I read that the law actually already allows for people to sue official terrorist sponsors. This only extends it to the countries ACTUALLY responsible.

And who determines the country is ACTUALLY responsible? Unless they outright admit it or evidence supports an investigation that says they are responsible, we're just supposed to believe on hearsay? I'm not trying to be argumentative I really want to know how you think it would work? The UN can't get anyone to admit to anything and they are the supposed enforcers.

---

And who determines the country is ACTUALLY responsible? Unless they outright admit it or evidence supports an investigation that says they are responsible, we're just supposed to believe on hearsay? I'm not trying to be argumentative I really want to know how you think it would work? The UN can't get anyone to admit to anything and they are the supposed enforcers.

Evidence would obviously need to be presented in a court. I believe the UN is the body who determines who is and isn't considered terrorists, but it's not exactly reliable.

---

Evidence would obviously need to be presented in a court. I believe the UN is the body who determines who is and isn't considered terrorists, but it's not exactly reliable.

Exactly my point. If they would do their job then no one would even think this whole thing is a good idea. 

---

The House and Senate just voted "overwhelmingly" to overturn the veto. It's the first overturned veto of Obama's Presidency.

---

The House and Senate just voted "overwhelmingly" to overturn the veto. It's the first overturned veto of Obama's Presidency.

 

Interesting too that Harry Reid was the one "No".

---

apparently this was turned down before, but then later passed after certain amendments were made to it... making it less effective if at all

 

https://www.justsecurity.org/31156/senat...passed-it/

 

new provisions allow for the Sec of State and Attorney General to prevent any lawsuit they want.  so what you're going to see (or not see) are lawsuits filed but then the Secretary of State saying "hold on, we're talking with the Saudis. we will get this figured out." playing the legal games that prevent people from using the court of law.

---

so unfortunately, we probably wont be seeing any kind of justice being done here at all.  this bill simply has no teeth, and its an opportunity for Congress to merely give the appearance of caring about 9/11 victims.  it can be easily overruled by whatever administration is in power.

---

Interesting too that Harry Reid was the one "No".

 

also reading that Bernie Sanders and Tim Kaine were no shows. explain that

---

Sounds like they're having regrets over signing the bill, not having realized it might have some unintended consequences.  I'm sure they'll blame Obama for this.  Somehow.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Sounds like they're having regrets over signing the bill, not having realized it might have some unintended consequences.  I'm sure they'll blame Obama for this.  Somehow.  

 

I found it funny that the article I read said the fear is that "US soldiers" could be targeted in lawsuits. Talk about spin. Soldiers would not be targeted, but their leaders (if any lawsuit filed against our country actually occurred).

 

Then it goes on about how the Saudis could pull billions from our economy. Oh no, we might make the Saudis mad. Let's pull the plug. Ridiculous. How long are we going to kiss this oppressive country's [BLEEP]?

---

Plus Obama already talked about this after his veto.  Why are they now saying "HEY WE MAY HAVE A DO OVER" when Obama already voiced these so-called concerns before they overturned the veto?

---

I found it funny that the article I read said the fear is that "US soldiers" could be targeted in lawsuits. Talk about spin. Soldiers would not be targeted, but their leaders (if any lawsuit filed against our country actually occurred).


Then it goes on about how the Saudis could pull billions from our economy. Oh no, we might make the Saudis mad. Let's pull the plug. Ridiculous. How long are we going to kiss this oppressive country's [BAD WORD REMOVED]?

Suppose they can sue whoever they want. Usually though you go after deep pockets

---

I go back an forth on this.  I think Cheney and Bush should be in jail for war crimes.  They lied us into a war.  I think Iraqis have a legit reason to sue us.  But I'm not sure that's how these things would ever work...  

 

As for 9/11 victims suing the government of Suadi Arabi, that would mean Saudi Arabia was responsible for the attacks.  If that's the case, should we not be at war with Saudi Arabia?  

 

If Saudi Arabia is only culbable because some of her citizens attacked us, suing Suadi Arabia would be akin to suing the parents of Timothy McVeigh for the OKC bombings, would it not?

---

Suppose they can sue whoever they want. Usually though you go after deep pockets

 

exactly. that's why it's a bogus concern. however that wont stop the articles from continuing to come in about how this puts SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN IN DANGER. bull.

---

I go back an forth on this.  I think Cheney and Bush should be in jail for war crimes.  They lied us into a war.  I think Iraqis have a legit reason to sue us.  But I'm not sure that's how these things would ever work...  

 

As for 9/11 victims suing the government of Suadi Arabi, that would mean Saudi Arabia was responsible for the attacks.  If that's the case, should we not be at war with Saudi Arabia?  

 

If Saudi Arabia is only culbable because some of her citizens attacked us, suing Suadi Arabia would be akin to suing the parents of Timothy McVeigh for the OKC bombings, would it not?

 

I dont think it has anything to do with where the terrorists are from.  It's about the 28 pages. It's about the numerous reports and suspicion that the terrorists received Saudi support.  Wouldn't it be a real doozy if lawyers could prove not only that, but also that people connected to the Bush admin knew about it?  "Let it happen" which in turn has caused this whole domino effect. 

---

I dont think it has anything to do with where the terrorists are from. It's about the 28 pages. It's about the numerous reports and suspicion that the terrorists received Saudi support. Wouldn't it be a real doozy if lawyers could prove not only that, but also that people connected to the Bush admin knew about it? "Let it happen" which in turn has caused this whole domino effect.

I would assume Iraq and Afghanistan will be filing quite a few lawsuits vs USA. Probably be US Citizen lawyers representing them. What's the going rate to settle mass killings by drones?

---

I would assume Iraq and Afghanistan will be filing quite a few lawsuits vs USA. Probably be US Citizen lawyers representing them. What's the going rate to settle mass killings by drones?

 

I honestly doubt it because it would require funding

 

now might American lawyers set out to find the citizens who were "accidently" bombed and had real loss?  they could seek damages from the government for alot of money id assume. that would be interesting and maybe that would force our leaders to be less wreckless.... but i doubt it.

---

I dont think it has anything to do with where the terrorists are from.  It's about the 28 pages. It's about the numerous reports and suspicion that the terrorists received Saudi support.  Wouldn't it be a real doozy if lawyers could prove not only that, but also that people connected to the Bush admin knew about it?  "Let it happen" which in turn has caused this whole domino effect. 

 

OK...  But then the bill is stupid.  The congress can make those 28 pages public at any time...  No need to get into the weeds about citizens suing a foreign state, right?

---

I would assume Iraq and Afghanistan will be filing quite a few lawsuits vs USA. Probably be US Citizen lawyers representing them. What's the going rate to settle mass killings by drones?

 

If I was a US vet that was injured or a family of a vet that died in Iraq, I'd be suing the USA myself...  That war was a lie and nobody has been held accountable for it, and alot of people in the USA and in Iraq have died or had thier lives destroyed for no good reason at all.

---

OK...  But then the bill is stupid.  The congress can make those 28 pages public at any time...  No need to get into the weeds about citizens suing a foreign state, right?

 

they were released. it doesn't give specific details but just says its possible they got support from somebody connected to Saudi government, which i assume is based on something other than speculation. 

 

the 28 pages just have some redactions also. which is kinda bogus in my opinion. FOIA is still unable to keep the government from covering up stuff like this.

---