It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

“Never Forget”: Gov’t Said the Air Was Safe, Now Thousands of 9/11 have Cancer

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 07:23 PM
link   
This reminds me of government entities that say our drinking water is safe only later it is exposed to have high lead content or other things that are equally as bad for health. You gotta feel sorry for the 9/11 first responders who did everything they could to save people's lives only to end up with cancer.


As Americans prepare for the 17th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, nearly 10,000 first responders and New York City residents have reported 9/11-related cancers.

In early August the New York Post reported on newly released numbers of reported 9/11 related illnesses, including 9,795 total case of 9/11-related cancer. The numbers were released by the federally funded World Trade Center Health Program.

According to the program there have been more than 400 documented cases of death from 9/11-related cancers. However, unfortunately, the plight of the men and women who rushed into “Ground Zero” on September 11, 2001 and the following months is often forgotten in the public conversation. Seventeen years after the attacks the first responders are still fighting for their lives.

www.activistpost.com...

www.wect.com...

www.nydailynews.com...



One week after the 9/11 attacks the Environmental Protection Agency’s Administrator Christine Todd Whitman released a statement declaring the air and water surrounding Ground Zero to be safe to breathe and drink.


Probably not so much lying as just being uninformed or stupid.




posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 07:29 PM
link   

One week after the 9/11 attacks the Environmental Protection Agency’s Administrator Christine Todd Whitman released a statement declaring the air and water surrounding Ground Zero to be safe to breathe and drink.

Bold part mine
What part of the word "surrounding" vs working in ground zero do folks not get ?
The territory surrounding Pripyat is perfectly safe. Not so much in Pripyat itself


edit on 9/3/18 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 07:35 PM
link   
It depends on what the definition of the word is is.



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Asbestos, dust, air and breathing. What could possibly go wrong ?


If you're worried about your water get a test kit.





posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 07:58 PM
link   
How exactly do they link 9/11 to cancers?
The people in question here are first responders that have been around probably hundreds of fires and other assorted disasters.



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
How exactly do they link 9/11 to cancers?
The people in question here are first responders that have been around probably hundreds of fires and other assorted disasters.


Probably because Silverman was going to have to pay a buttload of money for asbestos abatement in the towers.

Luckily for him, he bought terrorism insurance a month before 911.

Problem solved!!!

Except for the first responders and airborne asbestos...



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Bluntone22
How exactly do they link 9/11 to cancers?
The people in question here are first responders that have been around probably hundreds of fires and other assorted disasters.


Probably because Silverman was going to have to pay a buttload of money for asbestos abatement in the towers.

Luckily for him, he bought terrorism insurance a month before 911.

Problem solved!!!

Except for the first responders and airborne asbestos...


Im pretty sure Silverstien got stiffed on some of the insurance money.

It is interesting that the way those towers came down was the ONLY way it could have happened legally and economically.



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Except, the rebuilding of the WTC cost the owners billions out of pocket. Lost revenue while the new buildings were being built. And the owners still had to pay rent on the property.

And if it was a government plot, why let the owners of the WTC in on the plot?



www.911myths.com...

Not only had Silverstein insured for too small an amount, he’d also failed to complete policy negotiations before the attacks occurred. As a result he’s been involved with legal fights with the insurers for years, and can only claim $4.6 billion instead of the $7 billion (with even that subject to appeal as of January 2007) he might have got if they’d all agreed to the same document. Does any of this really sound like the actions of a man who knew what would happen on 9/11?



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 09:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
How exactly do they link 9/11 to cancers?
The people in question here are first responders that have been around probably hundreds of fires and other assorted disasters.


They had abnormally high cancer rates compared to the statistics associated with their professions. With abnormal increases in death rates.



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 09:08 PM
link   



Forgotten victims of 9/11 are developing cancer at alarming rates

Forgotten victims of 9/11 are developing cancer at alarming rates

Detective Zadroga's autopsy revealed that his lungs were full of ground glass and noxious chemicals. The WTC dust that he breathed in contained asbestos, benzene, jet fuel and other carcinogens. Detective Zadroga's death was the first to be officially linked to the toxins present at the World Trade Center.



posted on Sep, 3 2018 @ 11:19 PM
link   
The chemicals in the buildings that burned were very toxic. You cannot just look at cancer, those fumes caused a lot of varied diseases including cancer.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 01:51 AM
link   
I would love to see a proper study of this. To me this just sounds like lawyer-speak. Everyone lining up to get some cash because they have cancer (that's terrible) but also because they live in New York and were there when it all happened.

What are the base stats? One in three of us will get some form of cancer? Some studies show that men have a 40% chance of getting some form of cancer.
edit on 4/9/2018 by paraphi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 02:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: 14377
Asbestos, dust, air and breathing. What could possibly go wrong ?



Yeah. You wouldn't think you'd have to spell this one out. I don't care what the government says. If I can see the air, it's probably not safe to breathe.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 02:29 AM
link   
I thought this was well known..
police, fireman, civilians.. all started complaining in the 1-3yr period after 9/11 of major ailments and cancers..

Those buildings were asbestos traps...

They found nano thermite in the dust amongst other stuff..

and it was more than just ''ground zero''

look at the dispersion


edit on 4/9/18 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Agit8dChop



They found nano thermite in the dust amongst other stuff..


“They” are a group of seven or eight people producing an unethically peer reviewed paper that claimed active thermite without actually conducting an analysis that would conclusively prove thermite. The paper’s actual terms were thermite or super thermite.

The paper’s writers never completed the discovery process by submitting their samples to other labs for independent verification of thermite.

Other persons pursuing thermite in the dust could not determine the presence of thermite.

The chips containing epoxy, pigments, and clays found in paint more closely match industrial coatings then thermite.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 03:43 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi




I would love to see a proper study of this. To me this just sounds like lawyer-speak.



Something like this?




Forgotten victims of 9/11 are developing cancer at alarming rates

thehill.com...

A cancer cluster is emerging in lower Manhattan that has victimized former school children and teachers. Doctors from the WTC Health Program have certified that these cancers were caused by exposure to the toxic dust from the World Trade Center collapse.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Bluntone22
How exactly do they link 9/11 to cancers?
The people in question here are first responders that have been around probably hundreds of fires and other assorted disasters.


Probably because Silverman was going to have to pay a buttload of money for asbestos abatement in the towers.

Luckily for him, he bought terrorism insurance a month before 911.

Problem solved!!!

Except for the first responders and airborne asbestos...




Its very clear from your statement you have never had the pleasure of dealing with an insurance company...



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders

See it ???

Remember for weeks after 9/11 could smell it from where I worked in New Jersey

Would get this acrid burnt smell every time wind came from New York



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari



Luckily for him, he bought terrorism insurance a month before 911.


Reason bought terrorism insurance was because people putting up the money insisted on it

You don't think Silverstein reached in pocket and came up with couple of billion ……

Its called LEVREAGE . Put up small percentage using own money, get investors to loan the rest

No Insurance, No money

There was this little thing in 1993 when terrorists set off bomb in garage under building - killed 6, injured 1000 (mostly
from smoke), cost 500 million in damages

Silverstein and investors (GMAC, now ALLY BANK) argued on amount. Silverstein wanted 1 billion per building, investors
wanted 5 billion. Settled on 3.55 per billion which as turns out was not enough



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   
It would appear the powers that be certainly did know the air was not safe but when wall street needs to be open, well ….Sad disregard for the brave people against the ability to make that most important of all things, Money
The EPA's Inspector General concluded in 2003 that the agency "did not have sufficient data and analyses to make such a blanket statement" about air safety and chided the White House Council on Environmental Quality and National Security Council for interfering with the process. And in those dust samples the EPA did collect and analyze in the first week after the attacks, 25 percent showed asbestos levels above the 1 percent threshold that indicates "significant risk," according to the EPA. "Competing considerations, such as national security concerns and the desire to reopen Wall Street, also played a role in EPA's air quality statements," the Inspector General concluded in a 2003 report www.scientificamerican.com...




top topics



 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join