How dare you. How dare you not only taking away so much liberty and privacy of your own people, but now, in process, also to take away the the sovereignty of the rest of the world? How dare you to be that outrageously hypocrite? How dare you to possibly be able to attack my country’s freedom and to submit us to your will? How absolutely insane, short tempered, irrational, fearful are you really? Is this the USA you want to be? Is this the example you want to set for the rest of the world? Is this the right role-hegemony you have in mind?
You, USA, United Satans of America, became rotten to your bones. It seems that all logic, reasoning, and goodwill has left the USA – United States of America long time ago.
Dear reader, you’re probably wondering what provokes me. I’ll explain.
After 9/11 the scrutiny on its own people is overdone. The Patriot Act came into effect in 2001. In short, for the younger readers, it allows your government to do nearly everything legally what Snowden revealed. The Homeland Security Act came into force a year later. This combined all the different agencies into one big gigantic massive institution that has its fingers in everything in all its secrecy. In 2011 the NDAA came into effect, in which not only immigrated people who are suspected of terrorism can be detained indefinite without trail (Guantanamo) but also US citizens can be detained indefinitely without trail based on what? “Terrorism”? Note, it doesn’t need a judge, it doesn’t need a court, no, the government can just take you off the streets when they think you have something to do with terrorism to hold you forever if they want to. Actually, I don’t care so much on what your government is doing with its own citizens.
But! With the new act, in process, I am getting mad as the USA can sue/bring to court other nations as a whole if the USA thinks a citizen of that country has participated in terrorism in the USA itself. The whole bill you can read here: JASTA .
How it works in plain English
I exemplify very simplistically with a situation that can just happen at home how it works now:
Your kid hurts mine in my house. If I cannot solve it with you personally, as in asking you to punish your kid because he hurt mine then I go to the police, it comes in front of an independent court who finds out the truth and the judge sentences the parents of the wrongdoer to whatever appropriate punishment and the case is closed.
If JASTA becomes fact, it will be like this:
Your kid hurts mine in my house. If I cannot solve it with you personally, as in asking you to punish your kid because he hurt mine, then I get you into my house, sue you, punish you with a punishment I find appropriate to close the case.
Who can you turn to? Absolutely nobody at all! Oh! And! I always am bigger, always have more money and always have more guns, therefore I always have more power in any sense.
Yes, I will intervene in your family, yes, I will dictate how your rules are, yes, I will do everything possible to protect my interest all the time.
9/11.
On 9/11, three towers miraculously came down. Yes, I have seen the second plane going into the second tower live on the TV. However, it is scientifically i.m.p.o.s.s.i.b.l.e. that both of the towers came down because of the crashes. It simply cannot. 9/11 to me is an inside job, orchestrated from and on US’s soil. Especially because ‘building 7’ came down too, which was further away and not being hit by a plane at all! Closer buildings never were hit by a plane either and stand strong ‘without a scratch’!
JASTA is aiming to give 9/11 survivors the opportunity to bring Saudi Arabia to justice because of their speculated involvement in it.
I am absolutely no fan of Saudi Arabia as well because their view on women, their view on punishment, how they do that, when they do that, all about human rights is off. But that is not the point. The point is that something happened on USA’s soil, the USA not being honest and open about it, and now seeking “justice” through a backdoor to wash their hands clean once and for all. The economic and political stability what is left in the middle east is undermined heavily and it only will get worse for everyone so there won’t be a winner at all. More people will be hurt and die. One of the very few credits I can give to President Obama is that he opposes JASTA, while all other presidential candidates approve of it.
However, the text of the bill is so broad! Saudi Arabia is just the first nation, and then? Who’s next? The Netherlands? In ‘De Volkskrant’ of today (20-6-2016) is an article about it on which I will translate a paragraph:
“With the new law the next scenario is possible: A group of people left behind after the attack in San Bernardino start a court case against the Dutch state because the secret service might have had intelligence on the attackers and have not shared it with the American agencies. The group’s opinion is that the Dutch made a mistake and without that mistake the attack possibly wouldn’t have happened. They believe the Netherlands is liable for all damage done, both physical and mental, and claim millions or even billions – it’s America after all. The Netherlands has to explain themselves in front of a federal court in the USA and justify which intelligence the secret service had at what moment and why it wasn’t shared with the Americans”. – Huib Modderkolk
How it works now.
Presently, if the USA believes, in this example, the Dutch state is liable, they can have a request to our own department of justice to investigate the claims, make a court case out of it and send the verdict to the USA. It’s not only for this example, but for all that is going on. If any country or individual or group or whatever is presently harming US’s interests, the USA can ask the government to bring the suspects to justice. I do am questioning how valid USA’s extensive ‘protecting US’s interest’ so provocative is all over the world. Just count their military all around the globe.
What if there is a dispute? Isn’t there a solution to that?
YES!!!! There already is!!! It is called the International Court of Justice in The Hague where countries, or (ex) politicians are being brought to court in cases of Crimes against Humanity. They do a very good job in putting political wrongdoers behind bars. However! The USA never ratified this court so no US wrongdoer can be brought to justice in international courts, nor they can use that court for their own disputes towards other countries. Terrorism orchestrated by any state surely qualifies for that.
As the USA isn’t ratifying it, they just can do whatever they please, however they please and be that arrogant, violent bully to the world. They can keep on going droning the world to “protect US’s interests”.
You know what that means, right? Again, very simple, I can kill your kid because I think that he, because of your parental behavior, might harm my kid somewhere in the future and that is harming me, so I am taking him out already.
Pakistan isn’t a good ‘parent’ in USA’s eyes, so, people, who might harm the USA in some way somewhere in the future, are randomly blasted in oblivious by a drone along with people, read women and children, who are even more innocent.
Countless people have died already because of the USA – the list goes on and on and on. They haven’t won any war since the second world war but killed so many innocent, went in so many conflicts all over the world, illegally too! It is too big of a risk for them to ratify any international system they cannot control to keep hands above their own head to rage on and help this world to doom.
“Leverage the internet. Tell us about that old-fashioned thing you love and share it with the world online so that it may be preserved digitally, indefinitely.” – Daily Post: Analog
Unfortunately, times since 9/11 change and it is impossible to go back before these days in which people all over the world had either consciously or unconsciously way more peace on their minds.
Daniel Arendzen 
I understand your concerns about JASTA. It’s a slippery slope, right? I guess I’ll play devil’s advocate for the sake of discussion, though.
Imagine this scenario: Your kid punches my kid then runs back to your house. I come to you telling you about what happened and ask that you properly punish your kid for doing something wrong. You refuse; maybe you don’t believe your kid really did it, maybe you don’t have “time” to investigate further, or maybe you just don’t care. But my kid still has a broken nose. My kid gets no justice, and nothing has been solved.
That’s essentially the way the US government and the victims of 9/11 are seeing it. They are unsatisfied with the way Saudi Arabia has been bringing (or not bringing) entities to justice for their alleged involvement in 9/11. That’s why people feel JASTA is necessary.
I did also notice that JASTA does not outright determine guilt or innocence, but merely allows lawsuits to be presented in court. Lawyers from both sides would still need to prove/disprove their cases. (Granted, these cases will probably fall in the US’s favor since the court is in NY.)
In the end, I believe that stripping sovereign immunity is a very dangerous precedent to set. That is why I, personally, would consider opposing JASTA.
Hi, Thank you for your comment!
In a way I agree with you. People do have a sense of wanting to have justice. That feeling is legit and real beyond doubt. However, it is a feeling, it is thinking based on emotions and not on facts. That is already dangerous and what is too is because of that, especially when the facts are not clear at all (as 9/11 is one big controversy), bills like that have a very possible negative consequence for further deteriorating world’s peace.
If our kids start fighting, we start fighting too, in our of our houses, so there isn’t any neighbor who can “objectively” reason or preventing it from escalating so our houses won’t be burned. Life simply is not fair, and life cannot be played according one set of rules that is more likely to favor one above the other.
There is an international court, it has been around for decades already. The USA has simply too much to cover up to ratify it (same goes for climate change negotiations as it is US congress that needs to approve of agreements otherwise the USA won’t participate/agree. So they have the power to direct how the whole world is going about, and US congress isn’t perfect at all (just look at NRA’s involvement in restricting gun laws discussion)).
A big push in the solution towards stability will be for the USA to stop believing it is the greatest country, stop controlling, stop Pentagonism (wrote about it, just look it up if you’re interested), and start being humble, respectful, and learn from other countries as well.
Generally: restricted cats do jump
“If our kids start fighting, we start fighting too.” That’s a fair point. One of the biggest concerns for opponents of JASTA is that it would deteriorate already shaky US-Saudi relations. And judging by the kingdom’s reaction to JASTA, I’m inclined to believe that’s true.
I strongly believe the victims of terrorist attacks deserve justice. However, I’m not sure JASTA is the best way. This brings up a bigger question. Is a court case really justice? Is it enough? Maybe more genuine justice can be had when the US works with other countries to fight terrorism as a whole.
“Maybe more genuine justice can be had when the US works with other countries to fight terrorism as a whole” – in a way that is happening already. There are and were many coalitions “fighting terrorism” having illegal wars as well (Iraq). However, that doesn’t work as action only provokes a reaction and radicalism on both sides grows (we only think we aren’t radical as we are ‘the good guys’). No matter how large US’s army is (check that link in the article with how large it actually is abroad), there never will be any safety as long as nobody is ‘Orwelled’.
At some point we need to make a choice: Do we choose to stand behind the idea of Pentagonism, restrict more, especially in US’s way? (as there isn’t any other country that can match its economy or military strength) Or, will we choose what leaders like Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Mandela etc, are emphasizing?
I’m choosing the latter. We need to stop violence, provoking, and killing innocent people because we think ‘they are the bad guys’.
9/11 is a big controversy on its own, but in all the wars afterwards, more innocent people died because of the US. People who wake up, drink a cup of coffee before going to work and then getting a drone on their heads. People living their lives being sucked into wars and conflicts. They don’t have a judge to go to, they don’t have money, they don’t have military to form any form of large scale, international operating coalition to fight [US’s] ‘terrorism’. No, they simply die.
What I am reacting on is that 2 people write an bill, on their own, without having any international contact or agreement, that potentially can have large scale international conflicts as that bill is so broad in essence.
I don’t approve of drone strikes either, whether they be American, Russian, or anything inbetween. How would Ghandi end terrorism?
It’s a bit of a long watch, maybe nice to see when you have the time for it. In 1982 they made a very good movie about how Gandhi ended the colonialism of India. It starts with a young Gandhi in apartheid South Africa all the way till his hunger strike with the separation between India and Pakistan and how he is murdered. You can watch it here: http://putlocker.is/watch-gandhi-online-free-putlocker.html
It clearly shows his stands against violence. Of course his context was different then in India than what it is now with the fake war against terrorism. What fundamentally is the same is the approach to end it. In the movie there are fighters for independence, which were seen by the British as terrorists as they blew up railways. The government replied that violence with…. violence and then the Indians added more violence which triggered the government to add even more violence to the people and so on and so forth. Gandhi, on the other hand opposes it and somewhere he says: “An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind”.
That’s what the western approach is, taking out eyes that is, and the “terrorists” are returning the favor. Hence, the fear of violence, fear of ‘the other’ becomes very large and we can see the consequences of it.
I don’t know the steps Gandhi would take these days if he still were alive, but, non-violently for sure. People profit financially by killing other people. Violence = $$$. Terrorism, war, gangs, any form of violence does as the tool to kill has to be bought. Non-violence is free, is peace, is saving lives, is finding a solution with the absence of money.
911 was an obvious false flag affair with the Deep State(tm) involved. Nobody in their right mind should take US, the biggest liar and manipulator in history of mankind, serious, when they demand some sort of “court proceedings” on this murky internal affair. Just ignore them or reroute them on to any of 100:s of independent investigations on 911.
Trivial stuff, really!