WebGuru
Senior ODI Player
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2013
- Runs
- 21,339
- Post of the Week
- 3
-
Contact the PP Team
Obama has vetoed a bill that would allow family members of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia
- Thread starter WebGuru
- Start date
Couch Cricketer
First Class Star
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2007
- Runs
- 3,512
Republicans passed this bill to score points and they knew Obama will veto as if this had gone through other countries would have passed similar laws aimed at american companies.
Actually I think it was unanimously passed by both Republicans and Democrats.
they can if they want to?
Saeed
ODI Debutant
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Runs
- 10,077
Unethical but intelligent decision by Obama. U.S. has been involved all around the world so passing this would be like opening a pandora box. This will only ruin relationship between countries and helps terrorism grow as nations will be less willing cooperate with each other.
x-men
Tape Ball Captain
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2012
- Runs
- 1,241
Vote for Trump
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Congress rejects Obama veto of Saudi 9/11 lawsuits bill
Congress has voted to override President Barack Obama's veto of a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabian officials.
In the first veto override of his presidency, the Senate voted 97-1 and the House of Representatives 348-77, meaning the bill becomes law.
The White House described the move as "embarrassing".
The president argues the bill could expose US companies, troops and officials to potential lawsuits abroad.
CIA Director John Brennan said the vote carried "grave implications" for national security, adding: "The downside is potentially huge."
The House and Senate unanimously passed the legislation, known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism (JASTA), this year despite the Obama administration's lobbying efforts.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37498033
Congress has voted to override President Barack Obama's veto of a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabian officials.
In the first veto override of his presidency, the Senate voted 97-1 and the House of Representatives 348-77, meaning the bill becomes law.
The White House described the move as "embarrassing".
The president argues the bill could expose US companies, troops and officials to potential lawsuits abroad.
CIA Director John Brennan said the vote carried "grave implications" for national security, adding: "The downside is potentially huge."
The House and Senate unanimously passed the legislation, known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism (JASTA), this year despite the Obama administration's lobbying efforts.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37498033
it was passed unanimously by both democrats and republicans.
Saeed
ODI Debutant
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Runs
- 10,077
Conspiracy theories don't hold much weight in courts though.
good move by the congress (both democrats and repubs) to reject the obama veto. u cannot have the executive making a mockery of the democratic process. if the executive starts just vetoing the people's decisions, what makes usa better than a dictatorship? as an added bonus, this will be a part of obama legacy too.
You still didn't answer the question that was posed.
Are you sure about that? why did Mushy fold in a hurry in 2001? With killing of Osama about mile for Pak military school is enough evidence. Lot more than they have against Saudi govt.
what's there to answer. getting everybody on board and getting legislation to congress takes a long long time. and sometimes u don't feel a certain way about things until time has passed since the event and things have come to light. regardless both republicans and democrats wholly supported it.
Saeed
ODI Debutant
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Runs
- 10,077
Could have been many reasons. Looks like you know something most people don't. Not really, its really easy to cross the Afghan border and live in Pakistan.
Anyways coming back to the topic, where is the evidence for Pakistan training Saudi Hijackers?
Pak nurtured Taliban, Taliban nurtured al qaeda, Saudis funded al qaeda. Saudi are getting sued. no reason why pak can't be sued (ther then being broke and not having much money)
Syed1
ODI Captain
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2015
- Runs
- 46,041
- Post of the Week
- 3
Taliban and Al Quaeda were formed by USA. So going by your logic USA should also sue itself.
You can always trust an Indian to make a fool of himself
)Taliban and Al Quaeda were formed by USA. So going by your logic USA should also sue itself.
You can always trust an Indian to make a fool of himself
the counter argument to that would be that America funded mujahadeen to fight soviet occupation of afghanitan, while pak and Saudi funded, trained and aided taliban/al qaeda to promote islamic terrorism
Saeed
ODI Debutant
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Runs
- 10,077
Still no answer. Where is the evidence for Pakistan training saudi hijackers? Saudis are getting sued because hijackers were Saudi citizens and might have been supported by Saudi government.
Saudi hijackers does not equal saudi govt sponsorship. I figured you were smart enough to realize that.
the widely publicised reason for the obama veto is that there is a connection in there somewhere to the saudi govt in the classified documents. these documents would need to be made public now that the bill has passed.
Saeed
ODI Debutant
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Runs
- 10,077
Thats why I used the words "might have". I doubt these suits will get anywhere but if Saudia and Pakistan are involved in 9/11 then they deserve to get sued. Congress has opened a pandora box so U.S. Government equally deserve to get sued for killing civilians in Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and Syria.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...remorse-after-overriding-obama-veto/91289856/
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., suggested that the House might take up a bill to fix problems with the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA, after it comes back from its election recess. He acknowledged Obama's concerns that the bill could subject U.S. service members to lawsuits in foreign courts.
"So I'd like to think that there's a way we could fix so that our service members do not have legal problems overseas, while still protecting the rights of the 9/11 victims, which is what JASTA did do," Ryan told reporters Thursday.
"Nobody really had focused on the potential downside in terms of our international relationships," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said. "I think it was just a ball dropped."
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., suggested that the House might take up a bill to fix problems with the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA, after it comes back from its election recess. He acknowledged Obama's concerns that the bill could subject U.S. service members to lawsuits in foreign courts.
"So I'd like to think that there's a way we could fix so that our service members do not have legal problems overseas, while still protecting the rights of the 9/11 victims, which is what JASTA did do," Ryan told reporters Thursday.
"Nobody really had focused on the potential downside in terms of our international relationships," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said. "I think it was just a ball dropped."
Last edited by a moderator:
so [MENTION=137535]anuk[/MENTION], looks like republican retards have dropped the ball again. Trying to blame Obama for it. Idiots.
Republican leaders are as dumb as their supporters. LMAO.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-gop-chutzpah-20160930-snap-story.html
The classic example of chutzpah is the boy who kills his parents and then pleads for mercy at his trial because he’s an orphan. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has come close with his suggestion that President Obama is to blame for problems with an ill-considered bill that the president vehemently opposed only to see his veto overridden by Congress.
This week, after both houses had overridden Obama’s veto of legislation that would allow 9/11 victims to sue the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in U.S. courts — assuming responsibility could ever be established — McConnell acknowledged that the law might have “unintended ramifications.” (McConnell voted for the override.)
Are u being intentionally obtuse? What part of uninamiously passed bill do u not understand? Do u want the executive to overrule a bill passed by both parties? If there are issues the Congress will sort it out.
347-88?and guess which party pushed the bill trying to score political point and which party is lamenting the override?
congress? sort out issues? guess you have been sleeping for 6 years.
The bill was originally passed unanimously by the congress before Obama vetoed it.
Maybe the congress won't work it out but that is no business of Obama's. Its pretty embarrassing for Obama and boty parties rightly stepped up to embarrass him and shade his legacy.
Maybe the congress won't work it out but that is no business of Obama's. Its pretty embarrassing for Obama and boty parties rightly stepped up to embarrass him and shade his legacy.
it is consistent with your past cluelessness.
This was nothing more than a political dog and pony show in a election year. Looks like it is going to nicely blow up in the face of the party in power in congress and senate
Last edited:
Couch Cricketer
First Class Star
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2007
- Runs
- 3,512
They passed it because of this being an election year as no one was willing to risk saying no apart from Obama who doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected .
Abdullah719
T20I Captain
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2013
- Runs
- 44,825
FBI 'mistakenly reveals Saudi official linked' to 9/11 attackers
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has accidentally disclosed the name of a Saudi diplomat suspected of directing support to two al-Qaeda hijackers in the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, Yahoo News reported.
The mistake about the identity of the Saudi embassy official was made in a declaration by an FBI official in response to a lawsuit by families of 9/11 victims who accuse Saudi Arabia's government of involvement in the attacks, the report said on Tuesday.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020...ial-linked-911-attackers-200513063209259.html
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has accidentally disclosed the name of a Saudi diplomat suspected of directing support to two al-Qaeda hijackers in the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, Yahoo News reported.
The mistake about the identity of the Saudi embassy official was made in a declaration by an FBI official in response to a lawsuit by families of 9/11 victims who accuse Saudi Arabia's government of involvement in the attacks, the report said on Tuesday.
Michael Isikoff, the chief investigative journalist at Yahoo News who was the first to notice the apparent mistake, told Al Jazeera he knew right away the disclosure was "a slip-up".
"When I noticed that the declaration included this information, I contacted the FBI for comment. Because I knew that the justice department and the Trump administration had been going to extraordinary length to keep all of this under wraps," he said.
"In fact, both Attorney General William Barr and the Acting Director of the National Intelligence Richard Grennell had filed motions with the court saying that any information relating to the Saudi embassy official and all internal FBI documents about this matter were so sensitive; they were state secrets, that means if revealed they could cause damage to the national security."
The declaration by Jill Sanborn, the assistant director of the FBI's counterterrorism division, was filed in April but unsealed late last week, according to Yahoo News.
Mussaed Ahmed al-Jarrah was mistakenly named in the declaration, an error that Yahoo News said was also confirmed by a senior US government official.
Al-Jarrah was a mid-level Saudi foreign ministry official who was assigned to the Saudi embassy in Washington, DC in 1999 and 2000.
He was in charge of supervising the activities of Ministry of Islamic Affairs employees at Saudi-funded mosques and Islamic centres in the US, according to the report.
In a portion of the filing describing the material sought by lawyers for the families of 9/11 victims, Sanborn refers to a partially declassified 2012 FBI report about an investigation into possible links between the al-Qaeda hijackers and Saudi government officials, Yahoo News said. That probe initially focused on two individuals, Fahad al-Thumairy, a cleric, and Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi agent.
A redacted copy of a three-and-a-half page October 2012 FBI "update" about the investigation said that FBI agents had uncovered "evidence" that al-Thumairy and al-Bayoumi had been "tasked" to assist two hijackers by another person whose name was blacked out. This prompted the lawyers for the families of the 9/11 victims to refer to this individual as "the third man".
Describing the request by the lawyers to depose that person under oath, Sanborn's declaration said in one instance that it involved "any and all records referring to or relating to Jarrah", according to Yahoo News.
This represented the first public confirmation that the so-called "third man" was an accredited Saudi diplomat. But all of the FBI evidence the agents had gathered about al-Jarrah and his communications about the two attackers remain under seal, the report said.
It is unclear how strong the evidence is against al-Jarrah, whose whereabouts remain unknown. But the disclosure appears likely to revive questions about Saudi Arabia's potential links to the 9/11 plot and highlights the extraordinary efforts by US government officials to prevent internal documents about the issue from becoming public, Yahoo News said.
"This shows there is a complete government cover-up of the Saudi involvement," Brett Eagleson, a spokesman for the families, told the news outlet. "This is a giant screw-up."
Yahoo News said it contacted the Department of Justice on Monday, but officials notified the court and withdrew the FBI's declaration from the public docket.
"The document was incorrectly filed in this case," the docket now reads, said the report.
Fifteen of the 19 hijackers involved in the 9/11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people, were Saudi citizens.
The Saudi government has repeatedly denied any involvement in the attacks in which al-Qaeda-affiliated men hijacked and crashed planes into New York's World Trade Center, destroying the towering buildings and sending plumes of debris shooting through the most populous US city.
A third aircraft struck the Pentagon just outside of Washington, DC, and a fourth plane crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
"When I noticed that the declaration included this information, I contacted the FBI for comment. Because I knew that the justice department and the Trump administration had been going to extraordinary length to keep all of this under wraps," he said.
"In fact, both Attorney General William Barr and the Acting Director of the National Intelligence Richard Grennell had filed motions with the court saying that any information relating to the Saudi embassy official and all internal FBI documents about this matter were so sensitive; they were state secrets, that means if revealed they could cause damage to the national security."
The declaration by Jill Sanborn, the assistant director of the FBI's counterterrorism division, was filed in April but unsealed late last week, according to Yahoo News.
Mussaed Ahmed al-Jarrah was mistakenly named in the declaration, an error that Yahoo News said was also confirmed by a senior US government official.
Al-Jarrah was a mid-level Saudi foreign ministry official who was assigned to the Saudi embassy in Washington, DC in 1999 and 2000.
He was in charge of supervising the activities of Ministry of Islamic Affairs employees at Saudi-funded mosques and Islamic centres in the US, according to the report.
In a portion of the filing describing the material sought by lawyers for the families of 9/11 victims, Sanborn refers to a partially declassified 2012 FBI report about an investigation into possible links between the al-Qaeda hijackers and Saudi government officials, Yahoo News said. That probe initially focused on two individuals, Fahad al-Thumairy, a cleric, and Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi agent.
A redacted copy of a three-and-a-half page October 2012 FBI "update" about the investigation said that FBI agents had uncovered "evidence" that al-Thumairy and al-Bayoumi had been "tasked" to assist two hijackers by another person whose name was blacked out. This prompted the lawyers for the families of the 9/11 victims to refer to this individual as "the third man".
Describing the request by the lawyers to depose that person under oath, Sanborn's declaration said in one instance that it involved "any and all records referring to or relating to Jarrah", according to Yahoo News.
This represented the first public confirmation that the so-called "third man" was an accredited Saudi diplomat. But all of the FBI evidence the agents had gathered about al-Jarrah and his communications about the two attackers remain under seal, the report said.
It is unclear how strong the evidence is against al-Jarrah, whose whereabouts remain unknown. But the disclosure appears likely to revive questions about Saudi Arabia's potential links to the 9/11 plot and highlights the extraordinary efforts by US government officials to prevent internal documents about the issue from becoming public, Yahoo News said.
"This shows there is a complete government cover-up of the Saudi involvement," Brett Eagleson, a spokesman for the families, told the news outlet. "This is a giant screw-up."
Yahoo News said it contacted the Department of Justice on Monday, but officials notified the court and withdrew the FBI's declaration from the public docket.
"The document was incorrectly filed in this case," the docket now reads, said the report.
Fifteen of the 19 hijackers involved in the 9/11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people, were Saudi citizens.
The Saudi government has repeatedly denied any involvement in the attacks in which al-Qaeda-affiliated men hijacked and crashed planes into New York's World Trade Center, destroying the towering buildings and sending plumes of debris shooting through the most populous US city.
A third aircraft struck the Pentagon just outside of Washington, DC, and a fourth plane crashed in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Similar threads
