View Full Version : Why oh why
Graham F
09-09-2003, 20:37
I would like to say from the outset that i know this is an extremly sensitive issue and i trust that as adults we can discuss this sensitivly.
I have seen this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3094758.stm) acrticle and to be quite honest i was staggered that people would try and take this kind of action after such an event.
How can the blame for these horrific attacks be put at the feet of the companies involved? The only people that are responceable for them are the **** that carried them out NO-ONE else.
Originally posted by Scooby
I would like to say from the outset that i know this is an extremly sensitive issue and i trust that as adults we can discuss this sensitivly.
I have seen this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3094758.stm) acrticle and to be quite honest i was staggered that people would try and take this kind of action after such an event.
How can the blame for these horrific attacks be put at the feet of the companies involved? The only people that are responceable for them are the **** that carried them out NO-ONE else.
Agreed but people have children or dependants to take care of.There is no social services as such in the US so folk have to take such actions to provide for those who were financially affected by the deaths of family and bread winners.:(
Incog.
Yep seen that before but surly this did not surprise you about the yanks. They sue for anything over their.
As for the **** that did it well their everywhere
PS from what I seen on the news this morning they have been offered 1 million dollers but some are doing this thinking they will get more!
downquark1
09-09-2003, 20:42
Isn't this like suing a bank cashier who gave the money to a robber while being held at gun point.
Oh ye gods!
That is sheer lunacy! I hope those cases get thrown out of court immediately.
Graham F
09-09-2003, 20:44
Originally posted by Incognitas
Agreed but people have children or dependants to take care of.There is no social services as such in the US so folk have to take such actions to provide for those who were financially affected by the deaths of family and bread winners.:(
Incog.
I take your point on board but what could the airlines or even Boeing have done to have stopped this?
Nothing!!
Had better security.The US domestic airlines had a poor reputation around the world for very lax security.
Incog.:(
What could the Port authority have done to prevent it?
There could be an arguement that there should have been better security on the plane, but how the port authority could have stopped it I just couldn't say.
Graham F
09-09-2003, 20:51
Originally posted by Incognitas
Had better security.The US domestic airlines had a poor reputation around the world for very lax security.
Incog.:(
The regulations in place are set by the Fedral Goverment as far as i am aware so any problems with security would lie with them surely?
Stephen Robb
13-09-2003, 17:28
Originally posted by Incognitas
Had better security.The US domestic airlines had a poor reputation around the world for very lax security.
Incog.:(
I'm inclined to agree on this Incognitas, but this does open a rather interesting debate!
America does not have welfare system as such as we know it, so someone has got pick up the tab. Now as Mal said:
What could the Port authority have done to prevent it?
There could be an arguement that there should have been better security on the plane, but how the port authority could have stopped it I just couldn't say.
and Incognitas said:
Had better security.The US domestic airlines had a poor reputation around the world for very lax security.
It had been said afterwards that as regards aircraft security, especially their internal flights was to the point of being smug, nothing will happen syndrom!
Had that their security had been beefed up as it should have been, there would have been some possibility that the plot may have been avoided.
As regards the air lines and the makers of aircraft, bearing in mind that this sort of thing had been going on around the world for a considerable number of years, that they didn't think that as highjackers always go for the captain or first officer to make the cockpit impossible to penetrate.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I think that it's also a bit of the stable door!
Bill Payer
13-09-2003, 18:33
I can't see this getting very far. Insurance Cover omits "Acts Of War".
Graham F
13-09-2003, 18:37
The thing that gets me is that the US is offering all the families affeted something like $1 000 000 in compensation but they are not happy with this as it seems :shrug:
Stephen Robb
13-09-2003, 18:45
Originally posted by Scooby
The thing that gets me is that the US is offering all the families affeted something like $1 000 000 in compensation but they are not happy with this as it seems :shrug:
Agree with you Scooby. We know what a £1m is worth in this country which is roughly what, about $750,000 (can't be bothered to work it out) so I suppose they want it gold plated as well!
Stephen Robb
13-09-2003, 18:47
Originally posted by Bill Payer
I can't see this getting very far. Insurance Cover omits "Acts Of War".
Yes, Bill don't forget at that time the US was not in a state of war, so I cannot see how they can wriggle on that one!
The port authority was in charge of getting the towers designed/built and day to day running wasn't it?
Therefore I suppose the argument against them is that they failed to ensure that the towers would be able to withstand such an attack.
As for the airline/airport security, thing is, the knives used in the attack were ceramic, and so only patting every passenger down would have found them.
If an airline had a policy of patting down all it's passengers before they get on a flight there would be outrage in the states, not to mention several "indecent assault" cases!
Up until 11/09, hijackers took hostages as bargaining chips.
The terrorists knew everyone on those planes were going to die anyway, so as soon as their attack started they killed people.
Most of the passengers would have been thinking along the hostage lines of a "normal" hijacking, and so would have kept quiet hoping to get out alive at the end.
It wasn't until loved ones told the passengers on the flight that crashed in the field, how the other planes had been used as weapons, that some passengers took action knowing if they didn't, then they'd be dead anyway.
How these people bringing the cases could expect the aircrew to do anything other than try to keep people calm and expect a "normal" hijacking to take place is beyond me.
Even if the cockpit door was 2 inches thick and securly locked, how many people would be able to stay locked inside while hijackers killed the passengers one by one until you unlocked the door.
The only thing I can think of as a possible reaction to a hijacking now would be to drop the cabin pressure and thus the oxygen levels until everyone lost conciousness.
I'm not a flight engineer though, so I don't know if that would actually be possible.
Insurance cover also normally omits acts of terrorism.
"lets roll"
Stephen Robb
14-09-2003, 04:14
posted by Xaccers
Even if the cockpit door was 2 inches thick and securly locked, how many people would be able to stay locked inside while hijackers killed the passengers one by one until you unlocked the door.
This may be so, but at least the captain would have more chance to put the aircraft on the floor.
Lord Nikon
14-09-2003, 04:57
Originally posted by Xaccers
The only thing I can think of as a possible reaction to a hijacking now would be to drop the cabin pressure and thus the oxygen levels until everyone lost conciousness.
I'm not a flight engineer though, so I don't know if that would actually be possible.
A control on the flight engineer's panel allows O2 pressure regulation, dropping the pressure to 9psi would cause unconsciousness, HOWEVER, oxygen masks would drop from the bulkheads automatically when pressure started to drop below a certain point, so it is debatable whether that method would work, unless the oxy mask deployment could also be inhibited, which is doubtful as it is an independent system for emergency automatic use.
Would go someway to restricting people in their seats tho.
How accessable are the cabin crew's portable oxygen hoods?
Course a sleeping gas release system would help too.
Stephen Robb
15-09-2003, 21:29
Posted by Xaccers
How accessable are the cabin crew's portable oxygen hoods?
From what I know, they are in reach because if either the Captain or the First Officer leaves the cockpit the remaining officer must wear an oxygen mask at all time. Think it's same with bad turbulance and there is no exception to this standing order.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.