9/11: Clueless US Judge doesn’t Know Shiites from al-Qaeda, finds against Iran for $10 Bn.

TeleSur | – –

A U.S. court last week ordered Tehran to pay US$7.5 billion to victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Iran on Monday rejected as “ridiculous” a U.S. court ruling that the Islamic Republic must pay more than US$10 billion in compensation for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

A New York court last week ordered Tehran to pay US$7.5 billion to victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon — and US$3 billion to insurers over related claims — after ruling that Iran had failed to prove it did not help the attackers.

“This judgement is so ridiculous … more than ever before, it damages the credibility of the U.S. judicial system,” state television quoted an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson as saying.

Al-Qaida claimed responsibility for the 2001 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people. The group’s leader at the time of the attacks, Osama Bin Laden, was born in Saudi Arabia but was stripped of his citizenship in 1994. He was killed on May 2, 2011, by U.S. special forces in Pakistan.

In July last year, world powers including the U.S. signed a landmark deal with Iran to lift crippling economic sanctions in exchange for Tehran curbing its nuclear energy program.

Via TeleSur

Related video added by Juan Cole:

RT America: “Judge orders Iran to pay $10.5 billion to 9/11 victims”

Posted in Islam-hatred | 16 Responses | Print |

16 Responses

  1. That judge certainly knew that he was stealing from Iran. I base this upon extensive experience of gross political corruption in the federal judiciary (the state judiciaries are just as bad). The judiciary is uniformly corrupt beyond the dreams of the public, and the mass media are too vulnerable or corrupt to report this. Those who think of judges as Santa Claus make a very childish error, and will learn otherwise when it is too late to do anything about it. The fact that we cannot run the country without an uncorrupted judiciary does not mean that we have one.

    Federal courts routinely deny basic constitutional rights on the basis of corrupt influence, posting vacuous excuses as judgments and completely ignoring the law, the constitution, and their own prior judgments in favor of Repubs. Federal judges spend their careers inventing all-purpose excuses to use when violating the Constitution for political purposes, and they are nominated solely for this purpose by those who benefit.

    Whatever the decision, look carefully at the reasons, because those will be faked up to suit the political bias of the judges, as all federal judgments are. Judges are the most dedicated scoundrels in politics. We must get rid of every one of them, clean out the law schools, and throw out nearly all of their cases, which only enshrine the corruption of big money.

    Elected judges campaign with money from a political party that dictates the outcome of civil cases. State judges invariably rule along party lines, often declaring grossly unconstitutional principles, such as the idea that towns cannot commit civil rights violations because they are not people. See link to counterpunch.org link to counterpunch.org
    and also link to amazon.com link to amazon.com.

  2. ” Iran had failed to prove it did not help the attackers.”

    What happened to Innocent until proven Guilty?

  3. DM

    This is so ridiculous that it isn’t even funny.. These are the ppl who decide who decide someone’s fate, appeals notwithstanding…

  4. Veronika Kozma

    there must more info about this story, can we find links to that?
    I am a bit sceptical about how this presented – RT and Telesur? Certainly there are better sources?
    /jd

  5. I’d have to laugh along with Iran on this.
    Just who is paying this judge to “sit” all day and kind of know nothing of of world events, even those that happen in his own backyard.

  6. I wasn’t aware of any evidence that Iran had been involved in any way in the 9/11 attacks. Oh sure, there has been several neo-con diatribes condemning Iran but there is little evidence to support their accusations. In fact, the 9/11 commission said, “We have found no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack. At the time of their travel through Iran, the al Qaeda operatives themselves were probably not aware of the specific details of their future operation.” So if the President’s own 9/11 commission didn’t find any evidence, it seems to me that the judiciary is punishing the defendant in this case for not being able to prove a negative.

  7. Poor Journalism. Iran failed to defend itself in a US Court proceeding. In American if you don’t show up in court, they issue a summary judgement. Iran could have hired a lawyer and submitted the text of official 9/11 commission report. Victory would have been assured. Instead they chose to ignore the proceeding with a predictable result.

    The Iranians are extremely capable. One can only assume, they thought the propaganda value exceeded 10.5 Billion or they believe the JPOAC agreement overrides this ruling.

    • The 9/11 commission report concluded that several hijackers had been in Iran without having their passports stamped and this was the “proof” that the plaintiffs presented to support their claim against Iran before Judge Daniels.

      The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was cleared by the U.S. District Court despite assertions by conspirator Zacharias Moussawi that the attacks were planned in KSA.

      Bell Helicopter received a 22 million-dollar judgment against Iran a few years ago which was later vacated under the Federal Sovereign Immunities Act.

      A wrongful death judgment was also obtained in a U.S. District Court based upon a terrorist bombing in Israel that killed a U.S. tourist with the theory that Iran openly financed the Palestinian Islamic Jihad group that carried out the attack – the proof being that Iran’s national budget disclosed the funding of that organization. The Plaintiff’s estate did not collect on the judgment and the U.S. State Department opposed collection attempts by the victim’s family despite attempts to seize the former Iranian Embassy property in Washington D.C.

      As a practical matter, the plaintiffs will likely have a long road to travel before they come close to seeing paydirt.

  8. Same judge also managed to somehow find Saudi Arabia not to be responsible according to the video report.

    Years after the Iraq being state sponsors of terror blunder and not knowing the differences between Shia and Sunni, still…

  9. Curtains

    @phbarratt God help USA and all who still believe in the judicial system. No wonder this gets no world coverage-its plain stupid

  10. Yes, poor reporting by TeleSur, not exactly a top-notch news agency.

    Yes, it’s a default judgement, because Iran did not show up to defend the absurd claim. I assume that, rather than waste their time defending every little bullshit claim every wingnut Americans cooks up, they’ll push it to either the US Supreme Court or an international court and be done with it once and for all.

    Here is a better link:
    link to bloomberg.com

  11. This case should never have gotten this far. It’s a Trumpian road to demanding that Mexico should pay for our apartheid wall, or Blacks should pay Whites for being “civilized” by them.

  12. The reports are that this was a default judgment. Iran didn’t defend the case, so the judge felt that judgment was appropriate.

    However, this judge also ruled just last fall that Saudi Arabia cannot be liable for the same claim due to the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The mystery is how the judge concluded that a case against Iran could go forward at all, given the clear precedent of his own decision.

    Once the judge made the ruling in the case against Saudi Arabia, an attorney bringing a identical suit against another sovereign country risks falling into the category of filing a frivolous claim, and being subject to summary dismissal plus sanctions.

Comments are closed.