Obama vetoes 9/11 bill

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

NY-Times: Obama Vetoes 9/11 Bill, but Congressional Override Is Expected

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A really bad decision. Saudi Arabia and its government officials should be hold accountable for their involvement in 9/11. We shouldn't care whether they are so called "allies" or not. Justice must be done for the victims and their families. So, no, Mr. President, it does not "undermine US interests".

The only good news is that congress is expected to override the veto. Hope this gets done in a bipartisan effort. This isn't something were Republicans and Democrats should fight but work together instead.

Too bad that there is no information how Clinton and Trump view this.

The problem is that if we do this, then we'll open the door for other countries to file lawsuits in their own courts against American companies (and lets be honest, our companies have directly or indirectly gotten plenty of innocent people killed in the Middle East).  This bill is one of those ideas that sounds great in theory, but would be a disaster if actually implemented.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

NY-Times: Obama Vetoes 9/11 Bill, but Congressional Override Is Expected

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A really bad decision. Saudi Arabia and its government officials should be hold accountable for their involvement in 9/11. We shouldn't care whether they are so called "allies" or not. Justice must be done for the victims and their families. So, no, Mr. President, it does not "undermine US interests".

The only good news is that congress is expected to override the veto. Hope this gets done in a bipartisan effort. This isn't something were Republicans and Democrats should fight but work together instead.

Too bad that there is no information how Clinton and Trump view this.

The problem is that if we do this, then we'll open the door for other countries to file lawsuits in their own courts against American companies (and lets be honest, our companies have directly or indirectly gotten plenty of innocent people killed in the Middle East).  This bill is one of those ideas that sounds great in theory, but would be a disaster if actually implemented.

I don't see why this is a bad thing either. If a company operates under a foreign jurisdiction they should be subject to that country's laws. Forcing companies to treat people as people is a good thing even if it hurts our GDP.

What happens if the Saudis start demanding that major American companies to pay large enough amounts of money to drive them into bankruptcy after finding them guilty of kangaroo courts on trumped up charges?  What happens if they do that and threaten an embargo if we don't find a way to force the companies to pay?  What happens if they refuse to sell oil to any American companies until all "fines," "penalties," etc have been paid? 

The Saudis are obviously horrible and so are many of the American companies that would be hurt by this, but I really don't think folks who support this idea have thought this through.  Yes, it'd feel good for a few months, but then reality would set in.  If we really want to stick it to Saudi Arabia (and the bad elements of the Israeli government, for that matter), the best thing we can do is dramatically increase funding for research into alternative energy sources.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

NY-Times: Obama Vetoes 9/11 Bill, but Congressional Override Is Expected

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A really bad decision. Saudi Arabia and its government officials should be hold accountable for their involvement in 9/11. We shouldn't care whether they are so called "allies" or not. Justice must be done for the victims and their families. So, no, Mr. President, it does not "undermine US interests".

The only good news is that congress is expected to override the veto. Hope this gets done in a bipartisan effort. This isn't something were Republicans and Democrats should fight but work together instead.

Too bad that there is no information how Clinton and Trump view this.

The problem is that if we do this, then we'll open the door for other countries to file lawsuits in their own courts against American companies (and lets be honest, our companies have directly or indirectly gotten plenty of innocent people killed in the Middle East).  This bill is one of those ideas that sounds great in theory, but would be a disaster if actually implemented.

I don't see why this is a bad thing either. If a company operates under a foreign jurisdiction they should be subject to that country's laws. Forcing companies to treat people as people is a good thing even if it hurts our GDP.

What happens if the Saudis start demanding that major American companies to pay large enough amounts of money to drive them into bankruptcy after finding them guilty of kangaroo courts on trumped up charges?  What happens if they do that and threaten an embargo if we don't find a way to force the companies to pay?  What happens if they refuse to sell oil to any American companies until all "fines," "penalties," etc have been paid? 

The Saudis are obviously horrible and so are many of the American companies that would be hurt by this, but I really don't think folks who support this idea have thought this through.  Yes, it'd feel good for a few months, but then reality would set in.  If we really want to stick it to Saudi Arabia (and the bad elements of the Israeli government, for that matter), the best thing we can do is dramatically increase funding for research into alternative energy sources.

There's little reason to believe that a dramatic increase in funding for renewable energy research would make much of a difference in world demand for fossil fuels within the decade.

All you can do is all you can do.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

How can you actually have an international lawsuit?  Who would the judges be?  How does it make things any better? Not sure if I agree with the bill being overridden or not because it just sounds silly.

Im not an expert but Im pretty sure similar things happened with Iran in the past.  People sued them in US Courts and when they won the courts froze Iranian assests in the US and awarded them to the plaintiffs.  Perhaps something similar would happen here

Not a chance.