If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boston Globe)   US airlines successfully lobbied against security improvements for years   (boston.com) divider line 19
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1754 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Sep 2001 at 12:00 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



19 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2001-09-21 12:12:46 AM
fark'n A man!!
 
2001-09-21 12:24:01 AM
And the crow cried, 404
 
2001-09-21 12:39:40 AM
Yup. That link is deader than fried chicken.
 
rpm
2001-09-21 01:02:17 AM
Drew, you need to fix that bug with Boston.com URLS

Everyone: To see, go to the link, replace %20 with + and try again
 
2001-09-21 01:08:05 AM
I think the biggest argument against tighter airport security is that it obviously doesn't work.

If you really wanna fark with a plane, you're gonna be able to do it one way or another.
 
2001-09-21 01:11:25 AM
Rpm, thanks for the fix, it worked.

The first paragraph of this story tells it all. Airlines were repeatedly warned of possible catostrophic consequences for security holes. They chose to ignore it.

I'm starting to not feel so sorry that the airlines are losing billions of dollars and may go bankrupt. They apparently brought it on themselves. I only feel bad for the thousands of airline employees losing their jobs.
 
2001-09-21 01:17:05 AM
Now reap the whirlwind...
 
2001-09-21 01:40:28 AM
The airlines are asking for $17 billion of federal money to stay afloat. Bush has offered $5 billion. That's our tax money, that's going to the airlines because they can't seel tickets. Why can't they sell tickets? Because people don't feel safe flying. And why is that? Because we've now seen what can happen as a result of the airline industry's history of choosing low operating costs over high security.

fark the airlines.
 
2001-09-21 03:25:10 AM
If our taxes are bailing out the airline companies, would'nt you think we all deserve at least a free trip to where ever we want?
Where would I go? . . heh. . Amsterdam.
 
2001-09-21 03:57:25 AM
After reading this article, I think I'll stay away from the US until the security has been improved ( 10 years given the current track record).
 
2001-09-21 07:54:39 AM
Just Damn,

I just heard one of my FARK comments from a radio DJ in Atlanta, the Regular Guys.

He ripped my joke about making everyone fly naked, no luggage at all and free enemas.

I posted it a couple of days ago. He did not even mention FARK.

Bastard! Doh!
 
2001-09-21 08:27:31 AM

The airlines are biatching and moaning about the increased security even now, as are many business travellers. *cough* retards *cough* I'd argue that the security measures are ineffective though they may have prevented the last attack, but something does need to be done.


I'm in favour of a couple randomly placed air marshals armed with 45 caliber glock 21C automatics and glaser ammunition. Make the pilots cabin a fortress so that it can't just be kicked down by 8 year old soccer players.

 
2001-09-21 10:46:39 AM
I have not been up in a commercial airplane in over 30 years, why in the hell should I be taxed?
I don't fly anywhere because the airlines cut the partial pressure of oxegen in the cabins to the point that it could cause brain damage, this saves them about 80 dollars per flight.
They are my brain cells and if I want to kill them off by drinking, that's my choice, but how dare those jerkoffs decide that I don't need to breath.

closing rant tag now.
 
2001-09-21 10:56:34 AM
"Small wonder, said Hudson, the consumer aviation advocate. ''There is a virtual interlock between the [airline] industry and the Transportation Department and the FAA,'' Hudson said. ''The aviation industry spends over $20 million a year to get their way in Washington, and they get their way. I've never seen a serious instance in which they haven't.''"

The farkers are willing to spend $20 million a year to bribe politicians, but the assholes won't pay their employees a decent wage..... And now, they are asking for our tax dollars to pay for something that they should have handled years ago .... Goddamned Greedy capitalistic pig farkers.... pay your own way, as a matter of fact this states that United and AA are mostly to blame for what happened, shut those airlines down and give their equipment to the remaining airlines, and tell them that this is a warning...handle your own problems or have your company taken away...... farkin piece of shiat
 
2001-09-21 01:14:19 PM
The 'free' market isn't all that free after all. Big surprise.

Maximize profits = minimize costs

Simple microeconomics of capitalism.

But there is no model that captures gov't subsidies and lobbying.
 
2001-09-21 10:08:01 PM
Too late, they got the money.

Nice to see that it's business as usual. Taking care of the contributors is job #1.
 
2001-09-22 01:07:11 AM
I love this passage:

"Those long-standing concerns prompted the Gore Commission, even in its watered-down final report in February 1997, to urge a substantial increase in standards, training, pay, and advancement opportunities for airport security personnel."
"But the airlines, which pay the security bill, have fought the change. Only now are the recommendations of the Gore Commission being seriously considered. "

Do I hear a "Nyah, nyah?"

~ Pinky ~
 
2001-09-22 01:09:19 AM
Or was that a "Neener, neener"?
 
2001-09-22 03:07:50 AM
I wonder how much money Bush & Dick made from the airlines during their campaign?

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm....
 
Displayed 19 of 19 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report