Is the Goverment able to kill their own people?

[bio]

Um....I got bronchitis from the GZ dust. Doesn't mean I'm gonna sue Bush for attempted murder.

Do you think, the ill residents are just mollycoddles?

 

[moon1969]

When Boris Yeltsin was president and Russia lost the First Chechen war, Boris Yeltsin blamed Vladimir Gusinsky and the media. Boris Yeltsin told the FSB to do an operation "facedown in snow" against Vladimir Gusinsky. It is true that because Vladimir Gusinsky supported free and fair media Russia lost the first war but that all change when Putin got into power. So yes government can become oppressive and dangerous just like it is in Russia.

 

[kookbreaker]

Do you think, the ill residents are just mollycoddles?

What was Bush supposed to do? Evacuate the lowest portion of the most densely populated city in the USA and shut down the biggest financial hub in the world on the basis of a small potential increase in respiratory ailments and mental health issues?

If you were to do an overall cost analysis of such an evacuation and shutdown, I think you would find the costs in human lives and health to be much worse than remaining.

 

[gumboot]

Simple answer: people are stupid. PPE regulations are impossible to enforce unless there are supervisors breathing down the necks of everyone, all the time. This is why, for example, in British law there is a duty of care on everyone in a workplace to make reasonable efforts to ensure that everyone including themself is using PPE and working in a safe manner; unless you have a catch-all, everyone can say it's somebody else's problem, and everyone will backslide.

Anecdote time. On my first ever film job I was something of a general assistant. For one particular set up we had a skateboarder gliding through mid air on his board, so to facilitate this we had a steel track suspended overhead from a crane, and the stunt guy wore a harness so he could move down the track.

OSH regulations required that anyone passing under the suspended track had to wear a hard hat. For the duration of that set up I was given the task of standing at the foot of some stairs with a big sack of hard hats, to personally give one to any crew member passing under the track, and to make sure they wore it. Despite this, compliance rates were about one in ten, if that. A lot of guys took the helmet and just carried it. A lot refused to take it at all, or ignored me.

Each time I'd sent a despairing glance at the Safety Officer who would just shrug and point out that they were all contractors, responsible for their own safety. As long as we'd given them the option of complying with standards, if they got hurt it was their own fault, and we were not liable.

 

[gumboot]

another question is, if the firefighters knew these were needed (and they put in the order so they must have known) and they cost less than 50 dollars each, why couldnt they just go buy their own? i understand the principle that they shouldnt have to, but still

Firefighters already have masks, do they not? They certainly do here.

On the matter of respiratory illness, there was an article a little while back that talked about health claims relating to September 11. Apparantly a vast percentage of claims are false - that is people claiming they were made sick by air pollution from 9/11 when in reality their illness was either unrelated, or entirely fictional.

Let's bear in mind that post 9/11 Manhattan went into winter. In winter smog and other air pollutants in large cities tend to increase, and respiratory illness increases with it.

The same thing happened with "Gulf War Syndrome" - soldiers experiencing normal every day illnesses but crediting it to "Gulf War Syndrome" (resulting in such a scatter gun collection of symptoms that many medical professionals have questioned whether there actually is a single identifiable syndrome at all).

Basically, anyone living in Manhattan who suffered respiratory illness in the year or two after 9/11 is likely to have at least considered it was caused by GZ dust. In reality most would have suffered the same illness if the attacks had never occurred.

 

[gumboot]

See the rescuers and first responders had in addition to their duty to keep themselves safe, a duty to try and rescue those they might, and to try and recover the bodies of those they could not save. This duty may or may not, have made them (A) careless, (B) forgetful, or (C) prioritize their own safety much lower than those they were trying to help. These (A,B,C) may, MAY, have contributed to some NOT WEARING gear they were provided. Just a thought.

I suggest the reason is much more mundane than that. These masks smell bad, and they make breathing more difficult, and they're uncomfortable to wear for any length of time. Wearing them is basically unpleasant.

On film sets, there is a safety requirement to wear High Visibility vests when working on or near roads. Film crews are atrociously bad at complying with this requirement. (Safety Officers have this trick of following non-complying crew around with a road cone and putting it beside them any time they stop, until the annoyed crew finally put on a vest).

The reason is not distraction, or lack of concern for their safety, or that the vest interferes with their work. It's because they don't like wearing bright orange vests. It comes down to fashion. That's it.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Firefighters already have masks, do they not? They certainly do here.

firefighters here (and presumably everywhere) have a full-face mask with oxygen supply like this

the masks that were recommended/required on ground zero (and i believe the ones ordered by the fire department) were half-face respirator/dust masks with replaceable filters, like thise

while searching for a suitable image i found what may have been a much more popular respirator:

 

[gumboot]

the masks that were recommended/required on ground zero (and i believe the ones ordered by the fire department) were half-face respirator/dust masks with replaceable filters, like thise

Our firemen have both, along with a variety of other masks down to the paper ones such as worn by doctors. I understand that the primary mask used by firemen is the full-face variety with attached oxygen supply, however I find it hard to believe that a department as extensive as the FDNY did not have a large existing stock of dust masks of varying types for various uses. That is to say, the ordering of these masks may not have been an attempt by FDNY to acquire masks it did not have, but in fact a pre-emptive order to address an anticipated sudden increase in mask usage due to work at Ground Zero.

In other words not so much:

"Yikes, we need a whole bunch of masks, and pronto!"

As:

"Yikes, we're going to go through our entire stockpile of masks pretty quick, we better order some more!"

 

[LashL]

You can lead a horse to water..............

...but you can't make him drink (unless you're Chuck Norris.)

Dorothy Parker had it right: "You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think".

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Government? Wait, what happened to the Jews- *cough* Er uh I mean "zionists"?

Who is it trying to kill us again? The all knowing all powerful single entity single thinking government being, or the Je- er "zionists"? Is there a dummies book for this?

 

[bio]

Firefighters already have masks, do they not? They certainly do here.

On the matter of respiratory illness, there was an article a little while back that talked about health claims relating to September 11. Apparantly a vast percentage of claims are false - that is people claiming they were made sick by air pollution from 9/11 when in reality their illness was either unrelated, or entirely fictional.

Let's bear in mind that post 9/11 Manhattan went into winter. In winter smog and other air pollutants in large cities tend to increase, and respiratory illness increases with it.

(...)

Unless you are not able to give a reference, it is just a claim.

In contrast to that, I gave the New York Times as reference, that the illnesses became worst, "the closer people came to the debris pile in the early days and weeks after the twin towers collapsed, the more serious are the ailments they develop." This is true to residents of Manhattan and workers alike.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

But Bio, you made nothing but a claim about murder. you are spinning a source and then pretending that because you used a source to make a claim that isn't form the source that it's somehow OK. That is what dishonesty is.

And what's sad is rather than be upset about the people behind these attacks, the terrorists, who caused these health problems. You are more concerned with making political rhetoric instead. If not for the actions of Al Qeada, some 3000 people would still be alive and there wouldn't be anyone sffering illnesses in an attempt to help rescue others. Put blame where it belongs.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Sorry I didn't read this whole thing but...
Has anyone proposed a reason the 9/11 planners would also want to kill first responders even after they successfully completed the attack?
And if so, why they wouldn't they use a better and quicker way? (just fire the space lasers again, right?)

Even if this isn't just a tragic, avoidable but accidental outcome, even if they found a memo of someone saying they wanted first responders to die, so declare the air safe, how is that related to any 9/11 CT rather than somebody being needlessly sadistic?

I mean, the government COULD be doing more to keep people from smoking cigarettes, but instead are "murdering" millions of their own citizens every year, or whatever the stats, it's HUGE! THIS should be your proof of OMG INSIDE JORB!!111!!!!! Also, car crashes, and diabetes, and cancer, old age... lots of murder, eh? Therefore, they'd clearly be willing to do 9/11, duh!

 

[Miss_Kitt]

ahem..."mental health problems"? Now, I'm not a professional psychologist, but I would think that looking at the twisted remnants of what was once the City's proudest monument to business would push one towards brooding, depression, and/or fist-clenching rage. My sister, who works in NYC (and was there on 9/11) said that for months the hole in the skyline was like an open wound...and most likely, those who lived and worked closest to GZ were most likely to have known some of the victims. All of which points to some fraction of the population having "mental health" issues without inhaling anything.

In a related concept, the data gathered on WTC-related respiratory illness is most likely slanted towards problems occurring simply because the data is gathered from people who sought medical care for health issues. People who were equally close to GZ but did not have unusual respiratory issues--or did not seek health for them--are not going to be included in the data.

Neither of the foregoing should be read to imply that there are not real people with real health issues from exposure to dangerous materials; just that there are large challenges with the epidemiology of disasters, and for WTC in particular.

More directly to the OP's comments, any trained first responder (fire, police, etc.) knows that building fires and partial collapses produce noxious and sometimes dangerous particulate. They also know that fast response saves lives, and they make judgments about how encumbered they choose to be. That OSHA didn't have inspectors getting in the way of the workers, trying to make them wear safety gear they didn't want, is not the government "killing its own people".

The whole argument is parallel to saying, "The police aren't issuing enough speeding tickets, and THAT's why so many teenagers are killed in automobile accidents."

 

[JihadJane]

What was Bush supposed to do? Evacuate the lowest portion of the most densely populated city in the USA and shut down the biggest financial hub in the world on the basis of a small potential increase in respiratory ailments and mental health issues?

If Bush was serious about protecting the lives of "his people" he should have done exactly that.

"Stringent protocols govern asbestos contamination cleanup. After a specialized training period, health exam, and certification, licensed technicians must wear industrial-grade respirators and asbestos-resistant suits. New York City has a history of properly addressing asbestos contamination. Back in 1989, a relatively small steam pipe explosion on Gramercy Park South sent 200 pounds of asbestos blowing onto neighboring buildings. As a precaution, the entire building was covered in protective plastic sheeting, and city environmental officials complained that the cleanup would require more than four weeks of painstaking procedures for outdoor decontamination alone. More than 200 area tenants were displaced for weeks following the accident."

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/oct/the-9-11-cover-up/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C=

If you were to do an overall cost analysis of such an evacuation and shutdown, I think you would find the costs in human lives and health to be much worse than remaining.

There seems to be an umlimited amount of money available to wage murderous wars of plunder and to bail out plundering bankers. Why aren't similar amounts available to protect the health and lives of New Yorkers and rescue workers or to fund comprehensive studies of the still developing 911 health disaster?

"They once called the 9/11 cough a badge of honor. Now they know that the whole thing is a catastrophic government disaster."

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/oct/the-9-11-cover-up/article_view?b_start:int=3&-C=

 

[funk de fino]

If Bush was serious about protecting the lives of "his people" he should have done exactly that.

"Stringent protocols govern asbestos contamination cleanup. After a specialized training period, health exam, and certification, licensed technicians must wear industrial-grade respirators and asbestos-resistant suits. New York City has a history of properly addressing asbestos contamination. Back in 1989, a relatively small steam pipe explosion on Gramercy Park South sent 200 pounds of asbestos blowing onto neighboring buildings. As a precaution, the entire building was covered in protective plastic sheeting, and city environmental officials complained that the cleanup would require more than four weeks of painstaking procedures for outdoor decontamination alone. More than 200 area tenants were displaced for weeks following the accident."

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/oct/the-9-11-cover-up/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C=

Do you know what the first responders did when they tried to call off the rescue operation? What do you think they would have done when the govt tried to stop anyone going near the site who had not had the training?

The above is completly different than the 911 attacks and you know it.

Get real.

There seems to be an umlimited amount of money available to wage murderous wars of plunder and to bail out plundering bankers. Why aren't similar amounts available to protect the health and lives of New Yorkers and rescue workers or to fund comprehensive studies of the still developing 911 health disaster?

"They once called the 9/11 cough a badge of honor. Now they know that the whole thing is a catastrophic government disaster."

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/oct/the-9-11-cover-up/article_view?b_start:int=3&-C=

It goes without saying the OSHA did their job. IF the workers ignore warning then they have only one person to blame. The mask were there, the signs were there and people were telling other workers to wear them.

I have yet to see any links to people from lower manhattan who have sued the USG who were affected and were not workers at GZ?

 

[T.A.M.]

I think we have gotten from bio that his intent, in retrospect, was not to say they were murderers, but rather killed people through neglect.

That said, I would need to see definitive proof that the authorities did not provide the masks and ask people to wear them.

When I was a medical student, we would often be exposed to radiation (FLUOROSCOPYS, ETC...) as part of our training. Now we were provided with protective gear and told to use it. If I failed to do so, and ended up with the inability to have children as a result, should I blame the Faculty of medicine? The hospital? NO, neither...I AM TO BLAME.

Just some thoughts...

 

[twinstead]

It appears resorting to claiming the government killed people by neglect is simply a way to blame them for something, anything, in light of the fact that there is no honest and compelling evidence 911 itself was an inside job.

I'm certainly no Bush fan, but Jesus, this is pretty sad.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Here's an excerpt documenting the activities of Bechtel's environmental health and safety group. From SH&E At Ground Zero:

Risk-taking was the norm—not the exception—at Ground Zero. As SH&E professionals, it was difficult to watch these activities. Under normal circumstances, doing nothing to stop risk-taking equates to condoning and accepting the risk, which is contrary to how SH&E professionals are trained to conduct their craft. But work at the site was anything but “normal.” The group quickly learned that trying to control human behavior under such extreme conditions was not possible. In the simplest terms, during those early days, we were forced to accept such risk-taking behavior—not an easy task for any team member...

...Since no clear lines of authority had yet been established with regard to the team’s specific responsibilities, it was initially difficult to enforce even the simplest of SH&E principles at the site. As long as work at the WTC was considered “search and rescue” by the mayor’s office, it fell under the jurisdiction of the Fire Dept. of New York (FDNY) and the FDNY incident commander. As a public agency, FDNY took little direction from a private contractor.

Telling a firefighter, a police officer or any other worker at Ground Zero not to take risks during the first few weeks was simply not realistic. On one occasion, a senior commander told a safety representative from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that the first person to mention safety issues would literally be thrown off “his” site. He felt he had no time to worry about such things when there could still be survivors.

It was decided that we could begin to infuse correct safety structures by attempting to control the exposure to hazards that personnel faced each minute of every day.

... When the team first arrived on site, people were eating, drinking and smoking in the same areas where they were working—on the debris pile, where dust and smoke were the worst. No thought was given to personal hygiene—and even less regard was given to the use of PPE. Injured persons were being treated in open-air, makeshift triage stations while smoke and ash continued to rain down. The SH&E team recommended that all workers at the site wear, at a minimum, a hard hat, safety glasses, long pants, shirts with sleeves and sturdy shoes (preferably safety shoes). In addition, anyone within 25 feet of the pile or downwind of the site was required to wear respiratory protection. Dust masks were required when exposure was minimal (intermittent or downwind). However, on the pile, half-mask organic vapor respirators with HEPA filters were initially provided; later, organic vapor/acid gas respirators with HEPA filters were required.

The Salvation Army, American Red Cross and other groups provided enclosed eating stations and washing facilities for workers. NIOSH, and later OSHA, operated respirator fit testing stations and distributed thousands of respirators to workers (Photo 6). SH&E team members also helped workers with respiratory protection (Photo 7). Triage stations and first-aid facilities were relocated to tents and other protected structures (such as commandeered restaurants, exercise facilities and other establishments located near Ground Zero).

... etc. The point in providing this is to show that at first, the thought was to just do rescue and not worry about the risks, and that measures were indeed taken to improve worker protection against the health hazards present at the site.

ETA: Oh, and I forgot to add - This also shows that providing protection isn't simply a matter of coming down and saying "This is the way things will be". Note the 3rd paragraph - "... On one occasion, a senior commander told a safety representative from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that the first person to mention safety issues would literally be thrown off “his” site. He felt he had no time to worry about such things when there could still be survivors...". It doesn't seem to occur to many in this thread that there could actually have been active resistance at first to the notion of behaving safely, but that excerpt demonstrates that there was, and for a very understandable reason too. The situation is more complex, and involved more human behavior than is taken into account with charges that "Bush should've done something". Implementing safe practices took a while, as the above linked article points out, and rescue personnel were exposed in the meanwhile.

 

[Dave Rogers]

What is your personal opinion about that process as a human being with the capacity of love and empathy?

(a) It is possible that the Government may have been negligent in its duty of care towards first responders, in that it may have understated the risks involved in working on GZ without proper protective equipment. The case is far from proven, but a case could be made for further investigation. Health and safety failures kill people unnecessarily all the time, and this is cause for deep regret.

(b) Official negligence is of an entirely different order, both morally and operationally, to a hypothetical conspiracy to actively bring about the deaths of specific individuals, and the most rigorous possible proof of the former would neither begin to constitute a proof of the latter nor to establish any moral equivalence between these two radically different scenarios.

(c) General Francisco Franco is still dead, though it is unlikely that air pollution at Ground Zero is in any way responsible.

Dave