D.C. Federal Court Orders Saudi Holdings in U.S. Frozen in Civil Case

American companies sue to seize Saudi Royal Family's Holdings in the U.S.; British Court hears Prince's terrorist threats against Blair

A federal court in Washington, D.C. has ordered U.S. holdings of Prince Bandar, a leading member of the Saudi Royal family, frozen in a case brought by U.S. companies affected in a major British bribery and terrorism case. That ruling has received little attention in major U.S. media. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/engineering/article3340854.ece



***

At the time of the 9/11 attacks, Prince Bandar was Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. New evidence of Bandar's role in that attack has been disclosed in a parallel federal court case. Filings in that case, pending in New York, detail the actions of top Saudi leaders in the network that supported terrorist attacks on Americans.

Under pressure from the Bush Administration, the 9/11 Commission omitted 28 pages of evidence implicating leading Saudis in support of jhadist groups who attacked the U.S. Many of these facts, not previously disclosed, are contained in a recently-released filing by a group of large US insurance companies suing Prince Bandar and other members of the Saudi Royal family for losses these companies sustained after the 9/11 attacks.

The revised complaint is more than one hundred pages long, and provides a very comprehensive picture of the role allegedly played by the Saudi royal family in supporting and assisting al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attack cells before and after their arrival in the U.S.

(The complaint, linked below, is The Motherload of information about the Saudi role in 9/11. It will knock your socks off).

See,

http://www.september11terrorlitigation.com/pdf/Federal_Insurance_Company_First_Amended_Complaint.pdf


Very few Americans have read the Complaint in the 9/11 Insurance case. The case, itself, has received practically no major U.S. media coverage since it was first filed five years ago. The document, prepared by professional legal investigators, is the 9/11 Commission Report that should have been released in 2004, but wasn't.

British Court Hears Evidence of Threats by Prince Bandar of Further Terrorist Attacks

Meanwhile, a parallel court case is proceeding in London. Prince Bandar is accused there of threatening then Prime Minister Blair with further terrorist attacks following the 07/07/2005 London transit bombings if a long-simmering bribery case against him and fellow Saudi princes was not quashed. The following article in the Guardian also references an important development in the US case against Prince Bandar. See, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/15/bae.armstrade



***

If only half of the specific information in the complaint, and testimony given before the British judge, is accepted as true and relevant by the courts, these may prove by far the most damning court cases in history.

No accident, surely, that the allegations about Prince Bandar's threats against Blair are coming out now, as major U.S. corporations move to seize Saudi assets. BAE, a UK-based defense contractor has in recent years become one of the largest Pentagon and CIA contractors, is in the middle of the massive Saudi "Yamamah" slush fund and bribery scandal. Features of the BAE Yamamah Saudi bribery scandal has already appeared as a little-noticed part of the Duke Cunningham case, and reaches right into the Bush White House. See, http://journals.democraticunderground.com/leveymg/308

***

Note: Most of the detailed material about the Saudi Royal support for terrorim is in the latter half of the U.S. court filing, linked above. The short sections at the end dealing with Iran, Iraq and Syria as co-defendants in the 9/11 suit are much less detailed and convincing. This material seems to be a rehash of the rather thin evidence offered in the suit a few years ago, most of which has been thoroughly refuted. These added defendants seem to have been thrown in there as an afterthought in an otherwise solid, convincing case against leading members of the Saudi Royal Family as knowing, sustained supporters of al-Qaeda.

Finally, there are some key defendants in this case that go unnamed, despite their obvious contributing negligence that led to 9/11 - George W. Bush and Condi Rice, CIA Director Tenet and Cofer Black, head of the Central Intelligence Agency Counter-Terrorism Center (CIA/CTC), along with Directors Freeh and Mueller of the FBI and their very top aides at Bureau HQ counter-terrorism.

Very much worth reading, if you really want to know the details of the Saudi role in 9/11. I expect that when this gets into the mass media, it will trigger a major international confrontation with Saudi Arabia. It may also finally lead to the indictment of the former President, Vice President and other ranking officials of the Bush-Cheney Administration.

-American Forum - Saudi Arabian Investment - Saudi Arabia ...In February 2003, total worldwide Saudi investment, including investment in the United States and Europe, was conservatively estimated at U.S. $700 billion. ...
www.saudi-american-forum.org/Newsletters/SAF_Essay_22.htm - 221k - Cached - Similar pages

Footnote Fahrenheit : Saudi Arabia : Saudi investment in the ...Saudi investment in the United States (last updated July 31, 2004) ... Saudi individuals" had invested $500 billion to $700 billion in the U.S. economy. ...
www.footnotetv.com/f911chap3-5.html - 10k - Cached - Similar pages


http://xrdarabia.org/2007/12/22/saudi-sovereign-funds/
Saudi Sovereign Funds
The question of sovereign funds started to become a public policy issue this year. Some see it as a potential threat to particular sectors of national economies, though most see it simply as new investment patterns brought about by globalization and the opening of previous economic barriers. This piece from Financial Times says that the Saudis are about to enter the picture in a big way.

Already, some estimate that private Saudi investment in the US is approaching the $1 trillion mark. Now, with the Kingdom loosening its own regulations about state investment (it had only permitted investment within the KSA), it appears that another trillion dollars will be entering the market. The article notes that this is being done as the Saudis plan for the day the oil runs out, an IRA for the country, in other words.

Saudis plan huge sovereign wealth fund
Henny Sender and David Wighton in New York and Sundeep Tucker in Hong Kong

Saudi Arabia plans to establish a sovereign wealth fund that is expected to dwarf Abu Dhabi’s $900bn and become the largest in the world.

The new fund will be a formidable rival for other government-owned investment funds in the Middle East and Asia, which are playing an increasingly active role in channelling capital to western companies, particularly financial companies hard hit by the US mortgage meltdown.

a matter to continue the protection of secrecy and privilege that has gone on for decades. This country can't afford to protect those who saddled us with Bush2, 9-11, Iraq war and BFEE's wellfunded global terror movements.

and what I mean is that most Dem voters just vote for the Dems they think they know, who represent them locally. They don't normally think in terms of "Open Government" Dems or "Closed Government" Dems.

I'm not aware of any Democratic Party authority that gives a seal of approval so-to-speak, for the kind of Dem you describe as being the one to vote for.

I've seen a few subtle pronouncements from Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), but nothing as clear as we need for getting the word out so Dems can vote for the right Open Government candidates.

So... any suggestions here?

For instance, many Dems have no clue that the ONLY reason we even were able to learn of the Aug6 PDA is because Kerry kept taking Bush1 to court to force the release of documents he had refused to turn over. On some matters Kerry lost but on others he won including the oversight on those PDAs.

If we had more lawmakers like that and fewer who side with protecting secrecy and privilege, we could reverse the course of this nation.

Secrecy and privilege Democrats - Lee Hamilton, John Breaux, Bill Clinton are three of the worst....

Dems just need to step back and SEE....
http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

easier if you can create and control your own "enemies". You can manipulate them to carry out convenient attacks which you can then blame on strategic rivals or use for fearmongering.

Thanks Mark.

It's talking about conspiracies and coverups and stuff!

:tinfoilhat:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2935727

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2936623&mesg_id=2936623


Could it be that there is an awakening beginning here at DU? Coverups? Conspiracies? Government complicity?

:kick:'d

it is really Saudi Royal-Fascism and the Bush administration is laughing about it all the way to the bank!

;-)

Unfortunately. The honest Dems get the scorn while the dishonest ones gain power.

Dubai Islamic Bank, weren't they the financiers of the deal to buy our ports and bushitler was ok with dat?

As is the Bin Mafouz family's National Commercial Bank, and they bought out Dubya's oil company.

Banks and bankers are all a-okay in Bush's book.

looks more and more suspect

Finally its the SAUDIS
and who is getting rich off 103 dollars a barrell

perhaps they had more to fear from Saddam than we did

for most Americans to comprehend (read..WANT to believe).

But it is the most important story going right now and I kick and recommend if wholeheartedly.

Leveymg, you've done an outstanding job and I have a lot of respect for your work.

:kick:

BHN

BHN