From NRO’s Corner:
On October 26, a state civil jury sitting in Manhattan found the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey liable for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center (a Port Authority complex). Yes, you read that correctly. In its wisdom, the jury found that the Port Authority was SIXTY-EIGHT PERCENT RESPONSIBLE for the bombing, which killed six (including a pregnant woman), injured over a thousand, and caused damages possibly into the billions.
The jury found that the terrorists who constructed the urea nitrate bomb, cased the WTC repeatedly, planted the bomb in a rented van parked in the underground garage, detonated it, sent letters claiming responsibility for their handiwork, and warned (correctly as it turns out) that the attack was just the beginning, were THIRTY-TWO PERCENT RESPONSIBLE for their bombing.
I have already explained how within the non zero-sum framework of morality, a victim can be responsible without lessening the guilt of the attacker one iota. But here, the American legal system demonstrates – in what I consider to be an impressively ludicrous manner – that even in a zero-sum situation, it is perfectly legal and correct to consider the extent to which the victim is responsible for his victimization.
The Port Authority should have known better than to dress in such a slinky manner… clearly, she had it coming.