It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Vetoes Bill to Let 9/11 Families Sue Saudi Arabia

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Tbh, I thought for sure conservative ATS'er's known for attacking Obama and Clinton would have beaten me to the punch.

Timeline?


I'm not a conservative.

Check my sig for timeline, and proof.

Oh, and I dont really post just mere 'news bits' or 'video clips'. In my old blogs I did, but in here its generally 'my own stuff' I ever post.
edit on 23-9-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: pirhanna

Interesting but if the gov't completely fails to hold the House of Saud at all responsible for their obvious part in 9/11 then someone has too, and it's a lot of pissed off citizens. The gov't is clearly protecting and covering for the nation state that gave us modern Islamic terrorism so it's time someone stops letting them get away with it and try to fight back, even if it's just a lawsuit. I mean, talk about injustice when our only hope for justice is a god damn lawsuit.
edit on 23-9-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

While I personally think they should be able to sue, I think our own government should be taking care of their compensation.

The complications of allowing citizens to sue a government we are so econimically entangled with and have a 70 year alliance with could have far reaching global consequences.


The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation act finally passed -of cousrse after aRepublican Filibuster- and is extended 75 years Act setting aside 4.2 billion.

We know 15 of the hijackers were Saudi Arabians. We do not know it was planned by the Saudi government.

In fact this very website has a lot of other theories.
edit on 23-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

I don't understand why people don't recognize that this bill was a terrible idea.

So can the millions of people displaced in Iraq, Syria, and Afganistan then sue America for supporting terror? Let's be honest, our government is likely the top terrorism supporter in modern history. We have made supporting terrorists a strategy for regime change.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I don't think its all about the money with these families. They want accountability. If we can sue and find Iran guilty of 9/11 then so can we do the same with the House of Saud. Clearly corruption is behind this veto, nothing more.
edit on 23-9-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Not just to play devil's advocate, but what kind of situation would we be setting up if citizens from one country could sue the government of another country... That would mean Iraqis and Afghani citizens could sue the US government for invading their countries. It's hard to say where that may lead.

I know 9/11 is so laden with emotion for many of us, but I'm not sure the decisions made from an emotional position are the most wise. Of course, we'd LOVE to see the families of those who suffered in 9/11 to have some sort of recourse, and get some kind of compensation. But suing the country isn't the answer. And I'm not sure people who actually want this bill to pass are thinking fully about the possible repercussions. I haven't read the bill, but the first time someone from the US engages in an act of terrorism in another country, what happens then?

Suing Saudi Arabia is not going to do snip to make 9/11 disappear.

And should African Americans be able to sue the US government for some kind of reparations because of what happened in the past?
edit on 9/23/2016 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Then why is it we can sue Iran? That happened and the families won which is insane. Yet, somehow we can't with SA? Huh? Corruption is why.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

We did. See Iran.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

I do not disagree, of course in our case the tab will surely get passed on to the poor taxpayers as usual.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

It's not just their government.

There are specific names accounted for:



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: reldra

I don't think its all about the money with these families. They want accountability. If we can sue and find Iran guilty of 9/11 then so can we do the same with the House of Saud. Clearly corruption is behind this veto, nothing more.


It was ridiculous to find Iran guilty of 9/11. Or any other country we invaded. Why add another one?

They do want accountability. Oddly, our own government may be involved. So, I would think money beyond the 9/11 health bill that passed, would be in order.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I wasn't talking about you. Funny enough, you always think I'm talking about you when I mention conservatives.

Check your timeline for proof of what?
edit on 23-9-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Tbh, I thought for sure conservative ATS'er's known for attacking Obama and Clinton would have beaten me to the punch.

Timeline?


I'm not a conservative.

Check my sig for timeline, and proof.

Oh, and I dont really post just mere 'news bits' or 'video clips'. In my old blogs I did, but in here its generally 'my own stuff' I ever post.


Well. I think you are a conservative. I don't need proof.
edit on 23-9-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Well, we sued them and I doubt they'll be the last. The House of Saud are the guilty ones, not at all Iran. It's time for those in power to have some kind of accountability and if the only thing we can hope to get is a lawsuit then so be it, for now.

Maybe the US will slow down with its war machine if our politicians bank accounts suffered? F them all! BRING ON THE LAWSUITS!

Lawsuits, there is no justice in this world.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: reldra

Well, we sued them and I doubt they'll be the last. The House of Saud are the guilty ones, not at all Iran. It's time for those in power to have some kind of accountability and if the only thing we can hope to get is a lawsuit then so be it, for now.

Maybe the US will slow down with its war machine if our politicians bank accounts suffered? F them all! BRING ON THE LAWSUITS!

Lawsuits, there is no justice in this world.


It won't happen, in regard to Saudi Arabia. Whether it is wrong or right.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

I get labelled a conservative like every day. Both links in my sig right now 'prove' I'm not a conservative, basically, definitely prove I'm not a Republican and never was.

ANYWAYS, the timeline is riddled with House of Saud and their cohorts from start to finish. Got them going back into the 1970's, got them in the 80's involved in Iran-Contra coc aine smuggling, they're covered in every decade post-80's. They really helped cement the thing together, funnily enough, when I hadn't even set out with them in mind but they just kept popping up across the entire project.


edit on 23-9-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

Question is, when this is brought up again before our next president what will they do? Clinton, she'd veto it but Trump, that will be a true test of his so called character. Ironically enough, he loves lawsuits, obviously, so it would be hilarious if he too veto'd it.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Swills

I get labelled a conservative like every day. Both links in my sig right now 'prove' I'm not a conservative, basically, definitely prove I'm not a Republican and never was.

ANYWAYS, the timeline is riddled with House of Saud and their cohorts from start to finish. Got them going back into the 190's, got them in the 80's involved in Iran-Contra coc aine smuggling, they're covered in every decade post-80's. They really helped cement the thing together, funnily enough, when I hadn't even set out with them in mind but they just kept popping up across the entire project.



In social issues, you are more than covservative. In political issues, you are mainly conservative. Just because you investigate a few things in threads, does not make you not a conservative.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   
It's probably as you said. The US is afraid they will be held accountable for their crimes.

originally posted by: Swills
www.nbcnews.com...



President Barack Obama on Friday vetoed controversial legislation aimed at helping the families of the victims of the September 11th attacks sue Saudi Arabia — a move that sets up an emotionally-charged, election year showdown between an outgoing commander-in-chief and members of his party who supported the bill.

The measure, which was unanimously passed by both the House and Senate, enables the families of victims of the September 11th attacks to sue Saudi Arabia if that country is found legally liable for helping support the deadliest terrorist acts on U.S. soil. Fifteen of the 19 terrorists were Saudi and that nation's leaders have previously opposed the legislation and denied involvement.

The White House is strongly opposed to the legislation out of concerns it will open the floodgates and leave the U.S. vulnerable to similar suits. A bipartisan group of lawmakers backed the 9/11 families bill.

The president, in a statement on explaining the veto on Friday, said he has "deep sympathy for the families of the victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), who have suffered grievously. I also have a deep appreciation of these families' desire to pursue justice and am strongly committed to assisting them in their efforts."



What a piece of garbage and not a great way to leave office, despite having a high approval rating or not. Why would he do this? Is it conspiracy laden, like lizards and stuff, or are they truly afraid the US will be sued for all of their misdoings in the Middle East and abroad? Question is, people can't sue the US? I have no idea but is this a legit concern? It baffles me.

Funny enough though, we can sue Iran and find them guilty for 9/11 but apparently the House of Saud is off the table because oil, money, corruption, greed?

Trump, if he's smart, will attack Clinton and Dems relentlessly for this!

Also, not surprisingly, this happened today, Friday.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Binary mentality is the devil!

www.scientificamerican.com...

Read this:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Talk about my 'conservatism' in there.
edit on 23-9-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join