9/11 Texas War Criminal Dick Armey,et.al. protected Orlando 'Islamic Gay Terrorist' Omar Mateen's Employer From Procecution
9/11 War Criminal Dick Armey protected Orlando 'Islamic Gay Terrorist' Omar Mateen's Employer From Procecution
CRITICS SLAM HOMELAND SECURITY AMENDMENT
Rep. Armey's measure would exempt airport-security firms from liability
Critics are lining up against an amendment to the landmark Homeland Security bill that would grant immunity to airport screening firms whose negligence may have contributed to the 9-11 attacks.
SAFETY 9/11 to U.S. Senators
National Air Disaster Alliance / Foundation
2020 Pennsylvania Ave., NW #315 - Washington DC 20006-184
(888) 444-6232 - phone - (215) 540-0623 – fax
August 28, 2002
We represent survivors and those who have lost loved ones in almost 100 aviation disasters,
including families who lost loved ones in the four plane crashes on September 11, 2001.
On July 26, 2002 on the floor of Congress under the guise of "sundry technical and clarifying
provisions," a provision was slipped in the House version of the Homeland Security bill, HR5005.
This stealth provision received no committee scrutiny and floor debate was limited to just a few
minutes. The provision was narrowly passed as part of an en bloc vote on many changes.
Disguised as a correction to the definition of an "air carrier," this stealth amendment confers
immunity upon three foreign security corporations (Swedish, Dutch & British) that were supposed
to be providing air travel security at key locations on September 11. This hidden provision directly
contradicts the explicit intent and language of the Aviation Transportation Security Act and allows
these security companies to dodge their responsibilities to the families of Americans killed and
injured on September 11, 2001.
We cannot imagine that you would knowingly vote to further harm American families already
devastated by death or injury on September 11, 2001, so we are making sure that every Senator
receives a certified, registered letter (and several other forms of notice) alerting each to the fact
that the U.S. Congress has been used to help foreign corporations at the expense of dead
No Senator should unwittingly cast a vote to protect foreign security companies at the expense of
injured and killed Americans. We are therefore giving you notice of this outrage, so your vote will
be a knowing choice.
Here is how the security companies got immunity from Congress
On September 22, 2001, the President signed legislation passed by the House and Senate,
Public Law No: 107-42 (formerly H.R. 2926), known as the Air Transportation Safety and System
Stabilization Act, containing Title IV known as the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of
In that legislation, U.S. air carriers' liability for September 11, 2001 was limited to their liability
insurance coverage. See Section 408 (a), within the attachment.
The term `air carrier' was defined as a citizen of the United States undertaking by any means,
directly or indirectly, to provide air transportation, including employees and agents of such
citizens. See Section 402 (1), within the attachment.
On November 19, 2001, additional legislation was passed which amended the September 22,
2001 legislation. See Public Law No: 107-71, also known as the "Aviation Transportation Security
Act," formerly S. 1447.
Therein, the liability relief given to air carriers was extended to aircraft manufacturers (all planes
were Boeing, a U.S. company) and airport authorities (obviously all U.S. airports), and the World
Trade Center (obviously a U.S. citizen). See Section 201, within the attachment.
The Conference Report or S. 1447 (H. Rept. 107-296) specifically considered and excludedsecurity companies from limitation on liability. See the attached Conference Substitute language.
In other words, both the House and the Senate specifically rejected in clear legislation language
any protections from liability for security companies. That clear decision not to exculpate the
security companies were directly addressed by the legislation law which clearly stated:
"...Nothing in this section shall in any way limit any liability of any person who is
engaged in the business of providing air transportation security..."
See Section 201(b)(2) and "(a)(3)" thereunder.
But, shockingly HR 5005 strikes the relevant definitions, instead giving protection from liability to
these foreign security corporations, which include:
Argenbright Security a unit of Securicor PLC, in Sutton, Surrey, England
Security at Dulles, Terminal D, where AA Flight 77 departed
Security at Newark, Terminal A, where UAL Flight 93 departed
Globe Aviation Services a unit of Securitas AB which is based in Stockholm Sweden
Security at Logan, Terminal B, where AA Flight 11 departed
Huntleigh USA Corp., a unit of ICTS International NV, in the Netherlands.
Security at Logan, Terminal D, where UAL Flight 175 departed
The information we have since 9-11 shows these security companies appear to have violated numerous
regulations, hired people with criminal records, hired illegal aliens, failed to provide required training and
supervision, failed in their responsibility to the traveling public, and left the United States of America
vulnerable to multiple criminal attacks. Yet, security was the reason they were paid to be at the airports.
Astonishingly, a "technical correction" slipped in at the last moment seeks to give these security
companies immunity from their responsibility. See Section 781, within the attachment. Here is the
shocking language in that bill:
"The term 'air carrier ' means a citizen of the United States undertaking by any means, directly or
indirectly, to provide air transportation and includes employees and agents (including persons
engaged in the business of providing air transportation security and their affiliates) of such citizen.
For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term 'agent ', as applied to persons engaged in the
business of providing air transportation security, shall only include persons that have contracted
directly with the Federal Aviation Administration on or after February 17, 2002, to provide such
security, or are not debarred."
All these security companies and their U.S. subsidiaries have continued to work at airports in America
after February 17, 2002. Thus Congress would allow a contract with the FAA to extinguish the rights of
families of the dead and the injured. Additionally, only part of Argenbright has been disbarred and only
until October, 14, 2002! The Inspector General continues to investigate. See the Department of
Transportation Press Release of October 16, 2001, within the attachment.
Clearly this amendment is against the intent of the Senate, the President, the American people and
undoubtedly most House Members as expressed in the previous legislation. This amendment shocks the
senses of Americans. Many Senators and House Members told us that those who signed the September
22 and the November 16 legislation didn't know of certain provisions therein which harmed the families of
dead Americans. We are going to make sure that never happens again.
You have to choose: protect Americans from further injury or protect foreign corporations.
So that no Senator is unaware of this shocking provision, we have sent certified, registered notices, in
order to ensure that you could make an informed choice between your obligation to American families and
protecting the finances of foreign security companies shirking their responsibilities for the shocking
security lapses which enabled the horrible attacks on 9/11. We think it's time we hold not only the security
companies responsible, but Congress responsible as well.
Gail Dunham, President
National Air Disaster Alliance/Foundation
Keywords actor-network theory, airport security, Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, ... Since 9/11, terrorism has turned their security into a global controversy. ..... Name Private security companies Group 4 Securicor Trigion Securitas International ... Academy Pro-Check International ICTS Europe Other security actors Airlines ...