Skip to comments.Airlines, Others Sue FBI, CIA To Depose Agents In 9-11 Cases
Posted on 08/08/2007 9:05:12 AM PDT by BGHater
click here to read article
Wrong again, but its not a big deal.
AA should be sued into bankruptcy for their negligence.
The airlines sued for 9/11, based on ‘negligence’?
Good luck finding a judge granting standing on that one.
Why are there people who FAILED miserably, and possibly due to political skullduggery, to listen to the warnings not called to account?
Apparently that's already occured. Some of the victims families 'opted out' of that screwy government 'settlement'. Where the Constitutional authorization for that one came from, I'll never know. But since the Constitution is largely a dead letter these days I suppose that's irrelevant.
However AA hired the security firm and they were negligent in allowing what was an obvious plot to board commercial aircraft with weapons to proceed right under their idiot noses.
"Legal" is no defense to stupidity after all.
So here's hoping for a major bankruptcy in the airline industry really soon.
Tar and feathers would be far more appropriate than a lawsuit IMO.
There was no negligence involved. At the time, no one thought that:
1. Muslim males would hijack a plane AND use it as a missle.
2. The boxcutters they used (not “knives”, although yes they were used in that fashion) weren’t obvious weapons at the time
To have negligence, one must fail to act when a reasonable reason exists to act. You’re analyzing the situation with a post-9/11 mentality. Before 9/11 no one ever thought anything like this would ever happen.
So here’s hoping for a major bankruptcy in the airline industry really soon.
I have no problem with this. The rest....but not this statement.
Lord knows muzzies have never, ever engaged in hijacking....
The boxcutters they used (not knives,
If it's got a blade, it's a knife. (Geez do I really need to point that out?)
To have negligence, one must fail to act when a reasonable reason exists to act.
Let's see; multiple muslim males attempt to enter commercial aircraft carrying weapons.
Nope, no reason to get worked up there!
1. At the time, no one thought that Muslim males would hijack a plane AND use it as a missle.
2. The boxcutters they used (not "knives" although yes they were used in that fashion) werent obvious weapons at the time
I rest with my original claim: To have negligence, one must fail to act when a reasonable reason exists to act.
Prove to me that before 9/11, it was reasonable to expect hijackers would crash a plane into a building.
Prove to me that before 9/11, boxcutters were considered weapons on a plane.
If you can't, then you are doing just as I said in my original post: you are analyzing the situation with a post-9/11 mentality.
it is “proximate cause” litigation.
These are suits by anti-capitalists who seek to extend the proximate cause of any tort to the absurd extension. This is what real tort reform is about. Should civil libility exist when criminals act? When did EVERYTHING get submitted into attractive nuisance to create liability?
I rest with my original claim:
I certainly hope AAs lawyers do the same.
If they do, they're screwed.
Didn’t Condi Rice testify that no one could have guessed that such a thing could happen?
pre-9/11 MANY people carried pocket knives through security.
Security was watching for the hijack to Cuba, not the kamikazee pilot.
We have an intervening supravening criminal act.
We have an airline if full CYA mode.
Which is total CYA BS IMHO.
If you really believe that NO ONE in the FBI/CIA/intelligence community could have guessed that such a thing could happen...then I have beachfront property in Nebraska to sell you.
Yes, I think she said something to that effect.
Pre-9/11 you were allowed to take small pocket knives onto airplanes. Pre-9/11, seeing a couple Muslim males per flight who happened to have box cutters (at that time considered less dangerous than a knife) wouldn't have raised any flags. Pre-9/11, the standard thought was that if someone hijacked an airplane, they were going to demand it be flown somewhere, land and make monetary or "free my terrorist friends from jail" demands. The thought that they would slaughter the crew, take over the airplane and committ suicide by flying it into a building, was not even a thought. Maybe for some in government who knew about such a possibility, but not Boeing, American Airlines, Delta, et al.
This is a sheister lawyer (read: John Edwards) lawsuit trying to extract money from some deep pockets and should be thrown out of court.
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.