American and United Airlines to Stand Trial for 9-11 WTC Destruction
American Airlines Boeing 767-200 (photo: Wikipedia)
American Airlines and United Airlines will face a federal trial for negligence claims when jets owned by the carriers were flown in to the World Trade Center Twin Towers in New York City destroying them. Nearly 3,000 people were killed in the attack on September 11th, 2001.
‘World Trade Center Properties LLC, which owned the twin skyscrapers in lower Manhattan destroyed in the attacks, sued the airlines in 2008 alleging negligence against the carriers for allowing terrorists to board and hijack the planes that were flown into the buildings. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan said a trial is required.’
The American aircraft hijacked in the attack on the WTC was a Boeing 767-223ER and the United plane was a Boeing 767-222.
Category: Airnation
Comments (79)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Sites That Link to this Post
- Are They Serious? « A Simple, Village Undertaker | September 5, 2012
How in the Hell are you going to prove negligence? Is anyone suggesting the airline screen passengers before allowing them to board? Add the cost of a security check to your ticket, and book a month in advance.
It’s like sueing Chevy for a drunken guy crashing and killing someone else in a car accident!!! ABSOLUTELY ABSURB!
You are way off in your analysis. It’s like Chevy giving the keys to the drunk driver…. the airlines actively participated by doing nothing to secure passengers who would not promote an unsafe environment in the air.
Mark,
Try my analysis: Someone carjacks my car and crashes it into a building killing people. Am I to be held responsibe because I did nothing to secure my car?
stupidity is alive and well in the big apple
It appears common sense has also died in NYC.
I have long argued that it should be changed from ‘common sense’ to ‘un-common sense’ because it’s not all that common.
You don’t remember, but the airlines fought increased security tooth and nail prior to 9/11. Of all the people involved, they were principally responsible, and I have often thought that relevant airline executives should not only have been found responsible for negligence, but held criminally liable. They knew there was this danger, yet did nothing to prevent it, and even actively fought prevention!
The security process still hasn’t stopped any legitimate threats. Why would it have stopped these guys from getting on? The airlines opposed more stringent security measures because it causes delays, frustration, increased costs and inefficiency. The airlines are the last people that want their planes to crash; they have a vested interest. Now we just have security measures that frustrate everyone with regulations that often don’t make sense.
Where is the lawsuit suing the builders who used substandard materials which allowed the buildings to collapse? And against the greased palmed inspectors who passed the construction at every phase? They have just as much if not more liability.
Absolutely correct in numerous perspectives. Actually, if we are to trace the entire process involved with this entirely ridiculous lawsuit, the WTC LLC should be countered sued due to the fact they built those buildings and had they not been where they were and all the controversy surrounding them for years since they were originally built, then not one airplane would have ever had the opportunity to be crashed into them by terrorist. American or United had nothing to do with them. It’s time to regain this country and place all the lawyers in a space capsule and launch them skyward and hope and pray they…(well, we should all be intelligent enough to know their destiny) and life will return to some degree of normalcy.
This exceeds stupidity and deserves little comment.
agreed
It is my understanding passenger screening was the responsibility of the airlines prior to 9/11 and the TSA. However, I think the airlines (or their contracted security) did everything reasonable to protect passengers. When someone is screened “too thoroughly” they claim discrimination or harassment; when a demon coward terrorist slips by reasonable security measures and on to a plane we want to sue someone. May AA and United should sue for the buildings being too tall and being too much of a target.
AA and UA should sue WTCP LLC, for negligence in avoiding planes flying through their buildings. There wasn’t any sign prohibiting it. Nonsense….
This is ridiculous as the screeners, not the airlines, are responsible for airport security. Is Boeing being sued too as they are the makers of the planes that were crashed by the terrorists?
Prior to the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2011, the FAA established security guidelines, and the airlines and airports were responsible for enacting and enforcing those guidelines. Ergo, the airlines and airports were responsible for security on 9/11. That still does not justify this lawsuit.
Yes, Boeing was a defendant at one time.
This gives new meaning to the term “BILLABLE HOURS”
Rich WYeroski
The Federal Law for pilots before 9/11/2001:
HIJACKING – THE COMMON STRATEGY
E. Ascertain the location of legally-armed passengers by reviewing Law
Enforcement Official(s) procedures / paperwork (Section 13). Be alert
for passengers wanting to become “heroes” and discourage
unwanted intervention.
G. Attempt to establish a rapport with the hijackers. Do not negotiate
with the hijackers – allow trained negotiations to do this. Never attempt
to overpower a hijacker.
Absolute idiocy on the part of the WTC and even more so on the part of the judge. Since when were the airlines responsible for security as to searching passengers etc? If the screeners were sued, or even the NSA/FBI/CIA etc, one would understand where these morons at WTC were coming from but this is just imbecilic!
Why are we sueing United and American airlines. It is not just there fault for one. Two of the hijackers on American 11 went thru security while flying on Us Airways so when they arrived in Boston they didn’t have to go thru security again. On top of which yes security was a major issue here but we have had many issues in the past with hijacking and you would have thought that the US Goverment would have said we need to figure out how to prevent these again and if they would have then maybe September 11th would not have happen. But like they say why fix a problem untill we lose lives and souls because we are all about money money money.
It’s the US government they should be suing, they knew It was going to happen but did nothing to prevent It.
@Euronorb: They knew it would happen? On that day? That airline? Moron…
the government knew it would happen but not when or how they had the threats but didnt do anything to help prevent it. the government had intel during ww 2 that there was going to be an attack on pearl harbor before it happened and they didnt do anything to prevent it other then put more people there. go read the reports study what happened and not the news crap which is all b.s and think with an open mind that it can and most likely happen where i live. its not the airlines fault its the persons responsible for it also the person who wants to do it will think of ways to get around it if they truly want to do it.
You probably believe in UFO’s too….
Larry Silverstein should be investigated and brought to justice. He and his buddies committed the atrocities that day. He got a 99 yr. lease on the towers just 6 weeks prior to 9/11. He had owned WTC7 since its construction. Go to YouTube and watch the collapse of Building 7.
Amen Euronorb
Hi All:
I have to say that during 9/11 I was the only FAA Inspector on duty in the entire NY/Long Island area.
By order of Jane Garvey the entire FAA shut down and went home on the days right after 9/11.
WHY? I do not know. Lack of leadership, fear inept management, corruption…?
So the FAA PR department could take “any situation” and write a document to cover it up……or make it look like they were on the stick.
The 11th anniversary is approaching and here is a document that was created by FAA to cover their asses…… http://media.nara.gov/9-11/MFR/t-0148-911MFR-00247.pdf
In reality the FAA was out to lunch during 9/11 and the people in this document are responsible for that…!
Rich Wyeroski, former FAA Inspector
FAA WHISTLEBLOWERS ALLIANCE MEMBER.
Thanks for sharing and for being a whistleblower.
I am not a pilot nor havr I ever taken any flight lessons. I am curious though that these people had these multiple ratings. I thought one had to ammass a certain number of hours at various stages prior to mooving on through the process. Guess not. BTW I have begun an action against the sun. It is the sun that is responsible for my melanoma and the dry wrinkled skin on my body.
Hi All:
I don’t know how I missed this point, but it appears this lawsuit maybe a ploy to bankrupt American and United Airlines.
The reason is in chapter 7 bankruptcy these carriers will be very cheap to take over!
I forgot how low they can go for the money!
Rich Wyeroski
This is such an obvious “frivolous lawsuit” against American and United for “9.11 Destruction”. Oh please, ya right, they both planned a terrorist to takeover their planes and fly them into the WTC’s. Get real, jerks!
this is why we have to pay frivolous fees to fly. Come on NYC Courts. Get real and toss these law suits back to the idiots that filed them. Get real!!!
Suing them NOW??? Either the Justice system is really bored out of thier minds and dug this little nugget up or someone just wants to make a name for themselves. Incredible to think, I eman come on, these low lifes were well versed and trained in what to do to get past security. But if they go ahead with charging these airlines, it will give additional firepower for all those clamoring for the full body scanners and pat downs.
The lawsuit was filed in 2008. It has taken 4 years of pretrial hearings to determine that enough justification exists for a trial to actually take place. One of the shortcomings of our judicial system is that if there is ANY credence to an argument, it must be heard in court rather than a judge using common sense and sayinbg “Nuts to that!”
1. For all we complain about airport security, and though it is imperfect and annoying, since 9/11 there have been no major incidents. Certainly there are softer targets than airplanes now. Do not forget how lax security was before 9/11. Minimal scanners, no scanning of luggage, no identification of luggage to passengers, travel agents issuing paper tickets, changed with paper stickers, etc, etc, etc. Perhaps if airlines had enforced tighter security back then, 9/11 would not have happened, and we would not be spending billions on overkill, not to mention Afghanistan and (maybe) Iraq!
2. My guess is that these lawsuits were filed a long time ago, as the statute of limitations on the tort of negligence (which is what this suit is apparently about) is generally 3 years. Airport security is not the only inefficient system in this country!
Tgold – have you forgotten about the “underwear” bomber on Xmas Eve(?) / Xmas Day (?) 2001? I’d class that as a major incident, even though the idiot only hurt himself.
Stupidity rules supreme in Uncle Sam…
If after an idiot pseudo terrorist tried to smuggle a little explosive in his shoes, now we all have to take our shoes off, why after this one we don’t need to take our underwear off? And more, why take off shoes and jacket and not pants and underwear? Nonsense…
Exactly. It’s only on my last couple of flights within Europe have I been asked to take my shoes off, and not at every airport. Yet I always have to remove them when I visit America. Crazy…
In other news: Owners of apartment block in Amsterdam to sue El Al for allowing one of its cargo 747s to crash into it in 1992 (?) and hotel owner in Gonesse, situated between Charles de Gaulle & Le Bourget near Paris to sue Air France for allowing a Concorde to destroy it on 25th July 2000……
another junk lawsuit!
Almost eleven (11) years ago ALL of our lives were impacted by the terrorist attacks. Those in the airline industry know this all too well. That makes the timing of the following news even more hurtful. This INFURIATES me!
World Trade Center Properties LLC is suing United Airlines and American Airlines for what TERRORISTS did on September 11, 2001! NYC Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled that the airlines must be tried. WHAT THE HECK!??? Are you kidding me? SHAME on all of you!
Who do I get to sue because I lost my job over this – TWICE! Furthermore, do I get to sue this judge, and WTC Corporation after this is said and done, because it will affect the bottom line of the company I work for, which will – in turn – effect me, AGAIN!?
RIDICULOUS!
Money-hungry, greedy, self-absorbed, etc., etc., etc.!
My problem is with the judge Alvin. This should have been thrown out. They love all those legal loop holes and this has been our main problem in tearing our country apart.
Totally amazing..
The LAWYERS involved in this ambulance chase need to be taken to Singapore and receive Singapore’s cane discipline, so richly deserved.
@Jeremy, that is correct. In addition, at that time, it was perfectly legal to take a knife on board an airplane as long as the blade was under a certain length (4 or 6 inches I believe), which is why they used box cutters.
Most likely, the scum terrorists did empty their pockets at the security checkpoint, but because the box cutters were legal, they were allowed to carry them on.
Actually, Saudi Arabia should be sued and made to pay all the bills for the 9/11 attacks. 95% of the attackers were from Saudi, Bin Laden was a Saudi and it is known the Saudis hate us anyway.
The bill for TSA should be footed by them and same for all the rest of the damages. And of course we now have Obozo who made it a point to kiss the ass of the king of Saudi.
OK . . . why not sue World Trade Center Properties LLC for building two such large inviting targets. Had they build two towers less visible they might still be standing! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!!!
This has everything to due with the settlement of damage to property and nothing to do with lives lost on either side. If your car was stolen and it was driven into another house. Your insurance would pay that property claim up to the maximum. This is a common action that allows insurance companies the ability to offset the cost of their loss in the claim. Anytime a suit involves property damage and in this case the damage from a airliner to a building, you will always see a suit of this nature. Lawyers are not the only ones that chance things. Someone has to keep client premiums down and other companies will have to raise there rates due to losses. The damage from hurricanes is a good example of how we all lose in the insurance game.
Spoken like a true Lawyer. . . its all about the dollar.
If they would have allowed concealed handgun carriers to board airccraft armed, this never would have happened.
You do know that don’t you?
Right Rich, the concealed handgun carriers would have only hit the terrorists and no part of the plane. And the planes would have been fine with the sudden depressurization….
Try again
Despite movies to the contrary, a bullet hole in an aircraft skin does NOT cause immediate explosive decompression. Planes leak all the time, think about it, they are sheets of aluminum riveted together, there’s always leaks. The aircraft is constantly pressurizing itself to replace the air that leaks away.
As a pilot who has experienced rapid pressure loss I will disagree. When Rich states “concealed handgun carriers” I’m going to believe more than a single bullet will miss the mark…
In the big scheme of things..So what if one does.
That would be a much better outcome than 100s of millions of dollars worth of damage on the ground and 3000 dead.
Beside Mythbusters did that whole experiment by pressuring an airliner and shooting holes in the skin from the inside with a 9 MM with no rapid decompression.
So they finally shot the window out from the inside.
The result was very anticlimactic.
Actually, not true. I am an airline pilot. Plane can fly after a rapid decompression all day long. And a bullet hole wouldn’t not cause a huge structure failure either. You try again.
Thanks PChris.
Actually they do leak all the time and that is why the roof of one blew off a few months ago.
The mechanics say that they used to be able to find loosely rivetted area years ago because the nicotine stains gave them away as they walked along the roof.
Not any more.
I guess if you shot a kitchen stove out of a canon and made a hole that big then you can pop a couple ear drums from the decompression.
But a hole the sie of a .45?
DTM ,I think you know not of what you speak.
But thanks for your kind commments.
They can fly “all day long.” Either you’re lying about being a pilot or you’ve never had rapid decompression while flying. To say that is irresponsible at best.
Dtm just stop. This will be my last comment because it’s not even worth my time. And point of fact, i do fly for an airline. Sounds like u had a rapid D, huh? Looks like you servived. true there have been accidents (like 30 years ago) related to structure failures of sorts. But a bullet hole, or several bullet holes would not bring an airplane crashing to the ground. Rapid D or not. Bye
You do know that if the WTC hadn’t been built, the 757 & 767 hadn’t been built, this would never have happened. What a stupid statement to make. There are so many “If’s” that you could use. If you put them all together, I could write one hell of a computer program that would take up the whole of a teragig hard disk.
Mythbusters? Ok, I thought you were being serious. Fail
They ought to be suing the federal government who couldn’t manage to find 4 errant airplanes on a crystal clear VFR day with the best airforce in the world. Explain that one!
That’s a completely inane statement. At that point in America, we didn’t have 24/7 in-air coverage by fighters. Nobody in the armed forces thought that commercial aircraft would be used as missiles. The guys who were on alert that day moved as fast as they could. NORAD was alerted to the issue at 0834 & the first airliner hit the WTC at 0846, which was the exact time that the pilots at Otis ANG base in Mass were told to scramble. The pilots had 13 minutes to suite up (remember, they were not on runway alerts any more).
I’ve always been amazed by Condi Rice’s admission that the Feds didn’t think that aircraft would be used as missiles. Tom Clancy had suggested just that approach in 1994: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_of_Honor. We certainly knew that Jihadis were willing to commit suicide for their cause.
I very rarely support corporates in anything however in this case I would make an exception. How could they possibly have prevented this happening, could anybody prior to that day have even dreamt that it was possible that planes would be hijacked, flown into the twin towers killing thousands of innocent people. Up until that day it was something you would have thought could only have happened in the movies.
It is seriously time we stopped this blame blame blame blame culture we live in.
The people that should be sued are the one that clame they couldn’t tell where the planes were. How could they not when they can find a crashed plane or the little black box that is a heck of a lot smaller than any plane. Then they show the planes route on the follow up news reports.
Well, you might take a look at this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9r3H4iHFZk
Go ahead just pick one out and try to follow it.
BTW the aircraft they were looking for that day had their transponders turned off and were flying very low making the primary targets invisible to most of ATC.
Let me guess you aren’t an air traffic controller, are you?
“Anything is possible…….if you don’t know what you’re talking about.”
Let me guess Rich, besides youtube, you also got info from MythBusters…
Great sources of information that definitely give your claims/arguments legitimacy.
Read some fact-based sites for goodness sake. You must be lonely.
Thanks for the insults.
I suppose if someone posted on youtube that the grass is green and the sky is blue that because you think youtube is not a reliable source in this instance that the grass isn’t green and the sky isn’t blue.
Oh, and thanks for the insults.
That is what people usually do when they can’t argue facts.
Too bad you actually think that any aircraft can instantly be found anywhere in the US without a transponder among thousands of other aircraft.
You make my point by displaying your ignorance.
Thank you.
So when you type: “Anything is possible…….if you don’t know what you’re talking about” that’s not trying to insult? So you can give it but can’t take it? If that’s the case maybe debating isn’t for you.
And you argue facts using Mythbusters and youtube as your sources? Seriously, you don’t see the flaws there? I’m not trying to insult you, just pointing out that those two sources might not be the best.
If that’s the case, then look out. aliens are real:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tumFe5rfqzM
It’s on youtube so it’s legit…
Hi All:
If this law suit starts up it will force United and American into Chapter 7 and force out of business two of our oldest legacy airlines.
The other side of the coin is will it uncover who really is responsible for 9/11. The point is “Who in government was ever held accountable for 9/11″?
I know every well the failures of FAA Management before, during and after the attacks.
There was a awful lot written on conspiracy and government failures to protect the people.
11 years later, the pain of 9/11 is still there for many Americans. If one lived in the NYC area at the time the reality of the attacks hits home every year and the horror and fear of that time is relived.
It is said the government has spend a trillion dollars on homeland security since the attacks and…. counting.
Now, Homeland Security wants to cut the Federal Flight Deck Officers’ Program 50% and eventually close down this important last line of defense protection.
Imagine if the pilots were armed ! of course we will never know, since the terrorist broke into the cockits and easily killed the crews and took over the aircraft!
(I am sure no one maybe be aware they knew where the key was for the door!)
“BUT WHAT IF THE PILOTS WERE ARMED”?
http://www.zimbio.com/Janet+Napolitano/articles/rGO5vozmuJk/Rep+Cravaack+Hammers+Janet+Napolitano+Over
Richard Wyeroski, former FAA Safety Inspector Operations
FAA WHISTLEBLOWERS ALLIANCE MEMBER
If pilots were armed? How we’d make it through security? It’s a nightmare without arms; they even took my nail cutter…just in case I was thinking about hijacking myself with it?!
Fred, google FFDO
Thanks Pchris. This is applicable to U.S. crews only and I guess the arms stay on board. They’d never make it through security in most countries. I’m sure terrorists know it and also know foreign airliners fly back and forth in the U.S. If they ever want to do it again, they will somehow. I hope this time passengers aren’t intimidated by fake bombs and arrest them before they can gain access to the flight deck. Although we now have armoured flight deck doors, we still need to go out to restroom, so we need to open it. I always wonder if there’s a hidden terrorist around when I need to get out.
The FAA should actually be on trial. They had numerous advance warnings of planned terrorist activity that they did not share with anyone, including their own field offices. Go back and listen to the tapes of ATC asking FAA HQ for guidance after the attacks began and you’ll hear the response, “Everyone’s left the room”! All cowards that were never held accountable.
The airlines were slack ( but probably working within the rules ) but the real blame lies with the FAA and all government agencies responsible for anti terrorism. Flying aircraft into buildings or cities was a logical progression of the combination of hijack and suicide bombers. How the authorities never saw this coming defies belief. This was negligence on an unprecedented scale.
We were warned many times to get our troups off foreign soil or face the consequeces. We were told that if it was not safe to walk the streets in their country, it would not be safe in ours. We elect government to run the USA, not the world.
The CIA call it blowback and they are very familiar with its causes.