Obama vetoes bill allowing 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia

September 24, 2016

Washington, Sep 24: President Barack Obama on Friday vetoed a bill allowing 9/11families to sue Saudi Arabia, risking a fierce public backlash and rare congressional rebuke.

barak obama

While expressing "deep sympathy" for the families of the victims, Obama said the law would be "detrimental to US national interests."

The White House tried and failed to have the legislation -- which was unanimously passed by Congress -- scrapped or substantially revised.

Terry Strada, whose husband Tom was killed in World Trade Center Tower One, told AFP the 9/11 "families are outraged and very disappointed" by Obama's decision.

She vowed that the group would now lobby "just as hard as we possibly can" to have Congress overturn the decision.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who has already painted Obama and his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton as weak on terrorism, described the decision as "shameful."

"That President Obama would deny the parents, spouses and children of those we lost on that horrific day the chance to close this painful chapter in their lives is a disgrace."

"If elected president, I would sign such legislation should it reach my desk."

On that point at least Trump was in agreement with Clinton, who, according to her campaign spokesman Jesse Lehrich, would also sign the bill.

Obama now faces the very real prospect of Republican and Democratic lawmakers joining forces to override his veto for the first time in his presidency.

Such a rebuke -- which Congressional sources say could come as early as next Tuesday -- would mark Obama's last months in office and show the White House to be much weakened.

Obama has issued 12 vetoes during his presidency and none have yet been revoked.

New York senator Chuck Schumer -- a Democrat with close ties to Obama and who cosponsored the bill -- insisted that is about to change.

"This is a disappointing decision that will be swiftly and soundly overturned in Congress," he said.

"If the Saudis did nothing wrong, they should not fear this legislation. If they were culpable in 9/11, they should be held accountable."

Families of 9/11 victims have campaigned for the law -- convinced that the Saudi government had a hand in the attacks that killed almost 3,000 people.

Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens, but no link to the government has been proven. The Saudi government denies any links to the plotters.

Declassified documents showed US intelligence had multiple suspicions about links between the Saudi government and the attackers.

"While in the United States, some of the 9/11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi government," a finding read.

Behind the scenes, Riyadh has been lobbying furiously for the bill to be scrapped.

A senior Saudi prince reportedly threatened to pull billions of dollars out of US assets if it becomes law, but Saudi officials now distance themselves from that claim.

The US-Saudi relationship had already been strained by Obama's engagement with Saudi's Shia foe Iran and the July release of a secret report on Saudi involvement in the attacks.

The White House insists Obama did not veto because of concerns over ties with Saudi Arabia, saying it is worried the bill would set a dangerous legal precedent, undermining the principle of sovereign immunity.

The European Union and a host of countries have expressed similar concerns.

But that technical legal argument will struggle to be heard over emotive accusations that Obama is putting relations with Saudi Arabia before 9/11 victims.

The White House will now hold out hope that the override could be delayed until after the November 8 election, when the politics may be less toxic and minds may be changed.

Congressional sources said White House appeals to security-minded senators like Dianne Feinstein may yet be enough to avoid the rebuke.

Comments

shaji
 - 
Sunday, 25 Sep 2016

It is well known that 9/11 attack was carried out by jews supported by Israel. However, they are accusing Muslims and Sauid Arabia for this. Saudi Nationals present in the planes were only passengers and not hijackers. The buildings collapsed mainly by internal blast which was planned by jews and that is the reason why almost all the jews were absent on the particular day. It was well planned by jews to put blame on muslims. The victims should sue Israel for compansations and Amercian Govt should presurise Israel for the payment.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 20,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 20: Janata Dal (Secular) leader HD Kumaraswamy has urged the Karnataka government to stop putting warning signboards in front of COVID-19 patients' houses alleging that they are leading to "social discrimination and untouchability" in the present times.

"A local government warning signboards in front of the homes of COVID-19 infected people is leading to neo-social discrimination and untouchability in the new age. Even after infection, the individual and family should live with dignity. The government should immediately stop the practice of placing signboards," Kumaraswamy's first tweet read.

"Instead of placing them in front of their homes and creating untouchability, send health workers to their homes to create courage and awareness. They should be told not to leave the house. There is no such degrading practice left behind. I would like to ask Chief Minister Karnataka BS Yediyurappa to pay attention to this," he added.

The former chief minister further said that threatening to cancel the licenses of medical colleges for refusing treatment to patients would not solve the problem and urged the government to take them into confidence instead of rebuking them.

"Refusing treatment is the fault of any hospital. But for the same reason, threatening to cancel government medical college licenses is not right. There is no profit in this emergency of health. MCI also has the power to revoke the licenses of medical colleges. Remember not the government," he said.

"In this case, the government should look to the Medical Colleges to get their services in order to get them to trust them instead of getting angry. Let them focus on meeting their needs. I insist on a collective fight against the coronavirus through this," he further added.

The COVID-19 count in Karnataka reached 63,772 on Sunday, including 39,370 active cases and 23,065 cured and discharged patients.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 27,2020

Bengaluru, May 27: Aimed at giving a boost to affordable housing, the Karnataka government on Tuesday decided to slash the stamp duty on new apartments costing up to ₹35 lakh.

The decision was taken during a meeting chaired by Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa to review the progress of the Stamps & Registration department.

The Chief Minister directed that the stamp duty be cut from the existing five per cent to two per cent on apartments costing less than ₹20 lakh, getting registered for the first time, his office said in a statement.

Further, the stamp duty on apartments costing between ₹21 lakh - ₹35 lakh will be down from five per cent to three per cent, it said. It is estimated that in 2020-21 due to COVID-19 induced lockdown, Stamps and Registration department might fall short of its revenue target by ₹3,524 crore. The revenue target for 2020-21 is ₹12,655 crore.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 29,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 29: The Karnataka High Court’s division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice H P Sandesh today rejected an application that wanted Amulya Leona’s case to be transferred from Karnataka Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

The bench, while observing that extraordinary jurisdiction can’t be exercised for transferring the case to the NIA, asked “What is so special that investigation should be transferred to NIA?”

The court, in its previous hearing, had questioned the maintainability of the petition seeking transfer of the sedition case against Leona to the NIA.

According to the petitioner, advocate Pavana Chandra Shetty, the case is a serious matter against national integration and unity and has not been investigated properly by the police. The state police also failed to file the chargesheet within 90 days, he said, and also asked for cancellation of her bail.

The bench asked the petitioner as to how a bail, already granted to a person, can be cancelled. “Is it not the indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail if chargesheet is not filed within stipulated time? How can you make a prayer for cancellation of bail?”  the Court asked.

The counsel for the petitioner also stated that in cases of a cognizable offence, when the chargesheet is purposely not filed within the stipulated time, the matter will have to transferred to the appropriate authority.

The court responded to his contention by asking him how could the court override law and cancel the bail. “Where is the question of cancellation of bail? Can we override the law and say that bail should be cancelled?” said the bench.

Advocate Vishal Raghu had filed the petition for transfer of Leona’s case, who was accused of raising pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-CAA rally on February 20 at Freedom Park. The advocate had blamed the probe team for not filing a chargesheet on time and has asked the state government to approach the higher court against bail granted to Leona.

Bengaluru student Amulya Leona was charged with sedition for her actions in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen chief Asaduddin Owaisi. She was arrested by the Bengaluru police for allegedly shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ slogans at an anti- CAA Protest in Bengaluru in February this year. On June 11, she was granted conditional bail by the Bengaluru civil court.

Her bail plea was earlier rejected by a Bengaluru court, after she had spent a three-month period in jail, stating that she may abscond if she is released. The sessions judge Vidhyadhar Shirahatti had also stated that if the petitioner is granted bail, she may abscond and may involve in similar offence which affects peace at large and hence her petition is liable to be rejected. The court had also noted that Amulya Leona is an influential person who may threaten and influence the witness and hamper the case in case of the prosecution and will abscond if released on bail.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.