Support NeoGAF

[TheRealTalker]

Sue if old

The US Senate passed a bill on Tuesday that would allow survivors and relatives of those killed in the 9/11 attacks to seek legal damages against the government of Saudi Arabia for its alleged complicity in the terror plot.

The legislation — the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) — passed the Senate unanimously, despite a veto threat from President Barack Obama and warnings from Saudi officials about possible repercussions.

At a press conference on Tuesday, Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, a co-sponsor of the legislation, said the bill is overdue.

"Today the Senate has spoken loudly and unanimously that the families of victims of terrorist attacks should be able to hold the perpetrators, even if it's a country, a nation, accountable," Schumer said, adding that the legislation does not put the US at risk of foreign lawsuits because the measure only applies to attacks on US soil.

Under current law, foreign governments are often considered immune from lawsuits filed in US courts, largely a result of the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act. JASTA would create exemptions in the immunity provisions for terrorism or other acts that cause "physical injury to person or property or death" in the US, the most obvious case being the 9/11 attacks.

The White House said on Tuesday that it has "serious concerns" about the bill, which still needs to pass the House before it hits the president's desk.
"It's difficult to imagine the president signing this legislation," White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters.

More in link (as seen primarly in older threads such as 28 pages, SA accusastions, etc...)
https://news.vice.com/article/senat...s-sue-saudi-arabia?utm_source=vicenewstwitter



Seeing as I am not an American I look at this bill not for the whole current reason as to why it was approved but the implication afterwards (if this bill is signed by Obama)

As in if the US can sue SA then can other countries sue America? Because if so then there would likely be a long, long, looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong line up for that.

 

[the_batman]

you think after all these years there's even any evidence left to implicate anyone.

 

[DragonSworne]

Obama is really going to veto a bill that got an unanimous approval from the Senate?

I'm completely against Obama in case and if he does veto it I'll seriously reconsider thinking he is a good president.

 

[Aaronrules380]

Obama is really going to veto a bill that got an unanimous approval from the Senate?

I'm completely against Obama in case and if he does veto it I'll seriously reconsider thinking he is a good president.

The bill sounds like a horrible idea, so he probably should veto it tbh. And vetoes can be overwritten regardless with a super majority vote

 

[TI82]

How is this a good bill at all? What a waste of time

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I don't even know how one goes about suing Saudi Arabia.

 

[darkace]

Obama is really going to veto a bill that got an unanimous approval from the Senate?

Why would he not veto it? This bill will achieve nothing except raise tensions between the Saudis and the US.

 

[gutter_trash]

I hope they sue the Sauds for everything they've got,

Saudi Arabia harbored and financed terrorists. They should be brought to justice.

 

[linkboy]

It's not like the Saudi's would even pay if the case went to court.

 

[Eyemus Lutt]

Obama is really going to veto a bill that got an unanimous approval from the Senate?

I'm completely against Obama in case and if he does veto it I'll seriously reconsider thinking he is a good president.

I don't think you realize how dumb this bill is. If other countries sued the USA for unlawful death and illegal wars, the USA would go bankrupt. Even if the victims of 9/11 sue and win, how do they think they'll get the money? You think the government will start seizing Saudi assets in the USA, that's the quickest was to a financial collapse as Saudi Arabia and every other middle East country pulls out all it's money and investments and puts it in China.

 

[ponpo]

I know most hijackers were Saudi but how was the government complicit?

 

[Aaronrules380]

Why would he not veto it? This bill will achieve nothing except raise tensions between the Saudis and the US.

The only reason I could see not to veto it is that since it passed unanimously, a veto will likely be overruled anyways, so he might prefer to just let it pass in order to not anger the senate too much

 

[old manatee]

How is this a good bill at all? What a waste of time

I agree. I don't see this having an effect on casting in the MCU.

 

[Crimson_Fate]

Obama is really going to veto a bill that got an unanimous approval from the Senate?

I'm completely against Obama in case and if he does veto it I'll seriously reconsider thinking he is a good president.

If the house passes it with 2/3 it is veto-proof anyway...

 

[Stinkles]

I hope they sue the Sauds for everything they've got,

Saudi Arabia harbored and financed terrorists. They should be brought to justice.

Yes so the correct order of events is to stop supporting SA. Release the 28 pages and tons of other evidence we have and THEN pass that Bill.

Until then it's political grandstanding and toothless.

 

[the_batman]

I know most hijackers were Saudi but how was the government complicit?

because some think members of the government funded the hijackers.

 

[dextran]

should have been an act of war
none of that Afghanistan head fake

 

[Mr. X]

What are the statute of limitations in this case? Are there?

How do you even sue another country?

 

[BryanGT]

The only reason I could see not to veto it is that since it passed unanimously, a veto will likely be overruled anyways, so he might prefer to just let it pass in order to not anger the senate too much

I think Obama gives zero fucks about what the Senate thinks at this point.

 

[lastplayed]

What did the families of non-American victims do? Did any of them sue?

 

[Aaronrules380]

I think Obama gives zero fucks about what the Senate thinks at this point.

Probably tbh

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

because some think members of the government funded the hijackers.

The Saudi government most assuredly did.

 

[gutter_trash]

whatever happened to going after countries that sponsored and harbored terrorists?


shame on the apologists

 

[TheRealTalker]

whatever happened to going after countries that sponsored and harbored terrorists?


shame on the apologists

there was no such thing in the first place

just Kabuki theater

 

[Lamel]

While I agree that Saudi needs to answer for a lot of its shit, this bill seems pretty pointless. No more than a symbolic gesture, as I don't see how any average family can all of a sudden sue a major government and get something out of it, even if it becomes a "class action" style thing. If we really care about making Saudi answer for its fuckery there are many other, more effective ways to go about it.

On another note, the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan should also sue the USA for the havoc we wreaked in their countries.

 

[Mii]

We need to terminate our relationship with Saudi Arabia. I hope Congress overrides Obama on this.

 

[DragonSworne]

On another note, the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan should also sue the USA for the havoc we wreaked in their countries.

I agree with this. The Bush administration should also be charged with war crimes and conspiracy.

I can't believe they got away with what they did.

 

[ponpo]

The Saudi government most assuredly did.

Link?

 

[TheRealTalker]

again like I stated in the OP even if whatever country sues another country if all things tumble downward as Obama predicted

what would be the most intriguing aspect of it is the dirt that will likely surface in every court case

maybe make some countries fear doing things if they can be accountable via civilian court


if said country doesn't just say fuck you though

 

[Chairman Yang]

Why would he not veto it? This bill will achieve nothing except raise tensions between the Saudis and the US.

Tensions should be raised between SA and the US.

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

While I agree that Saudi needs to answer for a lot of its shit, this bill seems pretty pointless. No more than a symbolic gesture, as I don't see how any average family can all of a sudden sue a major government and get something out of it, even if it becomes a "class action" style thing. If we really care about making Saudi answer for its fuckery there are many other, more effective ways to go about it.

On another note, the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan should also sue the USA for the havoc we wreaked in their countries.

Iran has been sued in US courts and lost by default since they didn't participate. People have been trying to take antiques loaned to US universities by Iran since they can't get Iran to pay up.

 

[darkace]

Tensions should be raised between SA and the US.

That's a very simplistic view of the situation.

 

[BajiBoxer]

I know most hijackers were Saudi but how was the government complicit?

The investigation was supposedly stopped before it got too deep, but here's a pretty good article that illustrates the accusations against Saudi Arabia:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...1-saudi-arabia-congressional-report-terrorism

 

[ponpo]

The investigation was supposedly stopped before it got too deep, but here's a pretty good article that illustrates the accusations against Saudi Arabia:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...1-saudi-arabia-congressional-report-terrorism

Thanks.

 

[n00bsauce87]

But first responders couldn't get free healthcare...

Priorities folks.

 

[Chairman Yang]

That's a very simplistic view of the situation.

How so?

 

[darkace]

How so?

As much as the US doesn't like the actions of Saudi Arabia, and is generally fighting against a terror threat that has its roots in Saudi actions, working with them is still a necessary evil in the Middle-East. Or as Obama said when asked if the Saudi's were friends: 'It's complicated'.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Obama could veto this and ask for the full report to be released. That's what should have been done preemptively. Now people will see Obama as blocking the release of the full report, which is what people really care about. If he had had it released long ago, this bill wouldn't have made much waves at all.

 

[Tamanon]

Kinda silly bill that really doesn't do anything. But it's a good bullet point for election ads.

 

[QuantumZebra]

I hope they sue the Sauds for everything they've got,

Saudi Arabia harbored and financed terrorists. They should be brought to justice.

+++++++1

 

[pgtl_10]

We need to terminate our relationship with Saudi Arabia. I hope Congress overrides Obama on this.

That be a terrible idea.

 

[Mii]

That be a terrible idea.

Our relationship with Saudi Arabia is a terrible idea. We need a major realignment that acknowledges the cancer that Saudi Arabia's Wahabiism is in the world.

 

[pgtl_10]

Iran has been sued in US courts and lost by default since they didn't participate. People have been trying to take antiques loaned to US universities by Iran since they can't get Iran to pay up.

Which is dumb.

 

[TheRealTalker]

the current people ruling SA isn't the same blooks that ran the country in 2001

but alas we must keep things basic it seems

 

[Brazil]

This is so bizarre. One could argue that the US government as an institution is way more liable for 9/11 than the Saudi government without even considering conspiracy theories.

 

[Muzy72]

What's the point in sueing them? It's not like they're going to pay up, or even bother participating in a trial.

 

[Ether_Snake]

SA btw is threatening to liquidate $750 billion in US assets.

The thing is officially it claims to have less than $200 billions in such assets.

April 20
Saudis threaten $750B asset sale, but experts question it

Saudi Arabia says it may sell off $750 billion in U.S. assets if a Congressional vote doesn't go its way, but experts question if the desert kingdom would carry out the threat — or if it even owns the assets.

Yesterday
Saudi Arabia’s $117 Billion Treasuries Tally Poses Fresh Puzzle

After the U.S. government’s first-ever release quantifying Saudi Arabia’s Treasuries holdings, a question echoed through Wall Street: That’s it?

The kingdom held $116.8 billion of Treasuries as of March, according to data that the Treasury Department released Monday in response to a Freedom-of-Information Act request submitted by Bloomberg News. It’s the first time the U.S. disclosed a breakdown for the world’s biggest oil exporter, after lumping it in with a group of other oil producers since 1974.

The tally is about 20 percent of the country’s $587 billion of foreign reserves, and roughly 10 percent of the stockpiles of China and Japan. The figure is also dwarfed by the $750 billion of Treasuries and other dollar-denominated assets the kingdom threatened to sell if Congress passes a bill allowing the monarchy to be held liable in U.S. courts for the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, the New York Times reported in April.

While the tally solves one puzzle, it introduces another: Central banks typically keep about two-thirds of reserves in dollar-denominated assets, according to the International Monetary Fund. And because Saudi Arabia’s riyal is pegged to the dollar and its main export -- oil -- is priced in the greenback, the kingdom should keep an even larger share of reserves in dollar-denominated securities like Treasuries, according to strategists.

That leaves just a few options for the remaining dollar-denominated investments, if they exist. The kingdom’s reserve fund may hold fewer dollar-denominated securities than most expect, it may be parking securities in custody at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or elsewhere, or it may own other securities that don’t show up in the Treasury’s data, such as stocks, derivatives or non-government debt.

“They could have positions in futures that wouldn’t be counted in here,” or holdings in another country, said Thomas Simons, a money-market economist in New York with Jefferies Group LLC, one of the 23 primary dealers. But the puzzle is the amount of assets the nation would need to hold elsewhere, he said. “We’re talking about more than twice what they have domestically.”

 

[pgtl_10]

Our relationship with Saudi Arabia is a terrible idea. We need a major realignment that acknowledges the cancer that Saudi Arabia's Wahabiism is in the world.

Go for it and see how much havoc that would cause. You won't get cooperation on anything. There will ten times the extremists. Our oil business will lose virtualy every contract in the Middle East. Worst of all Saudia Arabia would change the currency they accept oil in and force other countries to follow suit. That would could cause a change the dollar's reserve currency status.

 

[Mii]

Go for it and see how much havoc that would cause. You won't get cooperation on anything. There will ten times the extremists. Our oil business will lose virtualy every contract in the Middle East. Worst of all Saudia Arabia would change the currency they accept oil in and force other countries to follow suit. That would could cause a change the dollar's reserve currency status.

Of all the possible 'doomsday' fights, this is the one that is worth it. None of the rest of the Middle Eastern countries actually like Saudi Arabia - instead they feel coerced by them, both Sunni and Shia. We have fracking now and can stand on our own. And in the current day and age where the Euro is considered risky and the Yuan and Yen are considered troubled, no one is going to leave the dollar.

Lets have the (economic) fight. Its now or never.

 

[BajiBoxer]

whatever happened to going after countries that sponsored and harbored terrorists?


shame on the apologists

It gives me a headache thinking about how deep this goes, and how much of this shit from 9/11 on was entirely preventable.