Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Las Vegas on September 09, 2016, 03:46:34 PM
-
House OKs bill allowing 9/11 victim families to sue Saudi Arabia for role in attacks, but Obama likely to veto
(https://s16.postimg.org/s299n9ret/attack_tradecenter.jpg)
The House, with the 15th anniversary of 9/11 looming, approved legislation Friday permitting victims’ families to sue Saudi Arabia over the terrorist attack.
Passage of the bipartisan legislation will likely prove a pyrrhic victory as the White House has already indicated President Obama will veto the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).
But the House vote voice, coming four months after the Senate’s approval, was at the least a symbolic triumph for relatives of the nearly 3,000 people killed on Sept. 11, 2001.
“It's gratifying to see that when something is overwhelmingly in the interests of the American people, bipartisan action can happen,” said Jerry S. Goldman, attorney for several 9/11 families.
“The unity Americans felt in the days after 9/11 lives on in a determination to hold whoever was complicit in attacks on U.S. soil accountable, as existing law provides and as JASTA clarifies.”
Fifteen of the 19 terrorists involved in the 9/11 terror attacks were Saudi nationals.
The legislation would permit the family members to file suit against the Saudi government for any possible role that its officials played in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
“I hope for the sake of the families who have suffered such losses and fought so hard, the Administration will not veto this bill,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
“I'm pleased the House has taken this huge step forward towards justice for the families of the victims of 9/11,” he added. “There are always diplomatic considerations that get in the way of justice, but if a court proves the Saudis were complicit in 9/11, they should be held accountable.”
A vote of two-thirds in both the House and the Senate is necessary to override Obama’s veto.
(https://s16.postimg.org/7sft5i0yt/obama_saudi_arabia.jpg)
Obama speaks with smiling Arab.
-
No conspiracy at all, folks. Nothing to see here. Go play on snapchat.
-
(Published Wednesday. Written by Terry Strada, widow of Thomas Strada, who was killed in the World Trade Center on 911.)
After 15 years of enduring the gut-wrenching heartache from my husband’s murder — along with the murder of nearly 3,000 other innocent souls — we can all now feel a glimmer of hope after learning just before the 15th anniversary of 9/11 that Congress may finally pass a bill that could give me, my children and all other 9/11 families and survivors some chance at accountability for the terror attacks.
(https://s9.postimg.org/pjmh3wt1r/sen_charles_schumer_announces_justice_sponsors_t.jpg)
For me and our children, this fight is personal. I lost my husband and our three children lost their father. I promised them that I would never stop fighting for justice — not just against the hijackers but those who helped them.
As former co-chair of the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry, former Sen. Bob Graham always reminds us, we know that the 19 hijackers who barely spoke English could not come here and rent cars and apartments for two years; attend flight school; purchase first class airfare to scout out the flights and then later to execute the attacks; without assistance.
We family members and survivors have waited for almost 15 years to stand in a courtroom and hear and see the evidence collected against those that made 9/11 possible. One of the last steps to make that possible is a bill to be voted on Friday in the U.S. House, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, which the Senate passed unanimously in May.
That would give us a pathway to accountability. The bill has been navigated through the House by Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) and in the Senate by Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas).
(https://s15.postimg.org/ra4eg8j9n/main_v00.jpg)
JASTA merely restores a long-established principle of American law that foreign governments do not have immunity for their role in supporting terror attacks on U.S. soil.
That common sense principle was entrenched in our approach to sovereign immunity for nearly 40 years, until recent court decisions introduced confusion. As recently as 2005, in joint court filing by the U.S. Departments of State and Justice, the government stressed that no foreign government would enjoy immunity for its role in the 9/11 attacks.
JASTA does not determine whether the accused foreign state is actually responsible. It just wouldn’t get a free pass on accountability.
Under existing law, a foreign state alleged to be responsible for a car wreck has no free pass and must “face the music.” The same should be so for terror attacks. It is the right thing.
(https://s9.postimg.org/6npxo6e27/expert8n_3_web.jpg)
This week, my husband will have been gone 15 years. This week, the House has the opportunity to vote “Yes” on JASTA and “Yes” for terrorism accountability.
It would be a heart-wrenching insult for members of Congress to proclaim “Never Forget” at memorials this Sunday on the 15th anniversary without having passed JASTA. Please show that you stand on our side, the side of American citizens, and do not yield to pressure from powerful foreign influences looking to escape accountability. It’s past time to pass JASTA.
-
No conspiracy at all, folks. Nothing to see here. Go play on snapchat.
x2 The media had better not give that fucker a pass on this one. No legit excuse for what he plans to do.
-
House OKs bill allowing 9/11 victim families to sue Saudi Arabia for role in attacks, but Obama likely to veto
(https://s16.postimg.org/s299n9ret/attack_tradecenter.jpg)
The House, with the 15th anniversary of 9/11 looming, approved legislation Friday permitting victims’ families to sue Saudi Arabia over the terrorist attack.
Passage of the bipartisan legislation will likely prove a pyrrhic victory as the White House has already indicated President Obama will veto the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).
But the House vote voice, coming four months after the Senate’s approval, was at the least a symbolic triumph for relatives of the nearly 3,000 people killed on Sept. 11, 2001.
“It's gratifying to see that when something is overwhelmingly in the interests of the American people, bipartisan action can happen,” said Jerry S. Goldman, attorney for several 9/11 families.
“The unity Americans felt in the days after 9/11 lives on in a determination to hold whoever was complicit in attacks on U.S. soil accountable, as existing law provides and as JASTA clarifies.”
Fifteen of the 19 terrorists involved in the 9/11 terror attacks were Saudi nationals.
The legislation would permit the family members to file suit against the Saudi government for any possible role that its officials played in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
“I hope for the sake of the families who have suffered such losses and fought so hard, the Administration will not veto this bill,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
“I'm pleased the House has taken this huge step forward towards justice for the families of the victims of 9/11,” he added. “There are always diplomatic considerations that get in the way of justice, but if a court proves the Saudis were complicit in 9/11, they should be held accountable.”
A vote of two-thirds in both the House and the Senate is necessary to override Obama’s veto.
(https://s16.postimg.org/7sft5i0yt/obama_saudi_arabia.jpg)
Obama speaks with smiling Arab.
Suing an entire country for some radical Muslims??? Yea, I can see why Obama would veto that shit. Bunch of fucking morons
-
What do you call 4000 dead Americants?
A good start.
Happy anniversary.
-
Suing an entire country for some radical Muslims??? Yea, I can see why Obama would veto that shit. Bunch of fucking morons
You surely must know that S-A is the biggest sponsor of camel people blowing themselves up and they fund moskues where lunatics preach hate towards the Christians and other people. The country, the "government", are radical.
Suing the shithole is too light.
It should be nuked.
I'm serious here. It is the only country I suggest nuking as a whole. No single good, sane person lives in Saudi-Arabia. There is nothing and no one worth saving.
-
You surely must know that S-A is the biggest sponsor of camel people blowing themselves up and they fund moskues where lunatics preach hate towards the Christians and other people. The country, the "government", are radical.
Suing the shithole is too light.
It should be nuked.
I'm serious here. It is the only country I suggest nuking as a whole. No single good, sane person lives in Saudi-Arabia. There is nothing and no one worth saving.
Correct! Nuke mecca! Should've been done 15 years ago!
-
You surely must know that S-A is the biggest sponsor of camel people blowing themselves up and they fund moskues where lunatics preach hate towards the Christians and other people. The country, the "government", are radical.
Suing the shithole is too light.
It should be nuked.
I'm serious here. It is the only country I suggest nuking as a whole. No single good, sane person lives in Saudi-Arabia. There is nothing and no one worth saving.
No, they are no more of a state sponsor than we are and in fact with this, other countries like Iran and Iraq can sue us for the exact same thing, US citizen's lives could be endangered and lets not forget all of our trade relations with Saudi Arabia.
I feel bad for the victim but I think these lawyers are not doing them any favors
-
Obama = A piece of shit
-
One reason that is undeniable, as to why Obama would want to veto, is because it places a throttle on maniacs like him. It would make it so he and his pals would be forced into answering for their shit when it's the last thing they'd do otherwise.
They want to keep the "well, if you're not doing anything wrong..." argument to use against the little people and not themselves. Fuck that and fuck him.
Bottom line, we cannot trust the Obamas of this world to force their foreign-policy decisions on us. That's what he's trying to protect (at the absolute very least, that's what he's up to) and that's one of the reasons he's likely planning to do it.
-
Seeing your government continually covering for the Saudis makes me sick. That bill even made it through congress. Is the senate poised to pass it as well? Obama is really dropping the ball on this issue.
-
I think a lot of members of congress voted for this knowing that it would get vetoed by the president (by any president). that if it actually had a chance of becoming law, they would not have voted for it.
-
I think a lot of members of congress voted for this knowing that it would get vetoed by the president (by any president). that if it actually had a chance of becoming law, they would not have voted for it.
You may be right about that. Unsettling to say the least.
-
I think a lot of members of congress voted for this knowing that it would get vetoed by the president (by any president).
What about Bernie?
that if it actually had a chance of becoming law, they would not have voted for it.
If so, why do you suppose that might be?
-
why do we support governments that seem to have values not in line with our constitution? Why do we support totalitarian government? Apartheid governments? Governments with dismal human rights records. Because it is in our best interest? Because it is more stable than the alternative? Because we need their resources?
Allowing people to sue the Saudia Arabian government, which is just one very rich family, would cause great embarrassment to that family. Which would play into the hands of the religious fundamentalists in that country. The house of saud is suppose to follow Wahhabism, a strict version of Sunni. However, a very large number of them are bored spoiled rich kids jet setting their way around the world. The religious fundamentalists in SA would like nothing better than to replace the monarchy with a theocracy. A Sunni theocracy that would love to then take out the Shia theocracy of Iran next door.
We all know how well taking out a despot in Iraq turned out.
Now that doesn't mean that passing this bill doesn't give the president (any president) leverage. Carrot/stick, good cop/bad cop. Hey king, you got to help me out here. Don't know how long I can protect you from Congress. Maybe you can improve your human rights just a bit.
On the other hand, I'm all for cutting off all military sales to SA until they stop bombing Yemen.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Madhhab_Map3.png)
think of all the wars in Europe in the 1600s-1800s between Protestant and Catholic factions of Christianity.
-
why do we support governments that seem to have values not in line with our constitution? Why do we support totalitarian government? Apartheid governments? Governments with dismal human rights records. Because it is in our best interest? Because it is more stable than the alternative? Because we need their resources?
Allowing people to sue the Saudia Arabian government, which is just one very rich family, would cause great embarrassment to that family. Which would play into the hands of the religious fundamentalists in that country. The house of saud is suppose to follow Wahhabism, a strict version of Sunni. However, a very large number of them are bored spoiled rich kids jet setting their way around the world. The religious fundamentalists in SA would like nothing better than to replace the monarchy with a theocracy. A Sunni theocracy that would love to then take out the Shia theocracy of Iran next door.
We all know how well taking out a despot in Iraq turned out.
Now that doesn't mean that passing this bill doesn't give the president (any president) leverage. Carrot/stick, good cop/bad cop. Hey king, you got to help me out here. Don't know how long I can protect you from Congress. Maybe you can improve your human rights just a bit.
On the other hand, I'm all for cutting off all military sales to SA until they stop bombing Yemen.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Madhhab_Map3.png)
think of all the wars in Europe in the 1600s-1800s between Protestant and Catholic factions of Christianity.
Are you saying the threat in this, is that as information comes out, certain parts of that info will cause Saudi Arabia to become a theocracy through a revolution?
-
Are you saying the threat in this, is that as information comes out, certain parts of that info will cause Saudi Arabia to become a theocracy through a revolution?
the threat of the clerics revolting is already there. Anything that weakens the Saud family helps those wanting theocracy.
-
the threat of the clerics revolting is already there. Anything that weakens the Saud family helps those wanting theocracy.
But isn't it theoretically true that all evidence will lead right to those same people who would have a theocracy, if the reason claimed for 9/11 is accurate?
-
But isn't it theoretically true that all evidence will lead right to those same people who would have a theocracy, if the reason claimed for 9/11 is accurate?
Doesn't mean that the Saud family wouldn't be weakened.
-
Doesn't mean that the Saud family wouldn't be weakened.
Weakened, as a result of helping those people you say create the potential threat? How can it be that they might present a special threat from that?
-
Tim, are you saying that details about certain lifestyles and things might be revealed, and those details have the potential to cause a religious uprising?
-
the clerics want a theocracy. if the Sauds look damaged, the clerics might make a move.
-
the clerics want a theocracy. if the Sauds look damaged, the clerics might make a move.
By 'looking damaged' you must mean from personal details being revealed about certain individuals.
Is that the reason you'd say a person should be for the veto?
-
By 'looking damaged' you must mean from personal details being revealed about certain individuals.
Is that the reason you'd say a person should be for the veto?
No, I'm saying it is a kabuki dance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabuki_dance). Everyone in congress knew that such a bill could not become law without doing major damage to an important ally, and if it had any chance of not being vetoed it wouldn't have been brought up for a vote. But this way members of congress can say hey we tried, and it may make the Saudis more amenable in other negotiations.
-
No, I'm saying it is a kabuki dance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabuki_dance). Everyone in congress knew that such a bill could not become law without doing major damage to an important ally, and if it had any chance of not being vetoed it wouldn't have been brought up for a vote. But this way members of congress can say hey we tried, and it may make the Saudis more amenable in other negotiations.
What are your thoughts about it on a personal level, as far as right or wrong?
-
9/11 Lawsuit Bill: Could Congress Override Obama’s Expected Veto?
9.9.2016
Days before the 15th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2011 terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people, the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed a bill Friday that would allow victims’ families to sue Saudi Arabia for its alleged role.
Dubbed the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA, the long-brewing measure received largely overwhelming support within Congress, but President Barack Obama has long been opposed to the notion and many believe he will veto the bill.
On the other hand, it’s entirely possible Obama, who has a little more than five months left in his second final term, could see his presidential veto overridden, according to Politico.
JASTA proponents have said the bill will give the families of 9/11 victims justice, but critics suggest the measure could greatly affect U.S. foreign relations with Saudi Arabia and with allies.
Under federal law, once the JASTA bill is sent to Obama, he has 10 days, not including Sundays, to veto it, which would then send the bill back to the Senate. Politico reports that the Senate is technically in session but it’s only to hinder Obama from employing a recess appointment for Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.
Congress will have to set a date for the override, which requires a two-thirds majority in the House, however since it’s an election year not only for the White House but also for many members of Congress, it’s highly unlikely any such vote would take place until after Election Day.
During his time in the Oval Office, Obama’s employed his constitutionally empowered right to veto legislation passed by Congress 10 times. Thus far, the House has been unable to override Obama’s vetoes. The most high-profile example came earlier this year when House Republicans attempted to pass a bill that wouldhave repealed several top line provisions to the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare and considered to be a major part of Obama’s legacy in office. The attempted veto override came up well short of the required majority, 241-186
-
What does this say about our claimed "War on Terror", to know we'd back out of a golden opportunity to advance?
-
Of course we can't sue Saudi. They were not responsible for the terrorist attack remember? That was Iraq. That is why Bush invaded that country and made sure the Saudis and Bin Ladens family had safe passage out of the US in the days after the attack.
-
Of course we can't sue Saudi. They were not responsible for the terrorist attack remember? That was Iraq. That is why Bush invaded that country and made sure the Saudis and Bin Ladens family had safe passage out of the US in the days after the attack.
"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror” – George W. Bush, CBS News Sept. 6, 2006
What a fucking clown.
-
What are your thoughts about it on a personal level, as far as right or wrong?
We should stop propping up totalitarian states, apartheid states, states with bad human rights records. We should stop undermining democratically elected governments just because those governments might be hostile against American business interests.
-
"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror” – George W. Bush, CBS News Sept. 6, 2006
What a fucking clown.
he really said that? what a dick.
-
We should stop propping up totalitarian states, apartheid states, states with bad human rights records. We should stop undermining democratically elected governments just because those governments might be hostile against American business interests.
What are your thoughts on the TPP, Tim?
-
he really said that? what a dick.
One thing about him, is that you just know he remained clueless throughout. He really didn't know what was happening most of the time, and he's probably the only decent person from that administration.
-
What are your thoughts on the TPP, Tim?
It gives too much power to corporations. allows them to take governments to international court to fight regulations, such as safety, or pollution. And makes intellectual property rights even worse than they are now.
-
It gives too much power to corporations. allows them to take governments to international court to fight regulations, such as safety, or pollution. And makes intellectual property rights even worse than they are now.
Then why was Hillary all for TPP, until she had to face Sanders in the primaries, and saw that the people opposed it, from left to right?
-
It gives too much power to corporations. allows them to take governments to international court to fight regulations, such as safety, or pollution. And makes intellectual property rights even worse than they are now.
Interesting how Obama pushes the TPPA while he moves to stop JASTA.
The TPP comes from 500 official U.S. trade advisors representing corporate interests involved in years of closed-door negotiations while the public, press and Congress were locked out. At the heart of the TPP are new rights for thousands of corporations to sue the U.S. government before a panel of three corporate lawyers that can award unlimited sums, including for loss of future expected profits, to be paid by American taxpayers when the corporations claim U.S. policies violate the new entitlements the TPP would provide them.
He acts like he doesn't give a damn about real Americans. Wonder why that is.
-
Dear Mr. President:
We are all mothers, fathers, wives, husbands or children who lost loved ones in the cruel and devastating attack on America 15 years ago Sunday.
We miss them. And we grieve at what they have missed in lives cut short by terrorists whose immediate targets were innocents and whose ongoing target is everything America has stood for, fought for and promised to protect and defend since our union was formed. And we anguish especially as we witness the spread of the poisonous ideology that is determined to ensure that 9/11 was only the beginning.
It is a hard day for all of us. But, as we are sure you must know, they are all hard, not just the anniversaries. For some of us, though, this anniversary is harder than any since the attack and we want you to understand why.
We and so many other families have fought for years to know all of the truth about 9/11. We have fought to ensure that anyone and any entity that may have had a responsible role in the murder of 3,000 people in New York, at the Pentagon and across a field in Pennsylvania is held to account for their actions. And, we have struggled to make sure that our laws — and those who are sworn to uphold them — leave nothing undone in our battle against terrorism.
The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act addresses a missing piece of America's anti-terrorism campaign — a piece that is missing because of grievously errant misconstructions of earlier laws meant to ensure that the families of Americans harmed or killed as a result of terrorist attacks with respect to which foreign governments may be complicit will be able to seek justice in our courts. That right is important for our nation, because it will help to deter state-sponsored terrorism. It will help uncover truth — such as the mysteries surrounding the ability of 19 hijackers — barely educated, not speaking much English and without visible resources — to come to America, learn to fly, set up camps in several cities and hijack four commercial airliners, crashing them spectacularly into the heart of our government and the heart of our economy.
You have had your differences with us about JASTA. And we have been supportive of the reasonable efforts Congress has made to address your misgivings. But, now, Congress has acted, and the result is legislation that both the United States Senate and the House of Representatives passed without a single dissenting voice.
JASTA will be delivered to you soon, perhaps Monday. And, here lies the reason this anniversary is made even harder than past ones: We don't know what you will do. We are left to wait, to hear remembrances and reassurances and regrets.
Mr. President, we don't need your comfort. We have each other. We don't need words — other than the words "I will sign JASTA into law when it reaches my desk." We need those words and a simple action — the stroke of the only pen that can give us and the American people the assurance they need that your foreign policy and your defense of this great nation include a determination that truth be our guidepost, that victims of terrorist attacks also have rights in our courts and that the justice delayed for the 9/11 families will not become justice denied.
Please, Mr. President, don't slam the door shut and abandon us. We need the Executive Branch to join Congress and protect us and all future victims of terrorism. Please sign JASTA.
-
(https://s18.postimg.org/tdycjslop/obama_stare.jpg)
President Obama will veto a bill allowing families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia in U.S. courts, White House press secretary Josh Earnest announced today, 12 September 2016.
-
President Obama will veto a bill allowing families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia in U.S. courts, White House press secretary Josh Earnest announced today, 12 September 2016.
Of course he will! Typical Libtard. Screw America first. Blame America first. Cost America first. Help Americans never.
-
Of course he will! Typical Libtard. Screw America first. Blame America first. Cost America first. Help Americans never.
Only thing 'lib' about this guy imo, is how liberally he devotes himself to globalism and the wealthy. He's a lying despicable neocon --and thanks to his hopelessly devoted partner, the media, he's been allowed to hide behind the "liberal" tag. It makes it so everyone will blame "the liberals" for the crimes of the neocons. Real cute.
(https://s18.postimg.org/71cdtj06x/bamabush.jpg)
-
Top GOP senator 'confident' of 9/11 bill veto override
Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn voiced confidence on Monday that the chamber would override a promised veto from President Obama of legislation that allows the families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia in U.S. courts.
"This would be the first one under this president and I think it would be well deserved," the Texas Republican, who helped spearhead the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), told reporters.
Asked if he thought Obama's expected veto would be overridden by less than a unanimous vote, he added, "I can't imagine [why] if nobody objected to the bill. I don't know why they would change their vote on a veto override."
White House press secretary Josh Earnest emphasized earlier Monday that Obama would veto the bill even though it sailed through Congress unanimously because of concerns that it would open up the United States to retaliatory lawsuits.
Under current U.S. law, victims may sue a country designated as a state sponsor of terrorism, such as Iran. The bill would allow citizens to sue countries without that designation, including Saudi Arabia.
Though Obama is expected to continue lobbying against the bill even after he vetoes it, Cornyn appeared to close the door to negotiating changes to the legislation.
"How do you compromise on something that passed unanimously in both houses?" he asked.
Instead, the Texas Republican said the president should back away from the veto threat, adding that it is "baffling that... Obama would rather make life easier for state sponsors of terrorism than he would lend support to the families of 9/11."
The fight over the legislation has pitted congressional Democrats against the president. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who worked with Cornyn on the bill and is expected to be the next Senate Democratic leader, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) sent a letter to Obama on Friday urging him to support the legislation.
The veto battle comes as the Senate, which is currently scheduled to be in session through the first week of October, is eying an early exit from Washington. The move would allow Majority Leader Mitch McConnell(R-Ky.) to get his incumbents back on the campaign trail as his party defends 24 Senate seats in November.
Cornyn, however, predicted senators would remain in Washington until the president sends back the bill, adding "I'd presume we would not leave until we had the chance to vote on a veto override following the [continuing resolution]."
-
(https://s14.postimg.org/uqhnhcj6p/US_Obama_sociopath_in_chief.jpg)
Obama Is Blocking The Path To Justice For 9/11 Victims’ Families
Back in ‘08, when people said Barack Obama was “the one,” I didn’t realize they meant that he would be “the one” and only person standing alone in blocking the path to justice for the 9/11 victims’ families.
Mr. Obama, please get out of our way and let us have some justice and peace 15 years after the brutal murder of our 3,000 loved ones.
JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, S.2040) is a well-thought out, powerful piece of anti-terrorism legislation. It does exactly what it says—it brings all those who fund terrorism to justice.
In a time where groups like ISIS are stomping around the globe decapitating people, ramming busses into crowds, and blowing up nightclubs, everyone (except Barack Obama) agrees that we need to stop terrorism in its tracks. One effective way to stop terrorists is to attack them at the root of their enterprise: their terrorist funding.
Without funds, terrorists can’t run and maintain websites or training camps. Without funding, terrorists can’t rent trucks, buy bomb-making materials, acquire assault rifles, or board airplanes to fly across borders. Without funding, terrorists can’t produce viral videos, create false documents, or recruit lone wolves. Without funding, terrorists are stopped dead in their tracks.
It goes without saying that the largest benefactor of terrorist groups such as ISIS and al Qaeda is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the incubator for global jihad. Saudis build madrassahs where fiery Imams like Anwar Awlaki preach hate, print and distribute school books that teach violence against infidels, and pay large sums of protection money to terrorists like Osama Bin Laden.
Notably, the Saudi role in radical jihad does not stop at underwriting terrorism—it carries into logistical support of individual attacks, as well. This logistical role is how the Saudis are linked to the 9/11 attacks.
Contrary to what President Obama says about the 28 pages (28 pages that Obama admitted to never reading), there is plenty of “there” found in the 28 pages—and it’s called EVIDENCE of the Saudi financial and logistical support of the 9/11 hijackers who were embedded inside the United States. See end note below for this specific evidence.
Shockingly, the facts and evidence found in the 28 pages were not fully investigated because at the time (2002-2004), according to Vice President Cheney, we were a nation at war and we could not divert our vital resources into investigating the Saudi role in the 9/11 attacks.
As Vice President Dick Cheney said, “An investigation must not interfere with the ongoing efforts to prevent the next attack, because without a doubt a very real threat of another perhaps more devastating attack still exists. The people and agencies responsible for helping us learn about and defeat such an attack are the very ones most likely to be distracted from their critical duties.”
In addition to being a nation at war and and unable to spare vital investigatory resources, the 9/11 Commission was also hamstrung by its extremely limited initial budget of $3 million and its extremely short 18-month time frame. Moreover due to publishing restraints and page limits, the 9/11 Commission was unable to include all information and evidence in its Final Report. Needless to say, the 9/11 Commission’s investigation into the Saudis was neither robust, nor complete.
Several 9/11 Commissioners—Democrat and Republican—have confirmed this fact by going on the record stating that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was not adequately investigated by the 9/11 Commission. Moreover, Commissioners Kerrey and Lehman said, “The 9/11 Commission did not exonerate Saudi Arabia of culpability for the events of 11th September 2001 or the financing of al Qaeda.
Even still, President Obama persists in protecting the Saudis and saying that the 9/11 Commission exonerated the Saudis. Yet, even given its drastic time, budget, and investigatory limits, the 9/11 Commission was able to conclude that, “Saudi Arabia has long been considered the primary source of al Qaeda funding...charities with significant Saudi government sponsorship diverted funds to al Qaeda. Al Qaeda found fertile fund-raising ground in Saudi Arabia, where extreme religious views are common and charitable giving was both essential to the culture and subject to very limited oversight.”
Perhaps, if President Obama took the time to read the 28 pages, he would understand the wisdom and need for JASTA. The President might also better comprehend why 100 percent of Congress has voted in support of JASTA.
JASTA has achieved what President Obama could not—a truly pure, bi-partisan work-product that serves the best interests of American citizens. JASTA shows that Americans can work together to keep us safer from terrorism. In an era, where all agree that you are either with us or you are with the terrorists, it is interesting to see where President Obama currently stands—alone, and against the will of the American people.
President Obama says that he is opposed to JASTA because it will open up the United States to lawsuits that would cost billions.
What President Obama doesn’t mention is that foreign nations and individuals can already sue the United States via statutes like ATA (Anti-Terrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. s. 2333) and ATS (Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. s. 1350). The ATS has been in existence since 1789 and ATA since the 90’s. Neither has cost us billions. Neither has opened the floodgates of litigation. Neither has endangered our soldiers nor impeded our ability to carry out drone strikes, troop movements, or torture.
The real reason President Obama opposes JASTA is because it will hold the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia accountable for their role in the 9/11 attacks. And for good reason (found in 80,000 documents in Florida and 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry of Congress), the Saudis are worried about being held accountable in a court of law for their misdeeds.
Saudi Royals aren’t exactly accustomed to having to answer questions, face evidence, or be held responsible for their acts—that’s why President Obama called them free-loaders last spring. President Obama certainly wasn’t worried about offending Saudi Royals then, nor when he paid $4 billion and cut his Iran deal last summer.
Of course, what’s most bothersome and depressing about President Obama’s bowing to this second terrorist regime, is that it runs so completely counter to what this man said he was all about back in 2008.
He promised to restore our faith in government. He promised transparency, rule of law, and accountability. He promised to limit the extent to which lobbyists could affect government. And to the 9/11 families specifically, he promised justice.
President Obama now chooses to protect a foreign regime that fuels hatred and terrorism rather than to protect the rights of American victims. Plain and simple, Obama’s choice is shameful.
Every member of Congress must recognize that President Obama’s two arguments against JASTA are specious. Congress must stand strong in its unanimous passage of JASTA and its protection of American victims of terrorist attacks by overriding President Obama’s veto because it is not just the right thing to do—it is the American thing to do.
Congress, the 9/11 families’ and JASTA’s message is clear: If you fund terrorists that kill Americans you will be held responsible. We, all of us who support JASTA, represent the UNITED States of America and we protect our own, Mr. President—not the Saudis and the terrorists who kill us.
ENDNOTE: directly from the 28 pages:
“Al Bayoumi provided substantial assistance to hijackers Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi after they arrived in San Diego in February 2000.”
“Al Bayoumi had extensive contact with SAUDI Government establishments in the United States and received financial support from a SAUDI company affiliated with the SAUDI Ministry of Defense.”
“The documentary evidence that al Bayoumi provided assistance to al Hazmi and al Mihdhar is solid.”
“The FBI discovered that al Bayoumi had far more extensive ties to the SAUDI Government than previously realized.”
“Bassnan has many ties to the SAUDI Government.”
“Bassnan reportedly received funding and possibly a fake passport from SAUDI Government officials.”
“Bassnan and his wife have received financial support from the SAUDI Ambassador to the United States and his wife.”
“Bassnan also has other ties to the SAUDI Government.”
“Bassnan’s wife received a monthly stipend from Princess Haifa.”
“These checks were payable to Bassnan’s wife and were drawn on the Riggs Bank account of Prince Bandar’s wife.”
“Bassnan cashed a check from Bandar in the amount of $15,000.”
“Bassnan’s wife also received at least one check directly from Bandar.”
“Bassnan is an extremist and supporter of Usama Bin Ladin.”
“Bassnan spoke of Bin Ladin as if he were a god.”
“Bassnan also knew Bin Ladin’s family in SAUDI Arabia and speaks on his mobile phone with members of the family who are living in the United States.”
“The Ibn Tamiyah Mosque in Culver City is a site of extremist-related activity.”
“An FBI agent said he believed that SAUDI Government money was being laundered through the Ibn Tamiyah Mosque.”
“There are also indications of SAUDI Government support for terrorist activity through charitable organizations.”
“CIA, Treasury, and FBI officials have all expressed their concern about the al-Haramain Foundation’s ties to both the SAUDI Government and terrorist activity.”
“The al Haramain Foundation has clear ties to the SAUDI Government and intelligence reporting suggests it is providing financial and logistical support to al Qaeda.”
“The FBI has located correspondence between al Bayoumi and the al Haramain Islamic Foundation.”
“The subject of Phoenix and Portland FBI counterterrorism investigations, also has close ties to a member of the SAUDI royal family.”
“Although his name was on the State Department watchlist, BLANK was apparently able to circumvent the Customs Service and the Immigration and Naturalization Service because he was traveling with the SAUDI prince.”
“The FBI expressed their concern that BLANK and others were using their status as SAUDI Arabian Airlines employees as a cover to enable them to transport weapons in and out of the United States.”
“In testimony and interviews, a number of FBI agents and CIA officers complained to the Joint Inquiry about a lack of SAUDI cooperation in terrorism investigations both before and after the September 11 attacks.”
“The SAUDIS have been useless and obstructionist for years.”
“The SAUDIS will only act when it is in their self-interest.”
“When a high level officer was asked how the September 11 attacks might have been prevented, he cited greater SAUDI cooperation, pointing to an example from the summer of 2001 when the U.S. government requested SAUDI assistance, with no success.”
“According to the former Chief of Alec Station, it was clear from about 1996 that the SAUDI Government would not cooperate with the United States on matters relating to Usama Bin Ladin.”
“The SAUDIS had stopped providing background information or other assistance on Bin Ladin because Bin Ladin had too much information about official SAUDI dealings with Islamic extremists in the 1980s for Riyadh to deliver him into U.S. hands.”
“The former Chief of Alec Station thought that the U.S. government’s hope of eventually obtaining SAUDI cooperation was unrealistic because SAUDI assistance to the U.S. government on this matter was contrary to SAUDI national interests.”
Kristen Breitweiser
-
(https://s17.postimg.org/9n1nsk1mn/an_american_flag_flies_near_the_base_of_the_dest.jpg)
An American flag flies near the base of the destroyed World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001
-
obama is a pos - why is any surprised.
-
obama is a pos - why is any surprised.
That combo -- killing JASTA while pushing TPP -- makes the guy 100% impossible. The argument for one, defeats the other. He's totally exposed himself for what he is: the lowest form of politician, downright subterranean.
-
(https://s22.postimg.org/b9idflbkh/561_obama_evil_eye_610.png)
Obama blocks justice for 9/11 victims' families
By Dr. John Meinhold
It was 10 a.m. in Portsmouth on September 11 this year and the skies were very unsettled. It was gray and grew darker with rolling thunder and rain. It was so different from the clear blue day when the first Twin Tower fell 15 years ago. 15 years ago our country had endured the worst terrorist attack in world history.
2,996 were killed and 6,000 were wounded. 343 firefighters and 72 law enforcement officers perished, making this the deadliest incident for them in our country's history. At least 3,000 children lost a parent. Untold thousands of others have had serious repercussions from the attacks.
Tom McGuinness, the co-pilot of American Airlines flight 11, who was murdered on 9/11, lived only a few blocks from my home.
And still, many unanswered questions remain over who assisted the attackers. Much evidence points to Saudi Arabia where 15 of the 19 hijackers and Osama bin Laden came from. For years, the 9/11 victims' families have pleaded for justice, for their day in court. They want to sue Saudi Arabia. Our government has stonewalled them. For years they lobbied for documents to be released that had been sealed by President George W. Bush. Documents known as the "28 pages" that were finally released earlier this year that shows plenty of possible connections to the Saudis and even Saudi diplomats.
A bill finally has made it through congress called JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, S.2040). This legislation will allow the 9/11 victims' families to sue the Saudis and have their day in court. It recently passed by unanimous voice vote in both the Senate and House. It has been sent to President Barack Obama to sign into law. But, the White House says Obama will veto JASTA. What a national disgrace.
Obama weakly claims that passing JASTA will open our country up to lawsuits in foreign countries. The Saudis have threatened they will remove some $700 billion in U.S. assets to disrupt our economy if a 9/11 lawsuit is filed against them. Let them do it. Since when did we cave in to international blackmail?
President Obama spoke at the 9/11 ceremony at the Pentagon this year. He said our country needs to defend "our ideals" and "reaffirm our character as a nation." He speaks with a forked tongue.
Kristen Breitweiser, who lost her husband in the 9/11 attacks said, "The Saudis have the president and the State Department on their side. I think that's un-American, I think it's unpatriotic, I think it's disgusting, frankly. I don't know how President Obama will be able to commemorate the 9/11 attacks, by giving a speech or laying a wreath ... when he stabbed the 9/11 families in the back by supporting the Saudis over 9/11 families."
The White House now says it will lobby congress to prevent an override of Obama's veto of JASTA. Please call our elected representatives and urge them to override Obama's veto of JASTA.
The writer is a U.S. Air Force veteran and resides in Portsmouth.
-
No excuses.
(https://s11.postimg.org/jjq19t377/1_f4570deda4.jpg)
-
(https://s10.postimg.org/wny19lrax/justice_minister_walid_al_samaan.jpg)
Trust Me! No, Really!!
Saudi "Minister of Justice" Walid Al-Samaani stands with Obama to prevent JASTA.
Where do you stand?
-
Bob Kerrey (not to be confused with John Kerry) says:
[T]he Saudi government has been engaged in a massive PR campaign in recent months to promote the remarkable and implausible claim that our Commission’s investigation exonerated the Kingdom of any culpability for the rise of al Qaeda and the Sept. 11 attacks themselves.
Nothing could be further from the truth,and it is well past time to set the record straight concerning the Saudis and 9/11 once and for all.... Stated most simply, our investigation found substantial evidence that one or more Saudi government employees located in the United States provided direct aid and support to the 9/11 hijackers. Those Saudi government employees were associated with the Kingdoms Ministry of Islamic Affairs, the same arm of the Saudi government that had primary responsibility for implementing the Kingdoms global efforts to propagate the radical Wahhabi stream of Islam, and that was responsible for supervising Wahhabi proselytizing organizations that directly sponsored al Qaeda, like Al Haramain.
-
White House Protest Will Counter Obama-Saudi Campaign to Kill 9/11 Lawsuit Bill
As the Obama administration and the Saudi government lobby Congress to prevent an override of the president’s promised veto of a bill that would enable 9/11 lawsuits against the kingdom, family members are organizing a White House protest of that veto for this Tuesday.
9/11 family members, survivors and other concerned citizens will convene near the White House at Lafayette Square on Tuesday, September 20 at 12:30 pm and organizers are arranging for bus transportation. If you can join them, you’re encouraged to sign up at passJASTA.org (whether you need transportation or not).
Effort to Kill 9/11 Bill Quietly Strengthens
The bill at the center of this controversy is the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which has now passed both the Senate and House via unanimous voice votes. President Obama has until Friday, September 23 to veto the measure, and appears likely to use all of that time to lobby lawmakers against overriding him.
With Congress poised to go on a lengthy election-season recess, the delay could also prevent the override vote from happening until much later this year, when legislators won’t face voter retaliation if they help Obama kill the measure.
The New York Times reported yesterday that “already, cracks are showing, even among Republicans who generally would love to exercise the first veto override against Mr. Obama.” One of those wavering Republicans is Tennessee senator Bob Corker, who told the Times that passing the law would encourage other countries to reciprocate, exposing the U.S. government to suits filed by family members of innocent victims of U.S. drone strikes.
Since he isn’t up for re-election this year, Corker is a logical point man for Republicans who are sympathetic to the administration’s drive to kill the bill. Corker has also supported Saudi Arabia’s U.S.-facilitated war in Yemen, which is creating mass suffering among Yemen’s population while strengthening al-Qaeda’s position in the country.
In July, 28 long-classified pages from a 2002 congressional intelligence inquiry into 9/11 were declassified. They catalog dozens of inter-connections between Saudi government employees, suspected intelligence operatives, al-Qaeda associates and individuals who aided the 9/11 hijackers. Some of the most important revelations concerned the then-Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan.
-
A little background on the matter, to give an idea of what it is about. Stopping information from being recorded, and going through ridiculous lengths to do that -- which is quite a sick joke when you think of the impact 9/11 has had on ordinary American society aka "the little people". (Published April 2016.)
Former FBI agent John Guandolo, who worked 9/11 and related al Qaeda cases out of the bureau’s Washington field office, says Bandar should have been a key suspect in the 9/11 probe.
“The Saudi ambassador funded two of the 9/11 hijackers through a third party,” Guandolo said. “He should be treated as a terrorist suspect, as should other members of the Saudi elite class who the US government knows are currently funding the global jihad.”
But Bandar held sway over the FBI.
After he met on Sept. 13, 2001, with President Bush in the White House, where the two old family friends shared cigars on the Truman Balcony, the FBI evacuated dozens of Saudi officials from multiple cities, including at least one Osama bin Laden family member on the terror watch list. Instead of interrogating the Saudis, FBI agents acted as security escorts for them, even though it was known at the time that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens.
“The FBI was thwarted from interviewing the Saudis we wanted to interview by the White House,” said former FBI agent Mark Rossini, who was involved in the investigation of al Qaeda and the hijackers. The White House “let them off the hook.”
What’s more, Rossini said the bureau was told no subpoenas could be served to produce evidence tying departing Saudi suspects to 9/11. The FBI, in turn, iced local investigations that led back to the Saudis.
“The FBI covered their ears every time we mentioned the Saudis,” said former Fairfax County Police Lt. Roger Kelly.
(http://s18.postimg.org/rtgil12a1/sept_13th_a_1.jpg)
Bandar relaxes at the White House with Bush, Cheney and Rice on 9-13-01
-
To be fair, here's an argument against JASTA. Try not to laugh at the ridiculousness.
With respect to security, many observers believe that this bill will foster a political environment that will paint an unflattering and grossly inaccurate image of the United States as an enemy of Islam and all of its practitioners.
This will play right into the handbook of extremist groups, who will not miss the slightest chance of employing this incendiary narrative for their recruitment efforts, as they are in a perpetually constant and desperate need to create any justification for the demonization of America.
Talk about senseless. Wow. Wtf does this mean, when it comes to "fighting terror"?
-
JASTA Facts
Our organization, the 9/11 Families & Survivors United for Justice Against Terrorism, consists of over 9,000 family members and survivors, seeking the truth, accountability and justice against all perpetrators of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack against our nation.
Today, we are still witnessing terrorist attacks with radical Islamist’s fingerprints all over them. We are not safer today, because terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, ISIS and Boco Haram continue to thrive, growing in numbers, and spreading throughout the world. We must stop the flow of money to the terrorists in order to STOP future attacks against the United States.
IMPORTANT FACTS:
JASTA corrects a potential grievous error by a federal court ruling that no one can be held accountable for financing or supporting a terrorist attack inside our borders as long as they provided the money or support from outside the United States.
JASTA makes clear that those who support terrorism against the United States can be held accountable no matter where the money or support was given.
JASTA ensures that victims of terrorist attacks have the power to hold terrorist financiers accountable, to bring justice and to make our nation safer by:
- Protecting Victims’ Rights: making clear what Congress intended, which is that private citizens can take legal action against those who provide financial or material support toward acts of terrorism, extrajudicial killing and torture in the United States.
- Removing the Cover of Sovereign Immunity: making clear that being a foreign state shall have no immunity for actions taken in support of terrorist acts occurring in the United States.
- Re-establishing Jurisdiction: making clear that the law requires only that the injury occur in the United States, and that the U.S. Courts do have jurisdiction over actions carried out, in part, outside the U.S. that produce injury or damage inside the United States.
JASTA will prevent terrorism financing cases against foreign states from being subject to the whims of transient political considerations and will instead ensure that they are based upon core principles of justice and the rule of law.
-
Two commission lawyers investigating the Saudi support network for the hijackers complained their boss, [9/11 Commission Executive Director] Philip Zelikow, blocked them from issuing subpoenas and conducting interviews of Saudi suspects.
9/11 Commission member John Lehman was interested in the hijackers’ connections to Bandar, his wife and the Islamic affairs office at the embassy. But every time he tried to get information on that front, he was stonewalled by the White House.
-
Looks like Obama may be waiting until the last minute today (Friday), when he has the most cover.
-
Veto is in, CoB Eastern, Friday.
-
(http://s9.postimg.org/o5zxthpj3/evil_obama_1.jpg)
Former FBI agent John Guandolo, who worked 9/11 and related al Qaeda cases out of the bureau’s Washington field office, says Bandar should have been a key suspect in the 9/11 probe.
“The Saudi ambassador funded two of the 9/11 hijackers through a third party,” Guandolo said. “He should be treated as a terrorist suspect, as should other members of the Saudi elite class who the US government knows are currently funding the global jihad.”
(http://s14.postimg.org/xt13qeo41/Obama_Arab_Summit_JPEG_0cb02.jpg)
“The FBI was thwarted from interviewing the Saudis we wanted to interview by the White House,” said former FBI agent Mark Rossini, who was involved in the investigation of al Qaeda and the hijackers. The White House “let them off the hook.”
What’s more, Rossini said the bureau was told no subpoenas could be served to produce evidence tying departing Saudi suspects to 9/11. The FBI, in turn, iced local investigations that led back to the Saudis.
(https://s18.postimg.org/71cdtj06x/bamabush.jpg)
Directly from the 28 pages:
“Al Bayoumi provided substantial assistance to hijackers Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi after they arrived in San Diego in February 2000.”
“Al Bayoumi had extensive contact with SAUDI Government establishments in the United States and received financial support from a SAUDI company affiliated with the SAUDI Ministry of Defense.”
“The documentary evidence that al Bayoumi provided assistance to al Hazmi and al Mihdhar is solid.”
“The FBI discovered that al Bayoumi had far more extensive ties to the SAUDI Government than previously realized.”
“Bassnan has many ties to the SAUDI Government.”
“Bassnan reportedly received funding and possibly a fake passport from SAUDI Government officials.”
“Bassnan and his wife have received financial support from the SAUDI Ambassador to the United States and his wife.”
“Bassnan also has other ties to the SAUDI Government.”
“Bassnan’s wife received a monthly stipend from Princess Haifa.”
“These checks were payable to Bassnan’s wife and were drawn on the Riggs Bank account of Prince Bandar’s wife.”
“Bassnan cashed a check from Bandar in the amount of $15,000.”
“Bassnan’s wife also received at least one check directly from Bandar.”
“Bassnan is an extremist and supporter of Usama Bin Ladin.”
“Bassnan spoke of Bin Ladin as if he were a god.”
“Bassnan also knew Bin Ladin’s family in SAUDI Arabia and speaks on his mobile phone with members of the family who are living in the United States.”
“The Ibn Tamiyah Mosque in Culver City is a site of extremist-related activity.”
“An FBI agent said he believed that SAUDI Government money was being laundered through the Ibn Tamiyah Mosque.”
“There are also indications of SAUDI Government support for terrorist activity through charitable organizations.”
“CIA, Treasury, and FBI officials have all expressed their concern about the al-Haramain Foundation’s ties to both the SAUDI Government and terrorist activity.”
“The al Haramain Foundation has clear ties to the SAUDI Government and intelligence reporting suggests it is providing financial and logistical support to al Qaeda.”
“The FBI has located correspondence between al Bayoumi and the al Haramain Islamic Foundation.”
“The subject of Phoenix and Portland FBI counterterrorism investigations, also has close ties to a member of the SAUDI royal family.”
“Although his name was on the State Department watchlist, BLANK was apparently able to circumvent the Customs Service and the Immigration and Naturalization Service because he was traveling with the SAUDI prince.”
“The FBI expressed their concern that BLANK and others were using their status as SAUDI Arabian Airlines employees as a cover to enable them to transport weapons in and out of the United States.”
“In testimony and interviews, a number of FBI agents and CIA officers complained to the Joint Inquiry about a lack of SAUDI cooperation in terrorism investigations both before and after the September 11 attacks.”
“The SAUDIS have been useless and obstructionist for years.”
“The SAUDIS will only act when it is in their self-interest.”
“When a high level officer was asked how the September 11 attacks might have been prevented, he cited greater SAUDI cooperation, pointing to an example from the summer of 2001 when the U.S. government requested SAUDI assistance, with no success.”
“According to the former Chief of Alec Station, it was clear from about 1996 that the SAUDI Government would not cooperate with the United States on matters relating to Usama Bin Ladin.”
“The SAUDIS had stopped providing background information or other assistance on Bin Ladin because Bin Ladin had too much information about official SAUDI dealings with Islamic extremists in the 1980s for Riyadh to deliver him into U.S. hands.”
“The former Chief of Alec Station thought that the U.S. government’s hope of eventually obtaining SAUDI cooperation was unrealistic because SAUDI assistance to the U.S. government on this matter was contrary to SAUDI national interests.”
(http://s18.postimg.org/rtgil12a1/sept_13th_a_1.jpg)
Two days after 9/11, Bandar drinks at the White House with Cheney, Bush and Rice.
-
Repubs want to bitch about Obama letting the 911 guilty walk. But that also means admitting bush was a part of it. Damn.
-
Repubs want to bitch about Obama letting the 911 guilty walk. But that also means admitting bush was a part of it. Damn.
Yep, main people protected in America are top Bush people. So everyone's baffled on how to react. Works like a dream.
-
President's veto was overturned.... 97-1.... :o :o :o
-
Of course he will! Typical Libtard. Screw America first. Blame America first. Cost America first. Help Americans never.
the libs in the senate seem to be shitting on obama here
-
^^ Impressive.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/us/politics/senate-votes-to-override-obama-veto-on-9-11-victims-bill.html?_r=0
-
President's veto was overturned.... 97-1.... :o :o :o
Congress rejects Obama veto of 9/11 bill, in first override of presidency
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/28/congress-rejects-obama-veto-911-bill-in-first-override-presidency.html
Marking a significant defeat for the White House, the House ensured the bill will become law after voting 348-77 to override Wednesday afternoon. This followed a 97-1 vote hours earlier in the Senate.
That fucking dinosaur again:
The lone "no" vote in the Senate was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
-
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/298290-white-house-lashes-out-at-embarrassing-senate-veto
Obama can go catch aids and croak from banging an indoneasian hooker for all I care. FNG traitor communist thug pos - F Him
-
Repubs want to bitch about Obama letting the 911 guilty walk. But that also means admitting bush was a part of it. Damn.
::) Typical 240 - please bro - STFU sometimes
-
Needless to say, Lindsey Graham and his pals have been very helpful to Obama in the past several months.
They managed to add a provision that would allow the executive branch to halt the litigation if the executive branch proved in court that good-faith negotiations for a settlement with a nation were underway. This would preserve the executive branch’s purview over foreign policy while still giving a pathway for family members to sue.
-
::) Typical 240 - please bro - STFU sometimes
SC,
Do you think this dude from the saudi govt gave $ and support to the 911 hijackers, as those 28 pages show?
-
https://www.scribd.com/document/326074287/Saudi-Lawsuit#from_embed