Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(MSNBC)   Federal funds to Sept. 11 victim's families frustrate Oklahoma City survivors   ( divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1848 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Dec 2001 at 1:56 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

37 Comments     (+0 »)
2001-12-22 02:05:11 PM  
New York is better than Oklahoma. Get over it.
2001-12-22 02:07:39 PM  
Why stop at OKC?
Reparations for families lost in wars fighting, fascism, communism, slave reparations and on and on and on.

Didn't George McGovern advocate a million dollars dor every American in 1972 to end poverty?
But what about the rest of the world?
and on on and on and on.

There's got to be fairness and equality for all.
2001-12-22 02:21:24 PM  
It's bullshiat that they even get any money.
2001-12-22 02:28:23 PM  
Dude, the WTC victims deserve something, but so do all the other victims of all the crap that happens everywhere. We don't make the families of every murder victim in the country millionaires, do we? How many people in Manhattan need more money, anyway?
2001-12-22 02:35:11 PM  
Help me...I'm special.
I just want what's mine.
What I got comming to me.
They owe it to me.
It's not fair that life can be hard.
Where's my check?

This legislation should have been done on a state level as the national precedant is horrible. Let New Yorkers look after NYC.
The idea that the Federal Government is your Daddy Warbucks to solve your problems through entitlement legislation/special interest legislation will be cause and IS causing regional/sectional differences in the country and for the future. And please don't give me that crap that this is a special case, one time crapola. You just kissed national unity and purpose down the toilet because the "fairness and equality" hyperbole will begin.
Chuck Schumer and Hilary Clinton are assholes. Jeez.
2001-12-22 02:39:42 PM  
Let the resentment begin.
A beer says that non-New York Americans won't give a crap anymore about the victims anymore. Watch tourism go down in NYC too. Uncle Sam just took over.
This story is just beginning..............
2001-12-22 02:49:49 PM  
How many people in Manhattan need more money, anyway?


Why feel so sorry for greedy capitalists? World Trade Centre victims would be alive and well now if they weren't at work that day trading on the futures of poor people all over the world.

The day after the WTC attacks I saw fresh graffitti on a wall near where I live that said "Capitalists get what they deserve."


Let the flaming begin.

P.S.- I think the real reason New Yorkers are getting money and Oklahomans aren't is because New York is apparently the centre of the known universe.

P.P.S.- I don't truly mean any of this.
2001-12-22 02:52:22 PM  
Chuck Schumer and Hilary Clinton are assholes. Jeez.

One could argue that they are just looking out for their constituents' best interests. Maybe they are just better at getting things for New Yorkers than were Oklahoman legislators??
2001-12-22 03:03:10 PM  
If a Canadian flamer even thinks this might be unfair, then look out.

Schumer and Clinton should have a national view as well as local view,I think. As to whether they're a-holes is not for me to decide. I think this is regrettable legislation and precedant as well. I also think that Japanese reparations were a bad idea as well but not the apology.
Its a reality that life is not fair and never will be.
2001-12-22 03:17:47 PM  
billy buna

I agree.
Bad precedents are being set.

One of the saddest things resulting from these attacks was the legislation in its wake. None of this stuff was thought through. Some of the stuff is plain scary and would have been fought vehemently by civil rights groups were it not for the fact that doing so currently labels one as unpatriotic (if you're lucky) or an enemy of the state.

Ummmm also what did you mean by Canadian flamer????? hahahhaha
2001-12-22 03:27:48 PM  
"also what did you mean by Canadian flamer?"

Nothing mean spirited ...
an agents provocateur of conversation and discourse hehe
2001-12-22 03:30:11 PM  
OH MY F'in God!
I am about to lose it after reading that.... everyone wants their f'n lives to be spoonfed to them by the government and all people do in this country is COMPLAIN!


It just makes me more then angry that people get press time for saying "My free gift of 100,000 bucks wasn't enough"

God damn I hate these pathetic people who complain. </vent>
2001-12-22 03:31:47 PM  
Hmm, while I think LordWatson is a complete idiot, already I have conflicted views on an issue I thought I knew. Before I get to that: capitalism is by far the best way to go. It allows anyone to make a fortune, and is the root societal ideal that allows the "American Dream." People who hate capitalism in favor Socialism or perhaps Communism, don't understand those systems of goverment and why they DO NOT WORK in real-life.

Anyway, getting back, up until now I had absolutely no problem with the WTC victims and industries getting federal funds. Now, all of a sudden, I'm shocked I didn't see the problems with this before. Why hasn't money been given out before? Is there a standard now, a certain amount of people must die at once before federal funds are given? On the other hand, this seems reminiscent of the way alimony payments are handled -- the spouse receives a large enough payment so he or she is able to live at the previous standard. Again though, it's only a matter of time before people start complaining about past wrongdoings and how now they should finally get paid.

So that's the question...where does one draw the line on when federal funds are used? How much public outcry? How many lives must be lost? How much must the event "suck?"
2001-12-22 03:44:18 PM  
I agree and that's why these decisions should be a state decision because "everybody got a problem" and the future need to be "inequitalable" if for no other reasons than budgetary which will breeds resentment. There are only so many teats to go around and it should never have been a Federal problem.
Repeated FEMA bailouts of flood victims to maintain their lifestyle is wrong too. I just don't think you can ever eliminate unfairness, consequences and personal responisiblity and make a society go. This does not mean I don't empathize with all victims but your Uncle Sam is fleeting.
2001-12-22 03:48:02 PM  

For the record I am not a complete idiot. I am however very close.

I understand your desire for capitalism and am capable of accepting other people's opinions without calling them idiots. It comes from being raised in a country where people are free to raise their opinions regardless of how far fetched they are (Ben Franklin: "Everyone has the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong").

I think the reason that socialist states have not worked in the past is that they have not been given a fair chance. Either countries like the US made it impossible for them to operate or they went too far with totalitarianism which is WRONG whether it be left wing or right.

Also, to answer your question, I think people should be entitled to compensation in any situation where a life was taken. Perhaps the money should not be provided by the state but at least facilitated. How about they take money from the frozen Al-Qaeda bank accounts and distribute it to victim's families? They could also sell Tim McVeigh's clothes and other possessions to Goodwill and distribute that money to the Oklahoma families I guess......
2001-12-22 03:48:52 PM  
anyway, enough of my pompousness...out of hear and Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night.
2001-12-22 03:52:53 PM  
Have a nice holiday Buna

-The Canadian Flamer.
2001-12-22 04:03:23 PM  
Complete and utter bullshiat.

I have no issue w/the money coming from those who donated to the 9/11 funds (of all sorts), but I do have an issue w/the money coming from the government.

(With the exception of magnitude,) what the fark is any different between this tragedy and the number of people killed in one of those highway pile ups or in a bus crash?
What about an F5 tornado?
The deceased had no cause in their own demise, other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

(...based upon the article, since I haven't read the law...)What about the people who were fortunate to NOT have died, but now have no place to work? Do they receive no funds? What about the men and women who die in service of our country? Will they now be given $1.6m too?

Someone needs to justify this.

I agree w/LWatson that a very baaaad precedent is being established here.
Here is something else shiatty: I heard a man (who had lost a family member in the attacks) on the radio complain that 1.6 was an insult and petty. fark him.

Then, if we are going to do this muck, why exclude the OKC bombing families?
2001-12-22 04:16:09 PM  

Totally agree with you.

You know the answer that could be given to your statement: The deceased had no cause in their own demise, however is that they were the cause of their own demise. The Al_qaeda and UBL were supposedly angry at the US and its economy that funded states like Israel. They were hitting what they thought was a legitimate target of American economic imperialism.


I just think that it could be argued that they were the cause of their own demise. It's semantics anyway.
2001-12-22 04:29:32 PM  
Assuming that is probably why the gov is giving money (that they had no cause in their own demise), then why not give it to ANYBODY who dies through no fault of their own.

I think this is total bollocks.
2001-12-22 04:36:53 PM  

Yours is the strangest bio I have yet to read on Fark. I do not know how to make extra fields to make mine more entertaining.
You are right though, there is a double standard with funding some while turning away from others who died in just as sad circumstances.
I think they're doing this because it is so high profile.
2001-12-22 04:38:39 PM  
Steb: and let's not forget when the source of terrorism is governmental.. like Waco, Texas.

That's kinda like what they're doing in afghanistan, actually - bombs and compensation (food) together.
2001-12-22 04:42:44 PM  
It's pretty easy to see what side of the proverbial political sphere someone stands on when they accuse the US government of being terrorists in an incident where federal agents shut down a heavily armed secessionist group of religious zealots living in a military compound.
2001-12-22 05:29:41 PM  
The "NEW" New York State Lotery

Fun is good.

Free money from the government is even better.
2001-12-22 05:48:35 PM  
Little Lord Watson:

"For the record I am not a complete idiot. I am however very close."

Let there be no doubt, you are a complete one.

"I just think that it could be argued that they were the cause of their own demise. It's semantics anyway."

You're an inbred idiot troll. Top ten of stupidest remarks on Fark. We just throw away your Canadian dollars as they're not worth shi*t. Nice haircut BTW. Beg for your supper, troll.
2001-12-22 07:42:13 PM  
I don't know if anyone actually wrote down the real reason wtc survivors get money and oklahoma city doesn't, I just breezed past these notes.

WTC victims were killed by airplanes while oklahoma city was killed by a bomb. The major term for accepting the some odd million dollars is that they can't sue the airlines.

Yeah sure it looks like a humanitarian gesture, but it is really GWB trying to save the airline industry from bankruptcy by however many hundreds of multimillion dollar lawsuits that lawyers are eventually going to press the survivors into.

Oklahoma was just a nut with some fertilizer, no great industry is at risk there.

Now you know.
2001-12-22 08:10:06 PM  
Those shiat sacks in Oklahoma need to shut the fark up. Greedy farks had their family members die because they are nothing but money hungry pigs.

2001-12-22 11:02:36 PM  
In the immortal words of Denis Leary..

"Life Sucks, get a farking helmet"

Get life insurance. Amazingly enough you and your family can exist without sucking off the teat of government.

"Maybe they are just better at getting things for New Yorkers than were Oklahoman legislators??"

Yeah lets see, Oklahoma has 8 Electorial Votes and New York Has... 33.. Strength in numbers.. But anyway, really a moot point. Point is, if you die, the government shouldn't be responsible for helping out the surviviors. Thats what charities and life insurance do. If the Government really wants to help, and do so equally, Get rid of or reduce Death Taxes.

Yukon, OK
2001-12-23 12:34:40 AM  
if anybody should be blamed here, it's the US Bar assoc. (that's lawyers)
the money is to keep folks from sueing the airlines out of business (let's face it, if they had done their jobs in a few places, this might not have happened). that's why the money comes from the airline bailout funds.- keep the Johnny Cochrans of the world from chasing these ambulances...
if there was anyway to sue somebody in O.K. I'm sure it would have been tried.
2001-12-23 01:19:47 AM  
New conspiracy theory: the Jews were secretly behind the WTC tragedy. No, not Israeli intelligence. Jewish housewives from Long Island.
2001-12-23 01:48:24 AM  
I'm getting sick of victims acting like this means they have won the lottery. Toad is right though, this is just a ploy to keep the airlines from getting sued since you have to sign a waiver to get the money. Basically the feds are paying the airlines legal liability.
2001-12-23 03:29:18 AM  
i think its really sad how GREEDY people are. no amount of $$$ could bring your loved ones back. besides funeral expenses and whatnot, whats the point??
2001-12-23 10:21:25 AM  
I notice that no one has mentioned the long-term regarding payments to 9-11 victims families. What happens a few years from now when their money is all gone due to inflation/bad investments/idiocy? Don't we owe these people a lifelong stipend that not only keeps up with inflation, but takes into account that most of the victims would progress monetarily?
2001-12-23 01:52:54 PM  
mmmmkay Flatulent Bastard

Because you're from Texas we're gonna walk through this real slow. Alright? Want me to hold your hand? Here goes:

"I just think that it could be argued that they were the cause of their own demise. It's semantics anyway."

That means that the Al-Qaeda people (the people who are darker than you and live around the world John), obviously had a problem with people in the WTC or they would not have tried to hurt them. See? They tried to hurt them because they thought that people who worked in the WTC were international symbols of American economic imperialism. Do you know what that means?

Okay. So the terrorists hurt them for a reason. The fact that they (finance people) do what they do (trading on others peoples' fortunes and miseries). They are not all stock traders but many were, and those people and other financial types were the ones that the bad brown people did not like. So that would be an Al-Qaeda person's argument. They killed them for a reason. They were the cause of their own demise.

You see John I explicitly said I did not agree with that. I live off the avails of capitalism so it would be hypocritical of me to condemn western economics. Still with us Tex?

As for throwing away Canadian dollars, you can do whatever you like. But honestly, be careful what you say to Canadians.
You wouldn't want a repeat of this:

Thanks little buddy.

P.S. - That photo is not of me. It's a joke. I'm pretty sure you missed that. You'll understand all of this when you're just a bit older son.
2001-12-23 02:56:08 PM  
I think they have a point. I really think that the new york victims receving money is a little rediculus. It really is no differant than the oaklahoma incident.
2001-12-23 04:33:13 PM  
This from Bush the "compassionate conservative". Had he proposed nothing, that would be wrong too.

In Farkinstan, he's hosed no matter what he does, and congress along with him.
2001-12-26 03:47:30 PM  

I live in Oklahoma City and lived through what happened at the Federal Building here. The Federal Building was not full of evil bureaucrats or capitalists. They were full of elderly people visiting the social security office, full of military at the recruiting office, secretaries and accountants and executives and little children in the "American Kids" daycare center. Not "greedy pigs" like Fb so "eloquently" described. Hopefully Fb will someday find out for himself what karma is.

The World Trade Center was a symbol of American Capitalism, I'll agree. But these weren't people living off the misfortunes of others. What makes America great is that we aren't a Communist society and that because of capitalism, people have the opportunity to make their lives better. But that's off my point. My point is, like in OKC, the WTC victims committed no crime greater than showing up for work that day. They certainly, like the OKC victims, didn't do anything that deserved a death penalty.

As far as ANYONE receiving benefits, I'm prone to agree with Dunec (a fellow Oklahoman) and Tvcausualty. No one needs government payouts. That is what charities and insurance is for. Unfortunately, the people who caused these tragedies in both instances will never be able to pay for what they did, and right there is where the blame and recourse belongs.
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.