The 9/11 fund was unwarranted compensation against a TERRORIST act.
The only real purpose was to prevent lawsuits against the airlines, which might have succeeded even though the airlines weren’t at fault.
The bridge collapse was a result of the state’s actions and the families should be compensated as such, but any comparisons or attempts to mimic the 9/11 fund would be a mistake.
The 9/11 fund was an atrocity that should never be repeated.
No kidding, especially when one considers that most of the families of the 9/11 victims were well off.
BTTT
“The 9/11 fund was an atrocity that should never be repeated.”
Especially since I do not remember any similar offered to the victims of Oklahoma City. The rationale behind this surprised me - were the AIRLINES responsible for airport security?