On a very quiet and sneaky Friday afternoon, whilst the media was all in a frenzy trying to shame white people into submission, President Obama vetoed a bill that was passed which would give the families of 9/11 the power to sue Saudi Arabia — a country who is believed to be the principle players behind the 9/11 attacks.
Since this would cause a bad precedent for America’s war making ways, sashaying throughout the world, dropping daisey cutters into green fields of people covered with slime, this couldn’t be permitted under any circumstance.
Via the fuckheads at Politico:
In a three-page veto message outlining his objections, Obama again stressed those arguments and others made by his administration in recent days. Particularly problematic, in Obama’s view, was the possibility that courts could end up wading into terrorism issues best left to national security and foreign policy officials.
“This would invite consequential decisions to be made based upon incomplete information and risk having different courts reaching different conclusions about the culpability of individual foreign governments and their role in terrorist activities directed against the United States,” Obama said. That, the president added, “was neither an effective nor a coordinated way for us to respond to indications that a foreign government might have been behind a terrorist attacks.”
Yes, it would be a bad idea indeud, especially if you had something to hide. The whole point of being able to sue was to bring forth facts and attempt to uncover the truth behind the attacks. Why should members of a foreign government be immune to prosecution, if in fact they committed crimes against the people of the United States?
Obama again reiterated the White House’s view that the 9/11 bill could lead to retaliation — which could cause “potentially seriously financial consequences for the United States,” he warned — while arguing that the 9/11 bill “threatens to create complications in our relationships with even our closest partners.”
In other words, Hillary Clinton and others of her ilk could no longer tap Saudi Arabia for tens of millions in charitable donations. Or, maybe The House of Saud would get angered by this and withhold contracts to exploit their lands for crude oil? Unfortunately, we will never know the consequences.
“I have deep sympathy for the families of the victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, who have suffered grievously,” Obama said in the veto message. “I also have a deep appreciation of these families’ desire to pursue justice and am strongly committed to assisting them in their efforts.”
But he added that the legislation “would neither protect Americans form terrorist attacks nor improve the effectiveness of our response to such attacks.” Those arguments have rung hollow for Congress, which passed the legislation unanimously through both chambers. The Senate passed the measure in May, and the House followed suit earlier this month on the eve of the 15th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.
This is lazy logic on behalf of the very learned Barrack. If exposing criminals to the crimes they’ve committed cannot serve as a deterrent for future crimes from said criminals, why do we even have prisons to begin with?
Interestingly, both democrats and republicans have united to fight Obama on this issue. They will attempt to override the vetoe, perhaps giving the United States with leverage over Saudi Arabia to make explicit demands. Perhaps they will send a note saying ‘give us a fuckload of oil, else this shit passes?
Cornyn called not only the veto “disappointing,” but also Obama’s “refusal to listen to the families of the victims taken from us on Sept. 11.” And Schumer called the veto a “disappointing decision” from Obama that will be “swiftly and soundly overturned in Congress.”
“If the Saudis did nothing wrong, they should not fear this legislation. If they were culpable in 9/11, they should be held accountable,” Schumer said after Obama officially vetoed the bill. “The families of the victims of 9/11 deserve their day in court, and justice for those families shouldn’t be thrown overboard because of diplomatic concerns.”