Bushmustgo Posted September 17, 2003 Report Posted September 17, 2003 I wish they could sue Pres. Bush for his role in ignoring the warnings from Clinton. Quote
nova_satori Posted September 18, 2003 Report Posted September 18, 2003 or they could sue clinton for not taking a few more measures to stop this. Or they could just sue both of them and the airlines. Because that will make the world better! Make everyone poor! No. Quote
KrustyKidd Posted September 18, 2003 Report Posted September 18, 2003 6 months after 9-11 - Atta the leader of the hi-jackings was mailed a Visa extension. I joke not. The Press uncovered this idiocy and I hope some people were fired. How can gov't be so incompetent as to issue Visa's to dead terrorists who's faces were planted on every media outlet in the world ??? Hate to break it to you Craig. Unless he rose from the grave and put his name on the "Do Not Call List' he's still getting offers to have his scissors sharpened and free flight lessons. Quote We're Paratroopers Lieutenant. We're supposed to be surrounded - CPT Richard Winters
Craig Read Posted September 18, 2003 Author Report Posted September 18, 2003 More than likely yes. But of course it is AA's fault that national security was compromised, that Clinton and his democratic friends were too busy having panty parties and whiskeys with hollywood sluts, and that the acronyms were immobilised by political pressure and doubt. Indeed i think the passengers should sued for their own demise -after they could have stopped the terrorists. Quote
Aristides Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 (edited) The federal government is responsible for security screening in the US. If you want to make airlines responsible you better be prepared to go through screening twice, once for the government and again for the airline. Back in the day we sometimes had cockpit open houses when passengers were free to come up a couple at a time on long day flights. Flight attendants hated it but it was interesting for us and informative for passengers. Aviation has had to adapt as new threats came along (hijacking, bombs etc). 9/11 was another one. I don't know how you could hold an airline responsible for not anticipating something that had never happened before nor can you be critical of passengers who would have had no idea the plan was to crash the aircraft into buildings. Edited March 12 by Aristides Quote
robosmith Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 On 9/10/2003 at 5:14 AM, Craig Read said: Now the geniuses in the US judiciary have inexplicably decided that because the CIA, FBI, FAA and INS all screwed up costing 3.000 lives, that citizens can now sue the airlines. Good job boys. Let's understand this - 250.000 gov't workers, with billions in budgets fail in their job and the reaction of the US gov't? Sue the airlines and Boeing for not knowing that 19 deranged Islamofascists would break through the various acronyms protecting America and slaughter people on a September Tuesday morning as they worked. This is insane. Yesterday it was announced: A federal judge ruled that Sept. 11 victims can sue for negligence. Here are some of the many claims: American Airlines, United Airlines: Should have screened passengers to keep terrorists from boarding. Port Authority of N.Y. and N.J., Larry Silverstein's WTC Properties: Didn't design building safely or provide adequate evacuation plans. Boeing: Should have built cockpit doors that could prevent terrorists from breaking in. ===== How about suing the acronyms for negligence and stupidity ? Actually the airlines are much more responsible for weak cockpit doors. Boeing would have done it, but the airlines fought it tooth and nail cause they never imagined a suicide mission, since to date they were always hijack for ransom or changes of policy. Quote
robosmith Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 1 hour ago, Aristides said: The federal government is responsible for security screening in the US. If you want to make airlines responsible you better be prepared to go through screening twice, once for the government and again for the airline. Back in the day we sometimes had cockpit open houses when passengers were free to come up a couple at a time on long day flights. Flight attendants hated it but it was interesting for us and informative for passengers. Aviation has had to adapt as new threats came along (hijacking, bombs etc). 9/11 was another one. I don't know how you could hold an airline responsible for not anticipating something that had never happened before nor can you be critical of passengers who would have had no idea the plan was to crash the aircraft into buildings. It's really their job to anticipate things that have never happened before. I can see at least 2 monetary reasons they actively fought a simple measure. 1. adds expense including a little extra weight 2. suggests that airliners are more vulnerable to terrorists and they didn't want to scare potential passengers. 9/11 took care of removing #2. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 2 hours ago, Aristides said: The federal government is responsible for security screening in the US. If you want to make airlines responsible you better be prepared to go through screening twice, once for the government and again for the airline. Back in the day we sometimes had cockpit open houses when passengers were free to come up a couple at a time on long day flights. Flight attendants hated it but it was interesting for us and informative for passengers. Aviation has had to adapt as new threats came along (hijacking, bombs etc). 9/11 was another one. I don't know how you could hold an airline responsible for not anticipating something that had never happened before nor can you be critical of passengers who would have had no idea the plan was to crash the aircraft into buildings. 21 year old thread 🤔 1 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Aristides Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 44 minutes ago, robosmith said: It's really their job to anticipate things that have never happened before. I can see at least 2 monetary reasons they actively fought a simple measure. 1. adds expense including a little extra weight 2. suggests that airliners are more vulnerable to terrorists and they didn't want to scare potential passengers. 9/11 took care of removing #2. Really? It's their job to identify terrorist threats. What happened to the CIA and FBI? Airlines operated for 60 years without the need for hardened doors. Hindsight makes everyone a genius. Quote
robosmith Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 13 minutes ago, Aristides said: Really? It's their job to identify terrorist threats. What happened to the CIA and FBI? Airlines operated for 60 years without the need for hardened doors. Hindsight makes everyone a genius. Most people could see the terrorist threat evolving which is why hardened doors were an issue. The airlines fought it cause it cost money and scared customers. Quote
gatomontes99 Posted March 12 Report Posted March 12 What the f....? 1 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
Aristides Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 3 hours ago, robosmith said: Most people could see the terrorist threat evolving which is why hardened doors were an issue. The airlines fought it cause it cost money and scared customers. Yes it would have cost money. Customers wouldn't have known or cared, 90% of them knew nothing about cockpit doors and 75% probably still don't. Quote
CdnFox Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 Jesus Christ, 22 years...... it took you that long to think of a response? Quote
robosmith Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 1 hour ago, Aristides said: Yes it would have cost money. Customers wouldn't have known or cared, 90% of them knew nothing about cockpit doors and 75% probably still don't. IT was in the NEWS a lot here, so very many knew about the doors even before 9/11. Quote
Aristides Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 1 hour ago, robosmith said: IT was in the NEWS a lot here, so very many knew about the doors even before 9/11. Where? Quote
CdnFox Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 58 minutes ago, robosmith said: US By 'US' do you mean you, and the voices in your head? Quote
Deluge Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 On 9/10/2003 at 6:14 AM, Craig Read said: Now the geniuses in the US judiciary have inexplicably decided that because the CIA, FBI, FAA and INS all screwed up costing 3.000 lives, that citizens can now sue the airlines. Good job boys. Let's understand this - 250.000 gov't workers, with billions in budgets fail in their job and the reaction of the US gov't? Sue the airlines and Boeing for not knowing that 19 deranged Islamofascists would break through the various acronyms protecting America and slaughter people on a September Tuesday morning as they worked. This is insane. Yesterday it was announced: A federal judge ruled that Sept. 11 victims can sue for negligence. Here are some of the many claims: American Airlines, United Airlines: Should have screened passengers to keep terrorists from boarding. Port Authority of N.Y. and N.J., Larry Silverstein's WTC Properties: Didn't design building safely or provide adequate evacuation plans. Boeing: Should have built cockpit doors that could prevent terrorists from breaking in. ===== How about suing the acronyms for negligence and stupidity ? Their planes WERE slammed into the two towers, and maybe it wasn't just the terrorists that planned that attack. I say go to work and find justice for lost loved ones. Quote
User Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 What is also comical is that all the original people in this discussion seem to be gone. LOL So, lets drag this thread up! Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 13 Report Posted March 13 Most of them were around about as long as Perspektiv... Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.