Airlines sue FBI, CIA over Sept. 11

[rsmith6621]

Source: By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press Writer 20 minutes ago

NEW YORK - Airlines and aviation-related companies sued the CIA and the FBI on Tuesday, asking a federal court to let them interview investigators who can tell whether the aviation industry was to blame for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks or whether it had acted reasonably.


The separate lawsuits in U.S. District Court in Manhattan asked a judge to order the government to let the aviation companies gather the information as part of their defense against lawsuits brought by victims or families of victims of the 2001 attacks.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070807/ap_on_bi_ge/sept11_lawsuits

[lisa58]

1. great idea....

...but they should sue the administration for not listening to the fbi and the cia

[alstephenson]

2. Wow! This could be BIG! eom

[Stinky The Clown]

11. It *could* be big. It won't be.

These guys have shit all over the airlines before and they'll do it again. They won't allow this to go forward.

[Octafish]

3. Good place to start is with the FAA, which destroyed a tape of interviews with ATCs.

From The NYT, via TruthOut:

F.A.A. Official Scrapped Tape of 9/11 Controllers' Statements

By Matthew L. Wald
The New York Times
Thursday 06 May 2004

WASHINGTON - At least six air traffic controllers who dealt with two of the hijacked airliners on Sept. 11, 2001, made a tape recording that day describing the events, but the tape was destroyed by a supervisor without anyone making a transcript or even listening to it, the Transportation Department said today.

The taping began before noon on Sept. 11 at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center, in Ronkonkoma, on Long Island, but it was later destroyed by an F.A.A. quality-assurance manager, who crushed the cassette in his hand, cut the tape into little pieces and dropped them in different trash cans around the building, according to a report made public today by the inspector general of the Transportation Department.

The inspector general, Kenneth M. Mead, had been asked by Senator John McCain, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, to look into how well the Federal Aviation Administration had cooperated with the 9/11 Commission.

The quality-assurance manager told investigators that he had destroyed the tape because he thought making it was contrary to F.A.A. policy, which calls for written statements, and because he felt that the controllers "were not in the correct frame of mind to have properly consented to the taping" because of the stress of the day, Mr. Mead reported.

Another official, the center's manager, asked the controllers to make the tape because "he wanted a contemporaneous recordation of controller accounts to be immediately available for law enforcement," according to the Mead report, and was concerned that the controllers would take a leave of absence immediately, which is standard procedure after a crash.

On the tape, the controllers, some of whom had spoken by radio to people on the planes and some who had tracked the aircraft on radar, gave statements of 5 to 10 minutes each, according to the Mead report.

CONTINUED...

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/9/4392

While they're at it, the airlines may want to ask thousands more questions to ask the United States government.

[Up2Late]

4. Wow, talk about adding fuel to the conspiracy theory fire!

It's stuff like this that can spawn about a half dozen conspiracy and counter-conspiracy theories alone, but I'm though with all that crap, those of us who are still around in 50 years will eventually know when the truth comes out, until then...

[noel adamson]

10. Maybe a real investigation will replace conspiracy theories with conspiracy facts

[Octafish]

15. What theory? The facts are the FAA burned the tapes interviewing the Air Traffic Controllers.

That's no crap.

[file83]

17. That person obviously never heard that fact before, so ...

thinking that they were so "smart", they'd go ahead and call it a conspiracy theory.

Little did they know how ignorant they were of the facts.

Glad you brought that point about the ATC tapes to the conversation. It's one of the many red flags of cover up.

[Up2Late]

19. I didn't mean to imply that that part of history didn't happen...

...rather, that that action alone is enough base about a dozen conspiracy theories on without all the really crazy ones that have been dreamed up in the last 3 or 4 years.

If you need an example, just wait, they'll be here soon to give you a few.

[jeff30997]

20. Excellent!

[pitohui]

5. how can you file a civil lawsuit after this amt of time?

it has been over 5 years, in my state you would be laughed out of court

:shrug:

i would like to know the truth but civil courts in most states have a very brief statute of limitations, don't they? (asking not telling)

[Auntie Bush]

6. Kick....maybe somebody will know the answer to that question.

I'd like to know too. :shrug:

[EVDebs]

7. Hmmm. No statute of limitations on murder.... right ?

[pitohui]

27. this is wrong, prosecuting murder is a CRIMINAL action not a civil action

civil lawsuits have very strict statute of limitations, even when death or injury is involved

[EVDebs]

30. Go tell that to the Goldman family, remember the OJ trials ? nt

[nickgutierrez]

31. That was probably "wrongful death", not murder. n/t

[EVDebs]

34. A difference without a distinction, at least in CA. There is a time limit, however

""Q: What is the difference between murder and wrongful death?
A: O.J. Simpson was charged with first degree murder in the state court in California. The jury found him "Not Guilty." A "not guilty" verdict means the state failed to prove the charges "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is the standard of proof in all criminal prosecutions. Criminal cases are brought on behalf of the citizens of a particular state or federal district, not by the victims or their families.

After O.J. Simpson was found not guilty in the criminal case, the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman sued him in the state court in California for wrongfully causing their deaths. Civil lawsuits for wrongful death are tried for money damages, not to put the defendant in prison. Civil cases are brought in the name of individuals, not in the name of the State.

The burden of proof in criminal and civil cases is different. In criminal cases, the standard is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." There is also a presumption of innocence that stays with the defendant until and unless the jury returns a guilty verdict. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "by a preponderance of the evidence," which essentially means "more likely than not," or put another way, proof by 51% or more.

Return to index . . .""

and


""Q: What is the statute of limitations for filing a wrongful death claim?
A: Like many types of suits, there is a time frame that must be observed when filing the suit or the opportunity to file the claim is forever lost. The time frame for filing is set by state law. The clock begins to run from the time of the incident or, in some states, from the time the party became aware of, or discovered, the injury.

Return to index . . .""

In this case the state isn't the initiator and the penalty is monetary. But a form of justice is being done; I'd hope the victims of 9-11 got the chance for a similar action and that time doesn't run out, but it appear to already have after two years from the date of the event

http://www.edgarsnyder.com/statute-limitations/new-york.html

the same, two yrs also in PA and VA,

which is why murder charges should be brought instead of civil action. No statute of limitations on criminal murder.

Thanks for making me investigate this more. Not that anyone will ever bring a criminal murder suit to court on this but it's possible should David Ray Griffin's works and more researchers work become better known. The logical train of it all leads to that conclusion.

[HamdenRice]

24. Here's my guess -- they are not "suing" but joining a party

In other words, this is an ongoing lawsuit in which the airlines are the defendants, not the plaintiffs. The suit started within the SOL by victims' families.

The airlines are merely saying now that they cannot adequately defend themselves unless they get the ability to interview FBI and CIA officials. Presumably, they asked for this a long time ago, the agencies have been stiffing them, and they finally got tired of it and sued for the right to take depositions.

[pitohui]

28. that's the only explanation that makes even a tiny bit of sense

very poor reporting/editing if you ask me, because that is quite a different matter from airlines filing a new lawsuit against the feds

[HamdenRice]

33. It could also be a "new" lawsuit, however

but the "wrong" they are suing about isn't 9/11, but the FBI's and CIA's failure to produce witnesses and evidence as requested in the original lawsuit -- a refusal or failure to produce which took place years after 9/11/01. Litigation procedure is fiendishly complicated and there are a number of ways to get the FBI and CIA on the hook for their failure to cooperate.

At any rate, I looked at a few articles and either way, this seems to be the explanation for their being able to proceed after the SOL passed on the original attack.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MasonJar]

9. They need to sue W and Cheney and Condi.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. I never saw this coming. Tell me you all thought those huge 2-6 million dollar

settlements given to the individual families was hush money to keep them from sueing the government and the airlines so that the failures from the Bush Administration would be kept quiet? So the twist in all this is that the airlines, which that settlement money protected, is now going to go through discovery and gather the information that will eventually give us all the answers we seek?

Or will the Airlines settle for billions of dollars as a privatized form of bail-out?

[MadMaddie]

14. The American Airlines have had twenty years to enforce cock pit

doors...The government gave them the option and didn't mandate it.

I have been looking for the information but can't seem to find it...I think it happened in Washington state...the copilot was killed and the pilot got in a fight with the hijacker and killed him.

The point is the Airlines have a high responsibility for not taking their own security more seriously. Had those cockpit doors been thicker, steel and locked we might not be in the mess we are in.

[Ian David]

16. Well, market forces didn't dictate it was necessary to reinforce the cockpit doors.

Consumers should have exercised the personal responsibility to only fly on planes with reinforced cockpit doors.

:sarcasm:

[flyarm]

26. the doors were locked..i as a flight attend had the keys! after 9/11

the keys were taken away from cabin crew..because the hijackers took the keys from the cabin crew.

and on 757's and 767's the doors were solid doors..the hijackers took the keys from the dead flight attendants.

fly

[EFerrari]

18. Can the bail outs be deducted from the settlement?

:mad:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

22. Exactly. $15,000,000,000.00

Surprised it took 18 posts.

http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/fyi/news/09/24/airline.bailout/

[Canuckistanian]

21. Nothing will happen

The government will cite CYA... oops, I mean "national security" concerns.

[Major Hogwash]

23. What?

Maybe they can ferret out more lies that Bush told about what happened on that day.

[Doctor_J]

25. Big Business vs. the National Security State

two of the peoples' worst enemies go toe to toe. Nothing bad can come from this, IMO

[goforit]

29. Hmmmm....this may turn the tide. But boy, did the Gov't bail them out for a

long time after 911 and their own CEOs walked away with padded wallets.

[Vidar]

32. I seldom sympathize with the airlines, but in this case, hell yes!