Estate of John P. O'Neill v. Iraq, et al (9-11 Iraq link)

[WheresWaldo]

a suit filed in court against Iraq by John O'Neil's family against Iraq. Has a lot of compelling information linking Saddam's Iraq and al-Qaeda and hence 9-11.


John P. O'Neill, Sr. was a former top FBI counter-terrorism official who had become director of security for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey shortly before September 11, 2001.

long document (70 pages) but worth skimming. Interested in responses to the evidence provided in the suit.

http://cryptome.org/oneill-v-iraq.htm

[meegbear]

1. something smells here ...

People familiar with John's involvment know that Iraq didn't have anything to do with it. Why would his family do this? This doesn't sound right.

[soleft]

2. wtf?

Can't believe such a document would contain this mistake?

"John Patrick O’Neill Sr. was in his office in the North Tower at the time the first plane hit the South Tower. "

[kcwayne]

3. A quick skim

The complaint is thin or non-existent on evidence, and is reiterating claims made by the government.

So if you believe Bush's case for tying Al Queda and Saddam, then you will believe what this complaint says. But if you think that Bush has been lying (actually you should know that Bush is lying), I think you cannot accept the claims made in the document in absence of proof.
Proof goes beyond claims made by a lawyer in a civil suit. This document takes as fact hearsay about Iraqi and Al Queda connections made (supposedly) by the CIA. The CIA's track record in getting these things right should cause one to be circumspect.

But I take the majority of the structuring of this complaint as an attempt by the lawyers to go for the money. Saddam has lots of it and it is in visible places. Who knows where Al Queda's money is?

If there is proof in this document, highlight it, it wasn't obvious from my quick read.

[WheresWaldo]

4. I dont accept or reject claims made

I stated that there was "compelling information" in the document. I certainly have my doubts about the Iraq 9-11 link. I was just surprised that this was filed by relatives of John O'Neil and thought it worth posting here for others interested in this and similar issues.

[Career Prole]

5. Ain't the first time someone's lied to make a buck. EOM

[FloridaPat]

6. Yes, something is weird. Reagan and Bush are just as

guilty, but they're not named. And if word is correct that Bush stopped investigations of Saudi Arabia, then why are only non-governmental people on the list. In fact, it excludes government people. And except for the hijackers, no one else from Saudi Arabia is on the list that I can tell. I do appologize for not knowing every single probably terrorists names forwards and backwards. Right

[damnraddem]

7. And don't forget: the Saudis have a lot of money, too.

Why didn't the suit go after deep pockets in Saudi Arabia?

[Devils Advocate NZ]

8. I've got the answer to your questions right here:

Think about it - They are suing Iraq based on the claims that Bush made. If the lawsuit fails due to lack of evidence, what do you think that does to Bush's case?

What is the bet that they will win? In other words, this is easy money.

[Abe Linkman]

9. As the late Roy Cohn once said:

"I don't care what the law is, just tell me who the damn judge is."

If the judge is a fair-minded, impartial arbiter, s/he will dismiss the suit on grounds of insufficient evidence. So, the case will never get to a jury, even if it isn't thrown out at an earlier hearing.

[Robb]

10. Similar case?

Wasn't a similar suit recently thrown out?

(edited to add)

Apparently not; interestingly this suit names freakin' everyone. Including "ZACARIAS MOUSSAUI", "THE TALIBAN", and "AL-JAEZEERA NEWS AGENCY".... :eyes:

[Robb]

11. Also,

Also, this moronic footnote:

"In April 2003, U.S. Armed forces overthrew the regime of Saddam Hussein. Any successor government of Iraq remains liable for the state-sponsored acts of terrorism of its predecessor government."

Now the lawyers are setting international policy. Don't they know that's the bankers' job? :)