Family members said they could provide few details about what they lea
rned or how much they received in the settlement. They agreed to keep the financial arrangements confidential, and a broad gag order forbids them from sharing information gleaned in the case. The case proved "airlines and security contractors were responsible for profound failures in security that could have prevented the attacks.
28 comments:
Meanwhile, 2 Iraqi women, including a mother of three, continue to be gunned downed by the neo-nazi occupation forces in Iraq.
"2 Iraqi women killed by convoy guards"
http://tinyurl.com/2s4cmt
Gee, do ya think this is first time since our original nazi invasion under Daddy Bush that something like this has happened?
Keep in mind that this happened after "western private security firms in Iraq" (apparently now a euphemism for out-of-control neo-nazi radicals) have been put under intense scrutiny and criticism. It's like they can't help themselves -- and nobody is in control of them.
I wonder if the three daughters of one of the victims will receive the same compensation and "secret answers" to their mother's death as the money-grubbing families and attorney involved in this airliner lawsuit.
There are other lawsuits still pending, especially against Boeing. Let's see if there are any heroes left in that crowd...
That's what happens when they start strip searching grandmotherly women, old men and law abiding citizens, and letting the obviously suspect people get through because they're afraid of a lawsuit for "profiling".
Surveys and studies have also shown with the inferior quality of the people doing the screening, that they tend to "pick" on the "safe" people. "Oooh, he's got a turban on, he might be a bomber, so I don't want to stop him, he'll blow me up".
Try not to let your white supremacy remarks shine through there, Life, as hard as that might be. Maybe you are forgetting that 9/11, and the subsequent holocaust in Iraq, were carried out mostly by radical KKK neo-nazi white boys from the South.
What the hell are they strip-searching anybody for in the first place? It was not possible to hijack a plane successfully on 9/11, and it is certainly not possible now.
Anybody wanting to just blow up a plane for the heck of it can do it 1000 times easier by simply planting the bomb in the luggage or doing it directly while the plane is sitting on the tarmac. It is pretty easy to access planes sitting on the ground, and there is not much we can do about it, short of not flying at all.
Again, why don't we just cut the "dark-skinned people are out to get us" scare-tactics crap and simply execute the neo-nazis and their cronies in government responsible for 9/11 and get on with it.
Remember (as the founder of the PAC called GWICAAC, this is important!) we have to replace all the slime with women under the age of 60 (to increase the chances that they have a spine) if we want to limit the possibility of "terrorist attacks" happening again.
BTW: GWICAAC = Get Women In Congress At All Costs, and the fact that it sounds like a cat spitting up a furball is beginnning to grow on me.
I don't recall reading anywhere that it was white men hijacking the planes. Do you have a source for this? Where is a link that says it was NOT Arabs who hijacked the planes?
Excerpt from a letter sent to every member of the US Senate dated September 20, 2007 (a similar letter will be sent out to every member of the US House of Representatives in about a week -- when I can afford it!)...
"Despite any proclamations of 'not knowing' or 'ignorance of the facts' that may be presented as a defense at a future trial, any US Senator who continues to support this administration and its various illegal activities and occupations after having knowledge of the evidence presented in this letter today is tantamount to nothing short of treason and a violation of an oath to protect the US Constitution from enemies from within.
1. The planes were probably not hijacked on 9/11/01 (at least not as described). If they were, it would have been the first successful hijackings of 757’s and 767’s in the history of the aircraft . Effective anti-hijacking capabilities were available long before 2001 and may have been installed in all 757’s and 767’s at the time of the purported hijackings.
Sources:
- http://www.airsafe.com/events/hijack.htm
- http://www.911-strike.com/remote_bb.htm
Although the letter to Congress only cited one article from Jerry Russell's web site (for the sake of Brevity), he has several articles concerning questions about the whole "Arab hijackers" story. Here is another one...
http://www.911-strike.com/remote.htm
Well, looks like we'll never know they REAL reasons security failed. So it looks like your nut-ball, reactionary theories are safe (for now.)
Note about using the e-mail FAX services: Metro Hi-Speed Fax is the best, but you must remember the 1000-page fax limits!
I sent about 7000 pages of faxes to Congress in a two day time span last August because I was unaware of the 1000-page limit. Metro Hi-Speed Fax was very good at trying to work with me in some kind of payment plan for the bill I generated for this, but because I wanted to continue sending at least the 1000-page/mo limit, they finally just canned me as a customer.
I am now using Ring Central Fax, probably the next cheapest for the 1000-page/mo limit.
Final note on using Faxes: this is the best form of communication to date with Congress because it is the only one that leaves an accurate paper-trail of the communication -- i.e., exactly what was said, when, and if the communication was received.
You would think the web mail does this, but it is not like e-mail at all -- in web-mail there is no evidence left in the hands of the sender of what was sent and when, so Congress can in effect make up whatever the hell it wants: "We've received thousands of web messages that say such and such..." Oh, really? And how do we know?
I heard that many Congresspeople ignore the web messages anyway, at least relative to Faxes, and I can understand why.
For those of you out there wanting to fight for a better democracy, I say one thing to focus on is forcing Congresspeople to have a web-based mail system that regurgitates back at you (at a designated e-mail address) an acknowledgment that your message was received, exactly what you wrote and when.
MoveOn.org does this, quite appropriately, with their "letters to the editor" campaigns.
"For those of you out there wanting to fight for a better democracy,"
uhh...this is a Republic, not a Democracy. Common mistake for those who don't know how this country works. Nazi Germany was a "Democracy". Ever heard of NSDAP?
And my guess is after about the first 2 letters with diatribes like this....
"Despite any proclamations of 'not knowing' or 'ignorance of the facts' that may be presented as a defense at a future trial, any US Senator who continues to support this administration and its various illegal activities and occupations after having knowledge of the evidence presented in this letter today is tantamount to nothing short of treason and a violation of an oath to protect the US Constitution from enemies from within."
Your money is wasted and they already have you on the Ignore list.
"Well, looks like we'll never know they REAL reasons security failed."
It failed because of left wing loonies who scream "prejudice" and "profiling" at every chance they get. Middle Eastern men between the ages of 20-40 or so have hijacked more aircraft than all others combined by a factor of about 50-1 or more. White women between 1-99, children aged 6 mos-15, white business men wearing suits, black women with children, black athletes, old Oriental married couples, etc, do NOT hijack airplanes. Middle Eastern, weird acting, nervous, fidgety, men do.
GMAB...accept reality...it helps.
t failed because of left wing loonies who scream "prejudice" and "profiling" at every chance they get. Middle Eastern men between the ages of 20-40 or so have hijacked more aircraft than all others combined by a factor of about 50-1 or more. White women between 1-99, children aged 6 mos-15, white business men wearing suits, black women with children, black athletes, old Oriental married couples, etc, do NOT hijack airplanes. Middle Eastern, weird acting, nervous, fidgety, men do.
Then what is the Government covering up? Oh, and one more thing...Timothy McVeigh.
"what is the Government covering up?"
Nothing except things that relate to national security and are none of the common people's business...and Timmy didn't hijack an airplane. He blew up a building and got his ass executed. Which needs to be done a lot more in this country.
"Common People" where are you living? 1938 Germany?
Timothy McVeigh was a Terrorist and non-Muslim, once again you miss the point and change the subject to match your reactionary (myopic) world view.
Moving on...
Actually I live in a world based in and on reality. Unless you're an employee of an agency or company who does security work for protecting the rest of us, it's nobody's dam business what "they" do to protect "us." People have a tendency to blab secrets, and the "bad guys" are always looking for ways to harm all of us.
"Loose Lips Sink Ships"
And we were discussing hijacking airliners and Timmy didn't...you're the one changing the subject. The sob got exactly what he deserved...and there's a couple million other people who need to get what they deserve...MooSlime or not.
"Middle Eastern men between the ages of 20-40 or so have hijacked more aircraft than all others combined by a factor of about 50-1 or more."
Really?
Hijacking statistics are pretty hard to come by, there, Life. I am extremely curious where you got this one from, other than FoKKKs News and your own frightened little white supremacist head, I mean.
And I am surprised you would make such a bold statement after I just challenged anybody to provide a link or citation or reference to any successful hijacking of a 757 or 767 that has occurred ever in the history of the planes. Here you are citing at least 50 successful hijackings! Surely at least one of them was with a 757 or 767, no?
If I had to guess (as I am sure you are doing, too, Life), I would say Cuban hijackers outnumbered everybody else before 1980, and then when new anti-hijacking mechanisms were put into place, successful hijackings decreased significantly so that I think you would be hard-pressed to find 10 successful hijackings since 1985, muchless 50.
Again, Life, please focus and provide some links and references. You asked me for links about Arabs not hijacking the planes, and I provided two or three. I can provide about 100 more if you want to include all the 9/11 sites out there ala David Ray Griffin and that crowd. In fact, Griffin has an entire book that says it wasn't Arab hijackers.
Airliner hijackings have declined since the peak of 385 incidents between 1967-76. In 1977-86 the total had dropped to 300 incidents and in 1987-96 this figure was reduced to 212.....892 hijackings total.
"In fact, Griffin has an entire book that says it wasn't Arab hijackers."
Sounds like a waste of paper to me..
how many since '96? Curious that you never heard of hijackings that much since then, the security measures must have been working.
Don't know how many since '96. Wasn't listed where I found those numbers at.
1996 is about when they quit letting me carry a 4" lock blade Buck knife and my pocket knife I'd been flying with for about 25 years. If every able bodied man on all the flights that day had been able to carry the normal stuff that men carry, those sobs would have been the ones with the slit throats and there'd been no hijackings.
Of course now, ya' can't even carry a pair of fkn fingernail clippers, shampoo or a bazillion other harmless items on a plane because of those rat bastards.
"The only thing more laws do is make it easier for an honest man to be a criminal and harder for a criminal to become an honest man."...Me..circa 1975..
Where did you find those numbers? Link, please.
And where did it say the hijackers were Arabs? I am pretty sure they were mostly Cuban hijackers, as I said.
Also, where did it say any of them were with 757's or 767's, and where is it listed the difference between "successful hijackings," i.e., -- ones where the hijackers were at least flown to where they demanded -- vs. ones where the planes simply came down at the nearest airport?
Thanks.
Providing you with links is a waste of time since you don't believe them anyway. I'm not your understudy...do your own research. Took me about 15 keystrokes to find it.
Yeah, Wikipedia, that pillar of irrefutable facts...
Since 1947, 60% of hijackings have been refugee escapes.[citation needed] In 1968-69 there was a massive rise in the number of hijackings. In 1968 there were 27 hijackings and attempted hijackings to Cuba. In 1969 there were 82 recorded hijack attempts worldwide, more than twice the total attempts for the whole period 1947-67.[citation needed]
Airliner hijackings have declined since the peak of 385 incidents between 1967-76. In 1977-86 the total had dropped to 300 incidents and in 1987-96 this figure was reduced to 212.[citation needed]
---------------------------------
Let me give you an example of what a real, factual statement is, Life. Here is a real, factual statement that I made in an earlier post that has since been corroborated in the above Wikipedia excerpt:
"Hijacking statistics are pretty hard to come by."
And here is an example of a baseless claim (unless you count white supremacist fear mongering as a base) that has been written specifically to look like it was based on some reliable source:
"Middle Eastern men between the ages of 20-40 or so have hijacked more aircraft than all others combined by a factor of about 50-1 or more."
And since we are apparently basing everything on guesses for now, my guess remains that it is Cuban men, not "Middle Eastern men," who have hijacked more planes in the history of hijackings -- until further notice and until real facts emerge otherwise.
Here's another statement of fact...People who believe that DEWs, CD, lasers, drones, or any other "weapons" were used as a part of an "Inside Job" or "Conspiracy" by GWB and the US Gov't to bring down the WTC's is an IDIOT.
That's not name calling...that's a statement of fact...and I'd dare say MORON probably applies also....look it up.
"People who believe ... is an IDIOT."
Now who's the REAL idiot here, dare we say MORON?
Tsk,tsk LB! You said "People is" instead of "People are" and of course, it was immediately noted because Shoes had nothing else to come back with. Don't you remember how much trouble GWB got into when he used a plural not a singular. Or, when Rush said "phony soldiers" instead of "phony SOLDIER?"
Notice when you come back with FACTS that debunk their theories, you are accused of changing the subject or your grammatical errors are brought to attention.
As Rantin Rosie would say.., HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!
Depends on what the definition of the word "is", is.
WOOF!!
Post a Comment