Should Americans have the right to sue Saudi Arabia over the deaths of their loved ones killed in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks?
Fifteen years later, that's what Congress will decide.
But Barack Obama is trying to persuade members to steer clear of any legislation that would make that possible in American courts.
Figures.
Every president since George H.W. Bush has been gifted with millions of dollars upon leaving office – a nice little sum for doing the bidding of the Saudis and watching out for their interests rather than those of the American people and national interests.
It's about time the U.S. got out of bed with Saudi Arabia. Not only have we fought their wars for them, we fought too many because of them.
As to the logic of holding Saudi Arabia accountable for the 9/11 disaster, let's look at some facts:
- 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. The rest were from Saudi-friendly Middle East nations.
- Osama bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia, the scion of a prominent and wealthy family in the construction business.
- Saudi Arabia funds and spreads radical Wahhabi Sunni Islam worldwide and often pays off terrorist groups so their own chickens don't come home to roost.
- How about all those Saudis evacuated by U.S. government immediately after the attack? What was that about?
- And then there are the 28 pages from the 9/11 Commission report redacted from what was released publicly – specifically dealing with official Saudi involvement in the attack.
That's enough for me. Why wouldn't we allow American courts to determine the validity of the cases?
Isn't that the way we do it in America?
It would indeed be a tough enough case to make, given the number of prominent U.S. law firms representing Saudi interests. That already stacks the deck against the families. Why on earth would we want to make it tougher for the truth to come out?
Saudi Arabia just plain has too much influence on America policies and American politicians. Enough is enough.
The Saudis have warned Obama and members of Congress that it will sell off hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of American assets held by the kingdom if Congress passes a bill that would allow the Saudi government to be held responsible in American courts for any role in the attacks.
According to the New York Times, the Obama administration has lobbied Congress to block the bill's passage. The paper reported "Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi foreign minister, delivered the kingdom's message personally last month during a trip to Washington, telling lawmakers that Saudi Arabia would be forced to sell up to $750 billion in treasury securities and other assets in the United States before they could be in danger of being frozen by American courts."
Families of victims are spitting mad. They point out Obama has consistently sided with the kingdom and has thwarted their efforts to learn what they believe to be the truth about the role some Saudi officials played in the terrorist plot.
"It's stunning to think that our government would back the Saudis over its own citizens," said Mindy Kleinberg, whose husband died in the World Trade Center on Sept. 11 and who is part of a group of victims' family members pushing for the legislation.
Obama arrived in Riyadh Wednesday. Perhaps he'll get his marching orders from the princes while there.
The 9/11 Commission found "no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization." But notice the carefully chosen words in that conclusion. If we know the Saudi government and senior officials weren't involved in funding the attack, who did?
The Senate bill is intended to make clear that the immunity given to foreign nations under the law should not apply in cases where nations are found culpable for terrorist attacks that kill Americans on United States soil. If the bill were to pass both houses of Congress and be signed by the president, it could clear a path for the role of the Saudi government to be examined in the Sept. 11 lawsuits.
With Obama on his way out, heading for a big-fat Saudi payday like every one of his predecessors since George H.W. Bush, the timing couldn't be better – unless, of course, the next president is Hillary Clinton, who has already had her payday.
One of the questions that is asked in courtrooms is whether the perpetrator had the means, the motive and the opportunity to commit the crime.
In the case of the Saudis in 9/11, the answer is most definitely yes.
Just think about to what Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal did while New York was still smoking in September 2001.
He handed Rudy Giuliani a check for $10 million to help in relief efforts and then explained why U.S. policies in the Middle East contributed to the Sept. 11 attacks.
"I entirely reject that statement," Giuliani said. "There is no moral equivalent for this [terrorist] act. There is no justification for it. The people who did it lost any right to ask for justification for it when they slaughtered 4,000 or 5,000 innocent people."
Giuliani rightfully tore up the check.
Now it's time to tear up whatever written agreements we have with the Saudis to give them aid, comfort and immunity from justice.
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact [email protected].
|