Collapse Of WTC Buildings (Just the facts)

[NiteShift]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
...Yet our government went on record telling us that the area was not toxic. You will call it a mistake, no doubt. I call it a lie.

It was known almost from the start that Ground Zero was toxic. It was not covered up -

"In August [2002], the EPA extended its deadline for residents in lower Manhattan to request free asbestos testing and cleaning in their homes." -
EPA offers cleanup

"Millions of dollars in federal aid to monitor the long-term health of Ground Zero workers is expected to be approved this week [2003]....The spending package now also includes up to $1 billion to cover insurance costs for health claims arising from work at Ground Zero"
Federal Aid

 

[LadyEagle]

If you think the United States government is so bad, then why don't you quickly pack your bags and move to Iran where they also hate the United States government. Maybe you would like it there better.

Phillip, you are a co-moderator on this forum. I have not been rude or hateful to you or to other members and it is too bad you cannot extend the same courtesy to me. There is no reason to personally attack me, because I question the actions of our government and history has proven that our government does not always work in the best interest of the citizens of the USA.

In addition, you have not refuted the claims here by any proof, only your "expertise." A good debate is not based upon personal opinion or "expertise" but is based upon facts, including links. And personal attacks are never called for. I will not "debate" you anymore, Phillip.

 

[LadyEagle]

I'll see if we can leave this thread open.

My vote is to close the thread for the reasons stated above.

 

[LadyEagle]

Originally posted by NiteShift:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by LadyEagle:
...Yet our government went on record telling us that the area was not toxic. You will call it a mistake, no doubt. I call it a lie.

It was known almost from the start that Ground Zero was toxic. It was not covered up -

"In August [2002], the EPA extended its deadline for residents in lower Manhattan to request free asbestos testing and cleaning in their homes." -
EPA offers cleanup

"Millions of dollars in federal aid to monitor the long-term health of Ground Zero workers is expected to be approved this week [2003]....The spending package now also includes up to $1 billion to cover insurance costs for health claims arising from work at Ground Zero"
Federal Aid </font>[/QUOTE]

AP) A judge attacked former Environmental Protection Agency chief Christine Todd Whitman for reassuring Manhattan residents soon after the 2001 terrorist attacks that the environment was safe to return to homes and offices while toxic dust was polluting the neighborhood.

"No reasonable person would have thought that telling thousands of people that it was safe to return to lower Manhattan, while knowing that such return could pose long-term health risks and other dire consequences, was conduct sanctioned by our laws," U.S. District Judge Deborah A. Batts wrote, calling Whitman's actions "conscience-shocking."

Whitman spokeswoman Heather Grizzle said Thursday that the former New Jersey governor had no comment. Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said the government had no comment either. EPA spokeswoman Mary Mears said the EPA was reviewing the lengthy opinion.

Batts refused to grant Whitman immunity against a class-action lawsuit brought in 2004 by residents, students and workers in lower Manhattan and Brooklyn who said they were exposed to hazardous dust and debris after the Sept. 11, 2001 attack.

The judge let the civil lawsuit proceed against the EPA and Whitman, permitting residents, students and workers to try to prove that the agency and its administrator endangered their health by their actions and statements soon after the attack.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/02/health/main1276366.shtml

 

[Ed Edwards]

LadyEagle: //A good debate is not based upon personal opinion or "expertise" but is based upon facts, including links.//

Here is a fact, but it is based on my espertise.
My expertise is I saw a documentary about people who drop
building with explosives. The 'drop' is caused by
timed (by wire length) explosive on the support members.
The 'drop proceeds from the bottom up, floor one is
zapped, the upper floors fall, floor two is zapped.

By contrast, the live picutre I saw of the second building
(and the instant replays of the first building, within
an hour) were from the point of inpact down.
The upper floors were collapsing each floor:
74, 73, 72, 71, etc.

That is what I saw, with the undoctored movies.

My conclusion from what I saw is that the planes & their
burning caused the collapses.
There was nothhing i'd call an 'implosion'.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Let's see... LE claims that Phillip hasn't "proven" his position.

Poncho. LE, and NiteShift continue to rehash conspiracy-theory sites, offer incorrect assertions (like "the government told us that Ground Zero wasn't toxic"), and when confronted with experience and scientific fact, they ignore the point and post more conspiracy-theory sites and offer incorrect assertions.

Phillip, the facts have been laid out several times already in these ten pages. I say if they ain't got it yet, they won't, and I am frankly tired of seeing the corpses of those who died on 9/11 urinated on by a bunch of "000H TEH BUSH IS TEH SATAN!!1!1!," tinfoil-hat, never met a wierd idea they didn't embrace "Christians." My vote is to close it and hide it somewhere safe, where children and Democrats, both of whom are impressionable and easily led astray, won't be harmed.

 

[LadyEagle]

TP, I gave you an ABC news site which shows there are going to be civil suits over what was told to the American people by the EPA. That is not a conspiracy site. No one is urinating on anybody. I suggest you tone down the rhetoric. This is an official warning.

Lady Eagle,
Moderator

 

[tragic_pizza]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
TP, I gave you an ABC news site which shows there are going to be civil suits over what was told to the American people by the EPA. That is not a conspiracy site. No one is urinating on anybody. I suggest you tone down the rhetoric. This is an official warning.

Lady Eagle,
Moderator

Plenty of rhetoric to go around, LE.

 

[Phillip]

LE, I didn't attack you, I simply called your hand because you took the thread down a tangent when you made the comment that the "government always lies to you". I WORK for that government and so does Ed, therefore as agents of the government, WE lied to you. Can you not see the tie.

Has everybody except tragic_pizza not read my answers to specific questions about why there were no explosives placed in the building? Do you ignore THOSE posts and then make me REPEAT my qualifications to post the reasons as to why it fell?

LE, as a co-moderator, you yourself should not be taking the thread on a tangent. Should we have to police each other, when we should know the rules? Should I turn your posts in?

Ed, thanks for the information. They will tell you that because the terrorists had engineers in the group they knew exactly where the planes would crash so they planted their explosives there. No answer that one....yuk, yuk, yuk!

 

[Phillip]

LE, I was NOT asked to do this, but I do publically appologize to you for telling you that you might like it better in Iran.

But, please, also look at our end of this and understand that we get frustrated with the press and media always trying to stir up trouble.

Again, sorry.

 

[tragic_pizza]

While I will not apologize for my "rhetoric," I'll probably not do it again.

 

[Daisy]

Personal expertise certainly does count when the expertise is in the very field being discussed. An expert can only explain why data is relevent or not if given the data that the claims are based on. We're lucky to have someone who can explain disturbing allegations (hopefully in simple terms so we can all follow - I know absolutely nothing about telephony except that there is such a term **hoping I used it right**).

I can't emphasize enough how correct LE is concerning the EPA's post 9-11 advice and cleanup. People were encouraged to move back to downtown within a couple of months if not weeks. People were told to dust their own apartments with a damp rag if they were outside an arbitrary zone (and inelegible for EPA cleaup). Cleanup and rescue crews were not given proper respitory equipment. There is enough to discuss on that alone to warrant a new, dedicated thread.

 

[Phillip]

Go ahead and open one Daisy, we've reached page 11 here. If anybody wants to continue to discussing the WTC FACTS then open another thread.

LE I have not studied the EPA situation and this might be an interesting subject.

Whether or not the rescue crews had enough equipment is based on "funding" and it is very possible that they were under prepared for such a huge attack. No argument there. I will say that most if not 95% of the toxicity would be from inhaling cement dust which (as far as I know) not a carcenagen; damp rag would probably be the best clean-up method and people can certainly do that themselves.

The EPA wets down the powder themselves and them it is less likely to become airborne.

I think the real issue was trying to get things down to a safe level and get the people back into their homes.

We had the same problem in Oklahoma City when a big apartment building was across the street and to the West of the Murrah Building. It was considered unstable and uninhabitable until engineers had a chance to study it to determine if it had structural degradation. I cannot remember how long it took, but the people were essentially homeless for at least a week and maybe longer. Ed may know the real answer to this one.

The people did finally return. Interestingly, this apartments security camera was one of the main cameras that caught McVeigh and his Ryder truck on tape driving up the the building at about 9 AM.

If anybody wishes to continue the WTC data, then please open a thread, if not then don't.......

Will that work for everybody? LE, you happy with that?

 

[NiteShift]

Originally posted by Daisy:
I can't emphasize enough how correct LE is concerning the EPA's post 9-11 advice and cleanup. People were encouraged to move back to downtown within a couple of months if not weeks.

Alright, you can argue that EPA gave bad advice, or was unprepared, or whatever. Nevertheless, it was known from the start that Ground Zero was toxic, the govt said as much, and attempted to help/pay the bill for cleanup.

EPA cleanup

[ April 16, 2006, 01:30 AM: Message edited by: NiteShift ]

 

[NiteShift]

Originally posted by tragic_pizza:
Poncho, LE, and NiteShift continue to rehash conspiracy-theory sites, offer incorrect assertions (like "the government told us that Ground Zero wasn't toxic")

You are mistaken TP. I never argued anything like that.

 

[LadyEagle]

Since we do have a 10-page limit on this forum, I'm taking the liberty of closing this on page 11. If anyone wishes to continue the topic, please start a new thread.

Thank you,
Lady Eagle