Saudi Arabia and 9/11
So far, Graham is holding up a bill:
Sen. Lindsey Graham has placed a hold on legislation that would open the door for victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks to sue Saudi Arabia.
Graham (R-S.C.), who is a co-sponsor of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, put the hold on his own bill over concerns that new changes could expose the U.S. to legal attacks.
thehill.com
I have some problems with the idea of suing foreign governments in U.S. courts.
But aside from that, while I love conspiracy theories as much as the next person, what motivation would S.A. have had to underwrite Al Qaeda?
GL2 said:
So far, Graham is holding up a bill:
Sen. Lindsey Graham has placed a hold on legislation that would open the door for victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks to sue Saudi Arabia.
Graham (R-S.C.), who is a co-sponsor of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, put the hold on his own bill over concerns that new changes could expose the U.S. to legal attacks.
thehill.com
as well he should. Private citizens should not be suing foreign nations in US courts.
Why is ok to hold Iran responsible but not Saudi Arabia?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/04/20/supreme-court-iran-terrorism-compensation-beirut-bombing/83275082/
Supreme Court upholds Iran payments for terrorism
Richard Wolf, USA TODAY11:15 a.m. EDT April 20, 2016
TWEETLINKEDINCOMMENTEMAILMORE
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld actions taken by Congress and President Obama that held Iran financially responsible for acts of terrorism dating back to the 1983 bombing of a Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.
The 6-2 ruling by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a victory for victims and their surviving family members, who had sought access to some $2 billion in assets controlled by Iran in a U.S. bank.
The court determined that a law passed by Congress did not dictate to the courts how to handle the dispute, as the Iranian challengers had claimed. The justices also said the Constitution gives the president and Congress broad powers to conduct foreign policy.
"Exercise by Congress and the president of control over claims against foreign governments, as well as foreign government-owned property in the United States, is hardly a novelty," Ginsburg said in summarizing her 24-page opinion from the bench.
Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, dissented. He said the narrowly crafted congressional statute, which specified that hundreds of plaintiffs should gain access to the money, sought to dictate the result of the case.
"No less than if it had passed a law saying 'respondents win,' Congress has decided this case by enacting a bespoke statute tailored to this case that resolves the parties' specific legal disputes to guarantee respondents victory," Roberts said.
But during oral argument, a majority of justices noted that Congress frequently passes laws with individualized effects, such as providing funds for a particular bridge or helping a specific person.
"You think the issue here is the protection of the judiciary, rather than providing a certain element of equal treatment for the people who are the litigants in the case?" Justice Samuel Alito asked Jeffrey Lamken, the lawyer representing Iran's central bank. "I would think it would be the opposite."
###a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/13/supreme-court-iran-terrorism-beirut-marines-attack/78649562/"###
USA TODAY
###/a###
How about releasing redacted pages but not suing? Can of worms? Might dispel conspiracy theories.
GL2 said:
How about releasing redacted pages but not suing? Can of worms? Might dispel conspiracy theories.
yes, I can see that, but I think most of the redacted high security top secret stuff is probably harmless info. what I would not like to see is any redacted info causing Americans or foreigners working undercover for Americans to be exposed, so its a very tricky thing.
do the redacted pages hold names of people that need protection, or do they shine light on people who need to be publicly held accountable?
tjohn said:
I have some problems with the idea of suing foreign governments in U.S. courts.
But aside from that, while I love conspiracy theories as much as the next person, what motivation would S.A. have had to underwrite Al Qaeda?
Exactly. When 9/11 occurred we were told the 15 Saudis involved were enemies of the SA regime as was Bin Laden.
28 pages: the controversy over Saudi Arabia and 9/11, explained
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11454968/28-pages-saudi-arabia-911
Some members of Congress who have read the report, but are barred from revealing its contents, describe it as potentially damning. An unnamed member of Congress told the New Yorker, "The real question is whether it was sanctioned at the royal-family level or beneath that, and whether these leads were followed through."
"The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11, and they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier," former Sen. Bob Graham, who is leading the charge to release the document, said in February.
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11454968/28-pages-saudi-arabia-911
Other officials, though, say the findings are speculative and inconclusive and have been rebuked by subsequent investigations. They warn that their release would spread unfounded conspiracy theories and cause unwarranted damage to the US-Saudi alliance, which has grown increasingly fragile in recent years.
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11454968/28-pages-saudi-arabia-911
Saudi Arabia has a long and tangled history with jihadist movements. In the 1980s, during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, the Saudi government (along with the US) aggressively funded Arab volunteers who fought against the Soviets.
The Saudis especially favored religious extremists, including a wealthy Saudi citizen named Osama bin Laden, who led a group of fanatical Arab fighters in Afghanistan that later became al-Qaeda.
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11454968/28-pages-saudi-arabia-911
I don't know if the Saudis were behind 9/11 but I will go to my grave believing that they knew it was going to happen.
I used to know a woman (her first name was Jean Anne) who was married to a member of the Saudi Royal Family. She was the next door neighbor and good friend to my closest friend. So whenever I was at a party at my friend's apartment Jean Anne was there too. The three of us often did fun things in Manhattan together. She was the executive Assistant to Gil Kaplan, founder of Institutional Investor when she met her future husband who was a Saudi diplomat with the UN. She was a stunningly beautiful young woman, southern society, her trust fund income was enough to pay the rent in a 1 bedroom luxury Manhattan hirise. She had gone to Tulane.
She had to accompany her future husband to Saudi Arabia when he petitioned the king for permission to marry her. Permission was denied but they got married anyway. He was transferred to London and she remained in NY in a Park Avenue floor through apartment that he bought for her. He would visit every few months and they took fabulous trips together, but she never went to London to visit him.
Then suddenly Jean Anne called our mutual friend saying she was moving to London that weekend. Her husband had arrived on a Friday in a private jet and she was packing her clothing, jewelry and artwork and leaving for London on Sunday. She asked my friend to take her 2 cats or help find a home for them. She arrived in London and was moved into a large suite at the Connaught Hotel where she remained for almost a year until they bought an apartment. We suspect we was living with a Saudi Wife in his own home and this was unexpected because otherwise he would have had an apartment for her already.
I went with my friend on Monday to pick up the cats and see the Park Avenue apartment ( I had never been inside it) . It was beautiful. Everything was as if they still lived there except her clothes and a few paintings were gone, as were the bank of computers in his study. There was still food in the refrigerator.
The next day was 9/11
So , her Saudi diplomat husband had been living in London for over 10 years without her. He appears on Friday without warning to move her to London. On Sunday they left. On Tuesday 9/11 happened.
Of course, my good friend reported this to the FBI. The FBI never followed up, never contacted her.
We're talking about a government that keeps the peace by tolerating their crazy Wahhabi mullahs, allowing Neanderthal public policies. Their beliefs are as close to ISIS/al queda thinking as any government tolerates. They have no alternative to their oil economy because they keep the 1000's in the royal family rich and decadent behind gated communities.
My spouse (as I've said so many times) has the pleasure of teaching western culture's founding documents to Saudi kids here. They know virtually nothing about anything besides the Koran.
They keep slaves, otherwise known as foreign workers. It's a despicable government that might've used its natural resources to modernize its country rather than spending like drunken sailors on all the western goodies they despise.
I have no trouble believing Abdullah, and now Salman (another doddering old man), would (at minimum) turn a blind eye.
That said, the kids sent here are naive but generally nice young men, who say things like "Why would a Saudi woman want to drive a car when they have a driver?", a perfect example of how they've been miseducated.
sarahzm said:
I don't know if the Saudis were behind 9/11 but I will go to my grave believing that they knew it was going to happen.
I used to know a woman (her first name was Jean Anne) who was married to a member of the Saudi Royal Family. She was the next door neighbor and good friend to my closest friend. So whenever I was at a party at my friend's apartment Jean Anne was there too. The three of us often did fun things in Manhattan together. She was the executive Assistant to Gil Kaplan, founder of Institutional Investor when she met her future husband who was a Saudi diplomat with the UN. She was a stunningly beautiful young woman, southern society, her trust fund income was enough to pay the rent in a 1 bedroom luxury Manhattan hirise. She had gone to Tulane.
She had to accompany her future husband to Saudi Arabia when he petitioned the king for permission to marry her. Permission was denied but they got married anyway. He was transferred to London and she remained in NY in a Park Avenue floor through apartment that he bought for her. He would visit every few months and they took fabulous trips together, but she never went to London to visit him.
Then suddenly Jean Anne called our mutual friend saying she was moving to London that weekend. Her husband had arrived on a Friday in a private jet and she was packing her clothing, jewelry and artwork and leaving for London on Sunday. She asked my friend to take her 2 cats or help find a home for them. She arrived in London and was moved into a large suite at the Connaught Hotel where she remained for almost a year until they bought an apartment. We suspect we was living with a Saudi Wife in his own home and this was unexpected because otherwise he would have had an apartment for her already.
I went with my friend on Monday to pick up the cats and see the Park Avenue apartment ( I had never been inside it) . It was beautiful. Everything was as if they still lived there except her clothes and a few paintings were gone, as were the bank of computers in his study. There was still food in the refrigerator.
The next day was 9/11
So , her Saudi diplomat husband had been living in London for over 10 years without her. He appears on Friday without warning to move her to London. On Sunday they left. On Tuesday 9/11 happened.
Of course, my good friend reported this to the FBI. The FBI never followed up, never contacted her.
Is this a parody? If it is then it is a great one. If not then it is exactly the problem.
Since the downturn, the government has become less generous in sending young people here for education. But these kids are prized students because they pay full freight.
zoinks, I know you're interested in only the bottom line but it's impolite to call other posters liars.
GL2 said:
zoinks, I know you're interested in only the bottom line but it's impolite to call other posters liars.
I am not calling anyone a liar.
I'm no conspiracy theorist but I do resent this "ally" bullsiht when what we really mean is that we're willing to fight for "freedom" only in convenient places.
sarahzm said:
I don't know if the Saudis were behind 9/11 but I will go to my grave believing that they knew it was going to happen.
I used to know a woman (her first name was Jean Anne) who was married to a member of the Saudi Royal Family. She was the next door neighbor and good friend to my closest friend. So whenever I was at a party at my friend's apartment Jean Anne was there too. The three of us often did fun things in Manhattan together. She was the executive Assistant to Gil Kaplan, founder of Institutional Investor when she met her future husband who was a Saudi diplomat with the UN. She was a stunningly beautiful young woman, southern society, her trust fund income was enough to pay the rent in a 1 bedroom luxury Manhattan hirise. She had gone to Tulane.
She had to accompany her future husband to Saudi Arabia when he petitioned the king for permission to marry her. Permission was denied but they got married anyway. He was transferred to London and she remained in NY in a Park Avenue floor through apartment that he bought for her. He would visit every few months and they took fabulous trips together, but she never went to London to visit him.
Then suddenly Jean Anne called our mutual friend saying she was moving to London that weekend. Her husband had arrived on a Friday in a private jet and she was packing her clothing, jewelry and artwork and leaving for London on Sunday. She asked my friend to take her 2 cats or help find a home for them. She arrived in London and was moved into a large suite at the Connaught Hotel where she remained for almost a year until they bought an apartment. We suspect we was living with a Saudi Wife in his own home and this was unexpected because otherwise he would have had an apartment for her already.
I went with my friend on Monday to pick up the cats and see the Park Avenue apartment ( I had never been inside it) . It was beautiful. Everything was as if they still lived there except her clothes and a few paintings were gone, as were the bank of computers in his study. There was still food in the refrigerator.
The next day was 9/11
So , her Saudi diplomat husband had been living in London for over 10 years without her. He appears on Friday without warning to move her to London. On Sunday they left. On Tuesday 9/11 happened.
Of course, my good friend reported this to the FBI. The FBI never followed up, never contacted her.
I don't know how you would know that something was followed up by the FBI. I don't disbelieve the story. In fact, I have a couple myself, and they too were shared with the FBI, who didn't contact me to let me know what they were doing with the information. I think they did follow up but there isn't any reason that they would tell me if they had.
No Its not a parody. I kind of wish it was. When I said the FBI never followed up, I should have said that my friend made the phone call, gave the FBI the information and she was never contacted again. I thought that if they had followed up, an agent might have called back to interview her. But, she never heard from them.
This issue has been in the back of lots of peoples' heads since 9/11 - possible high-level Saudi involvement. Do we release the 28 redacted pages? Do we allow legal action against alleged Saudi comspirators? Is any relationship between the countries worth more than resolution of the matter?
______________________________________________________
As he prepares for a trip to Saudi Arabia, President Obama finds himself firmly wedged in the midst of a debate over legislation that many of the families of victims of the September 11th attacks and some lawmakers say could help clear the way to hold that nation's government responsible in court.
A bipartisan group of lawmakers have a bill before Congress that would for the first time let Americans sue foreign countries if they are found to be responsible for terror attacks on U.S. soil — all with an eye toward buttressing the 9/11 families' efforts.
Saudi Arabia counters that if congressional efforts to hold that nation's government liable for the attacks are successful the Saudis will sell off $750 billion in American assets. Adel al Jubeir, the current foreign minister, delivered the threat of economic retaliation on behalf of his government.
The debate reflects a big disagreement between two allies and a great deal of mutual distrust.
The situation is troubling to the Obama administration. White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters on Monday that he can't say whether the legislation or the matter of declassifying the 28 pages of the 2002 congressional report will come up between Obama and the Saudis in the upcoming trip.
However, "the fact that it's been in the news more recently might change that equation," Earnest said on Thursday. He also couldn't say whether Obama has read the pages.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is working on declassifying the report and has expressed a desire to have it done by the end of the year.
In the meantime, the administration opposes the structure of a congressional bill aimed at removing immunity for governments that sponsor terrorist acts that kill U.S. citizens on American soil.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ahead-saudi-trip-obama-wedged-debate-over-9-11-report-n557871