Friday, March 28, 2014

The disappearing airplane winds up crashing into a remote part of the Indian Ocean? Of course it’s a Chicago story

One of the reasons why I have never really sought to work as a reporter-type person outside of Chicago (even when I was in Springfield, I was surrounded by Chicago-oriented people) was because of the fact that it seems just about every story of significance on Planet Earth has a Chicago angle.

The story of how an airplane like this ...
Have a disaster or military conflict that is killing people? There ARE ethnic enclaves somewhere in the city filled with concerned people wondering if their relatives are suffering.

THERE ARE GOVERNMENT officials around the globe who were educated, if not outright raised, in Chicago.

And how many foreign governments feel compelled to have consulates in our city to supplement the official embassies they maintain in Washington, D.C.? I can recall once having a job a couple of blocks from an ominous – and heavily secured – building I later learned was the Chinese consulate.

But back to the point – this is a place that is most definitely a part of the global economy; and one that takes full advantage of it. Our courts can wind up making rulings that have a significant impact on the planet.

Which is the real focal point of this commentary – because it seems the dominant news story of recent weeks is about to get not only a United States angle, but one that will cause it to get the dateline “Chicago.”

FOR A CHICAGO-based law firm (Ribbeck Law, to be exact) filed a lawsuit this week in Cook County Circuit Court that demands information about the airplane specs of the type of jet used by Malaysia Airlines for the flight that disappeared – only to have officials convinced it lies in pieces at the bottom of the ocean.

... winds up in a remote place like this ...
The airplane was one designed by Boeing Co. The law firm – which says it may try to organize a lawsuit on behalf of the families of the Malaysia Airlines flight in question – claims its actions this week are to gather information so that they can hire experts who can find potential defects in the design.

That could potentially allow for any lawsuit to include Boeing; and we all know that having a big and rich company legitimately involved in a legal action increases the potential for a financially big payout.

That big payout, of course, is the reason why people would want to get involved in a lawsuit of any type.

... may be learned at this place.
WE DON’T KNOW officially what happened with that Malaysia Airlines flight that had 239 passengers – of which it would be miraculous if any of them survived the disaster itself, let alone were still alive now.

The early speculation was that the airline pilots themselves may have somehow hijacked the flight – although no one ever carried that theory out to the point of trying to explain “Why?” they’d do that!

Which would make it hard to sue anybody. How many international terrorist organizations are public enough to have assets that could be seized as part of a lawsuit settlement?

That is why the legal types are telling the Reuters wire service that they’re trying to show that it was a mechanical defect that caused the airplane to disappear, then crash into the ocean.

A FIRE ON board the plane, or perhaps a loss of oxygen in the cockpit? Either of which would have the effect of causing the plane to fly out-of-control for awhile before finally crashing.

Because it could be believed that if the pilots had been fully aware and conscious, they would have tried to make an emergency landing somewhere – anywhere – on land. Instead of letting the flight fly out so far into the ocean that there was no chance of survival for the passengers.

The world has been focused on Malaysia in recent weeks to find out where the plane disappeared to. It’s going to wind up focusing on that rust-colored building near the Picasso statue to learn “Why?”


No comments: