Posted on 12/20/2001 10:35:38 AM PST by newsperson999
The boxcutters, perhaps, but the airlines could have had other procedures, for example: they could have had secure cockpits. Either there were things they *might* have done differently or we're just as much sitting ducks for hijackers as we were on the 10th of Sept.
I support suing the same airlines, the airlines that whined and got taxpayer bailout dollars, the very same airlines who used campaign contributions to "bribe" the Gore commission into completely toothless anti-terror regulations so they could go on flying on the cheap, flying irresponsibly insecure flights.
Let a court decide, let these airlines have to defend their "records". This is the American way. No more white-washing of corporate responsibility! If United, or American, or some other carrier goes under for negligent behavior, I'll have no pity. Other carriers, untainted by such corporate stupidity, will rise up and take their places.
that depends on the circumstances of the wreck. plenty of them are due to negligence. bad example.
I'm sure there's plenty of responsibility to investigate and pursue in the courts. I've wondered, like other freepers, about the tower evacuation plans. I've wondered why it appears hundreds of firefighters and other rescue workers were murdered because no one had an idea the buildings would fall. Who developed the response plan? This was never an impossibility--not even an implausible accident with so many airports in the area. Planning was evidently poor. Plenty of people watching in horror via television "knew" the buildings were coming down. It didn't take Freepers long to do crude but quick calculations to see the fuel-fed fire would burn hot enough to compromise the structural steel. Should there be no culpability, no concern for negilgence here?
Had the airlines installed secure cockpit doors--for crying outloud, we learned the Boeing aircraft cockpit doors all shared a standard key--there would have been no means of entry, no way to fly the aircraft into the towers or anywhere else.
I can't believe how many here are so eager to defend corporations that they can't even consider whether the corporations failed in their duties. I hope someone has the guts to find a way to put Gore in the hot seat over the campaign contributions which appear to have swayed his post TWA-800 safety commission toward toothless recommendations.
If there's provable negligence, let United and American (whiners for corporate welfare) go out of business. That's fine with me. Other airlines will rise up to the challenge and gladly take over their routes.
Morever, such a lawsuit is UNAMERICAN. It might even fall under "aid and comfort to the enemy". I'm sure this is unintentional, but think about it--if a jury awards a multi-million or even billion dollar award, United is out of business. That throws our economy into a further downward spiral, effecting not only the country at large, but the individual stock holders throughout the land (50% of the American public.)
Again, we're devastated by your loss, but respectfully say, "Thanks a lot lady."
NO!!! She should be suing Al Gore and Doris Meissner. Al Gore's ReInventing Government risky scheme cut back INS personnel, programs, eased off on entrance requirements for aliens, and allowed convicted felons into the country, by the thousands.
INS Commissioner Doris Meissner knew Gore's plan was designed to allow likely democrat voters into the country in time for the 96 election, she knew it would hurt the INS mission, but she supported him in congressional hearings.
Right On!! I've been saying the total "disarming" (fingernail clippers, even!!) of passengers is going the wrong way - If every qualified passenger was armed and carrying the proper ammunition for on-aircraft use, this would never have happened, and could never happen again!!
EVERY arguement against having as many passengers armed as possible is specious (just like all the BS the gun control fools promulgate)!!
9mm CCW - enough to cover me until I get back to my one-ton Texas crewcab dually pickup truck where the REAL artillery is stored - LOL!!
I know it sounds insane, but what changed my mind was the EPA's announcement that they were going to force General Electric to pay the cost ($450 million or so) of cleaning up the Hudson River in New York near the sites of a couple of old GE plants. The EPA correctly claims that GE dumped millions of pounds of PCBs in the river over several decades, but what really pisses me off is that up until the time the plants closed GE was abiding by every Federal regulation involving the discharge of PCBs into waterways. When PCB discharges were outlawed in the early 1970s, GE closed the plants down.
GE's response to the EPA was as follows: "How the f#ck can you hold us responsible for this cleanup when we did everything you told us to do at the time?"
If there was a problem with the design of the buildings, then sue the sh!t out of the agency that sets building codes. If there was a problem with airport security, then sue the sh!t out of the FAA or whatever agency is responsible for airline security.
Works for me.
I will second that!
The US Government through the FAA has always been the determining authority in the area of airline security and safety. The FAA has a history of security regulations that are designed to give only the appearance of security to the uninformed traveller.
This situation is not new and it has been the rule regardless of who was the President.
You may recall that following the tragic PanAm 103 incident there was a Presidential Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism. Since the PanAm 103 cause was conclusively proven to be a bomb in the checked luggage you might expect that some measurable improvement in the requirement to screen checked baggage would have come from this. We all know that nothing happened to actually improve security.
The airlines comply to the lowest level required by the FAA.
Americans have (unfortunately) never required the industry to provide anything but the minimum in safety and security. Examples, GPWD (ground proximity warning devices), Collision avoidance systems, explosives detection for checked and carry on luggage. You may be among those that think our airlines are equipped with a collision avoidance system that will alert a pilot to a threat in a non radar controlled environment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.