HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023391.jpg

In re: TERRORIST ATTACKS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001., 2012 WL 257568 (2012) “facilitated financial transactions for, and advertised, maintained and serviced accounts on behalf of, several of al Qaeda’s known charity fronts, including Al Haramain ..., [TIRO,] and [MWL].” JA4331. One such company that DMI Trust is alleged to have exercised “direct involvement” over is Faisal Islamic Bank of the Sudan. JA4331. Through this company and others, DMI Trust is alleged to have “entered into business partnerships with prominent al Qaeda supporters, such as the National Islamic Front, the fundamentalist regime which has ruled Sudan since 1989 and provided safe haven to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda from 1991 through 1996.” JA4331. Specifically, Faisal Islamic Bank, and thus DMI Trust, is alleged to have provided loans and other support to the National Islamic Front and its prominent members. JA4332-33. Faisal Islamic Bank is also alleged to *89 have “actively participated in the collection of funds for certain of al Qaeda’s ‘charitable’ front organizations.” JA4337-38. Another “wholly owned subsidiary, Faisal Finance,” is alleged to have “knowingly and intentionally” held and managed accounts for multiple al-Qaeda operatives, including Wa’el Julaidan and Yasin Al Kadi, who were both designated by the U.S. Department of Treasury as Specially Designated Global Terrorists. JA3723. Plaintiffs allege that in 1998, Al Kadi’s account was identified by “the FBI’s Counter Terrorism Task Force ... as being a source of funding for Hamas terrorist, Mohamed Saleh” and it “was one of the accounts frozen after September 11, 2001.” JA3823-24. Moreover, under DMI Trust’s control, Faisal Finance continued to provide these services even after Osama bin Laden publicly acknowledged his close ties to Julaidan in 1999. JA3723. Similarly, Tadamon Bank, another DMI Trust subsidiary, has “knowingly and intentionally lent repeated material support to Al Qaeda through” the provision of “financial and bank account services to several Al Qaeda operatives.” JA1789-90, 4335, 5915. *Q0 3. The District Court Failed to Draw Reasonable Inferences From Plaintiffs’ Extensive Additional Pleadings Establishing Defendants’ Knowing and Reckless Support of Terrorism. Further, plaintiffs presented extensive additional allegations that permitted -- indeed, compelled -- reasonable inferences that each defendant knew or recklessly disregarded whether the recipients of their funds and services were in fact advancing al-Qaeda’s efforts. Far from applying the rule that a court must draw “all reasonable inferences” in favor of the plaintiff when resolving a motion to dismiss, Matson v. Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of N.Y., 631 F.3d 57, 72 (2d Cir. 2011), the district court declined to draw even the most straightforward inferences about mental state from the extensive allegations of defendants’ actions directed toward al-Qaeda and its closest supporters. Plaintiffs’ allegations, taken as a whole, place defendants at the core of the network that supported al-Qaeda, including through direct provision of funds and services to al-Qaeda itself; extensive dealings with the most notorious and widely known charities, related organizations, and individuals who are prominently involved in global jihad and supporting al-Qaeda; and a pattern of dealing with and assisting the persons and entities most closely associated with al-Qaeda. An inference of mental state is almost always derived from *91 circumstantial evidence, and here that evidence pervasively and consistently points to the conclusion that defendants knew that their support advanced the efforts of al-Qaeda. Alternatively, at a minimum, plaintiffs’ allegations establish that only a person deliberately oblivious to the nature of the parties involved, which is the essence of recklessness, could have failed to understand that the alleged actions were supporting terrorism. (a) Reasonable inference based on provision of support to al-Qaeda, a notorious terrorist organization. The defendants are alleged to have “provided critical financial and logistical support to al Qaeda in relation to that terrorist organization’s global jihad.” JA3834, 3843-44, 3870, 4314, 4331. Defendants’ provision of material support to al-Qaeda came at a time when that terrorist organization was publicly, even notoriously, known to have declared its intent to “wage war with the United States.” JA3153, 3777. Moreover, al-Qaeda had taken credit for numerous terrorist attacks that were among the most highly publicized on the planet. As the district court noted, the terrorist organization had “publicly acknowledged responsibility for, such terrorist schemes as the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the 1998 attack of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the 2000 attack of *92 the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen.” SPA20, 50 (Terrorist Attacks I) (quotation marks and citations omitted). In addition, President Bill Clinton signed an Executive Order on August 21, 1998, that “block[ed] the assets of Osama bin Laden and his terrorist cells, including Al Qaeda, as international terrorists.” JA1065-66. WESTLAW HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023391