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.

 

Toxic Waste Removal at Area 51

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 07:02 AM
link   
I was watching this documentary about Area 51. Anyway it showed these construction workers that worked there and apparently they developed this sickness of skin pealing and flakeing. The cause was that due to Area 51 being so remote they had no way of disposing of toxic waste so they dug massive holes and poared aircraft fuel over it, then set it alight. The smoke and fumes were said to of caused this sickness. Two workers died as a result of it. Anyone ever hear about this?




posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 07:20 AM
link   
Yes this was a very public case that was taking to court as the workers sued the base. This case lead the goverment to addmit they have a base out there for the first time. Thanks to a law signed by Bill Clinton Area 51 does not have to follow any enviromental laws so they can burn whatever they want out there and dont have to worry about gettin introuble



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 07:24 AM
link   
yeah, but the stuff is being bured for security purposes as i understand, not becaue of convenience.

the families of those workers sued the government a few years ago. this prompted the first 'official' public acknowledgement of a government facility at groom lake (they didn't refer to it as 'area 51').

The families settled out of court.



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 07:24 AM
link   
yep. i read the opinion for this case and it really was interesting how much deference was given the secrecy of area 51 (or "the operating facility near groom lake, nevada" as it was called). its exempt from epa regulation for national security reasons. the interesting thing was it was only 1 of 2 facilities declared such during all of the clinton years, if i remember correctly.

-koji K.



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by koji_K
yep. i read the opinion for this case and it really was interesting how much deference was given the secrecy of area 51 (or "the operating facility near groom lake, nevada" as it was called). its exempt from epa regulation for national security reasons. the interesting thing was it was only 1 of 2 facilities declared such during all of the clinton years, if i remember correctly.

-koji K.


does anyone happen to know what/where the other facility is?



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 12:11 PM
link   
This case shows the ugly side of technological advancement.Nothing comes without a price.



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Wonder what kind of toxic waste they were dumping. I don't think that so called aircraft testing centers make waste thats overly toxic.



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Bandit

Originally posted by koji_K
yep. i read the opinion for this case and it really was interesting how much deference was given the secrecy of area 51 (or "the operating facility near groom lake, nevada" as it was called). its exempt from epa regulation for national security reasons. the interesting thing was it was only 1 of 2 facilities declared such during all of the clinton years, if i remember correctly.

-koji K.


does anyone happen to know what/where the other facility is?


im having some difficulty finding where i read what it was. but i remember it didnt sound *too* suspicious.. i think it was a known nuclear lab, like los alamos or brookhaven or something.

-koji K.



posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Wonder what kind of toxic waste they were dumping. I don't think that so called aircraft testing centers make waste thats overly toxic.


The creation of RAM or a by product of RAM seems to result in massive amounts of toxic solvents. Any new aircraft made at AREA51 would most likely use some form of stealth. So this could be a large part of their waste. Im also sure the test alot of stuff there like new types of fuels or whatever that could produce even more toxic waste that we have no clue about



posted on Jul, 14 2004 @ 03:57 PM
link   
I believe the families got nothing as the men by being exposed at a base that didnt exist then.

How could the government take responsiblity without admitting the base was there?



posted on Jul, 14 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   
They did admit is was there. That was the first acknowlegement of it by the gov.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join