Congress Overrides Obama Veto to Advance Saudi 9-11 Lawsuits
Late last month, Congress overrode a presidential veto that will allow families of victims who died on the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia for potential involvement in those terror attacks. While the new law seems positive, it misses the broader involvement of rogue U.S. and Israeli elements, who are alleged have been involved as well.
By Mark Anderson
In late September, Congress pushed back and overrode President Obama’s veto of a law that calls for allowing 9-11 victims’ survivors to file suit against Saudi Arabia for any alleged involvement in the crimes of 9-11.
The bill is formally called the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA, or S. 2040). Overturning the President’s opposition to this bill creates a legal avenue wherein U.S. courts could order the seizure of Saudi assets to pay for judgments obtained by 9-11 families.
The House’s override vote was 348-77; the Senate’s, 97-1. Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) cast the lone contrarian vote while Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) didn’t vote, nor did Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential candidate, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.).
What this boils down to is that most of those in Congress—grossly indifferent toward determining what really happened on 9-11 and who was responsible—are so servile to the official 9-11 tale that members overcame the usual partisanship logjam and achieved the required two-thirds super-majority vote in both chambers to cinch the override.
Back in February, Obama vetoed a bill that would have repealed some objectionable Obamacare provisions, while also removing Planned Parenthood’s federal funding.
This came just after evidence had surfaced that Planned Parenthood had sunk so unfathomably low that it was selling baby parts for profit.
Despite the intense outrage expressed by congressional opponents of the nation’s largest abortion provider didn’t morph into a veto override.
What’s often forgotten is the abortion industry, each and every day, claims about as many lives as 9-11 claimed. So, the domestic war on children and the foreign war on terror—without a constitutional declaration of military war—continue unabated.
The executive branch, thanks to congressional fealty, has long possessed a blank check through the Authorization for Use of Military Force to keep the U.S. permanently at war.
OFFICIAL 9-11 THEORY FLAWED
Most Americans are still psychologically imprisoned by the media-fed claim that 19 Arabs with box cutters commandeered four large airliners with super-human daring and accuracy. And while the U.S. 9-11 Commission maintains that Saudi Arabia’s government isn’t suspected of official involvement in any 9-11 plot, we’re still officially told that 15 of the 19 dastardly derelicts hailed from the oil-soaked Saudi kingdom. This official narrative is built sturdier than the World Trade Center’s twin towers ever were.
According to the Library of Congress, JASTA “amends the federal judicial code to narrow the scope of foreign sovereign immunity (i.e., a foreign state’s immunity from the jurisdiction of U.S. courts). Specifically, [JASTA] authorizes federal court jurisdiction over a civil claim against a foreign state for physical injury to a person or property or death that occurs inside the United States as a result of: (1) an act of international terrorism, and (2) a tort committed anywhere by an official, agent, or employee of a foreign state acting within the scope of employment.”
Sen. Ted Cruz and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stated that the veto override will translate into 9-11 survivors “getting their day in court”—with Cruz calling for the U.S. to keep policing the world toward “defending our freedoms and way of life across the globe.”
Absent once again is any concern that America’s interventionist foreign policy, under which scores of innocents are brutally drone-bombed due to their alleged proximity to suspected “terrorists,” will invite terror attacks against the U.S.
Worse still, even the few non-interventionists in Congress couldn’t withstand 9-11 propaganda. And so it was that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), as well as Reps. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Walter Jones (R-N.C.) supported the veto override, despite their noted record of speaking out against nonstop foreign misadventures abroad and the domestic police state it spawns.
But worst of all, this whole issue helps sustain the official narrative that the Muslims “did 9-11” and that the “war on terror” is justified. Forgotten is the fact that many of the 9-11 family members, who weren’t silenced by hefty payouts from the government’s Victim Compensation Fund, have already tried to “get their day in court” in their own nation—to little or no avail.
The gutsier survivors, including 9-11 widow Ellen Mariani, were skillfully and quietly marginalized and nullified, especially, critics say, by federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein at New York’s Southern District Court.
The research of AFP and that of other respectable outlets and scholars over the years turned up considerable evidence of Israeli involvement in 9-11—especially areas where 9-11’s outcome apparently aided Israel’s long-term geopolitical expansionist goals.
This represents the untouchable aspect of 9-11 as the 15th anniversary of that day’s tragic events folds into history.
Even more tragic, however, are 9-11’s bitter fruits: the unwinnable wars, the domestic police state, and now the misdirection provided by the “sue the Saudis” canard, with ample publicity from a complicit media.
Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving reporter.