CDZ Saudi Arabia Warns of Economic Fallout if Congress Passes 9/11 Bill

[Blackrook]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

 

[Blackrook]

This is not a dupe tread because this thread is about the legal consequences of carving an exception to the FSIA just for Saudi Arabia's alleged involvement in 9/11. Also, I have put in the clean debate section so to avoid the usual nonsense.

 

[irosie91]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

right-----the real issue is WHOM TO SUE. tracing just which of the Saudi overly wealthy pigs PASSED FUNDS to terrorists is the real issue-------one cannot sue the king-----in fact I do not believe that the king did it. I do believe that HIGHLY PLACE Saudis did it but not in their OFFICIAL CAPACITY

 

[Fishlore]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, they inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

The pages redacted from the 9/11 report have seeped (leaked slowly) into the serious press and are understood in broad outline by most of the Americans who care about the issue. The law to allow lawsuits is a ploy to give the Saudi role in al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks hot publicity. Why?

Because the USA is in the ridiculous position of being led around by the nose by the Saudi-Likud alliance. Both our "allies" are pushing their own agendas at American expense. Likud is trying to absorb the West Bank and the Saudis are conducting brutal, inept wars in Yemen and Syria. The damage being done to American interests world wide by the Saudi-Israel-USA menage à trois is simply not sustainable. Domestic USA politics makes an overt break impossible.

A break with Saudi will provoke a major crisis in the ME because the Kingdom is already toppling financially from low oil prices, kicking the props out from under the massive welfare payments that keep the royal family on the throne and the Wahhabi clergy calling the shots.

Likud has blundered into a blind alley with 500,000 "settlers" illegally occupying Palestinian land, making a peace deal impossible. At the same time, Netanyahu's unparalled meddling in US partisan politics has finally managed to outrage Republican as well as Democratic leaders. The moment of truth approaches...

 

[Blackrook]

Recent article about how the 9/11 attack caused a major drop in the Dow, a major recession, and huge increases to government spending on two wars and the War on Terrorism:

How the 9/11 Attacks Still Damage the Economy Today

 

[anotherlife]

So who says neo conservatives are history. Also, to understand this new law proposal, we would need to know who wrote it. But this is carefully withheld. Hehehe. My bet is that the same con artists wrote this law, who sued gaza peasants in tel aviv, for not liking their houses bulldozed.

 

[irosie91]

So who says neo conservatives are history. Also, to understand this new law proposal, we would need to know who wrote it. But this is carefully withheld. Hehehe. My bet is that the same con artists wrote this law, who sued gaza peasants in tel aviv, for not liking their houses bulldozed.

I missed it-----you got a link to that law suit against "gaza peasants" in tel aviv?

 

[anotherlife]

So who says neo conservatives are history. Also, to understand this new law proposal, we would need to know who wrote it. But this is carefully withheld. Hehehe. My bet is that the same con artists wrote this law, who sued gaza peasants in tel aviv, for not liking their houses bulldozed.

I missed it-----you got a link to that law suit against "gaza peasants" in tel aviv?

It was reported on the Internet a year or two ago, but most of them are not new, has been going on for like 20 years, only this time it was organized as a national or international class action. Of course it is rediculous, because you can't obligate people to pay your pension after you make them homeless, but this law suit exists, and it is not surprising that they want to export it to the USA now. In fact, the American version I think was first filed in New York City, straight from Israel. I will dig if I can find it from last year or so.

But this is proof, that none of this is about terrorism, but about the domestic policies of Israel, playing out in the USA.

 

[Tehon]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

The bill is written so that it only pertains to acts committed against Americans on American soil. Your concerns appear to be unfounded.

Text of S. 2040: Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (Reported by Senate Committee version) - GovTrack.us

 

[rightwinger]

We need to start treating the Saudis like the den of terrorists they are

 

[gipper]

We need to start treating the Saudis like the den of terrorists they are

Not only the Saudis, but the many Americans who actively covered up their role in 9/11. All those who covered up should face prosecution, including your good buddy W, if he was involved.

http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/

 

[JimBowie1958]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

IT would also be economic suicide for the USA.

Our dollar is back by the USD only policies of the oil trading nations, and this is the case because of Saudi Arabia. PAss this law and the Saudis will abandon the USD and we will see the US dollar dumped world wide and rampant inflation destroying everyones savings and our economy.

This is the most foolish bill I have ever seen. Vote for it if you want to see US seniors starving in the streets and our nations economy completely destroyed.

 

[Tehon]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

IT would also be economic suicide for the USA.

Our dollar is back by the USD only policies of the oil trading nations, and this is the case because of Saudi Arabia. PAss this law and the Saudis will abandon the USD and we will see the US dollar dumped world wide and rampant inflation destroying everyones savings and our economy.

This is the most foolish bill I have ever seen. Vote for it if you want to see US seniors starving in the streets and our nations economy completely destroyed.

What currency do you think the Arabs would accept in lieu of USD and how might the crashing of the US economy affect the global economy? What you say sounds right to me but I am not entirely convinced it is feasible at this point. I think there would be a lot of countries left holding useless T- bills.
http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

 

[rightwinger]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

IT would also be economic suicide for the USA.

Our dollar is back by the USD only policies of the oil trading nations, and this is the case because of Saudi Arabia. PAss this law and the Saudis will abandon the USD and we will see the US dollar dumped world wide and rampant inflation destroying everyones savings and our economy.

This is the most foolish bill I have ever seen. Vote for it if you want to see US seniors starving in the streets and our nations economy completely destroyed.

Such a drama queen....starving in the streets?

 

[anotherlife]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

The bill is written so that it only pertains to acts committed against Americans on American soil. Your concerns appear to be unfounded.

Text of S. 2040: Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (Reported by Senate Committee version) - GovTrack.us

No, because every con starts small before it gets big. The author's concerns are not unfounded then.

 

[Tehon]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

The bill is written so that it only pertains to acts committed against Americans on American soil. Your concerns appear to be unfounded.

Text of S. 2040: Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (Reported by Senate Committee version) - GovTrack.us

No, because every con starts small before it gets big. The author's concerns are not unfounded then.

Iran is already exempt from the Immunities Act due to their being on the State Depts. State Sponsor of Terrorism list.

The idea behind this bill is that Americans who have been harmed in terror attacks on American soil should have legal recourse against their offenders consistent with their constitutional rights. No country should have immunity to do such things as were perpetrated on 9/11 and if Americans are worried about retaliation in kind then perhaps Americans who live in glass houses should not be casting stones. Just saying.

 

[JimBowie1958]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...allout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0

This bill, if passed, would create an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which shields foreign sovereigns from litigation in American courts, and legal liability for their actions. Under FSIA, a lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or any of it's government representatives or entities, can not be pursued in an American court even if it could be proved they had involvement in the 9/11 conspiracy.

The FSIA was the topic of my law review article when I was a member of the International & Comparative Law Journal at Loyola Law School. This law is the reason the Soviet Union could never be sued in American court for any of it's atrocities. When sued, their typical modus operandi would be that they would not even retain attorneys to appear in court, and the court would dismiss the case based on the FSIA on it's own motion.

Other governments, like Germany sued for Nazi war crimes, would send attorneys and file motions to dismiss under FSIA, and these motions would be quickly granted.

http://iilj.org/courses/documents/princzv.germany.pdf

If this law passes and the government of Saudi Arabia is held liable for 9/11, this will be a major change in how the United States interacts with foreign sovereigns, and would create fear among other nations that have a long history of human rights violations they could be held accountable in American courts. Obama's friends in Iran and Cuba would certainly be on the list of nations thrown in panic if this law passes.

And while this might be fun to watch nations like Iran and Cuba squirm, their inevitable retaliation against American interests would grind the whole thing to a halt. That is why I think Congress is not going to pass this law, and probably shouldn't.

IT would also be economic suicide for the USA.

Our dollar is back by the USD only policies of the oil trading nations, and this is the case because of Saudi Arabia. PAss this law and the Saudis will abandon the USD and we will see the US dollar dumped world wide and rampant inflation destroying everyones savings and our economy.

This is the most foolish bill I have ever seen. Vote for it if you want to see US seniors starving in the streets and our nations economy completely destroyed.

What currency do you think the Arabs would accept in lieu of USD and how might the crashing of the US economy affect the global economy? What you say sounds right to me but I am not entirely convinced it is feasible at this point. I think there would be a lot of countries left holding useless T- bills.
http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt

IMF has a series of notes they issue, if I recall correctly and there is always the possibility of a currency backed by a basket of currencies that the issuer can honor in any combination he wants. So say they use a basket of ten metals, if the issuer has plenty of commodity F and G but not so much the rest, they can honor the agreement by honoring the redeemer by giving them X amount of only commodities F and G, and the redeemer cannot specify a specific commodity. That gives the issuer a lot of flexibility to avoid a run or depletion that they cannot honor. Thus the currency would be flexible and at the same time have an intrinsic value. I have read China is considering something like this, but I dont know that.

 

[Blackrook]

Clinton Comes Out in Support of Schumer's 9/11 Bill

Hillary Clinton, as a person who may be our next President, should not be advocating a bill that will take a major wrecking ball to foreign relations. On the bright side, she's probably lying and really opposes the bill.

 

[Blackrook]

I think we should just assume that Hillary is lying about everything she says and says she believes.

 

[Synthaholic]

If it is revealed that Saudi Arabia had a hand in 9/11 I won't want to file a lawsuit against them, I'll want to bomb them.