Be interesting to see the feedback on this one if it gets reported in the rest of the MSM

[dick thompson]

Good to see Bambi's usual voting present personality in this case.  He is really there for Americans - or not. Tuesday, June 23, 2009 Obama Saudi suit stance irks 9/11 families Tom LoBianco (Contact) Family members of the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks say they have been blindsided by the Obama administration's opposition to their lawsuit seeking damages from top members of the Saudi Arabian government over suspected financial links to the 9/11 attackers. A series of closed-door meetings between the relatives' groups and Justice Department officials, arranged as an update on Mr. Obama's plan to close the detention facility at the U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, turned instead into a sharp clash over the Saudi legal action, The Washington Times has learned. "Physically, President Obama has done what previous presidents have done for a long time, which is bow down," said Debra Burlingame, co-founder of 9/11 Families for a Safe and Strong America. The relatives of the victims have signed onto a lawsuit seeking damages from four Saudi princes, saying they have been financing al Qaeda and thus are responsible in large part for the attacks that killed their loved ones. The family members demanded to be be heard on the White House's stance during a series of closed-door meetings at the State Department and the Justice Department last week. The Supreme Court is expected to meet Thursday to decide whether to take the families' case, which was rejected by a federal appeals court last year. The administration's opposition to a Supreme Court review has dampened hopes among the 11 families for a reversal. "Myself and the other family members are unanimously upset," said Doug Connors, whose older brother was killed in the South Tower of the World Trade Center. "We feel that our government hasn't supported us as victims." A U.S. district court dismissed the suit against the princes, a Saudi banker and a Saudi-based charity in 2006, and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling in August 2008. But lower courts have split in other cases on how to apply the sovereign immunity rules set by the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act, and the Supreme Court justices asked Solicitor General Elena Kagan to weigh in on the 9/11 case in February. The brief was filed last month. U.S. law makes it extremely difficult for citizens to sue foreign governments in U.S. courts, and the lower court ruling noted that Saudi Arabia is not listed on the State Department's official list of state sponsors of terrorism. The Obama administration concurred with the overall sweep of the lower court rulings, but not with all of the legal reasoning. "The lower courts correctly concluded that Saudi Arabia and its officials are immune from suit for governmental acts outside the United States," wrote Ms. Kagan in her brief, considered the official position of the U.S. government. The administration's position caught many family members off-guard and left them simmering at last week's meetings. One meeting was called Monday at the State Department to hear from the families about terrorist-financing networks. Two meetings were held at the Justice Department for families to air their concerns about the future of the Guantanamo prison. Family members who attended the three meetings said the administration officials did not answer any questions about the Supreme Court brief, filed by the administration with the high court May 29. Ms. Burlingame attended a Tuesday meeting at the Justice Department with top officials, including Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.. When one of the family members asked about the White House opposition to the lawsuit, there was no response from the officials, Ms. Burlingame said. "In the nature and tone of the amicus brief of May 29, I'm so sorry to observe that it is just cynical, and it seems rooted in political motivation," said Alice Hoagland, whose son, Mark Bingham, was killed on Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania after he helped wrest control of the plane from the terrorists. "That to me is horrifying," she said. A Justice Department spokesman said the administration held the meetings to hear from family members and declined to discuss details. Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said that while he sympathized with the families, the State Department is pursuing a broader strategy, using multiple tools to reach beyond U.S. borders and freeze terrorist assets. "They'd be even more effective," Mr. Steinberg said Monday. "At best what the litigation can do is try to get a judgment against the individual who may not have assets in the U.S." Mr. Connors attended the Monday meeting at the State Department with top administration officials, including Mr. Steinberg and Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey, the department's lead official on terrorist-financing networks. Mr. Connors said family members got no answers to their questions about why the administration is opposing their lawsuit. Read 10 comments againstthecurrents This is a tough case for all, but honestly I do not see how these individuals plan on suing foreign leaders, or even finding an appropriate court situation to have a hearing in the first place. It appears that this is meant to be a symbolic gesture, one of which the administration see's little positive in at this moment in time. The idea that someone would be able to sue a Saudi prince, and then recieve a settlement is absurd in reality. I would like to hear more about the families evidence though, just because no money will ever be exchanged does not mean there may be truth to their allegations. Mark as offensive billwhit1357 The Saudi's could care less about what happened on 9/11. They are one of the largest supporters of the advancement of Islam and terrorism. We are considered Infidels and lower than dogs. It is a disgrace for a president to suck up to them, much less "bow" to the Saudi king. To do that showed no honor and was totally disgusting! Mark as offensive powerrange The Administration's continued arrogance is what most should focus on. To get zero response to their questions has become typical of the transparent Administration....opaque is more like it. Mark as offensive TexRancher Remember it was the White House and his administration's ruling, not the court's. With that in mind, remember what he said in his book, "When the going gets tough, I'll side with Muslims first"! My question is "When does he start representing AMERICANS"? Mark as offensive bartolomeo7 This is unfortunate.The plane crash was not outside the US.Critics of the crash are not convincing, but neither is the US government.The International Criminal Court takes years to come to a judgement. What was the FETA helicopter doing that flew through the smoke before the building came down? Mark as offensive GunnerM134 I don't see why anyone is surprised at The Great Community Organizers stance. Prez Barry can't do anything else but bow down, he has no backbone. Prez Barry OWES the 9/11 families an explanation and must be a public one, not one conducted while hiding behind closed doors... The federal government hasn't supported these families at all. Obama's selling out to the Muslim world... He's a COWARD!!! Mark as offensive dedalus1 Did anyone seriously expect this muslim dirtbag to support the american people over the murdering saudi inbreds? Mark as offensive RonD504 Not to worry, the burglar will still be able to sue you when he injures himself or you injure him as he robs your home! Mark as offensive TysonsTom Many of you may not be aware that the USS Liberty was attacked by Israeli planes and ships on June 8, 1967 with 34 American sailors killed and over 100 wounded. The US Government prevented the families of those killed or injured from suing the Israeli government although the line of responsibility there was direct; the line of responsibility for 9/11 to the Saudi government is not clear. Mark as offensive easterncrow Good point Tom, but the circumstances differ between the two ideas. The law firm representing the victim's family members has shown a stream of connections financially that tie the Saudis to the idea. I presume the present ire of the families stems from that knowledge thereby making the rhetoric of the President's staff on Gitmo and this issue a frustrating position and one that is filled with confusing emotions. Mark as offensive Please login or register to post a comment