President Obama on Friday vetoed legislation that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia over its alleged ties to the terrorists who carried out the attacks.
Congressional leaders plan to hold override votes in the coming days and supporters of the legislation say they are confident they can succeed in overturning the president’s action. It would be the first time during Obama’s presidency that Congress has overridden a veto.
The legislation would allow U.S. courts to waive claims to foreign sovereign immunity in cases involving terrorism on U.S. soil. The administration contends that this would break a longstanding practice that sovereign nations are protected from these types of legal threats. The result, according to the White House, is that American officials could now be sued in foreign courts over U.S. military or diplomatic actions abroad, which administration officials said poses a threat to national security.
This bill would "allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia over its alleged ties to the terrorists who carried out the attacks."
~Washington Post
Exactly how would families be finding out who is connected to who 15 years later? The powers that be couldn't straighten that out when the evidence was fresh
I think I found one of reasons this came up 15 years later.
The article below makes reference to our government allowing people from Saudi Arabia to leave the country days after 9/11 attacks --- when 15 out of 19 of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia.
An arrival board at Los Angeles International Airport on Sept. 11, 2001, shows canceled flights from around the nation following the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
The FBI mishandled its investigation of the travel of a Saudi prince and his companions out of Florida within days of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, new interviews, 9/11 Commission documents and FBI files reveal. And its detailed report on the matter, drawn up for members of Congress and President George W. Bush, was inaccurate.
The new reporting springs from suspicions that a well-connected Saudi living in Sarasota, Fla., may have associated with the 9/11 hijackers. Former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham, who co-chaired Congress’ Joint Inquiry into 9/11, has suggested that the FBI’s investigation of the Sarasota matter “was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI. An important investigative lead was not pursued and unsubstantiated statements were accepted as fact.”
These concerns have led to a re-examination of the efforts to get out of the U.S. immediately following the 9/11 attacks by a Saudi royal, Prince Sultan bin Fahd, and several companions. Their travel began in Tampa, a short drive from Sarasota.
Okay, maybe the people flown out had ties. But we knew they terrorists were connected to Saudi Arabia almost immediately, before they were flown out of the country and our attention was redirected to Iraq.
In any case, I don't understand why this isn't an obviously stupid idea. It seems like it would set a dangerous precedent, especially when you consider how fast the U.S. will choose a side in a local conflict 20,000 miles away then start bombing the hell out of country X --for so long as the collaterally damaged dead people aren't considered white (though they might look white to us).
In any case, I don't understand why this isn't an obviously stupid idea. It seems like it would set a dangerous precedent, especially when you consider how fast the U.S. will choose a side in a local conflict 20,000 miles away then start bombing the hell out of country X --for so long as the collaterally damaged dead people aren't considered white (though they might look white to us).
Foreign policy is kinda above my head. But some articles say congress and the senate have the votes to override the president's veto. The timing in suspicious. And it seems ridiculously high risk to sever diplomatic ties with a frenemy country after so much time has past and there's so little to be gained.
There is little to be gained, right?
The time for righteous indignation at Saudi Arabia's ties to the terrorists has long passed (ties that we knew about already... like... um... since when 9/11 happened in 2001. Again, fifteen out of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.
There is little to be gained, right?
The time for righteous indignation at Saudi Arabia's ties to the terrorists has long passed (ties that we knew about already... like... um... since when 9/11 happened in 2001. Again, fifteen out of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.
I just find it hard to believe that any lawsuit put forth could ever end up being much more than an exercise because I also find it hard to believe Saudi Arabia will ever pay anybody anything....except maybe Bush Jr. who supposedly helped some Saudis get of the country quick, fast, and in a hurry (I always assumed there were business ties between Daddy Bush and the Saudis if not Bush Jr himself. I also assumed that nobody but him hadd the power to authorize Saudi's leaving the country within days after the attack)
In the end, this doesn't pass the sniff test. This smells like an attempt to embarrass President Obama before he leaves office.
Then again, white republicans think money is the key to everything. They may really believe this actually makes sense.
Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment