Keep in mind that 9/11 was an inside job, not a Saudi job. Keep in mind too that the Carlysle Group (and the Bushes) were great friends of the bin Ladens, the U.S. allowed them all to fly home after 9/11 (the only plane allowed to leave the U.S.), and that Osama bin Laden (aka “Tim Osman”) was a CIA asset, visited by the local CIA chief in a Dubai hospital in July 2001 though wanted for the Kenyan embassy bombing, and treated in a Rawalpindi hospital for kidney problems on Sept. 10, 2001, etc., etc.
Also keep in mind that the Saudi Foreign Minister approached George Bush after 9/11 and established with him that four of the “hijackers” were still alive and had nothing to do with 9/11. (see Footnote 1.) Bush accepted this explanation but nothing more was ever said about it.
So now Lloyds of London goes offside by suing Saudi Arabia for 9/11. Ouch! But not to worry. Within days, Lloyds saw the light and withdrew their case. Yay! How fortunate. How much might have come out if they had not reconsidered their “unwise” course of action. I wonder what was said to bring about such a quick settlement of issues? Did heads roll?
Read all about it. Well, as much as the mainstream media are probably going to reveal.
Lloyd’s insurer sues Saudi Arabia for ‘funding 9/11 attacks’
By Cahal Milmo, Chief Reporter, The Independent, Sept. 19, 2011
A Lloyd’s insurance syndicate has begun a landmark legal case against Saudi Arabia, accusing the kingdom of indirectly funding al-Qa’ida and demanding the repayment of £136m it paid out to victims of the 9/11 attacks.
The Brighton-based Lloyd’s 3500 syndicate, which paid $215m compensation to companies and individuals involved, alleges that the oil-rich Middle Eastern superpower bears primary responsibility for the atrocity because al-Qa’ida was supported by banks and charities acting as “agents and alter egos” for the Saudi state.
The detailed case, which names a number of prominent Saudi charities and banks as well as a leading member of the al-Saud royal family, will cause embarrassment to the Saudi government, which has long denied claims that Osama bin Laden’s organisation received official financial and practical support from his native country.
Outlined in a 156-page document filed in western Pennsylvania, where United Airlines flight 93 crashed on 9/11, the claim suggests that the nine defendants “knowingly” provided resources, including funding, to al-Qa’ida in the years before the attack and encouraged anti-Western sentiment which increased support for the terror group.
The legal claim states: “Absent the sponsorship of al-Qa’ida’s material sponsors and supporters, including the defendants named therein, al-Qa’ida would not have possessed the capacity to conceive, plan and execute the 11 September attacks. The success of al-Qa’ida’s agenda, including the 11 September attacks themselves, has been made possible by the lavish sponsorship al-Qa’ida has received from its material sponsors and supporters over more than a decade leading up to 11 September 2001.”
The Lloyd’s syndicate is known as a “run-off”, meaning that it does not accept new premiums on the Lloyd’s of London insurance market and instead deals with historic claims. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, its members settled a raft of multimillion-pound claims from affected businesses, including airlines, airports and security companies, as well as injured individuals and relatives of those killed.
Its complaint, which quotes heavily from US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks detailing investigations by the US authorities into al-Qa’ida, attempts to establish funding links between some Saudi charities, and the terror group, and implicate the Saudi government in that funding through its support of the charities.
The case singles out the activities of a charity, the Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Chechnya (SJRC), which was alleged by UN officials to have been used as a cover by several al-Qa’ida operatives, including two men who acted as directors of the charity. It is alleged that at the time the SJRC was under the control of Prince Naif bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, half-brother of King Abdullah and the long-standing Saudi Interior minister. The claim states: “Between 1998 and 2000, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, through the SJRC, diverted more than $74m to al-Qa’ida members and loyalists affiliated with SJRC bureaus. Throughout this time, the Committee was under the supervision and control of Saudi Interior Minister Prince Naif bin Abdul Aziz.”
The Saudi embassies in London and Washington did not respond to requests from The Independent for a response to the allegations in the claim. The 9/11 Commission, America’s official report on the attacks, found that there was no evidence that the Saudi government or senior Saudi officials individually funded al-Qa’ida.
Diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks showed that American officials remained concerned that the Saudi authorities were not doing enough to stop money being passed to the terror group by Saudi citizens.
Lloyd’s withdraws 9/11 legal case
The Independent, Sept. 22, 2011
A Lloyd’s insurance syndicate has withdrawn a lawsuit which alleged that Saudi Arabia had indirectly funded al-Qa’ida prior to the 9/11 attacks through Saudi banks and charities. Lawyers in the US acting on behalf of the Brighton-based Lloyd’s 3500 syndicate had lodged a claim for $215m (£136m) paid out to victims of the attacks.
The syndicate withdrew the case “without prejudice”. Stephen Cozen, the lawyer bringing the case, said the case could be refiled. Saudi Arabia has always denied any role in funding of al-Qa’ida.
(1) Saeed Al-Ghamdi, Mohand Al-Shehri, Abdul Aziz Al-Omari and Salem Al-Hazmi “are not dead and had nothing to do with the heinous terror attacks in New York and Washington,” the Saudi Arabian embassy told the Orlando Sentinel.
Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal told the Arabic Press after meeting with President George W. Bush on Sept. 20th [that] “it was proved that five of the names included in the FBI list had nothing to do with what happened.” (“Alleged Hijackers Alive and Well,” 9/11 Research, downloaded from http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/planes/evidence/worldmessenger_alive.html, 6 August 2007.)