John Bolton: Bill Allowing 9/11 Families to Sue Saudi Arabia Is a ‘Cruel Hoax’

Appearing on Thursday’s edition of Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Alex Marlow, former U.N. Ambassador and American Enterprise Institute senior fellow John Bolton discussed the latest developments on the international scene, including the congressional override of President Obama’s veto against the bill allowing 9/11 families to file suit against Saudi Arabia.

Marlow mentioned a military family asking President Obama why he refuses to use the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” at a forum the previous day, a predilection that prevents his administration from “forming a coherent strategy” because they “don’t understand what the threat is,” in Bolton’s estimation:

I don’t know what he said yesterday, but I think the real reason that he won’t use the phrase is because of his disdain for the American people. He thinks they’re so foolish, so stupid, that if he says “radical Islamic terrorism,” they’ll forget the “radical” part, they’ll forget the “terrorist” part; it’ll just be anti-Islamic.

The Muslims of the world have borne a substantial part of the brunt of radical Islamic terrorism. They understand they’re in a civil war. King Abdullah of Jordan, for example, has referred to the struggle with the radicals in exactly that way. I think the person who doesn’t get it, and doesn’t understand it, is not the American people, it’s Barack Obama.

Wednesday brought the first override of an Obama presidential veto in eight years, by a nearly unanimous Senate vote, removing the President’s obstruction to a bill that would allow 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia for involvement in the terrorist atrocity. Bolton strongly criticized that bill, describing it as a “cruel hoax” perpetrated on the families of 9/11 victims:

Well, it will do two things. Number one, it will dramatically undermine America’s position in the world since we are the country most present around the world in other countries. It’s our people who need the protection of sovereign immunity, and we’re now at risk of seeing that stripped away.

Number two, the families are not going to get any relief here. The families are not going to find out anything more when they bring their litigation than they know now. They’re not gonna get damages. They’re not gonna get the satisfaction of seeing Saudi Arabia humiliated. Really, it’s a cruel hoax being perpetrated on them. Watching Congress do that, it’s no wonder their approval rating is at 15 percent.

Marlow suggested some would enjoy seeing Obama rebuked by the lopsided veto override vote, but may not have considered the objections Bolton raised to the actual 9/11 relief bill. “It certainly seems like one of those feel-good exercises that isn’t necessarily going to pay dividends,” he said.

“If you believe that the Saudis were responsible, even in part, for the 9/11 attack, that’s an act of war against the United States,” Bolton pointed out, adding:

President Bush treated it as an act of war when he overthrew the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Think how pathetic it is to say the Saudis attacked the United States, and we’re going to file a lawsuit against them. Imagine the horror of the Pearl Harbor attack, and people rushing to file lawsuits. It just is embarrassing for the United States.

Furthermore, Bolton wondered if anyone seriously believes “a lawsuit will find out more about what the Saudis did than our intelligence services in the past 15 years.”

“Both Obama and George W. Bush concluded the Saudi government was not involved. I want the proponents of this legislation, the Republicans in particular, to stand up and say George W. Bush covered up for the Saudis. Is that what they believe? Because that’s the implication of this legislation,” he challenged.

Marlow concluded by asking Bolton for his response to a U.N. panel’s declaration that the United States should pay more reparations for slavery.

“This is, unfortunately, typical of what U.N. bodies do,” Bolton replied, elaborating:

A few years ago, for example, a special rapporteur from what was then the U.N. Human Rights Commission issued a report saying that U.S. judges, federal and state, needed training in international human rights norms because they were too attached to the limited American Constitution. Well, aren’t we blessed to have that opinion! Funded, by the way, 22 percent by the United States through our contributions, telling us that our judges need training in international standards.

This goes on all the time. In most cases, people in the United States don’t know about it. Frankly, the more they know, the worse it gets.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

LISTEN: