Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> >
>
> > I think the solution to this is to hold United and American Airlines, as
> > well as the two security companies, and the airports from which the
> > airplanes flew from, financially responsible for the damages of today's
> > attacks, for their negligence in ensuring the security of their
> > airlines. The pressure of this financial impact will most certainly
> > force all other airlines to beef their security up to professional
> > levels.
>
> I don't think we have any way of tracing glass or ceramic knives
> on the person's body. Besides, doing what you suggest would
> more than bankrupt both airlines resulting in severe shortage of
> flights and carriers that would cripple the economy even more.
These two airlines were leaders in the lobbying to disband the Air
Marshals years ago. They didn't want to pay for them, and they didn't
want to keep giving away a seat they could be charging for.
What this is is an example of poor risk management. Numerous security
consultants have warned the airlines about this for years, (since 1993
at least) and they've refused to do anything about it. We've known since
the early 1980's that terrorists are quite willing to die in their
attacks, this is simply a faster car bomb.
El Al operates just fine with proper security procedures. To bad they
don't fly around the US very much, I'd make them my preferred carrier.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:44 MDT