It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

2,500 Ground Zero workers have cancer

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 12:06 PM
Israel did it. Everybody knows it. No amount of babbling, red herrings, thermite, asbestos, screams of antisemitism, etc will stop people from coming to the irrefutable realization that our "ally" did this to us with help from bought and paid for agents.

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 12:09 PM
a reply to: mcChoodles

That's nonsense.

Are you saying that they did a survey that deliberately implicated themselves in using depleted uranium shaped charges on the building? You aren't even thinking clearly.

Note: But if you do decide to read and think about the quotes above, go to the original linked thread to read them. For some reason a kink in the BB code apparatus does not allow me to copy and paste the quotes into this thread without dropping portions quoted from other sites.

Some of the quotes within the long quote are missing and they are important.

edit on 28-7-2014 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 12:29 PM

originally posted by: mcChoodles
You are wrong. You don't know what you are talking about. Most of the fallout was absorbed by the iron structure of the building. Radioactive waste does not move far from an explosion contained in a large iron superstructure. They would have had to get samples from directly above ground zero to see off the chart levels of radioactive elements.

You could read for yourself at Veterans Today Veterans Today - Slam Dunk

a reply to: BGTM90

I'd really have to see the math and proof on all of those claims because they all kind of sound like BS to me made to fit some ones view from a undisclosed source " with in the united states nuclear lab" I can make a bunch a stuff up to thats top secret and nobody knows about. Those where all claims with out any proof. Like the fall out being absorbed by the iron structure of the building. What does that even mean? how does iron absorb fall out? Is Iorn bonding with the radioisotopes?

Things like:

The secondary purpose of the iron oxide is to convert excess Gamma, X-ray and Neutron radiation into thermal energy. Its third function is to convert Alpha and Beta radiation into heat. Its fourth function is to convert the excess free electrons produced by the blast into a bigger EMP pulse. Its fifth function is to contain or absorb the radioactive fallout and reduces its levels, helping in clean up.

with out any proof of the mechanisms that cause this are completely meaningless especially if there is no viable source to go along with it.

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 12:42 PM
a reply to: signalfire

Yes I agree evryone look up black 911 for why the certain offices with certain people in them were hit, and yes it would take more than thermite but the actual offices and surrounding areas under and around were "renovated" just weeks before 911 actually painted with thermite, this is also in the black 911 video along with the other explosives planted (the pre explosions heard) before impact of planes wich also disintegrated...

and for the other guys about thermite causing cancer:

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 12:50 PM

That picture makes me sick!

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 01:09 PM
a reply to: loam
It's just not the workers 1,000's of people that live in a 5 mile radius that received the dut and it even got into their homes. They are also getting cancer and serious lung problems....but you don't hear about that!
We have friend that live across the river and after everything was said and done they had 2 inches of the stuff in their yard and some inside the home.
NOW get this EPA told "oh just clean it up as it were dirt"....well we know that was wrong advice.
The entire Family has cancer and %50 lung capacity, this includes their kids.

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 02:44 PM
Isn't this because the trade center was full of asbestos back in the day?

originally posted by: loam

2,500 Ground Zero workers have cancer

More than 2,500 Ground Zero rescuers and responders have come down with cancer, and a growing number are seeking compensation for their illnesses, The Post has learned.

The grim toll has skyrocketed from the 1,140 cancer cases reported last year.


The tragic sum rises to 2,518 when firefighters and EMTs are added. The FDNY, which has its own WTC health program, said Friday it counts 863 members with cancers certified for 9/11-related treatment.


Particularly appalling because we lied to these guys in the first place.

W. House Molded EPA's 9/11 Reports

Rice Reportedly Signed Off On 9/11 "Safe To Breathe" Documents

Documents: Feds, City Knew Of Ground Zero Toxins

Stunning proof has been uncovered that the government knowingly put New Yorkers in harm’s way after 9/11.

CBS 2 News has obtained documents revealing that Lower Manhattan was reopened a few weeks following the attack even though the air was not safe.

The two devastating memos, written by the U.S. and local governments, show they knew. They knew the toxic soup created at Ground Zero was a deadly health hazard. Yet they sent workers into the pit and people back into their homes.

One of the memos, from the New York City health department, dated Oct. 6, 2001, noted: “The mayor’s office is under pressure from building owners … in the Red Zone to open more of the city.” The memo said the Department of Environmental Protection was “uncomfortable” with opening the areas but, “The mayor’s office was directing the Office of Emergency Management to open the target areas next week.”

“Not only did they know it was unsafe, they didn’t heed the words of more experienced people that worked for the city and E.P.A.,” said Joel Kupferman, with the group Environmental Justice Project.

Another part of the memo noted: “The E.P.A. has been very slow to make data results available and to date has not sufficiently informed the public of air quality issues arising from this disaster.”

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:06 PM
a reply to: jhn7537

I have a hard time believing that asbestos caused the cancer. I mean...all those children and teachers at sandy hook breathed that stuff for years and they dont have it.

Had to be something else.

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 04:19 PM

originally posted by: darkwarrior
a reply to: jhn7537

I have a hard time believing that asbestos caused the cancer. I mean...all those children and teachers at sandy hook breathed that stuff for years and they dont have it.

Had to be something else.

Asbestos in a school (untouched) is a lot different than pulverized/heated asbestos being breathed in by the first responders. And Sandy Hook didn't have over 400 tons of Asbestos there.

I just have a hard time making the connection you are here. It's not apples to apples to me at all... Totally different situations

When the Twin Towers collapsed to the ground on September 11, 2001, a massive cloud of smoke, dust and debris released these hazardous asbestos fibers and other toxic substances into the air. Asbestos fireproofing materials from 20 stories of the towers came showering down on New York City. According to reports from the EPA, the implosion from the towers "pulverized asbestos to ultra-fine particles."

edit on 28-7-2014 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 05:14 PM
Those who worked at the WTC site seem to be at increased risk of cancer, especially thyroid cancer, melanoma and lymphoma. According to a study released of nearly 10,000 New York firefighters (half of whom worked at the WTC site), those from the site are 32 percent more likely to have cancer.

So it was something they breathed in or got on their skin, which would have been all that dust.

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 06:18 PM
edit on 106pm3150000000p86 by whatsup86 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 08:07 PM
a reply to: EA006

How about Asbestos.... Yep, the towers went up when that # was still considered perfectly safe to dip your 4 year old's oreos in.

Give me a break. Something nuclear, would have caused far more problems than cancer 13 years later.

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:06 PM

originally posted by: suicideeddie
a reply to: signalfire
can you post here the images/video for this? "Gravity doesn't throw massive steel beam assemblies out laterally hundreds of feet" and while your at it can you post the evidence of a nuclear device at work ie. the concussion, heat strike and proton flash of detonation locally also any radiological evidence ie. radio frequency bursts, electromagnetics and of course neutrino detection which should be available from active detectors worldwide and in orbit.

Pull up any video of the buildings in mid-collapse and you can see the exterior beam assemblies (the 'wheatchex' looking ones) blowing out laterally, trailing steam/smoke. The building was 209 ft on a side and it's quite easy to measure how far out those hundreds of tons beams were thrown. The weapons used were not the atomic weapons we've all been trained to expect, the multi-megaton blasts, but tactical nuclear weapons the size of apples (we've had these for decades now, do the research). They can be selected for any given yield or radiation signature so perfectly that they take out the building in question and only break a few windows next building over...

The rest of your questions are answered at the links I gave. Feel free to actually read them. I've noticed that people that continually ask questions without doing any research don't learn much. As far as your 'neutrino detection from orbit' question (?) the Russians are well aware of what happened that day. So is everyone else except in the continually brain dead United States.

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:23 PM

originally posted by: mcChoodles
You're biggest fail is assuming the US govt would do an accurate assessment of a terrorist event they perpetrated. All the rest of your charts and data are meaningless. a reply to: ipsedixit

It's 'YOUR', not 'you're'... you got it right the second time, sheesh.

And the USGS personnel that released that information did it either without knowing what they were seeing (likely, they were looking for toxins like asbestos) or while putting their lives and their family's lives in extreme jeopardy.

Only three resources I've seen up until lately have noticed what the elemental charts so clearly show, Jeff Prager, Ed Ward MD, and 'the anonymous physicist'; but people are slowly catching on and I really hope this information goes viral.

It would be too little too late but the realization of what we are really seeing when we look at the towers in mid collapse is necessary for the U.S. and global population to realize just how much they've been lied to, and by whom.

Now if you don't mind, I'm going to ignore the people on this thread who weren't paying attention during fourth grade grammar classes. The hiring standards for the keyboard jockeys at Langley must be on the decline.

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 02:04 AM

originally posted by: conz1992
This is bad though (if true), first time I've heard about it..The fact they knew the debris and whatever else would be deadly to breath in and purposely told the public it was safe, absolute psychopaths, how is this not a blatant false flag?

W. House Molded EPA's 9/11 Reports

The first step in any crisis is to downplay the problem to everyone who isn't in the know. That way the public doesn't freak out, riot, and cause more damage.

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 02:10 AM
a reply to: Hijinx

Mesothelioma usually takes 15 to twenty years to start showing symptoms...a la Steve McQueen,...

But,... given the high concentrations released at the sight...who may have accelerated the process of death by asbestos...

The point is elements within the Gov. perpetrated 9/11 and the more collateral deaths the better in terms of not having any witnesses to be around later when they are finally brought to justice,...if they are still alive that is...

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 02:16 AM
Yes Asbestos can cause cancer but not at 2.500 people simultaneously!

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 10:17 AM
a reply to: Hellas

I'm sure 400 tonnes can do a fair amount of damage...

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 10:18 AM
a reply to: Aazadan

Yeah I suppose, same reason that they wouldn't tell us if the world was going to end tomorrow, or next week, or soon. Because people would just freak out

posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 11:30 AM
I'm sure the fact that thermite fumes contain known carcinogens is just another coincidence...

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in