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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Saudis could pull billions from US economy, hinder access to Mideast bases following 9/11 lawsuits

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:23 AM
link   


Published time: 29 Sep, 2016 11:54

Saudi Arabia and its allies could retaliate against US legislation allowing the kingdom to be sued for the 9/11 attacks, including scaling back investment in the US economy or restricting access to important regional air bases, experts claim.

"This should be clear to America and to the rest of the world. When one Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) state is targeted unfairly, the others stand around it,” Abdulkhaleq Abdullah, a professor of political science at United Arab Emirates University, told Associated Press.

“All the states will stand by Saudi Arabia in every way possible.”



Saudis could pull billions from US economy, hinder access to Mideast bases following 9/11 lawsuits


On Wednesday, Congress overwhelmingly voted to override President Barack Obama’s veto of the bill that would allow Americans to potentially sue Saudi Arabia for 9/11. Lawmakers said their priority was not Saudi Arabia, but victims and families. The “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA)” would allow US judges to waive sovereign immunity claims when dealing with acts of terrorism committed on American soil – potentially allowing lawsuits against Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 attacks.

15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals. Chas Freeman, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia during Operation Desert Storm, told AP that Saudi Arabia could respond in a way that risks US strategic interests. That could include Saudi restricting its rules for overflight between Europe and Asia and the Qatari air base from which US military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria are directed, Freeman says.

“The souring of relations and curtailing of official contacts that this legislation would inevitably produce could also jeopardize Saudi cooperation against anti-American terrorism,” Freeman told AP.

Obama vetoed JASTA last week, saying it would erode the doctrine of sovereign immunity and expose the US to lawsuits around the world.

He argued the bill could lead to other governments acting “reciprocally” by allowing their own courts to exercise jurisdiction over the US, including over deadly US drone strikes.

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir told reporters in June that the US has the most to lose if JASTA is enacted.

There have been reports that Riyadh threatened to pull billions of dollars from the US economy if the bill became law, however al-Jubeir has only officially said investor confidence in the US could decline.




Well, this definately doesn't sound like it's going to go over well. It may even be what Soros and the like wanted all along in order to create a WWIII manufactured scenario, drop kick the Economy and cause more chaos than you can shake a stick at.

And don't forget who was in charge of putting Saudi Arabia in the United Nations drivers seat. All of it was done by design.
edit on 9/29/2016 by awareness10 because: aliens




posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: awareness10
The Saudis could do that, but would they do it?

Wouldn't it hurt them more in the end to do that?



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:34 AM
link   
The saudis have more to lose than we do. Phuck 'em.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: awareness10


Like most other of our "friends," the Saudis need us more than we need them. I'm sure Obama's "justice" and state department will throw up roadblock after roadblock in such suits.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
MIC (Military Industrial Complex) won't let this happen. Too much money is spend in the ME on weapons/systems which in turn goes back to our congress via lobbying (aka, bribes)



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

If they had Obama at the helm, yes.

This came out in June asking for Saudi Arabia to be suspended from Head of the UN aka Human Rights Council.

www.hrw.org...


June 29, 2016 10:55AM EDT UN: Suspend Saudi Arabia from Human Rights Council ‘Gross and Systematic’ Violations in Yemen Threaten Council’s Credibility



(New York) – The United Nations General Assembly should immediately suspend Saudi Arabia’s membership rights on the UN Human Rights Council, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International said today. A two-thirds majority of the General Assembly may suspend the membership rights of any Human Rights Council member engaged in “gross and systematic violations of human rights.”

Saudi Arabia, as the leader of the nine-nation coalition that began military operations against the Houthis in Yemen on March 26, 2015, has been implicated in numerous violations of international humanitarian law. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented 69 unlawful airstrikes by the coalition, some of which may amount to war crimes, killing at least 913 civilians and hitting homes, markets, hospitals, schools, civilian businesses, and mosques.

The two organizations have also documented 19 attacks involving internationally banned cluster munitions, including in civilian areas. Saudi Arabia should be suspended from the Human Rights Council until it ends unlawful attacks in Yemen and conducts credible investigations that meet international standards or agrees to and cooperates with an independent international inquiry.





posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: awareness10

Not a chance in hell. I truly don't see this happening, and if anything comes to fruition from these lawsuits against the Saudis, it will likely just be for "show", just like when huge irresponsible "Too Big to Fail" banks get fined a few million dollars, after making hundreds of millions faudulently.

That's my personal take on this anyway.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: TXRabbit

I hope you're right, but Obama has made gestures that he'd like to move on to the UN after his Presidency is up.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Yes i agree!



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

I'm just looking at the scenarios i see possibly playing out. I hope nothing comes of this either, but I don't trust the President of your country, nor do i trust Soros or the other players who rule over the planet. I would rather create a much better scenario than focus on this absolutely!

Thanks for your input on this



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Saudi's don't need American Dollars, they have oil. The Us Dollar is a petrodollar The Saud's have all the oil... Who should be worried.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: awareness10

If 19 Americans flew planes into towers in Saudi, then I would think that America would make reparations.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Indeed yes, however i believe it was all done by design. But that is only my opinion due to my lack of respect and trust in Gov't.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aeshma
a reply to: butcherguy

Saudi's don't need American Dollars, they have oil. The Us Dollar is a petrodollar The Saud's have all the oil... Who should be worried.

We have more oil in the ground than the Saudis do.
edit on b000000302016-09-29T09:54:56-05:0009America/ChicagoThu, 29 Sep 2016 09:54:56 -0500900000016 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: awareness10

The real stupidity here is that the Saudi nation had relatively little to do with the funding or sponsorship of the 9/11 attacks, or the organisation that put those attacks together. America created that circumstance when they created Osamas mob, funneling money and training resources, as well as equipment and other material aid, during the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. The US kept its connections with that and other groups the entire time afterward. They performed admirably, destabilising the region after the Russians left, carving out territory and making a target of themselves. Perfect performance.

Furthermore, if we must discuss the Saudi involvement in the process, of which there is an undeniably large amount, it must be said, then lets make a note here, that it should be individuals WITHIN Saudi government, and not the nation or the government itself, which are targeted by any litigation arising from the attacks. I would argue though that unless Bush (both of them) Cheney, Blair and a whole host of other warmongering savages from the west are going to pay for the thing, then there is no reason to expect the Saudis to do so, since of the fingers in that whole cluster bang pie, theirs were the least firmly thrust.
edit on 29-9-2016 by TrueBrit because: factual correction.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   
As long as we don't endanger the sand shipments from them to keep our beaches maintained.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Aeshma
a reply to: butcherguy

Saudi's don't need American Dollars, they have oil. The Us Dollar is a petrodollar The Saud's have all the oil... Who should be worried.

We have more oil in the ground than the Saudis do.


Wonderful point...but American energy independence isn't an Obama/Clinton thang.

Plus the Saudis have so much money invested in Clinton...they'd hate to see all that future influence go to waste.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

I think you guys are saving up your own oil and using everyone elses...wise move tbh.
We are doing the same with Tea.
Wow did the op just get whacked?.



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 10:07 AM
link   

edit on 29-9-2016 by FamCore because: nvm



posted on Sep, 29 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Good, kind of hard to act high and mighty when one of your biggest "allies" are one of the most oppressive countries in the world.

We have an oligarchy not a democracy, we do not promote democracy. Our blood that drives us and feeds the wealthy, war machine, and corporations is oil. And it's unnecessary. We could easily use renewable energy but choose not to as it's not as profitable.

We have no independence, nor democracy because of our fabricated "need" for oil. Let it happen, things will be bad for a bit but it's time this spoiled culture gets shocked into what life and citizen responsiblilty is before this world gets any worse.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join