America's quest for the most annoying lawsuit continues. It's hard to imagine any level of security short of a full strip and cavity search would have prevented the WTC attacks on September 11, but one woman is suing United Airlines anyway. I understand her grief, but fer cryin' out loud. Security was so tight as it is that the hijackers weren't able to get anything more potent than boxcutters on board anyway.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/12/20/wtc.united.lawsuit/index.html As Dr. Brin observed, it wasn't a failure of security that allowed this to happen, it was a failure of doctrine. For years and years the most reasonable approach to hijackings always assumed that the hijackers weren't suicidal and that the best thing to do was to not resist. This approach probably saved many more lives than it lost in the long run, but it obviously didn't work with the 9/11 hijackers. Sliante, Richard S. Crawford http://www.mossroot.com AIM: Buffalo2K ICQ: 11646404 Y!: rscrawford MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "It is only with the heart that we see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye." --Antoine de Saint Exup�ry "Push the button, Max!"
