It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran asked to pay 10.5 billion dollars to 9/11 victims

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: snowspirit

THIS is salient



Makes no sense. That's the first time I've even heard Iran mentioned in anything to do with 9/11. Seems to be a stretch.....are they also suing Saudi, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc?


One wonders after all failed attempts to cast Iran as a bad boy they sink this low.

Very reminiscent of Libya and the Lockerbie Plane bombing - no proof but we'll attack you nation anyway!




posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
According to the info in my prior post, Iran was considered an "accessory to the crime", not that Iran carried it out.

The same judge, according to my last link,


Saudi Arabia was legally cleared from paying billions in damages to families of 9/11 victims last year, after Judge Daniels dismissed claims that the country provided material support to the terrorists and ruled that Riyadh had sovereign immunity.


9-11 victims certainly have not seen justice done. Sad. Monetary compensation is no substitute for denied justice.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: haman10

There is more circumstantial evidence suggesting the US government carried out the attacks on Sept 11th 2001 than there is Iran.

Yet, the US government invaded 2 sovereign nations in 2001 and 2003 then paid out the banksters in 2008.

But yeah - them damn Persians and their shenanigans aye!!!



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: haman10

That is nothing new. The American Judges are F****** crackhead.
edit on 10-3-2016 by mekhanics because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Let me read you some of the backslash I've came upon from Iranian people in the WWW :

1- " Well i foresaw this. I knew this would happen. You show US officials your good side and they interpret it as a sign of weakness. We had this coming when our foreign minister got in a love affair with Secretary Kerry over the phone "

2 - " WTH did just happen? I think this is a prank isn't it? US terrorist allies (saudi and qatar) are doing whatever the hell they wanna do and now they scapegoat our country? Ridiculous. So much hate "

3-"i don't understand what did we ever do to these people?"

4- " F*** you Rouhani. Reap what you sow"

These were the most interesting comments I've came upon. I think these kind of incidents leave a mark in people's hearts and they eventually harm USA Iran relations

Iran and US will get along one day. We're not going to be enemies forever that's crystal clear because the world doesn't work that way

Not now maybe 20 years from now or maybe 50-60 years from now. But it will happen.

This just pushes that day further back



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Stupidest thing I've heard all day.

And believe me, brothers and sisters, today was a god damn doozy of a day.

Utterly preposterous.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 01:36 AM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Ha Ha no late drinking or rebel rousing for you in Chester then, poor thing I bet you're gutted.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 01:41 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10

There is obviously a great deal of vested interest by certain groups of people in harming the improving USA/Iran relationship that are developing. This is going to work if people on both sides don't see that they are being played by through media and those put in high places such as judges by those vested interests.

You only have to look at who controls the media and other parts of the institutions in the USA to see who is behind this nonsense. Its so childish its embarrassing.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10

Are you sure the heading is correct and some how got confused with Saudi Arabia??



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 05:33 AM
link   
I don't think it's for the 911 victims... This report seems like an hoax.
Could it be something to do with this article posted: 26 February 2016 mail online?



SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Ten terrorist attack victims who won financial claims against Iran can seize a $2.8 million judgment owed to that country's defense ministry, a federal appeals court said Friday. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the seizure would not violate agreements between Iran and the United States to resolve the Iran hostage crisis. The court also said the money, which has grown to more than $9.4 million with interest and attorneys' fees, was among assets that had been frozen by an executive order. A call to an attorney who represented Iran's defense ministry was not immediately returned. The victims include survivors of a 1997 suicide bombing in Jerusalem. A lower court judge determined that Iran provided training and other material assistance to the bombers and ordered Iran to pay the victims damages ranging from $2.5 million to $15 million, according to the 9th Circuit ruling. Another victim is the son of former Iranian prime minister Shapoir Bakhtiar, who opposed Iran's Islamic regime and was murdered at his home in France in 1991. Iran won the $2.8 million judgment in 1997 against an American defense company that had agreed to sell it an air combat system. The sale, however, was disrupted by the 1979 Iranian revolution, and Iran sought reimbursement. The 9th Circuit has previously ruled that a separate group of terrorist attack victims who won financial judgments against Iran could go after $17 million owed to an Iranian bank.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10


I have zero use for Iran. Yet I see zero connection with 9/11.

If one is going to sue Iran, then sue them for the hundreds, if not thousands, killed by Iranian IEDs sent to Iraq
by Iran. Now your talking...



edit on 11-3-2016 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

'Why?

We never should have been in Iraq in the first dam place!

That's like me sueing your neighbour for shooting me while I Broke into your house.


Don't want dead troops ?DONT GO ROUND #ING INVADING COUNTRYS!

It's war! People die! You expect the enemy to just roll over and not fight?

edit on 11-3-2016 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok


No one attacked Iran. Iran was at war with Iraq just a few short years previously.


IRAN SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUPPORTING THE U.S. IN GETTING RID OF SADDAM.


Iran is culpable.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker
Iraq was there next door neighbour.

It was there sphere of influence.

UK does not like Germany much and laughing at merkal burning the place down while we are trying to distance ourselfs and we have been in two major wars with them the last 100 years but if Putin decided invade Germany UK would support them in a heart beat.

Iran might of hated Iraq but a illegal act of aggression on a bordering neighbouring country is a major concern.

What if China invaded Mexico?

So no iran should not have "supported it".







edit on 11-3-2016 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

That's definitely old crap you're trying to serve us here ...

Pentagon Caught Red-Handed Trying To Frame Iran



...
However, the alleged Israeli engineers have now been fingered for sniping at U.S. Soldiers and the murder of two female American Marines who had their throats slit and then placed in garbage dumps.

These female Marines had been investigating the origins of the I.E.D. (Improvised Explosives Devices). And of course it gets worse. It can now be reported that the origin of the I.E.D.'s, come not from Iran, but come from Zapata Engineering of North Carolina, Hawaii and Tel Aviv.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok


What you omit, I suspect deliberately, is the fact that Saddam was the enemy of Iran. As you say, their neighbor. Responsible for untold deaths in the region.


Using your example of China and Mexico, if Saddam was the ruler of Mexico and China took him out, the U.S. would cheer!!!


"The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

edit on 11-3-2016 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Perhaps your "old crap" is a truth you have a hard time digesting....


I, for one, will never forgive Iran for the IEDs, the resulting U.S. servicemen deaths and Bush's failure to respond appropriately.

If Iran had supported the removal of Saddam, stayed out of the Iraqi conflict, the U.S. would have been able to withdraw sooner and Iran would have had the 'sphere of influence' restored...Oh no, those maniacs had to pile on.

Can't handle that obvious truth? Oh well....



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

So US is friend with the Kurds given that they fight ISIS ...
Or US is friend with the Turks given that they fight the Kurds ...

That two-cent logic doesn't stand when you 'create' your enemies because you need your public opinion to be convinced about the righteousness of a given militaristic intervention. Intervention that doesn't even need to serve your own interests but those of whom you are the puppet.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Remember when Collin Powell carpet-bombed the UN assembly with BS in order to justify Iraq invasion after ... 9/11. Why didn't they went after Iran instead ?

Hard to find consistence in US lies.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: nwtrucker

So US is friend with the Kurds given that they fight ISIS ...
Or US is friend with the Turks given that they fight the Kurds ...

That two-cent logic doesn't stand when you 'create' your enemies because you need your public opinion to be convinced about the righteousness of a given militaristic intervention. Intervention that doesn't even need to serve your own interests but those of whom you are the puppet.



Avoidance of my point is nothing more than a confirming it's obvious truth.




top topics



 
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join