Why weren't we warned about the asbestos dust from the WTC that existed for weeks after 9/11?

Question

The owners (the Port Authority) had previously been REFUSED permission to have the buildings demolished on the grounds of the resulting toxic dust that would cover NY, so surely plenty of people in authority in NY were aware of this situation? why didn't they evacuate the whole area for a few weeks?

there were 2,000 tons of asbestos in the WTC used as fire-retardant up to at least the 40th floors. asbestos was banned in 1971 & the owners were required to remove it.

just 7 days after 9/11, the EPA stated the air around ground zero was safe to breathe & yet workers were claiming they weren't feeling well whilst working there 6 weeks after 9/11.

360+ have died so far, 600 already have cancer now & a database exists of 71,000 names of those exposed.

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

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/ground-zero-air-pollution.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/05/08/2008-05-08_360_post911_workers_have_died_including_.html

Answer 1

I believe people were more worried about other things - lets see huge buildings that fell down- the loss of life more than the actual asbestos. we had to have first responders - wtf do you think we should have done.

Answer 2

Because we were worried about the two 200 ton airplanes that crashed into the world trade centers that day remember that

Answer 3

You can't exactly evacuate all of New York city in a few weeks, or for a few weeks.

Answer 4

First, you have to think "What would the people think if no one was sent in to look for the dead bodies and the survivors?"

I saw a show called "9/11: a Toxic Legacy" that talks all about that.  But, you have to think,  is it really easy to get 4,000,000 pounds of asbestos out of a building that houses thousands of businesses and transport it out through a major city of over 6 million?  Then, they would need to close the building to replace the fire retardant and insulation, shutting down hundreds of businesses.  An easy way to do it?  No.  

Indeed, the evacuation plans were very poor, but what do you expect from a mayor whose great idea it was to put the center of emergency communications in the building that was already targeted before for terrorist attacks?  Giuliani was not very popular in New York, though touted as somewhat of a hero after 9/11, the workers who were at ground zero started spreading the truth, and I'm suprised how he made it so far through his presidential campaign.  Dumb luck? Stubbornness? Both, I think.  Oh, and, lots of money.

Anyway, there is really no winner here.  No one can place most of the blame on anybody,  but we do need better evacuation and security strategies to support Bush's so-called "Homeland Security."  He's not doing anything, why don't we?

Answer 5

I believe since you seem to know this was a staged false flag by our government, you already know what little regard they have for the lives and welfare of the little people.

Answer 6

Let's see.



The 2 tallest buildings in the country destroyed immediate killing thousands of people.

The Pentagon also hit.

Trying to find out who did this terrible thing and planning a proper response.

Grieving over all the people who died and the carnage.



Yup my first concern would be to see if their happened to be any asbestos in the air and to warn people about it.



In NYC there are thousands of people who have cancer.  How can you link this to asbestos after 911?  Carcinogens are all over the place and many people choose to knowingly inhale them.

Answer 7

all the more reason to be hacked off at islamic extremist terrorists...

Answer 8

I don't know the justification, but I have friends in the environmental health industry who were initially called in after 9/11. They warned the government about a whole bunch of health risks from the dust of the Towers and their concerns were buried. I would like to think that they just didn't want any more panic than there already was... but I don't know.

Answer 9

You're right. The people in authority aren't idiots, but they may actually want the people to believe they goofed on that.

It gets worse. Here's some solid science on the collapse itself:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...

Answer 10

I dont understand what is so hard to understand here.

None of you really see the point so far.

YES there was a disaster that needed attention.

YES there needed to be first responders, heavy equipment operators, and coordinators for everyone in between....ON THE GROUND.

Why didnt the government give those people respirators?

Why did Whitman (head of the EPA) come out and say flat out that the air was ok to breathe?

Respirators would have helped with more than just he asbestos, and there are many ways of testing the air for contaminants that I THINK the EPA just may have access to.

Answer/Speak to that!  The argument that "hey man, there was a tragedy....people didnt have time to think" is complete BS.  If someone falls off a cliff it is a tragedy, if 2 rescuers die because of haste and lies, that is a disaster.

Answer 11

Gee, maybe something else was going on, like trying to find the body parts of people who were killed. You don't honestly think someone was covering it up to kill people, do you? 9/11 is the terrorist attack that seems to never end since it continues to take victims everyday.