İntikam

In a 97-1 vote, the Senate acted decisively Wednesday to override President Barack Obama's veto of Sept. 11 legislation that would allow families of victims to sue Saudi Arabia for the kingdom's alleged backing of the hijackers. (Sept. 28) AP

Terry Strada
(Photo: Brian Tumulty, USA TODAY)
WASHINGTON — The House and Senate Wednesday voted to reject President Obama's veto of legislation allowing lawsuits against foreign sponsors of terrorism in the first successful override of a presidential veto since Obama took office.

The president had vetoed the legislation Friday because he said the bill — known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA — would infringe on the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy. It was the 12th veto of his presidency.


USA TODAY
Why Obama doesn't want 9/11 families suing Saudi Arabia

But after an intense, lengthy push by 9/11 survivors and families of victims who want to sue Saudi Arabia based on claims the country played a role in the 2001 terror attack, even Obama’s Democratic allies on Capitol Hill voted to override his veto.

The House voted 348-77, well above the two-thirds majority needed. The final vote tally in the Senate was 97-1. Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-.Nev., cast the sole vote against override.

"In our polarized politics of today, this is pretty much close to a miraculous occurrence," said  Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. Democrats and Republicans in both chambers have agreed, he said, that the bill "gives the victims of the terrorist attack on our own soil an opportunity to seek the justice they deserve.".

The top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said he shared some of Obama's concerns but said the victims' rights outweighed them.

"We cannot in good conscience close the courthouse door to those families who have suffered unimaginable losses," Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., said.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest decried the override as the "single most embarrassing thing the United States Senate has done possibly since 1983."

"Ultimately these senators are going to have to answer their own conscience and their constituents as they account for their actions today," he said, adding that Reid showed "courage" in opposing it.

The measure was approved in the House by voice vote earlier this month and sailed through the Senate by unanimous consent in May. In recent weeks, however, there had been some pushback against the bill, which would create an exception to sovereign immunity, the doctrine that holds one country can’t be sued in another country’s courts.

Former ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton and former U.S. Attorney Michael Mukasey, both of whom served under President George W. Bush, warned in a Wall Street Journal op-ed earlier this month that the legislation could open Americans to such suits abroad.

“An errant drone strike that kills non-combatants in Afghanistan could easily trigger lawsuits demanding that U.S. military or intelligence personnel be hauled into foreign courts,” they wrote.

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, and committee Chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, reached out to colleagues in recent days asking them to reconsider support for the bill. Thornberry sent them a letter saying that in addition to putting Americans abroad in legal jeopardy, the move undermines the United States’ reliability as an ally.

“We must work with other nations, even imperfect ones,” he wrote. “Requiring their government officials to participate in and give testimony in lawsuits — even when nothing has been proven — will create tensions and lead to less cooperation. I believe the net result will harm our security.


USA TODAY
House approves bill letting 9/11 families sue Saudis

The Manhattan skyline and the twin towers of the World
The Manhattan skyline and the twin towers of the World Trade Center are shown from Jersey City in this March 2000 photo.  Mark Lennihan, AP
Fullscreen
The Manhattan skyline and the twin towers of the World1 of 22
United Airlines Flight 175 approaches the World Trade   
Smoke billows from one of the towers of the World Trade   
People run from the collapse of one of the twin towers   
President George W. Bush has his early morning school   
Marcy Borders is covered in dust as she takes refuge   
Two women hold each other as they watch the World Trade   
A police officer and others walk up Park Row from St.   
A charred document sits in the soot near the destroyed   
Military personnel flee from the Pentagon after a plane   
A helicopter flies over the burning Pentagon.   
The rubble of the World Trade Center smolders Sept.   
Firefighters gather near the World Trade Center site   
Women wearing dust masks flee across the Brooklyn Bridge   
Smoke fills the air around the World Trade Center in   
A man stands in the rubble, and calls out asking if   
A Pennsylvania State Trooper stands guard at the crash   
President George W. Bush puts his arms around firefighter   
A man looks at photos of people missing in the World   
Firefighter Tony James cries while attending the funeral   
With the skyline of New York City as a backdrop, two   
Brooklyn firefighters George Johnson, left, of ladder
Last SlideNext Slide
As recently as Tuesday, some lawmakers had said they may have been wavering in their support. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a co-sponsor of the legislation, told USA TODAY he was still “thinking about it.”

“I’m not sure that I want to — I just have to think it through, that’s all,” he said at the time.

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said he had “concerns about what this bill’s going to mean to America.”

“This isn’t to me about Saudi Arabia, it’s the blowback to us because we’re the most involved in the world,” Corker said. “What you really do is you end up exporting your foreign policy to trial lawyers.”

Still, he conceded the veto would be “handily overridden” and said he hoped to revisit the issue when Congress returns from recess after the November elections.

Both Corker and Hatch voted to override Obama's veto.

Terry Strada, national chairwoman for 9/11 Families & Survivors United for Justice Against Terrorism, had called the override votes a “tremendous test of our democracy.”

“I mean, do we have a democracy or does Saudi Arabia own us?” she said. Her group sent a letter to Congress on Tuesday urging lawmakers to override "the President's unjustifiable veto."

Strada, whose husband was a Cantor Fitzgerald bond trader who died when the World Trade Center collapsed on 9/11, drove to Washington on Tuesday from her home in New Jersey to continue lobbying for the override vote.

In his unusual three-page veto message to Congress last week, Obama said he has "deep sympathy" for the families of victims of terrorism.

"I recognize that there is nothing that could ever erase the grief the 9/11 families have endured," Obama wrote. "Enacting JASTA into law, however, would neither protect Americans from terrorist attacks nor improve the effectiveness of our response to such attacks."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/09/28/senate-poised-override-obama-veto-911-bill-allowing-saudi-suits/91184976/

Go hell dirty killer !

I hope a day he'll be tried by creat and supporting to ISIS, al qaida and other jihadist groups who cutting head and eat human liver. I hope will be executed.

Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2016, 03:51:03 PM »
Congress: Yeah sure, sue the Saudis. Leave George Bush and Dick Cheney out of this.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2016, 04:11:26 PM »
This was done purely for political gain.  They had 15 years to do it but never did until now.

Why?
Hillary will win.
Then this bill will fuck up what little stability is in the middle east.
Guess who gets blamed?  The first woman president.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10178
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2016, 04:53:36 PM »
This was done purely for political gain.  They had 15 years to do it but never did until now.

Why?
Hillary will win.
Then this bill will fuck up what little stability is in the middle east.
Guess who gets blamed?  The first woman president.

Why would the democrats want the blame to fall on their President? Bipartisan support for this bill was the highest in recent memory. The Senate voted 97-1 (Harry Reid being the only nay) to approve it and the House voted 348-77.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2016, 05:03:23 PM »
This was done purely for political gain.  They had 15 years to do it but never did until now.

Why?
Hillary will win.
Then this bill will fuck up what little stability is in the middle east.
Guess who gets blamed?  The first woman president.

Why would the democrats want the blame to fall on their President? Bipartisan support for this bill was the highest in recent memory. The Senate voted 97-1 (Harry Reid being the only nay) to approve it and the House voted 348-77.
Woman hating.
And because it was bipartisan, they can mitigate the blame on "A woman".

Also, the Democrats didn't have a choice.  It was:

"Vote no and get hit with 'unamerican, saudi loving, evil democrats' in the attack ads or Vote yes and match the Republicans who are voting yes for the same reason."

Really, it's a lose-lose situation.  Hence why they're doing it now. 
And best part is, if Trump wins and HE gets hit with the fallout, the republicans get to crush him out of a 2nd term and crush anyone else like him from running.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10178
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2016, 05:30:44 PM »
This was done purely for political gain.  They had 15 years to do it but never did until now.

Why?
Hillary will win.
Then this bill will fuck up what little stability is in the middle east.
Guess who gets blamed?  The first woman president.

Why would the democrats want the blame to fall on their President? Bipartisan support for this bill was the highest in recent memory. The Senate voted 97-1 (Harry Reid being the only nay) to approve it and the House voted 348-77.
Woman hating.
And because it was bipartisan, they can mitigate the blame on "A woman".

Also, the Democrats didn't have a choice.  It was:

"Vote no and get hit with 'unamerican, saudi loving, evil democrats' in the attack ads or Vote yes and match the Republicans who are voting yes for the same reason."

Really, it's a lose-lose situation.  Hence why they're doing it now. 
And best part is, if Trump wins and HE gets hit with the fallout, the republicans get to crush him out of a 2nd term and crush anyone else like him from running.

I'll be surprised if anything comes from it at all beyond some strong rhetoric. It isn't going to further destabilize the Middle East. Our overlords won't let that happen anyway unless for some reason we don't need Saudi Arabia anymore. As of now, they are critical to our oil-based dollar.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2016, 06:48:57 PM »
This was done purely for political gain.  They had 15 years to do it but never did until now.

Why?
Hillary will win.
Then this bill will fuck up what little stability is in the middle east.
Guess who gets blamed?  The first woman president.

Why would the democrats want the blame to fall on their President? Bipartisan support for this bill was the highest in recent memory. The Senate voted 97-1 (Harry Reid being the only nay) to approve it and the House voted 348-77.
Woman hating.
And because it was bipartisan, they can mitigate the blame on "A woman".

Also, the Democrats didn't have a choice.  It was:

"Vote no and get hit with 'unamerican, saudi loving, evil democrats' in the attack ads or Vote yes and match the Republicans who are voting yes for the same reason."

Really, it's a lose-lose situation.  Hence why they're doing it now. 
And best part is, if Trump wins and HE gets hit with the fallout, the republicans get to crush him out of a 2nd term and crush anyone else like him from running.

I'll be surprised if anything comes from it at all beyond some strong rhetoric. It isn't going to further destabilize the Middle East. Our overlords won't let that happen anyway unless for some reason we don't need Saudi Arabia anymore. As of now, they are critical to our oil-based dollar.
My fear is that Saudi won't give a shit about the lawsuits but implement a similar law in their country.  Then the rest of the nations will follow suit and start suing the US.  The US will care even less and just ignore it, which will just cause even more anger and potentially create a "fuck the US" in places that actually like us. 

Destabalize is too strong a word, I admit.  But it certainly isn't going to help.  This is really all about people wanting money from governments for the actions of madmen.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16082
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2016, 07:14:19 AM »
Hey guys literally all politicians in the US (including Hillary supporters) hate Hillary so much that they passed a bad law and only Obama likes Hillary enough to try and say no!
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2016, 07:43:27 AM »
Hey guys literally all politicians in the US (including Hillary supporters) hate Hillary so much that they passed a bad law and only Obama likes Hillary enough to try and say no!
Also, they want to keep their job, yes.

And Obama is in his last year.  What the fuck does he care about opinion polls?
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16082
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2016, 08:32:01 AM »
And Obama is in his last year.  What the fuck does he care about opinion polls?
His polls directly affect the Democratic party. Unless you're suggesting that Obama is stupid and/or a Trump shill, he most likely cares about his PR.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2016, 09:23:00 AM »
And Obama is in his last year.  What the fuck does he care about opinion polls?
His polls directly affect the Democratic party. Unless you're suggesting that Obama is stupid and/or a Trump shill, he most likely cares about his PR.
Not as much as those who have to run for reelection.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16082
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2016, 11:42:07 AM »
Not as much as those who have to run for reelection.
Well, then we agree that Obama is callous, clueless, and a big asset to the Trump campaign. I guess we're not so different after all.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2016, 12:24:02 PM »
Not as much as those who have to run for reelection.
Well, then we agree that Obama is callous, clueless, and a big asset to the Trump campaign. I guess we're not so different after all.

Or, you know, actually doing what should be done and not voting based on some other agenda.

This bill does nothing productive.  It's the equivalent of suing the parents of the guy who murdered your loved one on the grounds that they gave him some money when he asked for it.  I mean, answer me: Why was this bill put to vote NOW?  During an election year (and less than 3 months from said election)?
It certainly wasn't to give those victims "justice".  No, it's done purely for political reasons.

And since the sitting president is ALWAYS blamed when shit goes wrong (regardless of who is responsible), guess who gets to take the fall?  Whoever wins in November.

Meanwhile, Obama will chillax in Hawaii, smiling at the reporters and saying "Hey, I vetoed that shit.  Don't blame me."  And there's nothing anyone can honestly say against it.  He vetoed it.  He opposed it.  He didn't cave to political pressure. 

So if you want to say he's callous, fine.  Means he can make the hard choices.  And it beats the paper thin skin of Donald Trump.  Man can't even keep his cool in a debate.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16082
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2016, 12:46:47 PM »
Not as much as those who have to run for reelection.
Well, then we agree that Obama is callous, clueless, and a big asset to the Trump campaign. I guess we're not so different after all.

Or, you know, actually doing what should be done and not voting based on some other agenda.

This bill does nothing productive.  It's the equivalent of suing the parents of the guy who murdered your loved one on the grounds that they gave him some money when he asked for it.  I mean, answer me: Why was this bill put to vote NOW?  During an election year (and less than 3 months from said election)?
It certainly wasn't to give those victims "justice".  No, it's done purely for political reasons.

And since the sitting president is ALWAYS blamed when shit goes wrong (regardless of who is responsible), guess who gets to take the fall?  Whoever wins in November.

Meanwhile, Obama will chillax in Hawaii, smiling at the reporters and saying "Hey, I vetoed that shit.  Don't blame me."  And there's nothing anyone can honestly say against it.  He vetoed it.  He opposed it.  He didn't cave to political pressure. 

So if you want to say he's callous, fine.  Means he can make the hard choices.  And it beats the paper thin skin of Donald Trump.  Man can't even keep his cool in a debate.
Holy shit, how did you even go from "this legislation is here because SEXISM!!!" to any of this?

JASTA was originally proposed in 2009. Does that put your conspiracy theory to rest, or do you think the evil American machine knew that it would take 7 years to pass and ensured that it would all be put in place just to troll a woman?
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 12:51:44 PM by SexWarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2016, 01:00:34 PM »
Want an honest answer?

I'm just making it up as I go.  I do, honestly believe this is a stupid law.  I do, honestly believe this will cause more harm than good.  I do, honestly believe that it's being voted on now and unanimously simply because of politics and not because it makes sense.

No, I don't really think it's a "take down Hillary" plot.  But I am right: Any negative consequences that occur will be blamed on the sitting president by the opposite party.

Though I am likely wrong since I can't trust anything I know about this law.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7675
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Congress rejects Obama veto on 9/11 bill; first override of his presidency
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2016, 08:33:49 AM »
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/09/29/white-house-congress-has-buyers-remorse-after-overriding-obama-veto/91289856/

Whoops?

I especially like how McConnel blamed Obama anyway.  "I don't want to blame him but... He should have told us the problems sooner...so its his fault, really."
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.