Congress overrides President Obama's veto on 9/11 bill

"We need breathing room."
"Earth, Dayton Kitchens, 2016"

Obama's position is a disgrace, and for once Congress does the right thing.

A lot of shit for which people and institutions should be accountable.

Why? You want anyone to be able to sue any country for damages, and for every country to be able to seize the assets of every other country to cover those damages? You know how quickly that would lead to violence, right?

What makes you think this bill is a good idea?

Other nations routinely seize the assets of the U.S. and other nations within their borders.

How does anyone think the Saudis got started in the oil business? They didn't build it themselves.

Please explain how this is worse than TPP allowing private litigation against foreign governments based on allegations that such foreign governments' actions abroad cost the plaintiffs money.

It's a surprising stance for a guy so big on international law -- Congress is authorizing citizens of the United States to do something in contravention to international legal standards. But it's not at all surprising for a guy who hates the United States.

Given that this bill is about achieving justice for American victims of terrorism, that's a fairly crazy comment.

What international restrictions are there against doing this? Obama doesn't include any in his statement, and this in particular...

...is laughable given the stance of the US government towards Saudi Arabia, and its tolerance of their support for terrorism and human rights record generally.

His entire argument that this works against "national interests" is code for the maintenance of a friendly relationship with the House of Saud. Rather than having allegations pursued he would instead prefer to subordinate decisions on how or if acts of terrorism are followed up to political considerations, controlled from the top. Indeed, the findings of the 9/11 report indicated that there was Saudi involvement, but nothing was done about it and that section was suppressed until just a few weeks ago.

Opposition to this decision betrays an alarming lack of trust in the US justice system to weigh evidence. If such exists that Saudi Arabia has a hand in the 9/11 attacks, then the Saudi's need to be brought to account and anyone against this bill has an onus upon them to suggest an alternative path for that to happen.

"International law" such as it is isn't like the Criminal Code of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

No, Rick, Obama's point, which is correct, is that such a law undermines internationally accepted principles regarding state/citizen interaction.

Routinely?? I suppose you have proof of this?

Then tell me which law or treaty that refers to.
And please explain how you propose to call the Saudi's to account, given the federal governments manifest unwillingness to do so.

Seizing enemy property isn't just an act of war; it's a war crime. What Congress is implicitly authorizing isn't meaningfully different than Trump's plan to steal Iraqi oil.

Is the US at war with Saudi Arabia?
Do US sanctions against various other nations therefore constitute war crimes?

Cuba, Libya, Saudi Arabia for starters just off hand.

I gotta say I'm surprised at Rick's position on this issue.

Given his hate on for America is almost as big as Dinner's for Muslims, I thought he'd have blasted us for even considering such a proposal.

What a piece of shit this guy is. Unfortunately we're going to get a third term of these same policies.

You're a fucking moron. How would you like it if Germany or Japan or Cambodia or Vietnam or Iraq decided to seize American assets as restitution for American bombing that occurred decades ago? Or if Arab nations seized European assets and claimed it was because of the Crusades? Because that's the sort of idiocy you're encouraging with a law like this.

Why do you hate families of 9/11 victims?

Sovereign immunity is international customary law*. There's no single treaty or law to point to, but rather the actions of the vast majority of nations have recognized this principle.

*Other examples include prohibitions on slavery, and prohibitions on capturing coastal fishing vessels during war time.

They know what they did.

Why do you hate freedom?

Wouldn't it be hilarious if some Truthers tried to seize Israeli and Bush family assets to collect damages for 9/11?

Except that even the die hard liberals don't blame the Bush family for 9-11.

Try posting something along the "truther" lines and the Democratic Underground discussion board will ban you outright. Its in their rules you agree to. At least I think it was DU. Anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Any president would have vetoed the bill. This is one of those places where the primary split is not going to be between parties, but between the legislative and the executive.

Yeah because we're in bed with them.

Yep. This law would open the door to constant litigation against the United States. If we denied them that right even as we took full advantage, we would lose the ethical, moral, and legal standing we have in international court.

Dumb law, as much as i feel for 911 victims this isn't the way to do it. This is gop pandering that there scared to lose congress.

Obama was right, Now McConnell is eating crow but still blaming Obama. Hes disgusting!