Have you ever wondered what became of Osama Bin Laden’s trust fund?
Coming up Friday in a federal courtroom in lower Manhattan is a hearing that could mark a turning point in attempts to solve the mysteries that by some accounts still shroud the fate of the multi-million dollar inheritance of Osama bin Laden. This hearing, before U.S. Magistrate Judge Frank Maas, is part of the 9/11 civil suits brought by families and colleagues of some of those murdered in Al Qaeda’s Sept. 11 terrorist assaults on America (”In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001″).
The immediate issue involves dreary-sounding matters of jurisdiction. But that leads on to the big question of whether more documentation out of places such as Saudi Arabia might become available — possibly providing more insight into the exact fate of Osama’s inheritance.
But wait a minute, wasn’t that all settled by the 9/11 Commission? — which reported in 2004 that Osama’s share of the Bin Laden family business was sold in 1994, and the Saudi government “subsequently froze the proceeds of the sale.”
Well, there are some questions still unanswered, according to a fascinating and heavily researched new book, just out, “The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century,” by Pulitzer Prize-winning author Steve Coll. On pages 405-408, Coll delves into the story of Osama’s inheritance, and comes up with a load of questions. Based in part of court documents that have already floated up in the 9/11 cases, Coll writes that in June, 1993, the Bin Laden family began the process of expelling Osama as a shareholder from two family companies: the Mohamed Bin Laden Company, and the Saudi Bin Laden Group. By 1994, says Coll, Osama’s shares had been sold “in a transaction designed so that Osama would not profit, yet in a way that would protect the rights of his heirs under Islamic law.” The value was set at about $9.9 million — “a strikingly modest sum,” but hard to judge “because few of the underlying assumptions used to set the price are available.” The tale proceeds: “After consultations with the Saudi government, the funds generated by the sale of Osama’s shares were placed in some kind of special trust and eventually frozen under court supervision.”
But is that all there was to it? As Coll tells it, Osama assigned his shares in 1993 to one of his brothers, Ghalib Bin Laden. Coll writes that later that same year, 1993, Ghalib Bin Laden “transferred $1 million to a new investment account at Bank Al-Taqwa, in the Bahamas, an off-shore bank founded in 1988 with backing from the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.” Ghalib’s account at Al Taqwa, over which yet another Bin Laden brother, Bakr Bin Laden, had signature authority, remained active “until at least the late 1990s,” according to bank documents filed in a U.S. court, writes Coll. [Note: In November, 2001, the U.S. Treasury designated Al Taqwa as an Al Qaeda-linked financier of terror; it remains under that designation today.]
The Bin Laden clan denies any wrong-doing. Bakr Bin Laden, in an affidavit, has said that since Osama was cut off, at the latest in June, 1993, “Osama has not received a penny,” and that since that date anyone acting on behalf of the Bin Laden companies was forbidden to make any payments to Osama, or provide any support, direct or indirect.
Coll tries to fill in more details, and bumps up against assorted mysteries, writing: “A number of aspects of Osama’s shareholding divestment remains unclear, however. For example, it is uncertain whether Ghalib paid cash for Osama’s shares, and if so, where he raised the money from.”
And here come Coll’s questions:
“Is there a bank account in Saudi Arabia that has held the $9.9 million in trust ever since the sale was completed? How do Saudi courts assert control over such an account, if it exists? If the sale did not involve a cash payment, but rather a credit of some kind, how was this organized and who has kept track of the proceeds since then?” He concludes: “The Bin Laden family has provided little clarity about these details.”
Which brings us to the hearing this Friday in lower Manhattan, where families and colleagues bringing suit over the September 11 attacks will be waiting to find out whether answers to some of these questions might yet emerge. I’m curious myself, and plan to tear myself away from Steve Coll’s book long enough to drop by the courtroom to witness this next scene, live, in this long-running drama of our times.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
4 Comments
1. Bill in Chicago:That trust fund may be just the tip of the iceberg:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=56623&d=26&m=12&y=2004&pix=world.jpg&category=World
And don’t forget that the Bin Laden brothers were on the “Golden Chain” list of Al Qaeda’s financial backers. You can read more about that here:
http://www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com
Apr 11, 2008 - 11:34 am 2. Arnie:Since September 2001 I have maintained a free and confidential “9/11 list-serv”.
The “9/11 list-serv” distributes daily e-mails containing newspaper articles and other relevant information re: 9/11 issues of interest to 9/11 families, 9/11 organizations and interested individuals.
The 9/11 List-serv archives can be accessed at http://groups.google.com/group/911-list-serv
If you would like to ’subscribe’ to this free news service – please send an e-mail to amkorotkin@aol.com with the word “subswcribe” in the subject box.
Apr 12, 2008 - 9:48 am 3. Brian F. Sullivan:Claudia,
From what I understand, Judge Maas, at the request of the defendants, cleared the courtroom for a while at Friday’s hearing, over the objections of the plaintiffs’ Motley Rice attorneys. If what I’m hearing is accurate, that doen’t speak well for transparancy for the American public. Where you were going to attend Friday’s hearing, I’d sure be interested in seeing a followup. My experience has been that the government has abused the intent of the Sensitive Security Information moniker. It is supposed to be used in the interests of national security, not as a tool to cloud legitimate discovery. Too often I’ve seen government secrecy used to preclude accountability and/or embarassment, as versus its intended purpose. I fear that, if what I heard happened on Friday is true, this might be one more example of that pattern I’ve seen develope in different tracks dealing with 9/11 litigation. Remember that in the Moussaoui trial, Judge Brinkema granted the 9/11 plaintiffs access to a large body of inforamtion. The TSA appealed that decision and won, demonstrating that the terrorist could have access to information in his defense, which would later be precluded from his victims. Hell of a country, huh? In any event, I sure would like to hear your observations after attending Friday’s session before Judge Maas.
Best regards,
Brian F. Sullivan
Apr 12, 2008 - 1:19 pm 4. Brian Sullivan:FAA Special Agent (Retired)
For Claudia: Sept. 11 victims pursue bin Laden family fortune
By LARRY NEUMEISTER – 17 hours ago
NEW YORK (AP) — As the United States continues its long manhunt for Osama bin Laden, victims of Sept. 11 are in the midst of their own bin Laden pursuit: for his family’s vast fortune.
Victims and survivors of the 2001 attack and insurance companies say the bin Laden family failed to cut off ties with their infamous relative after learning he was devising terrorism plots and should be held liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.
Lawyers for the victims and survivors argued Thursday that the family members are getting off easy in defending against the claims that they turned a blind eye to his evil ways after learning of his terroristic leanings in 1993.
The lawyers asked a judge in U.S. District Court in Manhattan to let them seek more information to prove their claim. Their lawsuit targets the Saudi Binladin Group, along with numerous banks, charities and individuals worldwide, alleging that they provided material support and assistance to al-Qaida before Sept. 11.
The Saudi Binladin Group is a construction and engineering company that has expansive holdings in the Middle East. Osama bin Laden once owned a small stake in the company.
The victims and survivors suffered a setback last month when U.S. Magistrate Judge Frank Maas turned down many of the requests for more information about the financial ties between bin Laden and his family, saying, in essence, that the plaintiffs had become petty in their requests.
Lawyers for the Saudi Binladin Group have said in court papers that bin Laden’s 2 percent shares in the company and another firm, the Mohammad Binladin Co., were sold in June 1993 and put into a trust.
The judge issued his findings on May 21, giving the Saudi Binladin Group one month to produce documents which would show the receipt and subsequent disposition of any dividends, distributions or similar payments arising out of bin Laden’s shares of the company between 1993 and 2000.
But he said he believed discovery in the case “must have boundaries,” especially given the lengthy amount of time it had taken the case to proceed.
Further requests would likely be denied unless there are “truly exceptional circumstances,” he wrote. “Simply put, we are reaching the end of the line.”
The lawyers for Sept. 11 victims cited a 1997 interview in which bin Laden briefly discussed nine visits by his family, including his mother, an uncle and several brothers.
The lawyers said the interview showed that the relationship between bin Laden and his family was cordial, “implying that representatives of his family remained sympathetic to his situation and mission after 1993.”
In their own court papers, lawyers for the Saudi Binladin Group had accused the plaintiffs of “wishful thinking” and “wild speculation.”
The lawyers said the Saudi Binladin Group had helped the United States, building the air base from which U.S. forces operated during the first Gulf War.
The Sept. 11 commission also concluded that the Sudanese government seized bin Laden assets when he left the Sudan in 1996.
As to his shares or the proceeds of them, the lawyers wrote: “Osama bin Laden never received any buyout payment and has never had access to these funds.”
Jun 16, 2008 - 8:44 am