Slashdot Mirror


Blackmail: Obama Under Pressure To Declassify Secret 9/11 Report (cbsnews.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Families of Sept. 11, 2001 terror attack victims are pressuring Obama to support legislation allowing them to sue the Saudi government. A recent "60 Minutes" investigation has stirred up some controversy by looking at possible links between Saudi officials and the 9/11 hijackers, which revealed that new information may be hiding in a classified section of a Congressional report. The Saudis said in a report in the New York Times that they might sell "up to $750 billion in treasury securities and other assets in the United States" if the bill passes. The bill in question is being considered by Congress and it would permit lawsuits against countries that "contribute material support or resources" for "acts of terrorism." Van Auken, who is among those convinced that the 9/11 hijackers were helped by Saudi agents, said, "It feels like blackmail. The government, the president is siding with Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 families. If someone you loved was murdered and the person was just able to go away Scott free, would you be okay with that? I don't think anybody would." Last week the royal embassy of Saudi Arabia said, "The 9/11 commission confirmed that there is no evidence that the government of Saudi Arabia supported or funded Al Qaeda."

25 of 354 comments (clear)

  1. Remember, Obama promised "most transparent admin" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The government, the president is siding with Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 families.

    Is anybody really shocked by this? Obama has made it a habit of failing to live up to his campaign promise to "run the most transparent administration in American history."

    I remember when he first ran and got elected. I thought, "I don't agree with a lot of his policy ideas, but if he lives up to his word on just that one point by making things transparent, I would be impressed and he will have proved that he's not a politician's politician." I don't think that promise even made it to the end of his inauguration speech. Oh well.

  2. This is either blackmail or a confession. by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let them sell the bonds. Who's gonna buy 'em? Lots of people. It can only hurt the Saudis. However, in our game of empires, we need them desperately, so I doubt anybody is going to seriously ruffle any feathers.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:This is either blackmail or a confession. by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd say "Sell them, and you'll never buy another piece of American military equipment again, and there won't be a single US soldier within your borders within six months."

      As oil's importance fades, I think the response to anything from Saudi Arabia should "Fuck you, fuck you very very much."

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:This is either blackmail or a confession. by guises · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The bigger problem is, this is a ridiculous bill - you can't let all of your citizens individually pick fights with foreign countries. Laws and lawsuits are too inflexible to allow for real diplomacy. Some politicians are going to recognize that, see that this bill has no chance of passing, and vocally support it - saying that those politicians who oppose it are corrupt and selling out American citizens to foreign interests. There's no risk to these opportunist politicians, since the bill is never going to get passed / signed anyway, so they're free to grandstand to their hearts' content.

    3. Re:This is either blackmail or a confession. by exomondo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It is that lawsuits could be brought against them in the US that they would then have to defend in US courts or face the possibility of their US assets being frozen. I don't think they would want to risk that.

      Ultimately what is the goal of these lawsuits? Even if they get to a point at which it is discovered and comprehensively proven that the Saudi government did have some involvement in it what happens then? Is the US going to mount an incursion into a sovereign nation to arrest Saudi nationals on the basis of a US court ruling? Are the families just wanting an admission of guilt from somebody? Or are they chasing a financial payout?

      Sure they want the guilty parties held responsible but even assuming that is some senior Saudi government official and it is proven in a US court, how will justice be served?

    4. Re:This is either blackmail or a confession. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      'Need them desperately' for what?

      For funding more ultra-conservative Sunni Salafist/Wahhabist madrassas and mosques around the world to provide the cannon fodder for Al Qaeda and ISIS?

      For bombing Yemeni Shiites, and further destabilising/arming Sunni fundamentalists (Taliban and ISIS/AQIR) in Iraq and Afghanistan?

      For providing the majority of the hijackers in the World trade centre bombing?

      For trying to trash the US shale oil industry (which has made it energy independent, and for the first time in 70 years a net exporter of oil) through pricing that only it can afford and still make a profit off, as well as renewable energy sources?

      For enlisting the US to defend Saudi interests (in Iraq, in Kuwait, in the Gulf States, in Yemen) and expend its blood and treasure whilst the Saudis sit pretty?

      The Saudis have been bleeding the US for years ... why are they so 'desperately needed'? Seems to me that the 'approved enemies' ... Iran and the like haven't been taking single uS life, or funding any terror against US citizens, but 'our friends the Saudis' have been mixed up one way or the other in ALL the grief that has come the US's way from the Middle East.

      I'm guessing US diplomats can probably give us a really good reason for the unflinching support of the Kingdom ... but I sure as hell can't think of one.

    5. Re:This is either blackmail or a confession. by Sir+Holo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The US ally Saudi Arabia"

      I have never understood this term.

      If there is need to preface every mention of "Saudi Arabia" with "our ally", then your BS alarm should go off.

      How often do we hear:
              "Today our ally Iceland ..."
              "Today our ally France ..."
              "Today our ally Germany ..."
              "Today our ally Spain ..."

      The answer is never

    6. Re:This is either blackmail or a confession. by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is the other of the I think two thing Trump has said that I kind of agree with. Team America World Police is a very very expensive proposition. Its a huge expenditure of our resources.

      The counter argument is and will be that we get a great deal of influence and good will in exchange for that. Which I would agree has been true in the past, but that influence seems to be on the wane.

      Trump has suggested we send some of our protection clients the bill and or negotiate (extort, I believe we should tell it like it is) some tit for tat. I think he might be right about that. I think it might be instructive for various groups around the world to see what happens when America pulls up the tent stakes and goes home. See what happens to the House of Saud when we leave. We should have let ISIS have Iraq, its not our fight anymore. We should have allowed that to be the lesson for everyone else in the region about what happens to you when we don't get the status of forces agreement we want.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  3. go ahead by supernova87a · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let the regime posture and threaten all it wants. They're in enough trouble already with gas prices in the toilet, a state budget about to collapse, and a discontent/unemployed population that is chomping at the bit for reform of the ruling classes....

  4. Not about choosing "sides" by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's assume for a moment that everything 60 minutes claims is in fact true. Exactly how do they propose to force a foreign government to put themselves under the jurisdiction of a domestic civil court?

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  5. Not the way they see it... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It'll always be "THEIR" terrorist, "OUR" (freedom fighter/martyr).

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:Not the way they see it... by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >Plenty of freedom fighters around the world and throughout history refrain from inciting terror among civilians.

      There's probably nobody in the world who strikes more terror into the hearts of civilians than the US Military. There's a reason Noam Chomsky keeps pointing out that the unwritten part of the FBI's definition of "terrorism" must be "unless it's us doing it".

      The Iraq civilian death toll is well over a hundred thousand. Nobody even knows exactly how many people have been killed by drones in Pakistan but we do know that a lot of them were civilians - often civilians who just happened to park next to a target that may or may not be a legitimate target (we can't really tell if they are because we don't get to know who they are).
      How many civilians got killed in Libya ? What about Afghanistan ? And all that is before we even consider the impact of having neighbourhoods flattened - everything you built up over a lifetime of labour blasted to smithereens in seconds along with your neighbors...

      In a grand irony - there may be no more effective way to create terrorists than the war on terror. Look what Americans have done over the most little of imagined slights by the US government. McVeigh - the recent invasion of Vanilla ISIS in Oregon - and that's over such stupid things as "having to pay to let your cattle graze on federal land". Now imagine what it does to a community when the neighbourhood gets flattened by a bombing raid, children and grandmothers killed, homes destroyed, food and income lost. It is just about a statistical impossibility for ANY of those bombing raids to have NOT made SOMEBODY angry enough to want to blow Americans up at any cost.

      Odd... I remember saying that in 2001. I remember saying that the dumbest idea in history is the Bush suggestion that you can rid the world of terrorists by killing all the terrorists. It was always going to lead to there being more terrorists than before he started... I wish I had been wrong.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  6. Stop worrying ! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... .if China or Saudi Arabia stop buying our debt ...

    As a person who operates businesses in countries around the world I can tell you one thing ---

    STOP WORRYING !!

    This world needs America more than America needs the world

    And I am not kidding !

    I am not saying this because I am an American --- I am saying this as a fact --- without America this world's trade will be reduced by at least 57% and the impact of that much of a reduction to the world economy will be many times of that 57% !

    Without American green backs (I know, they are worthless if we count them in term of true networth) but at this juncture, THERE IS NO OTHER WORLD CURRENCY able to substitute the American green backs, at least, not yet

    Furthermore, this world has over 20 trillion dollars in excess cash --- yes, 20 fucking trillion dollars --- waiting for something to invest, and one day they are not used to invest in something, THEY LOSE MONEY ON THE CASH THEY KEEP

    That is why something / someone / somehow must purchase the American treasury bills --- it is one of the surest form of guarantee in the world. No other bonds in the world gets to enjoy that

    So let me repeat --- Please stop worrying so much

    The world will keep on buying the American bonds. If not the towel heads, then the Chinese or the Japanese or the Koreans or the Singaporeans will snatch them up

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  7. Re:Remember, Obama promised "most transparent admi by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Obama has done things that I wanted him to do as president. But after Snowden, it became readily apparent that he isn't going to do the things I need him to do as president.

  8. Stop being such a Chicken Little !! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... Do you really want them to start buying from the Russians?

    I am from China, and Russia is just north of China

    You go ask any Chinese in China --- whether they want to buy the Russian bond or the American treasury bill, 99.9% will tell you they prefer the American treasury bill

    Why?

    Because nobody else can guarantee their treasury bill like us, the United States of America --- the US has an excellent good track record when compare to the others

    So, stop being such a Chicken Little, my friend --- them towel heads can go buy up all the treasury bonds from Russia and they will end up with nothing but icy sludge

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  9. International Law by chromaexcursion · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can't sue sovereign states. It's a foundation of international law.
    If congress is is stupid enough to ignore this the US is screwed. We lose that protection.
    I know it sucks. But, we have to tell these people they have NO recourse against Saudi Arabia.

    Lots of people want and try to sue the US government. Constantly! Not just in the US
    They all get thrown out at stage one. you can't sue sovereign states.

    Just for instance:
    If this bill passes
    Millions of Vietnamese could sue the US

    think about it!

  10. Are you a sympathizer to the terrorists? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... Is America a syndicate of thugs that will enact vengeance upon an ally for the crimes of its rogue nationals?

    Who is an 'ally'?

    Someone who help us when we need their help, or someone who backstab us whenever they got the chance?

    The Saudis have backstabbed America many, many times --- 9/11 is only one of the more glaring ones

    Over three thousand people had perished in 9/11, and someone has to pay for the crime

    So far the 'characters' we have gotten are the 'donkeys', those who took part in the act, but we have yet to apprehend any of those who have bankrolled and/or sponsored the terrorist act

    There was a 'summit' organized by the '9/11 donkeys' in Kuala Lumpur of Malaysia and over there they discussed the procedures of the attacks

    That 'summit' was sponsored by the government of Malaysia - an islamic government which has been sponsoring many islamic terrorist organization, since the 1980's

    So far, none of the characters from the Malaysian government has been apprehended for the 9/11 incident, and we should go find out who is responsible for what and carry out the prosecution accordingly

    As for your accusation 'syndicate of thugs', them islamists are the syndicate of thugs, not us

    We did not bomb their Mecca, nor their Kuala Lumpur

    They bombed us

    It's pay back time and we must make sure that those who are responsible will get whatever they deserve

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Are you a sympathizer to the terrorists? by marsu_k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Over three thousand people had perished in 9/11, and someone has to pay for the crime

      Given the body count in both Afghanistan and Iraq (which, as was evident even when the war began, had fuck all to do with 9/11, but hey, collateral damage), it can be argued many people already have.

  11. Huh? by s.petry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You need to get a Calendar and some history books, because the US Politicians have been in bed with the Saudis since I was a kid in the 70s. Oddly we have a "travel at your own risk" warning for anyone going there, they are one of the most oppressive tyrannies on Earth, have a worse human rights record than China and close to the DPRK, and have a history of undercutting US businesses attempting to compete in the Oil business.

    Did we know about the Saudis and 9/11? Well the Government gave people a fairy tale and the public eats it up. Nobody wants to believe that their own government would fuck them over, so the delusion is incredible. The brain washing around the event is still very strong, with the populace having an irrationally strong emotional reaction to any mention of 9/11, FDNY, or the Twin Towers.

    Be prepared for nothing to happen and nothing to change. Remember, if you question anything the Government tells you about anything related to 9/11 you are a "Conspiracy theorist". (queue the *dun dun dun* music).

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  12. Groped by the TSA by Etherwalk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Over three thousand people had perished in 9/11, and someone has to pay for the crime

    Given the body count in both Afghanistan and Iraq (which, as was evident even when the war began, had fuck all to do with 9/11, but hey, collateral damage), it can be argued many people already have.

    Yes. Every person who flies on an airplane in America pays for it, as well as every kid who is easier to recruit as a terrorist because we bombed countries rather than building schools in them.

    1. Re:Groped by the TSA by houghi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, I think you forgot about the rest of the world. Every person who flies WORLDWIDE pays for it. I work in Brussels and due to these stupidities (Iraq), we have now soldiers on the streets.
      At this moment I am STILL more afraid of the traffic. I do not feel more or less safe, yet I have the Metro drive still 22 :00 and not later.
      I have my backpack searched at random.

      So yes, we all pay. Each and everyone pays. Thanks Bush. Let's see what the next lunatic will do that people vote for.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  13. Re:Remember, Obama promised "most transparent admi by jandersen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Obama has made it a habit of failing to live up to his campaign promise...

    To be fair, it isn't only Obama. By now, Americans ought to have caught on to the fact that all politicians promise way more than they can realistically achieve. and as a consequence, they will without fail disappoint people. Perhaps enough people are now tired of this situation and want to change it, but will inevitably take much more effort and cost everybody much more than they imagine. All of the part of the establishment will have to be dismantled in some way to allow something better to grow up and replace it; and the danger is that you either end up with the same old crap with a fresh layer of paint, or something worse - a dictatorship, maybe.

    We see much the same in Europe - in UK, people are listening to a guy like Jeremy Corbyn - not a hugely charismatic fellow, and his support for EU is clearly lukewarm at best, but I think that very fact rings true with people, because they feel the same way: nobody likes EU a lot, but staying is still better than leaving. I don't get to vote in the American election, but if I may offer a bit of advice, it would be this: whatever you do, think carefully and realistically about it first. Breaking things in a fit of anger is easy, building them up again afterwards is most definitely not. And who knows, after thinking carefully, perhaps you still find that you need to break things - but then you will know why and how, and what to do after that.

    To get back to the topic: how much of a chance does one man have against an establishment that most certainly doesn't want him to succeed? I don't really know another country where big business can steer the public opinion to such a degree that even those who would benefit from a new initiative like public healthcare, are turned against it. In a climate like that, how much could Obama actually achieve? I'm not the least surprised that he is now trying to ram as many executive orders down the establishment's throat as humanly possible; at least it will take whoever comes next a while to unravel, and who knows, maybe some of it will survive.

  14. Re:You get a kick out of hitting yourself? by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh, so you expect of every Syrian doctor to risk the lives of their families and kids for the greater good? I'm sure you would valiantly stay in a warzone and risk your kids being torn into pieces by a barrel bomb every day. But not everyone is as brave or as stupid as you, considering the Assad regime and its Russian allies have no qualms about leveling hospitals and ambulances from the sky.

    Right, Germany should be "ashamed" of taking in doctors from Syria. We should force these people to go back into the war until they die.

  15. Genocidal dictators kill more people by BCGlorfindel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >Plenty of freedom fighters around the world and throughout history refrain from inciting terror among civilians.

    There's probably nobody in the world who strikes more terror into the hearts of civilians than the US Military. There's a reason Noam Chomsky keeps pointing out that the unwritten part of the FBI's definition of "terrorism" must be "unless it's us doing it".

    The Iraqi Kurds cheering at the site of American forces and jets since the first Gulf war being a notable exception.

    The Iraq civilian death toll is well over a hundred thousand.

    Saddam executed a deliberate genocide of Iraqi Kurds long before that, with an estimated 150-350 thousand killed. And those were not collateral casualties due to the use of human shields or suicide bombings by the Kurdish resistance. Those were civilians loaded unto buses to be shot in the desert and burried by bulldozer.
    Saddam committed a second genocide at the end of the first Gulf War as Bush listened to chaps like yourself and stopped short of marching in Iraq. American forces were ordered to stand down and watch as Saddam's gunships led the charge that would kill another estimated 100+ thousand civilians.

    Apologies, I know that context messes with your agenda.

    Nobody even knows exactly how many people have been killed by drones in Pakistan but we do know that a lot of them were civilians - often civilians who just happened to park next to a target that may or may not be a legitimate target (we can't really tell if they are because we don't get to know who they are).

    I'll tell you what people do know about the number of people killed in Pakistan. The TTP(Pakistani Taliban) kill 100 plus Pakistanis for every life lost in drone strikes. The number of Al Qaida and Taliban leaders killed by drone strikes is also too long to include here, but notably has more than once knocked off the head leader of the Pakistani Taliban in Baitullah Mehsud(2009) and Hakimullah Mehsud(2013). Baitullah also being a top suspect for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto if we are to keep track of dead 'good' and 'bad' guys.

    How many civilians got killed in Libya?

    Gaddafi had declared his intention to end the Arab spring uprisings in Libya by "hunting the cockroaches down house by house" and his military advance was within a single city of seizing the control required to implement his promised genocide. Finally at the urging of the Arab League the world(not the US) agreed to act and aborted Gaddafi's genocide of his people.

    Or you know, tell it your way and blame the dead Libyan's on the fact things weren't all roses after the genocide was blocked.

    Your abject ignorance of all context to the tragedies you reference is growing tiresome.

    1. Re:Genocidal dictators kill more people by silentcoder · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing is - everything you say is true - and none of it matters one bit.

      This is about the perceptions people have, this is about what people in those countries are afraid off - and what they see as injustice, and what causes some of them to come to the conclusion that all Americans are evil and deserve to die.

      No amount of context is going to change that. It's just not how people think and it doesn't matter one bit if you think I'm just some wishy-washy liberal either.

      The fact is - when local evils do shit, people see it as their problem, when Americans get involved, anybody that dies is seen as a foreign invader bullying them. You can call that unfair all you want but it won't change human nature. Nobody likes having foreigners telling them what to do, how to live or killing their people - even if those foreigners claim it's to kill the evil people who were harming them (and even if that's true).

      The only wars America can ever fight on foreign soil without being hated for it are those where one of the following conditions hold:
      1) The country in question attacked America first, that hasn't been true of any war since World War 2 and Pearl Harbour (no 9/11 was not an attack by a country and the one country you could come closest to arguing was responsible is one of the only in the region America has never been at war with).
      2) You were ASKED to come. The people you are "rescuing" had requested your help. By and large America doesn't often show up when their help is requested (which only makes the perception problem worse) and do show up where their help wasn't wanted - which makes the claim of "helping" seem dubious in the extreme and certainly never get you much gratitude.

      Just try turning it around... would you be happy if the Russian Military showed up un-asked and started bombing Washington and New York next year to protect you from Trump's evil ? Would you feel they are helping ? Would you consider your dead family an acceptable loss ?

      Nobody else will ever feel any different.

      Deal with it - America has not been seen as heroes anywhere outside your own shores (and even there only by Republicans) since the 1960s and your international image has only gotten worse ever since. You are seen as arrogant, imperialistic bullies that insist on enforcing your will on the world, destroying other people's democracies and installing dictators anytime some people go about electing a leader that chooses the welfare of their own people over American corporate interests and invading places on the flimsiest excuse whenever they don't want to give you whatever resources they have for peanuts.

      It's probably not an entirely fair perception, but it is the perception that's out there - and you are working very hard to cement it I see.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *