Tuesday, September 09, 2003
A federal judge in New York has allowed lawsuits over the 11 September attacks to proceed against airlines, aircraft makers and operators of the World Trade Center.
OK, I can understand, kind of, being allowed to sue the airlines and aircraft manufacturers, though I think the litigants will have a hell of a time proving responsibility, but suing the people that owned the WTC? On what grounds? For being a tall building with intent to loom? For not being built on springs so when the panes crashed they didn't just tilt back and then catapult the planes into the bay? It seems a bit sad that people work on the assumption that it's always necessary to find someone to blame who has the money to pay for it.
OK, I can understand, kind of, being allowed to sue the airlines and aircraft manufacturers, though I think the litigants will have a hell of a time proving responsibility, but suing the people that owned the WTC? On what grounds? For being a tall building with intent to loom? For not being built on springs so when the panes crashed they didn't just tilt back and then catapult the planes into the bay? It seems a bit sad that people work on the assumption that it's always necessary to find someone to blame who has the money to pay for it.
