess! Whose bloody fingerprints might be all over it? Just think!

I do wish that Lloyd's could have filed somewhere thousands of miles away from BushieWorld, where Truth has been under attack since the first plane (or WHATEVER it was) hit the WTC. If this suit has been assassinated, PLEASE, friends, try and try again!
+11 # Erdajean 2011-09-22 20:23
Come to think of it, maybe Lloyd's will get around to suing Little George and Dickie -- think what depositions THOSE could be!
+9 # NanFan 2011-09-23 04:37
Quoting Erdajean:
Come to think of it, maybe Lloyd's will get around to suing Little George and Dickie -- think what depositions THOSE could be!

Are you kidding me? Their lawyers paid off Lloyd's to deflect them for good.

We can only hope that countries drowning in the debt and hubris of the Bush/Cheney American government choices will eventually get the International Court to bring them up on war crimes, crimes against humanity and the planet.

The revolution against Wall Street is small and just the beginning of people mad because they've been ripped off.

Wait till Greece defaults and Italy goes down and Spain struggles to keep their head above war. Wait till the Euro Zone fights back against the greed and sanctimonious, careless American government.

I hope I'm still alive to see it. And I'm not that young...could miss it if anyone ever does get the cajones to go after them.

+9 # KittatinyHawk 2011-09-22 20:59
So now we plan to blame the Saudis, who after that? Never ends.
We do not own up for our own plots and no one makes us.
+11 # troimille 2011-09-22 21:34
It's really beside the point whether anyone contributed to "al Qaeda" in 2001 since, at that time, the term referred to ALL of the Islamic groups that the CIA was watching -- whether peaceful of violently oriented, and they had little connection to each other. So "Meals on Wheels for Arabic shut-ins" would have still been "al Qaeda"!
+10 # rdbooth 2011-09-22 22:04
Purple haze is right. Every one of those Saudi Arabs in the pic are personal friends and school mates of the Bush and Cheneys. Not just GW but Bush Sr. This is fact, public knowledge and not mere speculation or theory. Further I don't for one minute believe that Osama was killed. Why? Who actually saw a body? Nobody but a very few inner circle type Bush/Cheney lackies! Further, the owners were involved in the 911 attack as were high ranking members of the US military. The mouthpiece for the owners admitted, during a press conference that demolition crews working for the co. had placed charges in specific locations within the buildings prior to the attacks and analysis of the support beams showed traces of a form of explosive that only One org. on this planet has access to, the US Military! The experts who identified that compound, among the worlds foremost engineers, were subsequently discredited professionally as were the engineers who reported on the explosives used in the Murrah building here in OKC. All those beams, if you all remember, were shipped out of country so fast that God barely saw it.
+10 # Jim 2011-09-22 23:06
And who will sue the USA for the death and destruction it has wreaked in Iraq, Afghanistan and countless other places? I suggest the Palestinians sue for complicity in Israeli atrocities. It's a fine can of worms.
+1 # Activista 2011-09-22 23:09
and for the "conspiracy"
and the "Lloyd's (MONEY, MONEY..) Sues Saudi Arabia for 'Funding 9/11 Attacks'" is pathetic. They should focus on NATO criminals bombing Libya - right there - from LONDON - killing thousands - including children.
+3 # ItsAboutTime 2011-09-22 23:33
The WITHRAWAL of the suit IS part of the STORY. Attorney Stephen Cozen of law firm Cozen O’Connor, who represents Lloyd’s, is quoted by Insurance Journal as saying, "We were INSTRUCTED TO voluntarily dismiss without prejudice ...".
+11 # Aaron Tovish 2011-09-23 02:26
Lloyds is not interested in blowing open the 9-11 issue, they are trying to recover a 215 million dollar loss. If the case has been withdrawn, the most likely situation is that an 'amicable' settlement was reached. 100 million is chump-change for the Saudi ruling family. But they do need to worry about other insurance companies lining up for their 'share' as this will not go unnoticed by other 'ambitious' lawyers. They may have hoped that all this would go unnoticed. Thank you rsn for making sure that is not the case.
+3 # William Bjornson 2011-09-23 21:02
Whatever Lloyds, or a faction of Lloyds, may have done here in purpose, they have published an accusation based on completely unconfirmable heresay and then "withdrawn" the accusation almost immediately. If it were a propaganda move, it is well designed, an excellent red herring.

Lloyds is many things. What do we know of the actual accusers? Who were the Members (Names) who paid 9/11 families? If we identify these people and corporations, would we note any commonality among them? Or do we just buy the Lloyds name and trust anything that comes out of it? Who are the accusers? Did they recently record a large profit? If not, why the expense of a frivolous suit? This author might have dug a bit deeper, or what he presented, days late, is exactly what he was paid to produce. Camel shit.
+3 # William Bjornson 2011-09-23 21:03
To someone above wondering about ghwbush, see: "The Bush Family: Family of Secrets" by Russ (not Russel) Baker an investigative reporter. Not recommended for those on heart medications...

And would someone please give the definitive story on whether the FBI listed either ObL or alQ as 'wanted' for 9/11? They were listed for the equally mysterious Africa embassy bombings years earlier only, is my perception. In both cases, alQ strongly denied having any involvement. Look. And you will find this to be true. You must look for the small inconsistencies and follow those. The larger ones are all covered with layers of ambiguation and misdirection. Or, I'm simply mistaken.
+2 # hkatzman 2011-09-23 03:07
please checkout the actual complaint ...
+6 # Richard Bluhm 2011-09-23 06:43
There has been smoking gun after smoking gun over the past ten years. "Time is the greatest enemy of truth." Controlled demolition brought all three WTC buildings down. Two planes hit and three buildings fell. The litany of proofs is preponderant. If the corporate state can play smoke and mirrors with Pearl Harbor for seventy years, they can certainly dupe a contemporary crowd. Check out the 1960s studies of obedience and learned helplessness by Stanley Milgram and Martin Seligman respectively. It was an effort to analyze the average German's compliance with the Nazi atrocities.
-9 # tclose 2011-09-23 07:59
No - conspiracy theories are the greatest enemy of the truth. Get a life.
+8 # Anarchist 23 2011-09-23 12:13
If conspiracy theories are the greatest enemy of truth, the 'Official History' is the greatest conspiracy theory of all time and the greatest enemy of truth! Jet grade kerosene can't melt 100,000 tons of steel nor cna it 'detonate'/expl ode hundreds of tons of concrete and office furniture, pulverizing it into dust. The Saudis finance was to the patsy organization. 'Al Queda is a 'legend'-it exists after a fashion but was wholly created by CIA in 80s as counter-weight to Soviets in Afghanistan and never could it have done what is was described as doing. Besides the sudden collapses of three steel framed buildings at free fall speed, there is NO evidence of a real plane crashing into the Pentagon-the evidence points to a cruise missile. And where was NORAD? What happened to all the testimony about bombs and explosives in the buildings? (!! was a 'shock and awe' exercise which did what is was supposed to do-hoodwink the American sheeple to allow the Constitution destroying Patriot Acts and all the rest. Are you really freer than you were before 911? More secure in your life?If you are, I have a bridge you might be interested in!
+6 # hjsteed 2011-09-23 18:14
I wonder why more connections to the Bush family and war profiteering haven't been drawn?

Could it be that there is still fear of more assassinations and renditions and torture?

Isn't it strange that Bush Senior was in charge of the CIA in Dallas when President Kennedy was assassinated leading to the Vietnam War - and Bush Jr's brother, Marvin, was in charge of security at the World Trade Center before and during 911 leading to a 10 year war on "terrorism" in the Middle East and Africa - and now we are seeing connections with Dorothy Bush marrying into the Koch family leading to further pollution of our planet and God knows what else?

And our country allows the execution of a black man when there was sufficient doubt that he was guilty?

I wonder what Lady Justice can do clear up this terrible nightmare...

Love to all...
-3 # artful 2011-09-23 10:06
Yeah, with friends like these, who needs enemies? Between the Saudi's and the Pak's with their ISI,we need to seriously reconsider allying ourselves with these 12th century cretins.
+1 # TJclyde 2011-09-23 12:17
+3 # Archie1954 2011-09-24 12:23
I understand that this lawsuit has been summarily withdrawn. I would very much like to know the reason why. Who got to Lloyds and told them to back off. I'll bet it was the US government!

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.