thedarkoverlord — 9/11 “Preview Documents”

A brief analysis of the first tranche of the 9/11 documents released by thedarkoverlord

Portrait by Aula Al Ayoubi, used as profile image of thedarkoverlord on Twitter

I’m going to skip discussing a lot of the setup of this in my usual way and instead focus on what we see in the documents already. For background, see the original announcement on Pastebin (removed, now on Steemit) or this convenient Motherboard article.

It suffices to say that a hacking group “The Dark Overlord” are claiming to have hacked several organizations and have a sizeable quantity of documents that “will top Edward Snowden’s finest work”. As a taster, it seems we have access to sixteen images of documents provided alongside the original announcement and thirty documents provided afterwards.

Some caveats: I am no expert in law or insurance. This article doesn’t purport to reveal anything or go in-depth into what we’re seeing, but there are some interesting points to note from a brief reading. First off, let us just inventory some of what we’re seeing so far (not all files listed, .msg emails were not reviewed due to inability to read the file format).

Legal documents

• 00036309.pdf: USDC SDNY — 21 MC 97 (AKH) In Re September 11, 2001 Litigation: Property Plaintiffs Master Liability Complaint
• 00036826.pdf: USDC SDNY — 21 MC 97 (AKH) In Re September 11, 2001 Litigation: Memorandom of law in support of airport operator defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ master complaints. This document is also referred to in The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States Finding Aid: Subject Files of General Counsel Daniel Marcus, Box 7.
• 00261011.pdf: USDC SDNY — 21 MC 101 (AKH) In Re September 11 Litigation: Memorandom of law in support of the New York Times Company’s motion to unseal certain judicial records and enforce the public’s right of access to filings and oral argument
• 00261094.pdf: USDC SDNY — 21 MC 101 (AKH) In Re September 11 Property Damage And Business Loss Litigation, 08 CIV 3719 (AKH) World Trade Center Properties LLC, et al., v. United Airlines Inc, et. al, 08 CIV 3722 (AKH) World Trade Center Properties LLC, et al., v. American Airlines, Inc., et al. Order to show cause
• 00261486.pdf: USDC SDNY — 21 MC 101 (AKH) In Re September 11 Property Damage And Business Loss Litigation, 08 CIV 3719 (AKH) World Trade Center Properties LLC, et al., v. United Airlines Inc, et. al, 08 CIV 3722 (AKH) World Trade Center Properties LLC, et al., v. American Airlines, Inc., et al. Notice of cross-motion by the WTCP plaintiffs and 7 World Trade Company, L.P. for a preliminary injunction; this document is particularly interesting since it has a confidentiality marking at the top referring to a March 30, 2004 confidentiality protective order and a Februrary 19, 2010 sealing order.
• 00276120.pdf: document on US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit letterhead titled “Notice of appearance instructions for substitution, additional, or amicus counsel” and reference to another lawsuit “Certain Underwriters v. AMR” with docket number “10–3133”.
• 00036754.tif: fax to USDC SDNY— 21 MC 97 (AKH) In Re September 11, 2001 Litigation: Notice of joinder
• 00275455.doc: United States Court of appeals for the Second Circuit — 10–2970-cv In Re: September 11 Property (and others): Notice of unopposed joint motion to consolidate appeals, designate additional appellees and simplify consolidated caption
• dedacabd7dea45a8910569677e8135b6-full.jpg: fax titled Re: 21 MC 97 World Trade Center September 11, 2001 Litigation. Document marked “Confidential For Settlement Purposes Only”
• 48b2689ad6adc168951731207547ef8c-full.jpg: fax titled Re: Lyles v. Argenbright Sec., Inc. (02 Civ. 7243 (AKH)) Motion To Disqualify Ness Motley

Other documents

• 00273276.pdf: document marked “Exhibit A” and a list of docket numbers and short titles of other lawsuits.
• 00037655.pdf: This document consists of a list of airlines, flight names, names, and numbers. This seems to be a list of associated cases under 21 MC 97 (see Appendix A in the Suspense Docket Order here, not in the Preview Documents)
• 00036315.tif: fax to USDC SDNY — Re: In Re September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack Litigation. Letter from United Air Lines supporting a motion to dismiss.
• 00036859.tif: fax Re: In Re September 11, 2001 Tort Litigation. Appears to be between plaintiffs’ lawyers.
• 00081025.pdf: This document consists of several forms titled “Amended Property Plaintiff Damage Disclosure — Subrogation”, with subtitles “911 Litigation 21 MC 101” and “Docket No.: 03CV0131”. Also in this document is a balance sheet from the Port Authority of NY and NJ describing submitted, corrections, and considered amounts.
• 00036319.tif: fax titled “…Arthur Andersen Reinsurance Programs incepting on 1st June 1998 and 1st June 2001”
• 00010873.doc: “Title 14 — Aeronautics and Space”
• 00014645.ppt: “Preliminary Subrogation Analysis World Trade Center” — only discusses four people, Robert W. Poole Jr, Viggo Butler, Brian Sullivan, Charles Slepian, J. D., and Dan Issacharoff. Document source appears to be from Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin.
• 00052249.doc: World Trade Center Litigation File №2178–15. Titled “Summary of Defendants’ Answers to Property Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Master Liability Complaint.”
• 00081026.doc: Document lists a number of “Amended Property Plaintiff Damage Disclosures” with various headings referring to civil cases 03 CV 131, 04 CV 7244, 04 CV 7294, and 03 CV 131.

Docket numbers

The actual documents appear to be largely procedural in nature. Since this is just a “preview”, naturally, the hacking group is not going to release the more tantalizing documents so early. However, more seasoned analysts may likely draw some more interesting conclusions from the actual content and insurance figures.

But let’s take a look at the docket numbers involved here: 21 MC 97 and 21 MC 101. A number of references to these docket numbers are visible on the SDNY website’s 9/11 section.

What is interesting is that there is a Wikipedia article about 9/11-related litigation titled “In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001” — compare that with “In Re September 11, 2001 Litigation”. This appears to have docket number 03 MD 1570. Only one of the documents describes the case with the expanded title, 00036315.tif.

As Wikipedia notes, “the case has focused mainly on alleged connections between the 9/11 attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia”. Since 21 MC 97 and 21 MC 101 focus on insurance and liability — SDNY explicitly says that 21 MC 101 is “personal injury, wrongful death, and property damage” — even with the suggestion of potential confidential documents, this particular document dump does not yet suggest any potential geopolitical consequences.

Furthermore, there is an argument to make that since the context for this document dump is primarily legal in nature, defendants and plaintiffs both will be putting forward their best cases for requesting relief. This may mean that a somewhat distorted narrative may arise from reviewing documents and memoranda directly. Documents may claim that airports were negligent but further legal reading would be necessary to determine whether a judge had actually decided this. In some circumstances we may never get such a decision since some settlements have been reported already in 9/11-related litigation.

Perhaps in the near future some law offices will continue to remain reticent to pay the ransom and we may see more documents in the future. We can only hope.

Update (2019–01–03): More files have been released from the group on receipt of crowdfunded payments. For example, of special interest is 011807~2.TXT in the Checkpoint 01 release: a transcript of video deposition with Barbara Ann Foster, who appears to be a TSA agent who had interacted with Mohamed Atta at the Portland airport. Other depositions of screeners are in the recent Layer 1 release.

Since this is a raw document dump, it will take time to examine the documents as they are released, especially due to the nonportable nature of the dump. Additional analyses will be published in the future.

Update (2019–01–10): See the next part in this series: thedarkoverlord — 9/11 “Layer 1” and “Layer 2” Overview