| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Al Rajhi Bank
|
Financial |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Aqeel al Aqeel
|
Material support |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
defendants
|
Financial |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
Al Rajhi Bank
|
Alleged material support |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
defendants
|
Alleged support |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Yassin al Kadi
|
Leadership financing |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Saleh Abdullah Kamel
|
Alleged material support |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Al Rajhi Bank
|
Financial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Saleh Abdullah Kamel
|
Alleged financier |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Suleiman Abdel Aziz Al Rajhi
|
Alleged financier |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Various defendants (Harvey, Carter, Young, Little, etc.)
|
Alleged funding support |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
AMI
|
Financial |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
al Haramain
|
Front organization |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Taliban
|
Support alliance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Khaled bin Mahfouz
|
Sponsor |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Collaborators/Sympathizers
|
Financial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
defendants
|
Material support |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
AMI
|
Protection backing |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
two other unnamed defendants
|
Alleged conspirators supporters |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Al Rajhi Bank
|
Alleged financier supporter |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
ICA
|
Alleged financier supporter |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
two other unnamed defendants
|
Material support |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Enaam Arnaout
|
Sponsor |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Saleh Abdullah Kamel
|
Financial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Osama bin Laden
|
Leader organization |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Drone attacks on Al-Qaeda base. | Tribal areas of Pakistan | View |
| N/A | N/A | Alleged support to al-Qaeda by Defendants Dallah al Baraka and Saleh Abdullah Kamel | Unspecified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Anti-Soviet jihad | Afghanistan | View |
| 2002-01-01 | N/A | Raid of an al-Qaeda front charity | Unknown | View |
| 2001-09-11 | N/A | Attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center | New York, Arlington | View |
| 2001-09-11 | N/A | Attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. | New York/Washington D.C. | View |
| 2001-09-11 | N/A | Terrorist attacks on the United States | United States | View |
| 2001-09-11 | N/A | Terrorist Attacks | United States | View |
| 2001-09-11 | N/A | Terrorist attacks resulting in nearly 3,000 deaths and billions in damages. | American soil | View |
| 2001-09-11 | N/A | Attack on the WTC. | New York, USA | View |
| 2001-01-01 | N/A | US invasion of Afghanistan | Afghanistan | View |
| 1996-01-01 | N/A | al-Qaeda's abrupt departure from Sudan to Afghanistan. | Sudan to Afghanistan | View |
This document is page 203 of a book (indicated by the header 'The Rise of the NSA'), likely produced during a House Oversight investigation given the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019691'. The text discusses the history of the NSA and CIA relations, the conflict between the NSA and hacktivists using Tor/encryption, and the expansion of NSA surveillance powers following the 9/11 attacks via the USA Patriot Act and Section 215. The footer indicates a print date of September 30, 2016.
This document appears to be a page from a House Oversight Committee report analyzing intelligence gathered after the raid on Osama Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad. It details Bin Laden's 'hands-on' leadership style, his paranoia regarding security and drone attacks (which he called the 'intelligence war'), and the internal friction between Zawahiri and other operatives like Atiyah. The text also notes that analysts found no evidence ('smoking gun') of Pakistani government complicity in hiding Bin Laden.
This document is a Washington Post article by David Ignatius titled '10 years after 9/11, al-Qaeda is down but not out.' It details the intelligence gathered from the May 2 raid on Osama bin Laden's compound, specifically focusing on communications between bin Laden and his deputy Atiyah Abd al-Rahman regarding plans for a significant attack on the U.S. involving economic targets. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, indicating it is part of a Congressional production.
This document is a news digest titled 'The Shimon Post' dated August 24, 2011. It lists seven articles from various major publications (such as The Daily Beast, Stratfor, and The Financial Times) covering geopolitical topics including the Arab Spring, US politics, and Middle Eastern relations. The document bears a footer indicating it is part of a House Oversight Committee file (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031913).
The text argues that terrorism is just one part of a larger threat that includes "Civilization Jihad" and "International Institutional Jihad," criticizing leaders like McDonough for ignoring these broader dangers. It contends that framing terrorism as a result of U.S. policy or victimhood is a distortion that prevents the West from confronting the reality of a declared religious war, instead relying on a narrative of Western guilt.
A Deutsche Bank presentation slide (page 24) authored by Francis J. Kelly of Global Public Affairs, analyzing the rise of radical Islam in China's western provinces. The document highlights the radicalization of ethnic Uyghurs, their alleged connections to ISIS and al-Qaeda, and China's resulting geopolitical shifts involving Afghanistan and Pakistan. The document bears a House Oversight stamp, indicating its inclusion in a congressional investigation (likely regarding Deutsche Bank's internal records).
A Deutsche Bank presentation slide (page 23) authored by Francis J. Kelly detailing a $46 billion Chinese investment in Pakistan to build pipelines to Gwadar. The document analyzes the geopolitical implications, noting India's displeasure and potential threats from al-Qaeda and ISIS in the northern region (labeled on the map as 'Where the bad guys live'). It bears a House Oversight Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production, likely related to investigations involving Deutsche Bank.
This document is page 822 from a Federal Supplement court opinion (House Oversight record) regarding 9/11-related lawsuits (Ashton and Burnett complaints). The court dismissed complaints against individuals Tariq, Omar, and Bakr Binladin for lack of jurisdiction but denied the motion to dismiss for the Saudi Binladin Group (SBG), citing the need for discovery regarding SBG's potential ties to al-Qaeda and operations in Maryland. The document also outlines allegations against the 'SAAR Network,' described as a web of charities allegedly established to fund terrorist organizations.
This document appears to be a composite of excerpts and analysis from a House Oversight production. It extensively quotes Peter Dale Scott's 'The American Deep State' regarding the 9/11 Commission's alleged protection of intelligence connections and the role of Saudi/Qatari royals. The text transitions into a conspiratorial analysis linking 'Clinton's daughter' to terrorism ops and notably mentions a 'Bud Horton' (formerly of Accenture) moving to South Carolina after being implicated in a 'continuing child sex scandal,' suggesting a nexus between intelligence operations, cyber crime, and illicit activities.
This document analyzes the deteriorating political stability in Iraq, highlighting Prime Minister Maliki's attempts to form a majoritarian government and the resulting marginalization of Sunni leaders. It draws parallels between recent violence against protesters in Fallujah and the 2006 Askariya shrine bombing, emphasizing the pivotal role of Anbari tribal leaders over traditional politicians. Additionally, it notes Tehran's influence in reunifying Shiite factions, specifically the Sadrists, which may exacerbate sectarian tensions.
This document appears to be a page from a geopolitical report regarding the political instability in Iraq around late 2012. It details the sectarian conflict between Prime Minister Maliki (Shiite) and Sunni leaders Rafie al-Issawi and Tariq al-Hashimi, as well as the military tensions with Kurdish forces. The text highlights a constitutional crisis exacerbated by President Talabani's stroke, leaving the country effectively without a president during a time of mass protests. The document bears a House Oversight stamp.
This document is a page from a legal brief or opinion related to the litigation surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks (In re: Terrorist Attacks). It argues against a district court's dismissal of claims, contending that defendants who provided material support to al-Qaeda through intermediaries or 'front charities' should be held liable under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). It specifically critiques the reasoning of Judge Daniels, comparing it to his predecessor Judge Casey, and cites various legal precedents regarding indirect support of terrorism.
This document is a page from a legal opinion (cited as 2012 WL 257568) regarding litigation related to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks ('In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001'). It discusses the dismissal of intentional tort claims (assault, battery, IIED), arguments regarding statutes of limitations in New York versus Virginia and Pennsylvania, and equitable tolling due to the clandestine nature of the conspiracy involving al-Qaeda. The document bears the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023406', indicating it was produced as part of a US House Oversight Committee investigation, likely included in a production by a financial institution or entity being investigated for connections to high-profile cases, though Jeffrey Epstein is not explicitly named in the text of this specific page.
This document is page 45 of a Westlaw printout concerning the case 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.' It discusses New York legal precedents regarding 'duty of care,' 'negligent entrustment,' and 'material support' to third-party tortfeasors (criminals/terrorists). While the text focuses on 9/11 and gun safety cases, the document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, suggesting it was used in the House Oversight Committee's investigation, likely as legal precedent to establish liability for financial institutions (financial angels) supporting Jeffrey Epstein.
This document is page 43 of a legal opinion or brief from 2012 titled 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.' It discusses the legal liability of entities under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA) for providing material support and financing to al-Qaeda. The text argues that the District Court erred in dismissing claims against banks (Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank, National Commercial Bank) on the grounds that corporations cannot be sued as individuals under the TVPA, citing various precedents including 'Khulumani' and 'Mohamad v. Rajoub'. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a Congressional investigation production.
This document is page 42 of a Westlaw printout concerning 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.' It is a legal text discussing the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), customary international law regarding terrorism, and the Military Commissions Act of 2006. While the document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp (indicating it is part of a Congressional investigation production), the text itself focuses entirely on legal precedents regarding 9/11 and al-Qaeda liability; there is no direct mention of Jeffrey Epstein or his associates on this specific page.
This document is page 39 of a legal brief or court opinion (Westlaw) regarding 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001'. It discusses the legal liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and Alien Tort Statute (ATS) for defendants who provided financial and material support to al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, specifically noting funding provided in Sudan in the early 1990s. The document bears the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023399', suggesting it was part of a congressional investigation, likely related to financial institutions involved in terrorist financing.
This document is a page from a 2012 Westlaw legal opinion regarding litigation surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks (In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001). It details legal arguments concerning the liability of entities including DMI Trust, Dallah al Baraka, and individual Saleh Abdullah Kamel for providing material support to al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden in the 1990s. The text discusses pleading standards under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and criticizes a lower court for applying an incorrect standard regarding the causal connection between 1990s support and the 2001 attacks. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp.
This document is a page from a legal brief or opinion related to the 'In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' litigation (2012). It argues that the District Court erred by examining evidence in isolation rather than collectively, specifically regarding allegations against Al Rajhi Bank and its executives (Saleh Abdullah Kamel and Suleiman Abdel Aziz Al Rajhi) for financing terrorism via the 'Golden Chain' list of donors. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, suggesting it was part of a Congressional investigation, possibly related to broader inquiries into bank compliance and terrorist financing, though Jeffrey Epstein is not mentioned in the text of this specific page.
This document is a page from a Westlaw printout of a 2012 legal opinion (In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001) stamped with a House Oversight Committee Bates number. It details the legal standards for detaining individuals as 'part of' al-Qaeda, referencing the 'Golden Chain' document which identifies financiers such as Saleh Abdullah Kamel and Suleiman Abdel Aziz al Rajhi. The text analyzes D.C. Circuit precedents regarding habeas corpus petitions from Guantanamo Bay detainees and the evidentiary standards required to prove material support for terrorism.
This document is page 33 of a legal opinion (2012 WL 257568) regarding the September 11 terrorist attacks litigation. It details the funding and recruitment mechanisms of al-Qaeda through charities like the IIRO and MWL, citing media reports from the 1990s and relationships involving Osama Bin Laden. The text focuses on the legal standard for inferring a defendant's 'mental state' (knowledge) regarding the funding of terrorism, likely serving as case law precedent in a House Oversight investigation (indicated by the Bates stamp).
This document is a page from a legal opinion (2012 WL 257568) related to the 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001' litigation. It discusses the liability of financial institutions, specifically Al Rajhi Bank and Dubai Islamic Bank, for allegedly knowingly providing financial services to Al-Qaeda. The text details how various charities (al Haramain, WAMY, MWL, IIRO, SJRC, BIFs) served as fundraising fronts for Al-Qaeda and links them to specific historical terrorist attacks prior to 9/11. While stamped 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT', the document text itself focuses exclusively on terrorist financing and contains no direct mention of Jeffrey Epstein.
This document is a page from a legal filing (2012 WL 257568) related to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks litigation. It details allegations against financial institutions Dallah al Baraka, ABID Corp, and DMI Trust (and individual Kamel) regarding their long-term financial support of Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, dating back to the early 1980s. The text describes money laundering, the maintenance of bank accounts for terrorist front organizations, and the facilitation of funds transfers to operatives in Europe and Sudan. The document bears a House Oversight stamp (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023390).
This document is a page from a Westlaw legal printout (2012 WL 257568) regarding 'In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001.' It outlines legal arguments criticizing a district court for ignoring plaintiffs' pleadings against Al Rajhi Bank. The text details allegations that Al Rajhi Bank knowingly provided material support, banking services, and donation management to al-Qaeda and several front charities (IIRO, MWL, WAMY, etc.), as well as providing services to 9/11 hijacker Abdulaziz al-Omari. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp.
This document is a page from a legal brief retrieved from Westlaw, bearing a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp. It argues that a lower district court erred in dismissing Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) claims against Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank, and others related to the financing of al-Qaeda. The text focuses on legal standards (Rule 8 and Rule 12), arguing the court applied an incorrectly heightened standard of scrutiny to the plaintiffs' pleadings regarding the defendants' intent and support for terrorism.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity