How threatening is Saudi 'threat,' really?

Monday, October 3, 2016
 | 
Chad Groening (OneNewsNow.com)

Obama with Saudi kingA national security expert says retaliation from the Saudis is likely following what he calls a "stunning" congressional override of President Obama's veto of the 9-11 victims' bill. But the threat posed by the Saudis, he adds, isn't what it used to be.

Last week – for the first time since Barack Obama moved into the Oval Office – both the House and Senate voted overwhelming to override his veto, passing a bill that would allow the families of those killed during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to sue Saudi Arabia for any role in the plot. The vote in the Senate was 97-1; in the House, 348-77.

"It is a stunning defeat for the president," says national defense analyst Robert Maginnis, who serves as senior fellow for national security at the Family Research Council. "You only have to understand, though, that the president likely is privy to information that suggests that the retaliation by the Saudis will be relatively fast and potentially painful."

One 9-11 widow, however, beat the Saudis to the punch. On Friday, two days after the vote, Stephanie DeSimone – whose husband was killed during the terrorist attack on the Pentagon that day – filed a lawsuit against Saudi Arabia. She alleges in the suit that the Middle Eastern kingdom provided material support to al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

Maginnis

While the president warned before the lawmakers voted that making the bill law would set a "dangerous precedent," Maginnis says for the sake of the 9-11 victims it's a risk Congress should be willing to make.

"Given that the United States is moving rapidly to energy independence – and this, in fact, may propel that – the Saudis' hand is not nearly as powerful as it once was," he argues. "And I think that those on the intelligence committees in both the Senate and the House understand that. So it's a risk that we should be willing to accept."

Maginnis expects some effort to reverse the impact of the law during the lame-duck session of Congress – depending on who wins the presidential election.

Comments

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details

SIGN UP FOR OUR DAILY NEWSBRIEF

SUBSCRIBE

VOTE IN OUR POLL

What would you say is Joe Biden's biggest liability in his quest for the Democratic nomination?

CAST YOUR VOTE

GET PUSH NOTIFICATIONS

SUBSCRIBE

LATEST AP HEADLINES

Parachutists jump over Dutch heath to mark WWII operation
Hong Kong protesters burn flag, police fire pepper spray
Area 51 events mostly peaceful; thousands in Nevada desert
Trump, in call, urged Ukraine to investigate Biden's son
Hurricane Lorena threatens Mexico's resort-studded Baja
US to send troops to Saudi Arabia, hold off on striking Iran
Houston area sees relief, rescues after Imelda leaves 4 dead

LATEST FROM THE WEB

'Almost impossible mission': The 8,000-mile nonstop flight to save a US soldier's life
School cancels football game days after cheerleaders are punished for pro-Trump banner
Trey Gowdy rips 'deeply partisan' Adam Schiff
How Elizabeth Warren used fake Native American identity to get ahead
New details reported on Trump-Ukraine call as Dems clash with White House on complaint

CARTOON OF THE DAY

Cartoon of the Day
NEXT STORY
Is the 'Religious Right' dead?

voting in AmericaIn a blistering speech to a gathering of Christian thinkers, the chairman of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission declared the end of the politically connected "Religious Right."