The families of victims of terrorism get million of dollars in compensation... But, REAL heros like the servicemen and women who die defending their country don't get crap... all they get is $5,000 for burial costs and whatever their SGLI gives them... That's wrong.
That's not a whole hell of a lot. The only thing I can say on the other side is that the servicemen and women sign up for the job. They know the risks and they are paid for their duty. That being said they aren't paid NEARLY enough. They need a huge raise.
How can one person be a hero more than an another person. If you want to say risk involved is the sole factor in determing a hero, then why not say professional race car driver, or professional bull rider is not a hero. What about those Spaniards who run down the streets in Pampalona with the bulls looking for their blood. What if we judge a hero by the usefullness of that person in daily life. In that case a waiter,secretary, or gardener would be a hero, right. its a load of crap to call these serviceman "the real heroes." They wanted the job, and so they are there. its all relative. leave heroes for comic books.
Who can doubt that servicemen are heroes? Yes, they sign on but they sign on knowing the risks and yet they still put themselves in harm's way for the mission. Most of the casualties of 9/11 were probably just victims-- innocently sitting at their desks when they got incinerated. For sure there were heroes among those dead and some heroes from The Towers and The Pentagon survived thankfully. I hope they get some compensation out of it. I hope those who are now waivering in their support of the military solution will throw their support full force behind this litigous solution. Volunteering for the hard jobs makes you even more of a hero in my book. Rising to the occasion is wonderful as well, but I would want a special asterisk by the name of the hero who knowingly put themselves in harms way and acted heroically.
The government shouldnt be paying the victims' families anything. It was a tragedy but not the govt's responsibility. If we are going to pay them $$, why not the OK City victims' families? If they want to sue backers of terrorists, fine. Its more of a statement than an actual lawsuit, and its a good statement. We should find some way to punish those who finance terror. But if they sue the airlines, they are no better than any other sue - happy group.
This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of in my life. Worse than those people who smoked and got cancer and sued for billions. What happened to the 500 million or so they raised for them??? THAT WASN'T ENOUGH?? That would be enough for each family to live well for a good while. But it's not good enough I take it. 16 Trillion dollars from who??? Who even has 16 trillion. People like them just make me sick. I understand their families died but damn--be realistic. I'd smack them all in the face if I could. Tell me it sounds heartless but I don't care. They are too damn sickening!
People who have had their husbands murdered do not get to sue for one hundred bagillion zillion quadpillian dollars, what makes them able to? Yes i feel really bad for them, but that does not mean i think they should become tragillionaires, they haven't earned it. Don't get me wrong, it's a very very tragic event...but money won't replace the pain.
People who have loved ones murdered sue all the time. Ever heard of a civil suit? They're not each individually suing for $116 trillion (and yes, I think that's a ridiculous number, just not a ridiculous effort). off_welfare, I think you should be punched in the gut...I mean, I'm sure you disagree with me on some things, so that's how it should be handled.
1. This isn't about compensation...this is about civil retribution. This is about making people pay, and pay big, for funding terrorist organizations. 2. $116 trillion is a worthless number if it can't be proved up in a court of law. If liability is found, then damages have to be proven up...Don't get your panties in a wad about the number put in the petition. It means nothing unless it can be proven up...if it can..and if it stands up on appeal, then I'd say that number is pretty reasonable. Refman did a pretty good job in showing the value of a lost life, as per the courts...and what kind of value do you put on mental anguish?? 3. mateo - these people aren't suing the government...they're suing anyone who funded al qaeda and bin laden. it seeks to freeze their assets, which would be a great thing for us all. ultimately this is about punishing those who funded the events of that awful day. I'm a defense attorney by trade...and I have lamented the failures of the legal system...and the willingness of people to sue. You may have seen me tell people here not to seek counsel to sue all the time, because sometimes you have to chalk things up to "the world sucks." But this is not one of those cases...this is about holding people accountable...about placing responsibility at the foot of those who funded 9/11. I support that like crazy! 4. I don't seek to make heroes out of wealthy attorneys...but the guys who are taking this case are doing so strictly on a contingency basis (meaning they don't get paid unless they win). I know at least one of the attorneys had to leave his firm, because they wouldn't allow him to take the case. He will make nothing...and this case will stretch out over AT LEAST 5 years. Now I'm not crying for him, because I know he's probably made a ton to be able to do that. But nevertheless, he will pass up on at least 5 years of income risking it all on this very risky case. And just because he wins, doesn't mean they'll collect. Just because you win a judgment, doesn't mean you collect on that judgment. He's taking this case because he believes in it...bottom line...it will get him publicity sure, but no attorney is gonna give up 5 years of income (at least) for publicity. 5. In no way is the filing of this lawsuit an abuse of the system...they have an argument to make...and if they can get past summary judgment proceedings, they'll get to trial. Again, they'll have to prove up their damages...so why is this abuse of the system? I don't get it...and I'm pretty damn conservative.
I have one problem with this: Who is actually going to make the defendants pay, assuming the relatives receive a favorable judgement??
a court...if these defendants assets are here in the US, then the plaintiffs would seek to put a freeze on them immediately...there may even be ways a court can freeze international assets that i'm unaware of (particularly if we have treaties to that effect with other specific nations, like the UK for example -- I bet the UK would honor a US court's order to freeze up assets in this case..but I may be wrong on that..there may be something I'm overlooking.) after the judgment, you abstract it and execute it...and then go through all the post-judgment discovery and ask the court to order turnover of assets...if those assets are already frozen that makes that pretty easy. ultimately, this will be very uncomfortable and inconvenient for the jackasses who funded this deal...and who continue to fund terrorist operations in this country and abroad.
1) Sue should only apply to those KNOWINGLY assist terrorist group. 2) If there is ever this number, Saudi will in war with US soon. No bank or nation can pay that in 50 years. They will be better off paying war retributions after lose fighting.
do you remember when the us air force bombed this wedding party ? they payed like 100$ for each killed person
Then bring them on. We are not going to change our legal system to satisfy the Saudis who have been PROVEN to have given money to the families of suicide bombers. I'd be willing to bet that they are funding it in ways we'll never know. I suppose you missed the OJ civil suit where he has an enormous judgment he must eventually pay out. The fact is that most civil defendants don't have the kind of money the defendants in this case do. It's pretty relative to resources available to satisfy the judgment. The organizations that took those donations in have come under tremendous fire because families have only be distributed a few thousand dollars each. So easy there tiger...I assure you they're not living fat off the donations. Besides...just because the American people will donate absolves the wrongdoers of their obligation. That changes everything. I'm going to go rob a bank and everybody here just give that bank 20 bucks...I'll be in the clear. Read the story. They're suing the corporation owned by the bin Laden family. The theory is that the corporation funded the 9/11 attacks. I'm not going to tell you that you sound heartless. It's just that you haven't taken the time to know what has happened and the particulars of the suit. You saw the number and posted a knee jerk reaction.
Ok, I can understand they are trying to find a way to just give it to the Bin Laden family, but why aren't they suing the airlines who caused all this? They should be suing American and United for this tragedy....they should just bankrupt those companies for their tragic mistakes...
If following all of the FAA regulations is a mistake then so be it. The system was flawed but that's not the airlines' fault. They follwed the rules that were set out to them. Had they violated the regulations and it could be proven that the breach actually caused the attack then I think it's a closer case.
a court...if these defendants assets are here in the US, then the plaintiffs would seek to put a freeze on them immediately... But MadMax, if the US already has evidence that these organizations are supporting terror efforts -- and if these plantiffs do, then US intelligence certainly should -- the anti-terror coalition should already be seizing any assets they can get to.
A ton of assets have been seized. It would become a matter of dispossessing the defendants permanently and distributing to the plaintiffs.
Your numbers are just as ridiculous as the lawsuit. If i can make $75,000 cleaning offices i'll quit my job now.
