Was 9/11 really such a surprise?

ferret · Was 9/11 really such a surprise?

You may not believe this, but might find this wesite interesting especially the video link.

http://www.mercola.com/2006/dec/2...rnment-allowed-9-11-to-happen.htm

I know my own thoughts about this event but would value others opinions.

amenity

Having watched this video the most compelling evidence is that the buildings must have been demolished.
The other thing that I did not know or had forgotten, was the third building that was not struck by any plane yet was demolished also.

The yanky government has lost all credibilty as far as I'm concerned.

Nevertheless it's good to see learned americans sticking their necks out for truth.

We should abolish the thirty year rule for sure.

After all, 'if the government has nothing to hide what are they frightened of'

Ha! Ha! Ha!

Spies, conspiracy, terrorists of course.

Maybe even a journalist finding out and printing his opinion Ha! Ha! Ha!

ferret

Why have'nt the newspapers printed any of these experts views if America is such a free country. The truth seems to frighten them.

The invasion of iraq was linked to the war on terror and this event.
Have you looked at teletext on channel 3 today page 313. Ford speaks from beyond the grave. He gave an interview in 2004 which he said was only allowed to be published after his death.
The interview was with the Washington Post's watergate reporter Bob Woodard. He said that Rumsfeld Cheney and President Bush made a big mistake over the invasion of iraq.
I wonder how much he may have known about the demolition of the towers. Perhaps this bit of the interview is still being kept back if it exists. Who Knows?

amenity

Thanks for that ferret

Nikadi

Is that the Loose Change video? If it is then it's amazing isn't it? I watched it a long time ago and it really intrigued me. 9/11 was one of the key points where I got more racial abuse then any other. And I'm not even Iraqi -_- (I'm half-Iranian). I dislike Bush and his gang.

amenity

Theres an awful lot of proffessional opinion in the US that say 9/11 had to be an inside job.
I strongly dislike Bush and his gang.

amenity

From Lloyds List today

Toxic aftershock of 9/11 starts to bite
Insidious effects of asbestos and other potentially-lethal substances are casting a pall over September 11 heroes and Manhattan workers and residents, writes James Brewer - Friday 11 May 2007
MORE than 2,000 days after the attacks on the World Trade Center, many thousands of New Yorkers and even people from out of state fear they are developing sicknesses and will be caught up in a legal and insurance nightmare.
As city mayor Michael Bloomberg told senators recently, “even now, we still do not — and cannot — know the full extent of the damage we suffered that terrible morning.
“Tens of thousands of people took part in the rescue and recovery effort, including 45,000 workers and volunteers who came from all 50 states.
“Many of these workers and other people who lived and worked near the World Trade Center now suffer from a range of physical and mental health problems. There is no telling what other illnesses may potentially develop in the future.”
Lower Manhattan, once a boom business zone, has become a relatively low rent district because people shun living or working there.
Mr Bloomberg’s testimony to a senate committee on the aftermath of the terrorist attacks confirmed to health campaigners worries that as many as 670,000 people were at risk from disease as a result of the environmental hazards.
No-one had ever before been exposed to the impact of a mixture of 200,000 tonnes of collapsed steel, 600,000 sq ft of window glass, 425,000 cu yds of concrete, 5,000 tonnes of asbestos and 12,000 miles of uproooted electric cables, Jonathan Bennett of the New York Committee for Occupational Safety & Health, told a meeting at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.
Despite this, federal, state and city governments had reassured New Yorkers that the air was fit to breathe and that it was business as usual. Today, some 20,000 individuals are sick as a result, said Mr Bennett.
Mayor Bloomberg’s analysis has starkly contradicted official reassurances just three days after the tragedy that the public and rescue workers should be unconcerned about contamination.
Dust thrown up was extremely fine and would stick to exposed skin, said Mr Bennett, and when people washed it off, they found their skin was red as though they were sunburnt. They had been affected by a mild chemical, in the same corrosive category as drain cleaner. This also went into their eyes, mouth, nose and throats. At the time, “no-one was telling them how they could protect themselves, or even if there was a need to have to protect themselves”. Press comment that there was no asbestos in the World Trade Center was “a bare faced lie”.
“No-one knows whether the residual contamination is capable of making people sick,” said Mr Bennett, calling for early screening and free medical treatment for those affected.
Mr Bennett’s committee is encouraging everyone who worked for pay or as a volunteer in the clean-up drive to register with the workers’ compensation board before the new cut-off date, August 14, to preserve their rights in case they needed to file a case.
The New York experience is likely to raise concerns in London and elsewhere over contamination potentially released by incidents including the July 7 2005 bombings, and recalls the years when the dangers of asbestos were at first ignored or unsuspected in shipyards, shipping and other industrial and domestic usage.
Laurie Kazan-Allen, co-ordinator of International Ban Asbestos Secretariat, said of the New York saga: “The story of how elected officials put profit before safety and spin before truth will resonate with UK citizens. Jonathan Bennett and the Committee for Occupational Safety and Health were pivotal in working with citizens’ groups and non-governmental organisations in New York in the hours and days after 9/11 to expose government ‘science’ as fatally flawed and reassuring press statements as untrue.
“Civil society has many lessons to learn from the post-9/11 fiasco.”
Mr Bloomberg convened a panel of City experts to determine how sickness had spread. More than 11,000 firefighters who responded on 9/11 experienced at least one new respiratory symptom within a week of the attacks, and more than 3,000 reported conditions including what is known as the ‘World Trade Center cough’ and ‘Reactive Airways Disease’.
More than 6,500 rescue and recovery workers who were examined at Mount Sinai Medical Center, about seven out of every 10, reported at least one new or worsened respiratory symptom while engaged in WTC response efforts. “And there are thousands of residents, commercial workers and others have reported experiencing acute breathing problems, worsening asthma, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other mental illnesses which require sustained treatment,” said Mr Bloomberg.
The main challenges were securing sufficient long-term funding for 9/11 monitoring, treatment, and research programmes, and compensating all the victims fairly and quickly.
The panel estimated that gross costs to treat those who are sick or could become sick as a result of 9/11 is $393m a year. “That estimate covers the entire potentially exposed population, including the thousands of rescue workers and others who came to New York City from all 50 states,” said Mr Bloomberg.
All those programmes could be discontinued unless they received sustained US federal support of $150m a year, he said.
The proposed 9/11 Heroes Health Improvement Act, introduced in January by Senators Edward Kennedy and Hillary Clinton, would provide nearly $2bn in monitoring and treatment grants between 2008 and 2012.
“This bill needs to be passed — and quickly,” said Mr Bloomberg. “Congress cannot turn its back on those who responded with courage and suffered through this terrible catastrophe.”
Persistent efforts were made after the attacks to obtain insurance to cover the rescue and recovery operations, but no-one was willing to provide it, he said. In 2003, the Federal government set up a $1bn World Trade Center captive insurance company for the city and some 150 contractors to defend against damage claims.
The city and the contractors who heroically rushed to help are currently defending claims from more than 8,000 City employees and other workers arising out of the rescue, recovery, and clean-up operations. Plaintiffs allege damages that may be in the billions of dollars, and it is impossible to predict how many more lawsuits will be filed in the future, said Mr Bloomberg.
“New Yorkers have always been proud of the way that the city came together after 9/11, but this drawn out and divisive litigation is undermining that unity,” said Mr Bloomberg, who wants the process of determining compensation to be removed from the courts by re-opening the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, which closed in December 2003.
If the liability of the city and the contractors were eliminated, “we could immediately transfer that $1bn into the re-opened Victim Compensation Fund”.
President Bush is offering to spend $25m to fund a September 11-related health care programme at Mount Sinai and a related effort for New York City firefighters, but some legislators say this is only a fraction of what is needed.
Senator Clinton, Representative Carolyn Maloney and Rep Jerrold Nadler are among those who have long been demanding the federal government provide health care to those who were exposed to the toxic dust pollution created by the collapse of the Twin Towers. They say that $1.9bn over several years is needed to treat the victims

amenity

Just for the record, well worth a read.

http://downingstreetmemo.com/blog.php