Impeach Obama Because He Vetoed 9/11 Family Victims Relief

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2016 10:23 PM GMT
    Impeach him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2016 10:27 PM GMT
    Don't vote for Hillary because she'd probably do the same. Impeach Hillary in her first 100 days. There is justice when two buildings are demolished and incinerated with people STILL IN THE BUILDINGS, JUMPING OUT OF THE BUILDINGS.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2016 10:40 PM GMT
    The issue is that every foreign government and their citizens will in turn be able to bring lawsuits against the US. That are normally not permitted under international treaties & precedent, the concepts of sovereignty, and reciprocity. This US law violates that and opens the door to mutual actions against the US by other nations.

    But Obama's veto will be overridden, so put your concerns aside. Until billions of US dollars start flowing out the door. Will you be happy about raised taxes to cover that loss? Or maybe just increase the national debt, to disguise the costs, as GW Bush did with his unnecessary wars.

    How do you know what Hillary would do regarding this bill? And has The Donald been asked about this? Well, it doesn't really matter what he answers. He'll deny it a day later and say something totally different.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 4:30 AM GMT
    This our "How could the German people allow the Holocaust?"
    This is our "How could the U.S. citizens allow someone to demolish and incinerate (burn) two tall buildings with people still in them, some of whom had to jump from more than 50 stories high to their death?"

    Weren't the Nazis too ready to wear the jewelry and steal the paintings of their victims?

    Weren't the Nazis too ready to present themselves the way we're presenting ourselves today: business/government as usual?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 4:52 AM GMT
    Art_Deco:
    The issue is that every foreign government and their citizens will in turn be able to bring lawsuits against the US. That are normally not permitted under international treaties & precedent, the concepts of sovereignty, and reciprocity. This US law violates that and opens the door to mutual actions against the US by other nations.

    Stephenoabc:
    Confessions of an Economic Hitman.
    You're an advocate of impunity?
    You're an advocate of no checks and balances?

    Art_Deco:
    But Obama's veto will be overridden, so put your concerns aside.

    Stephenoabc:
    Our concerns remain - the Holocaust of 3,000 people at Ground Zero. Concern #2 - Saudi Arabia claims, rightfully so, that the hijackers, that should have perished but didn't because some were reported to still be alive after 9/11/01, weren't from Saudi Arabia. There is a good case that what hit one of the towers and cut through the steel-based exterior as opposed to smashing the side of the building with at least the wings crumpling to the ground was not a commercial airplane to get hijacked.

    Art_Deco:
    Until billions of US dollars start flowing out the door. Will you be happy about raised taxes to cover that loss? Or maybe just increase the national debt, to disguise the costs, as GW Bush did with his unnecessary wars.

    Stephenoabc:
    So you can be bought on this?

    Art_Deco:
    How do you know what Hillary would do regarding this bill?

    Stephenoabc:
    She has not taken a vocal leadership stand on it; but, she can milk 9/11 at the Democratic National Convention.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 4:57 AM GMT
    He likes Saudi cock and cash! LOL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 5:07 AM GMT
    Clinton Campaign: Hillary Would Sign 9/11 Bill if She Were President

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/hillary-clinton-911-bill-sign-saudi-arabia/2016/09/23/id/749885/

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/24/us/politics/obama-veto-saudi-arabia-9-11.html?_r=0
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 5:13 AM GMT
    A newly-released Hilary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the “best way to help Israel.”
    In an indication of her murderous and psychopathic nature, Clinton also wrote that it was the “right thing” to personally threaten Bashar Assad’s family with death.
    In the email, released by Wikileaks, then Secretary of State Clinton says that the “best way to help Israel” is to “use force” in Syria to overthrow the government.
    The document was one of many unclassified by the US Department of State under case number F-2014-20439, Doc No. C05794498, following the uproar over Clinton’s private email server kept at her house while she served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-destroy-syria-for-israel-the-best-way-to-help-israel/5515741
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 5:23 PM GMT


    If Saudi Arabia is not guilty, then the bill is a miscarriage of justice

    (Schumer and Hillary are protecting another country or other countries).

    My support of the bill is not for a miscarriage of justice but to start the justice process.

    If the punishment is monetary only, the country/countries or non-country entity/entities

    that let Saudi Arabia take the fall can fund Saudi Arabia's penalties the bill allows.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 5:34 PM GMT
    A newly-released Hilary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the “best way to help Israel.”
    In an indication of her murderous and psychopathic nature, Clinton also wrote that it was the “right thing” to personally threaten Bashar Assad’s family with death.
    In the email, released by Wikileaks, then Secretary of State Clinton says that the “best way to help Israel” is to “use force” in Syria to overthrow the government.
    The document was one of many unclassified by the US Department of State under case number F-2014-20439, Doc No. C05794498, following the uproar over Clinton’s private email server kept at her house while she served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-destroy-syria-for-israel-the-best-way-to-help-israel/5515741

    = = =

    So, the Syrians would be able to sue the U.S. and Israel (since it was to benefit Israel) for some count of Syrian casualties.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14345

    Sep 27, 2016 5:34 PM GMT
    This is just more valid evidence that the democrats are a party of cold hearted, self serving elitists who are only interested in their own self aggrandizement and the Wicked Witch of Wall Street, Hillary rotten Clinton is the worst offender.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4433

    Sep 27, 2016 5:36 PM GMT
    I don't think it's a good idea to start letting courts and judges all over the world get their hands on the cash reserves flowing through commerce. We may think it is because we believe in our courts but it empowers fairly insulated individuals to enter a geopolitical realm that ultimately needs to remain government to government. It also once again reduces actions involving human life to a cash transaction. It elevates cash to a pinnacle that is unhealthy for society as a whole to progress. Money, money, money. I'm sick of it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2016 6:53 PM GMT
    StephenOABC said
    A newly-released Hilary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the “best way to help Israel.”
    In an indication of her murderous and psychopathic nature, Clinton also wrote that it was the “right thing” to personally threaten Bashar Assad’s family with death.
    In the email, released by Wikileaks, then Secretary of State Clinton says that the “best way to help Israel” is to “use force” in Syria to overthrow the government.
    The document was one of many unclassified by the US Department of State under case number F-2014-20439, Doc No. C05794498, following the uproar over Clinton’s private email server kept at her house while she served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-destroy-syria-for-israel-the-best-way-to-help-israel/5515741

    = = =

    So, the Syrians would be able to sue the U.S. and Israel (since it was to benefit Israel) for some count of Syrian casualties.

    I reviewed this site. It is highly hostile to the US overall, not just to Hillary Clinton.

    If you want to quote from it, fine. But just so long as we all understand your source as pure anti-US propaganda. And intended to undermine Western democracies in general. Even if you may not have the wit to realize it yourself.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2016 6:24 PM GMT
    child.jpg?w=600
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2016 6:34 PM GMT
    Art_Deco:

    I reviewed this site.

    Stephenoabc:

    Has Syria been an ally to Iran?
    Has Iran been an ally to Syria?
    Israel is not an ally to Iran.

    Destabilizing Syria benefits Israel and does not benefit Iran.
    Why didn't all the Syrian refugees go to Iran instead of increasing the Islamization of Europe?
    Destabilizing Syria in a way that creates a brain-drain from Syria benefits Israel.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2016 6:46 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    StephenOABC said
    A newly-released Hilary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the “best way to help Israel.”
    In an indication of her murderous and psychopathic nature, Clinton also wrote that it was the “right thing” to personally threaten Bashar Assad’s family with death.
    In the email, released by Wikileaks, then Secretary of State Clinton says that the “best way to help Israel” is to “use force” in Syria to overthrow the government.
    The document was one of many unclassified by the US Department of State under case number F-2014-20439, Doc No. C05794498, following the uproar over Clinton’s private email server kept at her house while she served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-destroy-syria-for-israel-the-best-way-to-help-israel/5515741

    = = =

    So, the Syrians would be able to sue the U.S. and Israel (since it was to benefit Israel) for some count of Syrian casualties.

    I reviewed this site. It is highly hostile to the US overall, not just to Hillary Clinton.

    If you want to quote from it, fine. But just so long as we all understand your source as pure anti-US propaganda. And intended to undermine Western democracies in general. Even if you may not have the wit to realize it yourself.


    Get smart about this:

    The document was one of many unclassified by the US Department of State under case number F-2014-20439, Doc No. C05794498, following the uproar over Clinton’s private email server kept at her house while she served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2016 6:53 PM GMT
    Furthermore, objectively, regardless of the site, there does seem to be a U.S. Dept. of State unclassified document.



    NEW IRAN AND SYRIA 2.DOC


    from the pdf

    UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05794498 Date: 11/30/2015 RELEASE IN FULL The best way to help Israel deal with Iran's growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad. Negotiations to limit Iran's nuclear program will not solve Israel's security dilemma. Nor will they stop Iran from improving the crucial part of any nuclear weapons program — the capability to enrich uranium. At best, the talks between the world's major powers and Iran that began in Istanbul this April and will continue in Baghdad in May will enable Israel to postpone by a few months a decision whether to launch an attack on Iran that could provoke a major Mideast war. Iran's nuclear program and Syria's civil war may seem unconnected, but they are. For Israeli leaders, the real threat from a nuclear-armed Iran is not the prospect of an insane Iranian leader launching an unprovoked Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that would lead to the annihilation of both countries. What Israeli military leaders really worry about -- but cannot talk about -- is losing their nuclear monopoly. An Iranian nuclear weapons capability would not only end that nuclear monopoly but could also prompt other adversaries, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to go nuclear as well. The result would be a precarious nuclear balance in which Israel could not respond to provocations with conventional military strikes on Syria and Lebanon, as it can today. If Iran were to reach the threshold of a nuclear weapons state, Tehran would find it much easier to call on its allies in Syria and Hezbollah to strike Israel, knowing that its nuclear weapons would serve as a deterrent to Israel responding against Iran itself. Back to Syria. It is the strategic relationship between Iran and the regime of Bashar Assad in Syria that makes it possible for Iran to undermine Israel's security — not through a direct attack, which in the thirty years of hostility between Iran and Israel has never occurred, but through its proxies in Lebanon, like Hezbollah, that are sustained, armed and trained by Iran via Syria. The end of the Assad regime would end this dangerous alliance. Israel's leadership understands well why defeating Assad is now in its interests. Speaking on CNN's Amanpour show last week, Defense Minister Ehud Barak argued that "the toppling down of Assad will be a major blow to the radical axis, major blow to Iran.... It's the only kind of outpost of the Iranian influence in the Arab world...and it will weaken dramatically both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza." Bringing down Assad would not only be a massive boon to Israel's security, it would also ease Israel's understandable fear of losing its nuclear monopoly. Then, Israel and the United States might be able to develop a common view of when the Iranian program is so dangerous that military action could be warranted. Right now, it is the combination of Iran's strategic alliance with Syria and the steady progress in Iran's nuclear enrichment program that has led Israeli leaders to contemplate a surprise attack — if necessary over the objections of Washington. With Assad gone, and Iran no longer able to threaten Israel through its, proxies, it is possible that the United States and Israel can agree on red lines for when Iran's program has crossed an unacceptable threshold. In short, the White House can ease the tension that has developed with Israel over Iran by doing the right thing in Syria. The rebellion in Syria has now lasted more than a year. The opposition is not going away, nor is the regime going to accept a diplomatic solution from the outside. With his life and his family at risk, only the threat or use of force will change the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad's mind.

    UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05794498 Date: 11/30/2015 The Obama administration has been understandably wary of engaging in an air operation in Syria like the one conducted in Libya for three main reasons. Unlike the Libyan opposition forces, the Syrian rebels are not unified and do not hold territory. The Arab League has not called for outside military intervention as it did in Libya. And the Russians are opposed. Libya was an easier case. But other than the laudable purpose of saving Libyan civilians from likely attacks by Qaddafi's regime, the Libyan operation had no long-lasting consequences for the region. Syria is harder. But success in Syria would be a transformative event for the Middle East. Not only would another ruthless dictator succumb to mass opposition on the streets, but the region would be changed for the better as Iran would no longer have a foothold in the Middle East from which to threaten Israel and undermine stability in the region. Unlike in Libya, a successful intervention in Syria would require substantial diplomatic and military leadership from the United States. Washington should start by expressing its willingness to work with regional allies like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar to organize, train and arm Syrian rebel forces. The announcement of such a decision would, by itself, likely cause substantial defections from the Syrian military. Then, using territory in Turkey and possibly Jordan, U.S. diplomats and Pentagon officials can start strengthening the opposition. It will take time. But the rebellion is going to go on for a long time, with or without U.S. involvement. The second step is to develop international support for a coalition air operation. Russia will never support such a mission, so there is no point operating through the UN Security Council. Some argue that U.S. involvement risks a wider war with Russia. But the Kosovo example shows otherwise. In that case, Russia had genuine ethnic and political ties to the Serbs, which don't exist between Russia and Syria, and even then Russia did little more than complain. Russian officials have already acknowledged they won't stand in the way if intervention comes. Arming the Syrian rebels and using western air power to ground Syrian helicopters and airplanes is a low-cost high payoff approach. As long as Washington's political leaders stay firm that no U.S. ground troops will be deployed, as they did in both Kosovo and Libya, the costs to the United States will be limited. Victory may not come quickly or easily, but it will come. And the payoff will be substantial. Iran would be strategically isolated, unable to exert its influence in the Middle East. The resulting regime in Syria will see the United States as a friend, not an enemy. Washington would gain substantial recognition as fighting for the people in the Arab world, not the corrupt regimes. For Israel, the rationale for a bolt from the blue attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would be eased. And a new Syrian regime might well be open to early action on the frozen peace talks with Israel. Hezbollah in Lebanon would be cut off from its Iranian sponsor since Syria would no longer be a transit point for Iranian training, assistance and missiles. All these strategic benefits and the prospect of saving thousands of civilians from murder at the hands of the Assad regime (10,000 have already been killed in this first year of civil war). With the veil of fear lifted from the Syrian people, they seem determine to fight for their freedom. America can and should help them — and by doing so help Israel and help reduce the risk of a wider war.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2016 12:03 AM GMT
    Stephen - thank you for posting.

    If liability to other countries is their best excuse....Obama has nothing. 9/11 was an aggressive act. Defeating Hitler was not.

    Both Obama and Hillary have been very stupid and greedy, and it's been swept under the rug because Clinton/Obama raise cash and turn out votes for Democrats.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2016 1:09 AM GMT
    Destinharbor said
    I don't think it's a good idea to start letting courts and judges all over the world get their hands on the cash reserves flowing through commerce. We may think it is because we believe in our courts but it empowers fairly insulated individuals to enter a geopolitical realm that ultimately needs to remain government to government. It also once again reduces actions involving human life to a cash transaction. It elevates cash to a pinnacle that is unhealthy for society as a whole to progress. Money, money, money. I'm sick of it.

    A good overview of this issue. But not going to sway the Republican-Robots currently infesting RJ, as they always do during the US election season, who only speak in canned speaking points. Only one legitimate thinker among them I've encountered, and even he puzzles me with his flawed reasoning.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2016 3:53 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    Destinharbor said
    I don't think it's a good idea to start letting courts and judges all over the world get their hands on the cash reserves flowing through commerce. We may think it is because we believe in our courts but it empowers fairly insulated individuals to enter a geopolitical realm that ultimately needs to remain government to government. It also once again reduces actions involving human life to a cash transaction. It elevates cash to a pinnacle that is unhealthy for society as a whole to progress. Money, money, money. I'm sick of it.

    A good overview of this issue. But not going to sway the Republican-Robots currently infesting RJ, as they always do during the US election season, who only speak in canned speaking points. Only one legitimate thinker among them I've encountered, and even he puzzles me with his flawed reasoning.


    Did the families and friends of 9/11 victims get justice via

    ? - the War with Afghanistan - October 7, 2001
    ? - the War with Iraq - March 19, 2003

    http://www.investigatingpower.org/timelines/9-11/


    Tell us what should satisfy the need for justice for the families and friends of 9/11 victims?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2016 4:07 AM GMT
    Veto Override / Sue? Yes / Saudi Arabia?

    7.7 million views







  • mybud

    Posts: 11829

    Oct 02, 2016 2:49 AM GMT
    Realjock conservatives want it both ways. They denounce overzealous suing lawyers yet they support this. You're all like the guy that was so confused he combed his ass while wiping his head...GO HILL