There MUST be someone to hold accountable - rehashing the 9-11 Victim Fund

Oct 31, 2011 10:26


Kenneth Feingold was on the radio this morning and was discussing his role in several mass settlement deals where victims of various events attempted to receive compensation through large funds set aside for that purpose. Honestly, Feingold is one of those people who are so easy to dislike; but he executed his responsibilities with a certain level ( Read more... )

9-11, aid

Leave a comment

Comments 116

mahnmut October 31 2011, 15:48:29 UTC
Hi. Could you use a lj-cut, please? Thanks in advance.

Reply

tniassaint October 31 2011, 16:08:34 UTC
You're welcome in hindsight.

Reply


dwer October 31 2011, 16:19:17 UTC
I'd suggest that the thought process was twofold:

1) It's not in anyone's interest to have the national airline industry dry up.
2) The airline industry has a lot of lobbyists and donate a lot of money.

You can decide which order those two should be in.

Personally, I think the whole thing should have been handled through FEMA; just because it wasn't a natural disaster doesn't mean it wasn't a disaster. Of course, at the time, FEMA wasn't being managed all that well...

Reply

tniassaint October 31 2011, 16:30:07 UTC
I agree with thought one and thought two... except for the erroneous subject of the airlines being culpable in the first place.

FEMA would have been a good route to go - I agree. I don't see FEMA as specifically being a Natural Disaster response only. This was certainly a National Emergency at any rate.

My issue is with the concept of these funds being established to protect the wrong people, and the law suites that went forward against the airlines. Seems like a rescuer's family suing an attractive girl for wearing a suggestive outfit after her rescuer got knifed when coming to protect her from a rape attack.

OK - maybe that was a little insensitive; but I think it's still sound.

Reply

dwer October 31 2011, 16:34:42 UTC
I think you can make a reasonable case for the airlines being held responsible for the perception of safety on flights. I can also see the airlines saying that they were victims just like the people on board; this wasn't due to bad maintenance or drunk piloting.

Reply

tniassaint October 31 2011, 16:49:02 UTC
I don't think it is all that reasonable given that even under teh security of the day at that time, I doubt these guys would have been ferreted out. Even now, with the "enhanced security", things still get through.

Obviously the courts have agreed with you on this seeing as several cases have been awarded against the airlines. I just question the logic and reason.

Reply


404 October 31 2011, 17:22:17 UTC
It is an odd thing the government did, to set aside money for the people that died in 9/1. What about the thousands that die across the country on a daily basis, where is their government funded victim fund.

Reply

dwer October 31 2011, 18:45:34 UTC
context matters.

Reply

404 October 31 2011, 19:02:56 UTC
What context?

Reply

dwer October 31 2011, 19:19:06 UTC
are you serious?

Wait, of course you are.

Think about it for a while, maybe it'll come to you.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up