Is Senate bill allowing 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia all it seems? Lawmaker ‘added loophole that allows State department to

Is Senate bill allowing 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia all it seems? Lawmaker ‘added loophole that allows State department to stall action’
May 25, 2016 By Tom Wyke for MailOnline and Associated Press

~The Senate passed legislation Tuesday that would allow families of September 11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia
~The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act had triggered a threat from Riyadh to pull billions of dollars from the U.S. economy
~Now it has been revealed loophole was inserted to reduce bill's power
~Senate Democrats had firmly supported the legislation, putting them at odds with the Obama administration

The Senate's unanimous passing of legislation that allows families of September 11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia may not be as groundbreaking as it was first believed.

The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) was initially reported as being a chance for the families to pursue damages from the Saudi government but now it has emerged a clause was inserted to water down the bill's power.

The wording of the loophole states the Secretary of State just has to engage 'in good-faith discussions with the foreign-state defendant concerning the resolution of claims against the foreign state,' according to the NY Post.

It had been feared the legislation would trigger potential diplomatic issues with Riyadh, which was threatening to pull billions of dollars from the U.S. economy, if the bill is enacted.

The legislation, sponsored by Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., gives victims' families the right to sue in U.S. court for any role that elements of the Saudi government may have played in the 2001 attacks that killed thousands in New York, the Washington, D.C. area and Pennsylvania.

The House still must act on the legislation. However the loophole means that the legal action only requires discussion with Saudi Arabia.

Relatives of September 11 victims have urged the Obama administration to declassify and release U.S. intelligence that allegedly discusses possible Saudi involvement in the attacks.

Passage of the bill on Tuesday sends the message that the United States 'will combat terrorism with every tool we have available, and that the victims of terrorist attacks in our country should have every means at their disposal to seek justice,' Cornyn said.

Schumer said that any foreign government that aids terrorists who strike the U.S. 'will pay a price if it is proven they have done so'.

Senate Democrats had firmly supported the legislation, putting them at odds with the Obama administration.

Schumer was confident the Senate had the necessary two-thirds vote of the chamber to override a presidential veto.

'We don't think their arguments stand up,' the New York lawmaker said at a news conference after the Senate action.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the chairman of the Senate subcommittee that controls foreign aid, had blocked the bill from moving to the Senate floor until changes were made to ensure the legislation didn't backfire on the United States.

Graham's apprehension was rooted in the possibility a foreign country could sue the United States if the door is opened for U.S. citizens to take the Saudis to court. Graham released his hold earlier this month, clearing the way for Senate action.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, also had warned that the legislation, if passed, would alienate Saudi Arabia and undermine a longstanding yet strained relationship with a critical U.S. ally in the Middle East.

Schumer said it is false to claim that the bill encourages retaliation or litigation against the United States.

'We're not busy training people to blow up buildings and kill innocent civilians in other countries,' Schumer said.

Schumer's 9/11 bill loophole to lock Saudis truth

New York Senator Charles Schumer has poisoned an anti-Saudi Arabia draft bill to protect Israeli interests and prevent the Persian Gulf Kingdom from telling the truth about the 2001 attacks, says an author and political commentator. Last week, the US Senate passed legislation that would allow the families of 9/11 victims to take legal action against Saudi Arabia and other foreign sponsors of terror for the possible roles they played in the attacks and pursue damages from them. While the legislation still needed the Congress vote, Schumer inserted a clause to the bill that will reduce its power. The amendment gives the State and Justice departments the power to stop any litigation against Saudi Arabia. Now Kevin Barrett believes that the senator tried to protect Saudi Arabia to prevent the release of the true reasons behind the attacks.

Video of Kevin Barret speaking -

(TomT, maybe you can post the video thumbnail? I tried posting the embed code here but its not working for me, I have no idea why)

The American author, speaking in an interview with Press TV on Wednesday, also referred to a recent report on London-based Saudi daily al-Hayat and said the US administration had carried out the attacks in order to “terrorize the American public into sponsoring decades of endless war, doubling the military budget and regime change operations throughout the Middle East targeting the Muslim states.” The US also wanted to rejuvenate its empire and remove those preventing “the hardliners in the military, intelligence and strategic communities from doing the very radical things they wanted to do,” he further noted.

According to Barrett, the main purpose of 9/11 was “to launch war against Israel’s enemies including the entire Islamic world that will never accept the Zionist occupation, ethnic cleansing and even genocide in Palestine.”He noted that if there “had been any lawsuit in which the 9/11 victims’ families had gone after Saudis, the Saudis of course would defend themselves by telling a larger truth about the 9/11.”Schumer, therefore, poisoned the bill by putting a poisoned pill to postpone an actual lawsuit or hearing.

The above text is from

PressTV, should have included the link, here it is:

url shorterners are bad


Technical guidelines for posts:
1. No URL shorteners. Please post direct links only. URL shorteners prevent the reader from knowing information about the domain they are clicking on. If you want to use a URL shortener for analytical purposes, you can instead make a perma-link to the content on the same domain that hosts it and use your server logs. Posts with URL shorteners are almost guaranteed to land in blogs. We reserve the right to replace shortened URLs with the target. ->

It's guaranteed that some of the links will outlive whatever url shortener service you use.

Kevin Barrett is only surpassed in poison-pillness by his co-host. No planes, fake everything, attaches us to every lead sinker he can under the cover of openness. IMO Iran's PressTV is in the same class as RT and CNN with shades of VT.


For the guidance re the URL shorteners (I didn't know that) and thanks for letting me know where you stand with Kevin Barrett.


Hey no prob. I look forward to your next vid... it's very difficult to cover the most effective ways to discredit something because the predominant technique is to attach good information to bad. With 9/11 it takes quite a bit of history to know who is who. People should always correct their mistakes and some never do. Going over the history of the Dynamic Duo is a good tutorial.