Families Sue U.S., Reject 9/11 'Bribe'

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Geez, Alchemize, I thought I was cynical about human nature, but your opening post reflects a partisan cynicism that's tough to match, and carries a tone of derision unwarranted by the facts.

These folks just gave up ~$1.8M apiece, no small chunk of change. And they've set out on a very difficult course in an effort to truly understand what happened and why. In order to file suit at all, they have to claim monetary damages- that's how lawsuits work on a purely technical basis.

While the Admin seeks draconian powers to deal with the so-called terrorist threat, invading our privacy and denying due process to suspected terrorists, they hide their own actions behind a veil of national security and obfuscation. Secrecy breeds suspicion, rightfully so. If the Bush Admin has nothing to hide, then they'll give the 9/11 commission anything and everything they want. These are hand picked individuals of great integrity and patriotism- arguments of withholding information on the basis of national security just don't cut it...

Somewhere, deep down inside, even Bush's most ardent supporters know this is true, but find a way to set that aside in the interest of partisan politics. The question of fifty years ago still rings true- Have you no shame?

That's the funniest thing I've read in a while. You accuse me of Partisan cynicism that is tough to match, then spew forth your own uber-partisan rant while decrying my use of "facts"

"draconian powers"
"invading our privacy"
"so-called terrorst threat" (that's the funniest one)
"veil of national security and obfuscation"


So I guess because I think that a percentage of people are greedy sue-happy twits makes me Partisan?

What a joke. 100 commissions aren't going to reveal anything about "what truly happened". We all saw what "truly happened" on the news that day. Everything else becomes political, with both sides protecting their interests. You think these cases are going to unravel 12-20 years of government red tape, and there will be some magical "finding" saying what went wrong?

But who are they suing?

will sue their government, airlines and state and local authorities.

Oh so they aren't chasing the money. I'm sure the airlines were part of the vast conspiracy, as were the Port Authority, NYPD and the FDNY

I don't care if they sue. Go crazy. Make the lawyers even richer.

 

[Jhhnn]

Remarkable disconnect, Alchemize. It's a phenomenon discovered during WW2, referred to as "avoiding cognitive dissonance" and is a powerful way to control people, good people, loyal to their government. When Allied troops discovered the concentration camp at Dachau, they couldn't understand how the population of the nearby village of Dachau could be ignorant of the camp's purpose until Army psychologists figured it out- they were loyal germans, and as such, trusted their govt completely, refused to question or even accept the idea that such was going on... they were as shocked as everybody else, the local mayor even killed himself the same day that he was shown the horror, iirc... They were duped into complicity by their own best intentions...

Not that the situation is quite the same, but the principle applies.

Naming the airlines and all of the authorities in the suit is standard practice. The discovery procedure demands that these entities hand over certain records that would not otherwise be obtainable, which may or not help reveal the extent of the tragedy, its causes, and possible preventative measures for the future. Interpreting this move as the work of money-grubbing tinfoil hat conspirists is scurrilous, and a deliberate attempt to paint the victims as perpetrators...

Face it, people screwed up, that's obvious from the little evidence we have so far. How far up the foodchain that extends is another matter, and important to folks not caught in the thrall of Bush-love....

We're patriotic Americans, too, and we don't appreciate what appears to be a great deal of dodging, weaving and obfuscation in this matter, nor does news that the national security advisor seeks to avoid public testimony under oath give us any sense of confidence in the ultimate outcome.

Partisans sometimes need to set aside their differences and simply seek the truth, let the chips fall where they may. Failure to do so indicates that the subject is a dupe or a zealot, take your pick...

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Remarkable disconnect, Alchemize. It's a phenomenon discovered during WW2, referred to as "avoiding cognitive dissonance" and is a powerful way to control people, good people, loyal to their government. When Allied troops discovered the concentration camp at Dachau, they couldn't understand how the population of the nearby village of Dachau could be ignorant of the camp's purpose until Army psychologists figured it out- they were loyal germans, and as such, trusted their govt completely, refused to question or even accept the idea that such was going on... they were as shocked as everybody else, the local mayor even killed himself the same day that he was shown the horror, iirc... They were duped into complicity by their own best intentions...

I'd like to see some documentation or sources on that, because IMHO that is just BS.

"What's that smell mommy?" "oh, Dieter, that's just the sausage factory down the road"

They knew, but it was just easier to deny it and act shocked. Or was Germany 100% populated by blind republicans with the same viewpoint? Lucky the US is roughly split between blind sheep and enlightened intellectuals, eh?

or was it a thinly veiled attempt to get closer to Goodwin's law? Something we all know and cherish on AT: P&N

Not that the situation is quite the same, but the principle applies.

Maybe in your opinion, but not in the mind of any who considers our society subject to checks and balance. We see that playing out in our court system right now with Padilla.

Naming the airlines and all of the authorities in the suit is standard practice. The discovery procedure demands that these entities hand over certain records that would not otherwise be obtainable, which may or not help reveal the extent of the tragedy, its causes, and possible preventative measures for the future. Interpreting this move as the work of money-grubbing tinfoil hat conspirists is scurrilous, and a deliberate attempt to paint the victims as perpetrators...

As apposed to those who would paint the government/airlines/local authorities as perpetrators by this lawsuit. Rather than the true perpetrators. But that's the american way. When you can't prove fault and find someone to punish, find someone close by with deep pockets to blame.

Face it, people screwed up, that's obvious from the little evidence we have so far. How far up the foodchain that extends is another matter, and important to folks not caught in the thrall of Bush-love....

How far up the foodchain it can be portrayed is important to folks caught up in the thrall of Bush-hate.

We're patriotic Americans, too, and we don't appreciate what appears to be a great deal of dodging, weaving and obfuscation in this matter, nor does news that the national security advisor seeks to avoid public testimony under oath give us any sense of confidence in the ultimate outcome.

And why should it be public testimony? Al-Qaida is still actively operating, I'm sure there are a number of active investigations going on.

Partisans sometimes need to set aside their differences and simply seek the truth, let the chips fall where they may. Failure to do so indicates that the subject is a dupe or a zealot, take your pick...

I'd like to see answers that are not warped by politics myself, as well. Believing that you will get "true answers not warped by politics" out of this process indicates that you are either a dupe, or a zealot, take your pick. That's reality.