Agreed, see my other messages.
Frank
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alice Dampman Humel
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:15 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: 9/11 Saudi Arabia Bill Opens US to Avalanche of
Lawsuits
OK, I can understand your feeling, I guess, but who do you think would suffer
from such lawsuits? I can guarantee you it will be us and not the so-called
ruling class of the super rich.
On Sep 13, 2016, at 7:19 PM, Miriam Vieni
<miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Well, personally, I think that it's fine if the US gets sued for everything
he lists.
Miriam
Published on
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
by
The Boston Globe
9/11 Saudi Arabia Bill Opens US to Avalanche of Lawsuits
by
Stephen Kinzer
Anti-drone demonstrators march in 2013. (Photo: Debra Sweet/flickr/cc)
Last week, as the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks approached, members of
Congress gathered on the Capitol steps to pray, followed by a rendition of
"God Bless America." Then, evidently energized, they went inside and passed
a bill that would allow relatives of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia for
its apparent support of the attackers. President Obama is likely to veto it.
Emotion could lead Congress to override his veto. That would have a
shattering effect on American and global politics.
Americans love to sue. Our society is one of the world's most litigious. We
have come to believe that almost anything can be adjudicated in court. That
is lamentable at home, but applying the principle of tort liability to
foreign policy is far more threatening. It opens the United States to an
avalanche of lawsuits from victims of our actions around the world.
"First in line to sue the United States would be relatives of Iraqis,
Afghans, Yemenis, and others who have been killed by American drone
attacks."
One sponsor of the newly passed bill, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New
York, has dismissed this possibility. No one could sue the United States for
damages, he reasoned, because "the United States does not engage in
international terrorist activity." He may honestly believe that, but judges
in other countries might disagree.
First in line to sue the United States would be relatives of Iraqis,
Afghans, Yemenis, and others who have been killed by American drone attacks.
In Pakistan alone, by one count, these attacks have killed 160 children.
Parents of every one of them would have a case in court. Victims of
"extraordinary rendition" and "enhanced interrogation methods" might also be
able to persuade judges that their ordeals were the product of state
terrorism directed from Washington.
From there, the list is almost endless. Every country where US intervention
has produced bloody results would become fertile ground for lawsuits.
Guatemalans could sue for our long support of regimes in their country that
carried out murder on a grand scale. So could families of Salvadorans,
Chileans, Brazilians, and others who were tortured and killed by US-trained
military units. Indonesians could claim that the hundreds of thousands of
people slaughtered in 1965 were victims of a policy set in motion by the
United States. A Cambodian or Laotian or Vietnamese who has lived without
limbs as a result of American bombing, or been deformed by napalm or Agent
Orange, would have a good case. Survivors of Mexicans killed by drug dealers
using weapons bought in Arizona could claim that weak American gun laws are
to blame, and demand compensation. Iran could sue the United States for its
cyberattacks on Iranian computer systems. How about Brazil suing because a
member of our Olympic team, Ryan Lochte, harmfully defamed Brazil by
fabricating stories about being attacked by police there?
This circus would run in both directions. If Americans can sue Saudi Arabia
because its government supports terror groups, they can also sue Pakistan.
Since the 9/11 attacks were directed from Afghanistan, it could also be on
the target list. An American judge might even find Germany guilty of
negligence for failing to monitor the attackers while they were living in
Hamburg.
"The fact that a foreign government may have aided and abetted terrorism is
infuriating to the families if justice is not done," Senator Chuck Schumer
of New York said last week. He is correct. Americans have a right to be
furious with some foreign governments. People in other countries have an
equal right to be furious with the United States. We best address that fury
not with lawsuits, but by changing the way we approach the world.
C 2016 The Boston Globe
Stephen Kinzer
Stephen Kinzer is a former New York Times reporter and the author of
Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq (2006) and
Reset Middle East: Old Friends and New Alliances: Saudi Arabia, Israel,
Turkey,Iran (2011). www.stephenkinzer.com<http://www.stephenkinzer.com>
Skip to main content
//
. DONATE
. SIGN UP FOR NEWSLETTER
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
. Home
. World
. U.S.
. Canada
. Climate
. War & Peace
. Economy
. Rights
. Solutions
. Defeating Dakota Access
. Into the Anthropocene
. Bernie Sanders
. Hillary Clinton
. Jill Stein
. Donald Trump
9/11 Saudi Arabia Bill Opens US to Avalanche of Lawsuits
Published on
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
by The Boston Globe
9/11 Saudi Arabia Bill Opens US to Avalanche of Lawsuits
by
Stephen Kinzer
. 5 Comments
.
. Anti-drone demonstrators march in 2013. (Photo: Debra
Sweet/flickr/cc)
. Last week, as the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks approached,
members of Congress gathered on the Capitol steps to pray, followed by a
rendition of "God Bless America." Then, evidently energized, they went
inside and passed a bill that would allow relatives of 9/11 victims to sue
Saudi Arabia for its apparent support of the attackers. President Obama is
likely to veto it. Emotion could lead Congress to override his veto. That
would have a shattering effect on American and global politics.
. Americans love to sue. Our society is one of the world's most
litigious. We have come to believe that almost anything can be adjudicated
in court. That is lamentable at home, but applying the principle of tort
liability to foreign policy is far more threatening. It opens the United
States to an avalanche of lawsuits from victims of our actions around the
world.
. "First in line to sue the United States would be relatives of
Iraqis, Afghans, Yemenis, and others who have been killed by American drone
attacks."
. One sponsor of the newly passed bill, Representative Jerrold Nadler
of New York, has dismissed this possibility. No one could sue the United
States for damages, he reasoned, because "the United States does not engage
in international terrorist activity." He may honestly believe that, but
judges in other countries might disagree.
First in line to sue the United States would be relatives of Iraqis,
Afghans, Yemenis, and others who have been killed by American drone attacks.
In Pakistan alone, by one count, these attacks have killed 160 children.
Parents of every one of them would have a case in court. Victims of
"extraordinary rendition" and "enhanced interrogation methods" might also be
able to persuade judges that their ordeals were the product of state
terrorism directed from Washington.
From there, the list is almost endless. Every country where US intervention
has produced bloody results would become fertile ground for lawsuits.
Guatemalans could sue for our long support of regimes in their country that
carried out murder on a grand scale. So could families of Salvadorans,
Chileans, Brazilians, and others who were tortured and killed by US-trained
military units. Indonesians could claim that the hundreds of thousands of
people slaughtered in 1965 were victims of a policy set in motion by the
United States. A Cambodian or Laotian or Vietnamese who has lived without
limbs as a result of American bombing, or been deformed by napalm or Agent
Orange, would have a good case. Survivors of Mexicans killed by drug dealers
using weapons bought in Arizona could claim that weak American gun laws are
to blame, and demand compensation. Iran could sue the United States for its
cyberattacks on Iranian computer systems. How about Brazil suing because a
member of our Olympic team, Ryan Lochte, harmfully defamed Brazil by
fabricating stories about being attacked by police there?
This circus would run in both directions. If Americans can sue Saudi Arabia
because its government supports terror groups, they can also sue Pakistan.
Since the 9/11 attacks were directed from Afghanistan, it could also be on
the target list. An American judge might even find Germany guilty of
negligence for failing to monitor the attackers while they were living in
Hamburg.
"The fact that a foreign government may have aided and abetted terrorism is
infuriating to the families if justice is not done," Senator Chuck Schumer
of New York said last week. He is correct. Americans have a right to be
furious with some foreign governments. People in other countries have an
equal right to be furious with the United States. We best address that fury
not with lawsuits, but by changing the way we approach the world.
C 2016 The Boston Globe
/author/stephen-kinzer
/author/stephen-kinzer/author/stephen-kinzer
Stephen Kinzer is a former New York Times reporter and the author of
Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq (2006) and
Reset Middle East: Old Friends and New Alliances: Saudi Arabia, Israel,
Turkey,Iran (2011). www.stephenkinzer.com<http://www.stephenkinzer.com>
