IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 17th May 2016, 04:04 PM   #1
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
Victims can now sue Saudi Arabia.

Will this be spun by the truthers, will they try to claim the credit for it?
Senate passes bill allowing Sept. 11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia via Yahoo News Digest

Get the app and the day's need-to-know news. https://yho.com/newsdigestall

Last edited by Crazy Chainsaw; 17th May 2016 at 04:09 PM.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2016, 10:05 PM   #2
HotRodDeluxe
Muse
 
HotRodDeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 692
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Will this be spun by the truthers, will they try to claim the credit for it?
Senate passes bill allowing Sept. 11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia via Yahoo News Digest

Get the app and the day's need-to-know news. https://yho.com/newsdigestall
Already on 'spin cycle' by 9/11 truth:

http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/4...rorists-2.html

See post 17

Last edited by HotRodDeluxe; 17th May 2016 at 10:14 PM.
HotRodDeluxe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 02:21 AM   #3
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
Originally Posted by HotRodDeluxe View Post
Already on 'spin cycle' by 9/11 truth:

http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/4...rorists-2.html

See post 17
Sad that site looks like a lot of truther dumb.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 03:54 AM   #4
HotRodDeluxe
Muse
 
HotRodDeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 692
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Sad that site looks like a lot of truther dumb.
Oh, trust me, it is. Most from here have abandoned it.
HotRodDeluxe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 04:00 AM   #5
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,753
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Sad that site looks like a lot of truther dumb.
Originally Posted by HotRodDeluxe View Post
Oh, trust me, it is. Most from here have abandoned it.
Yeap... every now and again pop back but quickly give up on it again..
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
For my complete compilation of evidence showing AAL77 hit the Pentagon -http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
For my compilation of evidence for UAL93 - http://ual93.blogspot.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 04:13 AM   #6
tinribmancer
Hasbarian NWO Templar Cattle
 
tinribmancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Intergalatic Solar System!
Posts: 1,692
So, What exactly did Saudi-Arabia do? Fund Al-Qaeda?
__________________
"Bravery Is Not A Function Of Firepower." - JC Denton

"And belief in conspiracy theories is not the function of a higher intellect." - BStrong
tinribmancer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 04:48 AM   #7
AdamSK
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,952
Originally Posted by tinribmancer View Post
So, What exactly did Saudi-Arabia do? Fund Al-Qaeda?
There are allegations that high-ranking Saudi officials helped organize the attack, that Saudi agents met with and supported the hijackers. So, more than just funding.
AdamSK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 04:50 AM   #8
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
Originally Posted by tinribmancer View Post
So, What exactly did Saudi-Arabia do? Fund Al-Qaeda?
Alqueda was funded though a group of fake Islamic charities, that had support from leading Wahabi Clerics, in Saudi Arabia. They had Ties to the House of the Kingdom's top officials.
How much the leadership knew about the fake Charities is unknown.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 05:03 AM   #9
tinribmancer
Hasbarian NWO Templar Cattle
 
tinribmancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: The Intergalatic Solar System!
Posts: 1,692
Originally Posted by AdamSK View Post
There are allegations that high-ranking Saudi officials helped organize the attack, that Saudi agents met with and supported the hijackers. So, more than just funding.
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Alqueda was funded though a group of fake Islamic charities, that had support from leading Wahabi Clerics, in Saudi Arabia. They had Ties to the House of the Kingdom's top officials.
How much the leadership knew about the fake Charities is unknown.
Oh, god. Makes you wonder what else they were connected with. They appearently have had connections with ISIS aswell according to what they said in the news a few months ago.

And how are the twoofers reacting to this (since they hate Saudi-Arabia)?
__________________
"Bravery Is Not A Function Of Firepower." - JC Denton

"And belief in conspiracy theories is not the function of a higher intellect." - BStrong
tinribmancer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 05:14 AM   #10
Bob Klase
Master Poster
 
Bob Klase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,937
Probably should correct the threat title to read "Victims can now sue Saudi Arabia, if bill passed by the Senate (and the House?) is signed by the President".
Bob Klase is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 11:10 AM   #11
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
Can someone please link to the language of this Senate Bill? What sorts of lawsuits by whom against whom does it allow?

It would indeed be a major depart from the basics of international law, where private parties don't have the sort of relations to states that private parties have among each other, or that states have among each other.

This Bill would create a bit of international law, as it seeks to regulate relationship of certain parties in one nation to the governments of other nations. However, the international scholarly and practical consensus on what the source of international law are, is expressed in Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (to which all UN member countries, including the USA and Saudi Arabia, are members):
1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply:
a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states;
b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.
A law passed by the US Congress only fails to meet all these criteria; thus, Congress cannot create international law - this Bill, if signed into law, would not get accepted by anyone outside the USA, and if a case was brought to the ICJ, the USA would clearly lose, and walk away with egg on her face.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. (Gilbert Keith Chesterton)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2016, 02:46 PM   #12
HotRodDeluxe
Muse
 
HotRodDeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 692
Originally Posted by tinribmancer View Post
And how are the twoofers reacting to this (since they hate Saudi-Arabia)?
Somewhat confused is my take on their reaction. On the very thread linked above re: 'the 28 pages', there are those arguing that some of the hijackers are still alive, therefore they can't have hijacked the planes. They're a little incoherent on this thus far.
HotRodDeluxe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2016, 04:26 PM   #13
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by tinribmancer View Post
So, What exactly did Saudi-Arabia do? Fund Al-Qaeda?
They just spend billions of dollars a year spreading their ultra-conservative form of Islam around the world creating extremists who go on to commit terrorist attacks.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2016, 09:39 PM   #14
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Can someone please link to the language of this Senate Bill? What sorts of lawsuits by whom against whom does it allow?

It would indeed be a major depart from the basics of international law, where private parties don't have the sort of relations to states that private parties have among each other, or that states have among each other.

This Bill would create a bit of international law, as it seeks to regulate relationship of certain parties in one nation to the governments of other nations. However, the international scholarly and practical consensus on what the source of international law are, is expressed in Article 38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (to which all UN member countries, including the USA and Saudi Arabia, are members):
1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply:
a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states;
b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.
A law passed by the US Congress only fails to meet all these criteria; thus, Congress cannot create international law - this Bill, if signed into law, would not get accepted by anyone outside the USA, and if a case was brought to the ICJ, the USA would clearly lose, and walk away with egg on her face.
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 05:03 AM   #15
AdamSK
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,952
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
A law passed by the US Congress only fails to meet all these criteria; thus, Congress cannot create international law - this Bill, if signed into law, would not get accepted by anyone outside the USA, and if a case was brought to the ICJ, the USA would clearly lose, and walk away with egg on her face.
That's fine, because this is about holding the Saudis accountable under US law, not internationally. As others have pointed out, the Saudis have enough assets here to make US court judgment meaningful. Seeking enforcement of the judgment outside the US simply isn't important if you can reach billions of dollars right here.
AdamSK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 05:31 AM   #16
ozeco41
Philosopher
 
ozeco41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Moss Vale, NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,617
Originally Posted by AdamSK View Post
That's fine, because this is about holding the Saudis accountable under US law, not internationally. As others have pointed out, the Saudis have enough assets here to make US court judgment meaningful. Seeking enforcement of the judgment outside the US simply isn't important if you can reach billions of dollars right here.
err...

Who are "the Saudis" who have assets which are accessible to legal judgement in the USA?

What basis is there for legal action against "those Saudis"?

In what US jurisdiction?
Civil of criminal?

Which asset owning Saudis are responsible beyond reasonable doubt for criminal activities within US jurisdiction?

Which asset owning Saudis are liable on the balance of probabilities for causing "injuries" to US citizens which could attract "damages" and who has standing to take the action?
ozeco41 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 05:49 AM   #17
AdamSK
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,952
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
err...

Who are "the Saudis" who have assets which are accessible to legal judgement in the USA?

What basis is there for legal action against "those Saudis"?

In what US jurisdiction?
Civil of criminal?

Which asset owning Saudis are responsible beyond reasonable doubt for criminal activities within US jurisdiction?

Which asset owning Saudis are liable on the balance of probabilities for causing "injuries" to US citizens which could attract "damages" and who has standing to take the action?
Won't it be interesting to watch the legal system tackle these questions if this statute becomes law?
AdamSK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 06:09 AM   #18
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
Originally Posted by ozeco41 View Post
err...

Who are "the Saudis" who have assets which are accessible to legal judgement in the USA?

What basis is there for legal action against "those Saudis"?

In what US jurisdiction?
Civil of criminal?

Which asset owning Saudis are responsible beyond reasonable doubt for criminal activities within US jurisdiction?

Which asset owning Saudis are liable on the balance of probabilities for causing "injuries" to US citizens which could attract "damages" and who has standing to take the action?
Who do you think is buying up the mineral rights, to the Illinois basin, and other oil fracking
Fields in the USA?
Oil is cheap, American independent oil is going bankrupt and Saudi investors are buying up
The leases for pennies on the dollar.
Do you even realize how many investment properties, are owned by the House of
Saud, in the United States or how much corporate investment the Saudis have in the USA?
If it has been found that the house of Saud willingly supported Alqueda billions are at stake, All in the USA.
It might however do serious harm to future forien investment to the USA, and could cause a down turn in the US. Economy.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 11:26 AM   #19
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
Originally Posted by AdamSK View Post
Won't it be interesting to watch the legal system tackle these questions if this statute becomes law?
Hence my request:
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Can someone please link to the language of this Senate Bill? What sorts of lawsuits by whom against whom does it allow?
Can someone please link to the language of this Senate Bill? What sorts of lawsuits by whom against whom does it allow?

Who would "The Saudis" be?
Would these be criminal or civil suits?

If China or Germany or Russia or Iran or, indeed, Saudi Arabia passed a law with the exact same language, only roles reversed, and started suing current and former US government members, or the US government, and started to freeze or grab US assets and investments in those countries, would you feel this is reasonably within the confines of existing international law, or even just?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. (Gilbert Keith Chesterton)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 11:41 AM   #20
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Hence my request:


Can someone please link to the language of this Senate Bill? What sorts of lawsuits by whom against whom does it allow?

Who would "The Saudis" be?
Would these be criminal or civil suits?

If China or Germany or Russia or Iran or, indeed, Saudi Arabia passed a law with the exact same language, only roles reversed, and started suing current and former US government members, or the US government, and started to freeze or grab US assets and investments in those countries, would you feel this is reasonably within the confines of existing international law, or even just?
This what you need?https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...nate-bill/2040
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 11:52 AM   #21
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Thanks. I tried to search senate.gov yesterday, but was denied access.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. (Gilbert Keith Chesterton)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 11:57 AM   #22
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,895
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Thanks. I tried to search senate.gov yesterday, but was denied access.
I have been having so much fun today and yesterday playing with a bulldozer in pond of 3ft.
Deep stinky mud, (slightly more appealing than being in a room full of truthers), that it took me a while to find it with the phone reception out here being horrible.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 12:54 PM   #23
AdamSK
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,952
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
If China or Germany or Russia or Iran or, indeed, Saudi Arabia passed a law with the exact same language, only roles reversed, and started suing current and former US government members, or the US government, and started to freeze or grab US assets and investments in those countries, would you feel this is reasonably within the confines of existing international law, or even just?
Since "US assets and investments" is vague, I'll make clear that we're talking about ceasing assets owned by the royal family on the assumption that the royal family is involved - not freezing assets of random private Saudi citizens or Saudi businesses.

In that context, it happens all the time that assets of US companies in foreign countries get seized when they run afoul of local laws, including laws a lot more mercurial than what I believe we're discussing here. Again, the international law restrictions only come into play if you want to try to act on assets or entities outside of the country making the ruling.
AdamSK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2016, 01:05 PM   #24
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 18,667
The Senate Bill makes explicit reference to narrowing the scope of "foreign sovereign immunity". There is an explicit law in US code that covers this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreig...Immunities_Act

I need to read and understand at least this, then the new Bill, before commenting further.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. (Gilbert Keith Chesterton)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:44 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.