Why weren't the WTC rescue workers warned about the fatal asbestos dust?

Question

the WTC construction had already begun before the use of asbestos was banned in 1971, so spray-on asbestos fire retardant was used up to at least the 40th floors of both towers (64th in the North Tower).

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2001/9/12/...

so then the owners were required to REMOVE it all by law, but the cost of just the scaffolding was over $1 million!

permission to have the Towers demolished had previously been refused because of the poisonous asbestos dust which would spread over the NY area - which, of course, was well-known about, but nobody warned the rescue workers....??

http://www.mesotheliomasos.com/newsWorldtradecenter.php

http://www.mesotheliomasos.com/newsWTCcoroners.php

so why on earth would Silverstein bother to buy the WTC lease six months before 9/11 knowing he would have all this asbestos problem on his hands?

he was lucky, because from his initial $125 million downpayment, he received $4,6 BILLION from his insurance against 'terrorist attacks'....

Answer 1

There are lots of old buildings that have asbestos problems. Firefighters particularly know this.

The heroes of that day would have gone in anyway. Most people would have. They just wanted to help in a feasible and concrete way and everyone did the very best they could.

And lots of people lease the same buildings with all kinds of problems like asbestos. No one expects a tragedy like that to happen.

Answer 2

Because they were not allowed to tell the truth...by the White House.

"The EPA's proclamation of safe air was premature and, as it turned out, wrong. The collapse of the World Trade Center released nearly 2,000 tons of asbestos³ and hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete in the form of dust. A 2003 report from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the EPA later charged that the EPA lacked the information needed to determine the air quality surrounding Ground Zero in the days following the September 11 attacks.4

The EPA was not given full control over its press releases in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. Administrator Whitman issued a memo on September 12 announcing that "all statements to the media should be cleared through the NSC [National Security Council] before they are released,"5 and the New York Post reported that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice was "the final decision maker" regarding the release of information by the EPA.6 In addition the OIG report details how the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) pressed the EPA to "add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones" from agency press releases.7 For example, information discussing the potential health risk for "sensitive populations" from exposure to particulate matter was discouraged from inclusion in a press release by a CEQ official, and language discussing detected levels of asbestos was softened.8 The involvement of NSC and CEQ officials raises questions as to whether public health concerns were trumped by political and security priorities."

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integri...

Answer 3

Do you really think that would have stopped the rescue workers?  I seriously doubt it.

Answer 4

Because it was MORE important to dispose of the evidence, Ahem, debris quickly than to attend to either health and safety issues or those relating to the structural integrity or evidence of the 'crime scene'?

Anyway, to answer the rest of your question, many filthy corrupt businesspeople would have bought it... if they were sure they could run the perfect insurance scam on it - with government complicity!

Answer 5

A proper mask would have gone a long way.  I don't understand why they would omit that kind of information from the public and the workers.  What is that manslaughter?

Answer 6

The ultimate death toll for first responders, clean-up workers and others who spent considerable time at ground zero will far exceed the number of victims who perished on 9/11.

The EPA knew that the air was unsafe. That was overruled and, as ordered, they announced it was safe.  The toxic air would not have stopped the rescue workers, but if given the information, they could have protected themselves.

People claim this travesty was an effort to get Wall Street up and running.  That may be a red herring.   Was there another motivation?  It will take many years, if not decades, to identify the criminals who were complicit in 9/11.  Thousands of potential witnesses will die prematurely as a result of the EPA's criminal actions.  I call that murder.  Figure it out.