A New York judge has awarded nearly $104m in damages to the families of two victims of the 11 September terror attacks. Judge Harold Baer ruled on the basis that the families had been able to show a tenuous link between Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda network and Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq. The compensation awarded to the families of businessmen George Smith and Timothy Soulas may be taken from Iraqi assets frozen in the US. Although the US Government suspects Iraq supported the attacks, it has not been able to prove a connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda. Judge Baer said in his ruling: "I conclude that plaintiffs have shown, albeit barely, by evidence satisfactory to the court, that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and al-Qaeda." The evidence was based on a statement by Secretary of State Colin Powell to the UN Security Council on 5 February. The judge also cited claims by former CIA director James Woolsey that the apparent leader of the 11 September hijackers, Mohamed Atta, met an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague in April 2001. There was also evidence from Laurie Mylorie, an expert on Iraq and terrorism. "Although these experts provided few actual facts of any material support that Iraq actually provided, their opinions... provide a sufficient basis for a reasonable jury to draw inferences which could lead to the conclusion that Iraq provided material support to al-Qaeda," the judge said. The families had named the former Taleban regime in Afghanistan, the al-Qaeda network, Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and the Republic of Iraq as responsible for the attacks. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3009251.stm so the guy harps on how sparse and tenuous the evidence is and yet finds in favor of the families? shouldnt judges have a higher standard? they are the law for chrissakes! is it cos there is money to be had? did the millions in cash found in iraq set off a feeding frenzy? nuts! This is hardly the first incident of collecting money from terrorist states through undefended lawsuits: two Gulf War hostages were awarded $93 million from Iraqi funds, and eight Iranian hostages were awarded $150 million from Iranian funds. http://www.plastic.com/article.html;sid=03/05/08/15235526
Does the money come from Hussein's pocket, or those of Iraqi with business dealings in the US prior to the war, or from legitimate Iraqi government funds (for hospitals, libraries, schools, etc.)???
Sell all of Saddams solid-gold toilets and that should cover it with intrest. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
the us has about $1.2 billion of frozen iraqi funds. due to this "tenuous link", i guess iraqis will have to wait until their oil is sold to rebuild since americans appear to be getting paid first do you remember how girlscouts sold cookies to raise funds for the survivors and their familes? how so much money was collected from citizens that the relief agencies did not know what to do with it (i bet some cash is still left over) then uncle sam paid their asses as well. didnt bush ask children to send their money in? frikkin greedy asses!
Blame the judge. Just one individual doing what seemed like a good idea at the time. Not the administration.
Americans .... Remember that we're talking about Americans here. With Americans, money is justice. There is no justice but money. The disparity of human value, though, is disturbing. A person I'd never met, a high school buddy of a guy who has become one of my best friends, was gunned down by an associate. The shooter was a week shy of his eighteenth birthday, and was tried as a juvenile. Less than three years in the juvenile correction system, and cash restitution of just under $1150.00. If that counts as justice, then a $104m award is way out of line. Oh, wait. A white person killed a white person. I forgot that it's worse if someone kills themselves with cigarettes or if an Arab kills a white person. In truth, it's probably an award based on sentiment. Even judges are human, and prone to stupidity. (Remember the one who let the cop off on a charge of having sex with a fourteen year-old on the grounds that Clinton had an affair? Talk about a grudge ... that happened only last year. Or the judge who sentenced a guy to cut his ponytail? Incidentally, the ponytail had nothing to do with the "crime" of defending himself after someone stepped out from behind the bushes in front of his house and grabbed him. And no, he didn't kill the guy. Broke his nose and glasses. Turned out it was a "friend" of his. But yeah ... that's a judge for you.) Remember that in issues where people are hurt by popular infamy, judges give the government much room for error. Potheads in New Jersey getting twenty-five years for carrying his girlfriend's jacket? (She had a 5 mg coedine pill in her pocket, mixed with however many milligrams of acetamenophin plus the weight of filler material and the weight of the prescription bottle bearing her name? Charged with possessing a gram of heroin? Added to the roach in--less than 1g of marijuana--in his pocket equals automatic distribution conviction on conviction for possession. Now add to that an illegally-unsealed Minor in Possession of Alcohol citation from his high school years and he's a repeat offender. Twenty-five years for being the wrong poor f--ker coming out of a Grateful Dead show and being searched without proper cause. Yes, courts hand out these sentences. The same courts that find leniency in other things found no room for leniency in the drug war; "My hands are tied," said many a judge while handing down a ridiculous prison term for possession. It's a matter of sentimental bias, is all.) Watch the judges hand out Ashcroft's "free passes" for circumventing the US Constitution. No longer should we be surprised at the knee-jerk reaction from the courts; mere disgust should suffice. "Live Free or Die" ... when is the massacre coming in New Hampshire? :m:, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
This is completely absurd....are all the Iraqis who've been hurt by saddam's regime gonna be paid similiar amounts? perhaps if they could show that saddams regime came about due to US influence they could be compensated for his crimes by the US taxpayers Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Who defended the iraqi funds at the trial? I bet it wasn't the same caliber lawer as for the families. This thing really get's me sick. To think that these fvckn people are getting filthy rich off the 9-11 victims and the victims of iraq. There is no justice and no god.
oh wait, I'll take that back. Halliburton got nailed! http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1503&ncid=1503&e=14&u=/afp/20030509/ts_afp/us_halliburton_ethics_030509175123
i agree. this is completely absurd. what's the point of this? if iraq played a role, it was a minor one. this is pathetic. ''the law is an arse.''--- Charles Dickens.
They hardly 'got nailed'. The bride was discovered by Halliburton during an internal investigation. They then voluntarily reported it to the SEC.
i agree, better yet every civilan death should have a coriners inquest and every solder who shot\bombed a civilan should be charged with murder ops, they were yanks who did that wernt they God bless stupidity
The 'compensation culture' in the US that is unfortunately taking hold in the UK, is an embarresment to the whole western world. Doctors are giving up medicine because of people trying to 'sue for damages' for anything and everything. Forget Iraq and international politics for a second, America! this 'litigation' culture is making you the laughing stock of the world, and is is only YOU who can do anything to stop it. The UK is not far behind, TV commercials offering a ' no win no pay' contract, it's a disgrace. How the world has changed. In 1966 in Aberfan in South Wales ( then a major coal mining area), a huge mountain of coal waste collapsed in very wet weather and engulfed the local school, over a hundered children died. The National Coal Board was not sued however, why? because the parents were not prepared to make money out of the death's of their children. The money couldn't replace what they had lost, Those who lost relatives in the WTC and sued for damages should read this and 'cringe in shame'.
the premiums here have shot threw the roof too obstitrisions are quiting because they cant get medical insurence
The National Coal Board was not sued however, why? because the parents were not prepared to make money out of the death's of their children. The money couldn't replace what they had lost, (aghart) i am a bit taken aback cos i am so used to a litigious culture and it is hard to imagine otherwise. all you guys will come around tho and follow the usa eventually (unfortunately)
