It is becoming a common gambit after a terrorist attack:
Families of victims file suit against those who supposedly financed
the assault.

The aim isn't always to get money, but to curb those who support
such incidents – in the hope of preventing future attacks.

That, at least, is the rationale behind the
largest such action so far – a more than $1
trillion lawsuit filed by the families of
hundreds of victims of the 9/11 attacks.
They're seeking damages from a long list of
Middle Eastern governments, princes,
banks, and charities that they believe fund or
support the Al Qaeda network.

While the suit may be well-intentioned,
experts say prevailing in a case that
implicates such a diverse group of nations
and individuals will be difficult – and could
have the unintended effect of complicating
US relations with some governments in the
Middle East.

The amount of money at issue is
unprecedented – equivalent to nearly half of
the US government's annual budget. Yet
attorneys who filed the suit late last week
say it's in line with past legal attacks against
governments associated with terror.

Libya, for example, was sued for $10 billion
in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over
Scotland that killed 270 people. Lebanon
hostage Terry Anderson was rewarded $340
million in a suit against Iran.

"If you hit people in the pocketbook, it will have a deterrent effect,"
says Allan Gerson, cocounsel in the suit and a lecturer at George
Washington University's law school. "If you pay a lot of money, you
won't sponsor terrorism in the future."

US law allows victims of terror attacks to recover from assets held in
the US by foreign sponsors of terrorism identified by the State
Department. Mr. Gerson says the trillion-dollar figure comes from
multiplying the 3,000 victims in the Sept. 11 attacks by the average
of $30 million recovered in such suits and then multiplying it by three
as allowed under US law that provides for triple damages for terror
victims.

THE suit filed Thursday actually called for damages totaling more
than $100 trillion dollars, but lawyers now say that higher amount
was a clerical error.

Gerson, coauthor of a book on the Lockerbie bombing, says this
lawsuit began when two families that lost relatives on Sept. 11
contacted him searching for a way to punish those responsible for
the attacks.

Gerson teamed up with South Carolina attorney Ron Motley, who
helped states recover billions in tobacco settlements. They enlisted a
team of five investigators around the world who spent much of the
year probing Al Qaeda's financial links.

In all, the suit identified some seven dozen defendants, including
seven banks, eight Islamic foundations, and three Saudi princes.

The suit alleges Saudi officials agreed in 1998 with Osama bin Laden
to avoid seeking extradition of Al Qaeda officials or closure of terror
training camps in exchange for bin Laden's promise not to undermine
the Saudi government. The suit also claims a brother of King Fahd
has donated millions to charities linked to Al Qaeda.

"The kingdom sponsors terrorism," Mr. Motley told reporters last
week. "This is an insidious group of people."

A spokesman for the Saudi embassy in Washington says the
government has not yet commented on the lawsuit.

But a Saudi bank named in the suit labels it extortion, while
newspapers and commentators in the country say it may force a
reappraisal of relations with the US.

Whatever the potential impact on diplomatic relations, victims
relatives said at a press conference announcing the suit last week
that they're dedicated to cutting off the supply of terror money.

"We have justice and morality on our side," said Thomas Burnett Sr.,
whose son died when United Airlines Flight 93 crashed in
Pennsylvania.