Ground Zero Toxic Death Fumes Covered Up From Day One, knowingly exposed 9/11...

[align=left]> 9/11 conspiracy theorists multiply
> New poll says most Canadians blame U.S. for 9/11 attacks
> More Than 4 in 10 Americans Still Think Saddam Involved in 9/11 Attacks
> Dying nun wants her body autopsied to prove 9/11 toxicity killed her
> Most 9/11 rescuers at Ground Zero have breathing problems
> 9/11 Truth: Mohammad Atta & The Patsies
> Stone weighing up second 9/11 movie
> The Only Question is Whose Conspiracy It Was[/align]

[align=left]Ground Zero Toxic Death Fumes Covered Up From Day One
Government Officials and agencies knowingly exposed 9/11 rescuers to deadly air and then tried to cover it up
Steve Watson / Infowars | September 8 2006[/align]

[align=left]A spate of stories have emerged in the mainstream media this week concerning the fact that government officials knew that rescue workers at ground zero in New York were being exposed to harmful and deadly toxins in the aftermath of the attacks on 9/11.[/align]

[align=left]This information has been known for years and it is yet again indicative of the massive steps forward that the 9/11 truth movement has made over the past year that it is now getting full coverage in the mainstream.
Of course not all the reports make it clear enough just how criminally responsible the government is on this issue.[/align]

[align=left]Not only did the government know on the day itself that rescuers were being exposed to harmful dust, they also ordered misleading information to be given to the public, they ordered scientific research results on the air to be falsified, they allowed residents to return to their homes in the immediate vicinity knowing the air was corrosive and lethal and, to top it all off, they have since embarked on a collective program to block compensation and funding of health programs because that would be an admission of guilt.[/align]

[align=left]â??Only 30 percent of the firefighters working at the site in October were wearing any protection at all,â?� according to Thomas Cahill, professor of physics and atmospheric sciences, who was called in to analyze the air from a station one mile north of the burning WTC rubble.[/align]

"You had the workers working on top of a huge incinerator in the rush to get Wall Street going again, it was really dumb." Cahill said.

Ground zero workers, volunteers and firefighters have since suffered from lung diseases and cancers, many have died. The New York Times reported earlier this year that the Fire Department tracked a startling increase in cases of a particular lung scarring disease, known as sarcoidosis, among firefighters, which rose to five times the expected rate in the two years after Sept. 11.

The latest study, by the Mount Sinai Medical Center in Manhattan, has revealed that nearly 70 percent of the rescue workers who toiled in the dust and fumes at Ground Zero after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks suffer breathing problems.

The study was based on detailed examinations of 9,442 of the estimated 40,000 Ground Zero rescue and recovery workers between July 2002 and April 2004.

Add to this the fact that the Government ordered the EPA to give the public misleading information, telling New Yorkers on September 12 it was safe to breathe when reliable information on air quality was not available and Asbestos levels were known to be three times higher than national standards.

Further documents have since been obtained by CBS news, revealing that Lower Manhattan was reopened a few weeks following the attack even though the air was not safe.

The two devastating memos, written by the U.S. and local governments, show they knew. They knew the toxic soup created at Ground Zero was a deadly health hazard. Yet they sent workers into the pit and people back into their homes.

"Not only did they know it was unsafe, they didn't heed the words of more experienced people that worked for the city and E.P.A.," said Joel Kupferman, with the group Environmental Justice Project.

Last month Dr. Cate Jenkins, a scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency, wrote a letter to Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and other members of the New York congressional delegation blasting the EPA for hiding dangerous toxins from Ground Zero workers in the aftermath of 9/11.

The Letter claimed that EPA-funded research on the toxicity of breathable alkaline dust at the site â??falsified pH resultsâ?� to make the substance appear benign, when it was, in reality, corrosive enough to cause first responders and other workers in lower Manhattan to later lose pulmonary functions and, in some cases, to die.

Jenkins wrote:

"These falsifications directly contributed not only to emergency personnel and citizens not taking adequate precautions to prevent exposures, but also prevented the subsequent correct diagnosis of the causative agents responsible for the pulmonary symptoms. Thus, appropriate treatment was prevented or misdirected, and loss of life and permanent disability undoubtedly resulted."

The website Raw Story obtained the entire letter which can be viewed here.

Ground Zero worker Sgt. Matthew Tartaglia revealed in an interview with Alex Jones on March 30 2005, that there were only certain parts of the site that you could not legally leave without going through decontamination. He recounted the personal health problems he and many other workers have since suffered:

Most everybody has chronic sinusitis. They have ringing in the ears. Some peopleâ??s teeth and gums are bothering them. In the last year, Iâ??ve lost seven teeth. They have just broken while I was eating. I have three or four more teeth that are just dying. And my dentist says, â??Iâ??ve never seen anything like this in someone whoâ??s healthy. There is something wrong with you but I cannot find what it is. And I canâ??t stop it either.â?�

The New York Times reported in 2004 that the Bush Administration is PURPOSEFULLY blocking millions in health compensation programs for ground zero workers and attempting to stonewall the issue because to do otherwise would be an admission of responsibility for exposure to harmful substances after the government had already given the all clear.

Standard procedure protocols of both FEMA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), both on the scene at the Pentagon and the WTC on 9/11, indicate that it is routine for workers to undergo extensive protective and decontamination processes at any large scale disaster area, particularly if it is considered to be a crime scene, and certainly if it is an act of terrorism.

By noon on September 11, an EPA Criminal Investigation Division Special Agent was on the scene at the Pentagon, providing emergency response investigative support and facilitating site safety for EPA Region 3 Emergency Response personnel and the FBI. On September 12, the FBI declared the Pentagon a crime scene, and EPA Special Agents were on the scene assisting in decontamination, gathering crime scene evidence (photography, videotaping, evidence gathering, etc.) and supplying other investigative and technical support to the FBI. In addition, EPA Special Agents assisted with body recovery and site safety until September 27, when the agents departed after the FBI returned the site to the control of the Department of Defense and FEMA.

This explains why workers were suited and booted and being decontaminated at the Pentagon (above), however, if this is standard procedure, why is it that the rescue scene at ground zero in New York seems to have been much more casual? Workers there did not have protective suits, boots or full face masks, neither did they undergo decontamination, despite the fact that there was more destruction and more possibility of harmful dust, smoke and chemical inhalation.

There have been many reports on the health hazards in Manhattan following 9/11, however a 2004 report by the Sierra Club went further than previous reporting in detailing the cover-up of the public health hazards of Ground Zero. The report's summary indicates gross malfeasance by EPA, FEMA, and the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA):

• <LI class=mediumtext1>The Ground Zero health risk cover-up did not result from a poorly informed government. The World Trade Center attack involved the open, uncontrolled burning and demolition of two huge buildings - conduct that would be illegal in any state of the Union because of the known risks to human health. This report finds that the federal government ignored its own long-standing body of knowledge about pollution from incineration and demolition. The notion that EPA had to wait for test data before telling people that the pollution posed health risks is absurd. EPA should have issued a health warning, based on its own knowledge of pollution, before any test data came in.
  
  <LI class=mediumtext1>EPA failed to investigate and disclose toxic hazards properly. Oddly, EPA's website reports that it found no polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) - cancer-causing chemicals generally released by combustion of mixed materials - "in any air samples," although four independent tests found them at elevated levels and even EPA's own research scientists reported in a scientific journal that they found them at levels that Science magazine deemed worthy of "the most serious kind of concern."
  
  <LI class=mediumtext1>The federal government failed to change its safety assurances even after it became clear that people were getting ill, and even after a survey of federal employees of a sister agency in the same building as EPA at 290 Broadway revealed that they were suffering health impacts - a survey that, this report finds, the federal government did not release to the public at the time. It was quietly published in a journal in 2002.
  
  <LI class=mediumtext1>Many Ground Zero workers did not have proper protection, especially in early weeks. This report explains that federal assurances of safety gave workers conflicting messages about the need for respirator masks, which are difficult and exhausting to wear.
  
  <LI class=mediumtext1>OSHA refused to enforce worker safety standards at Ground Zero. It wrongly claimed that it had no authority in national emergencies. It then continued this refusal long after the emergency had passed, and long after it became apparent that serious health and safety risks were occurring despite efforts by OSHA staff to advise safety.
• EPA and FEMA, in concert with New York City's own health department, told families that they could clean up the contaminated dust themselves with wet rags. In fact, they actually discouraged area residents from wearing safety masks.

[align=left]Bin Laden Tape Betrays 'Phony Hijacker' Contradiction
Target is "U.S. home audience," as with fake Al-Zarqawi propaganda campaign, to reinforce 9/11 myth as 5th anniversary nears
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | September 8 2006[/align]

[align=left]A new tape showing Osama Bin Laden meeting with September 11 hijackers days before the attack has served to boost the Bush administration's war on terror agenda as the fifth anniversary of 9/11 nears, yet one of the hijackers who appears in the tape is reported elsewhere as still alive and completely unconnected to the terror plot.[/align]

[align=left]The tape purports to show Bin Laden meeting with alleged 9/11 hijackers Wail Alshehri and Hamza Alghamdi days before the attack in Afghanistan.[/align]

[align=left]After reports emerged that some of the named hijackers were still alive the FBI quickly changed its story to claim that some of the hijackers had stolen the identities of other individuals. Innocent people who saw their photograph amongst the 19 terrorists complained to their embassies yet the same mug shots are still used to this day and the FBI has made no effort to revise the list.[/align]

[align=left]Telling therefore it is that Wail Alshehri was one of the accused hijackers reported by the L.A. Times to still be alive and protesting his innocence in Saudi Arabia after 9/11.[/align]

[align=left]So how can Alshehri appear in a tape meeting with Bin Laden when he had no involvement with the plot whatsoever and is presumably still alive today? Does the Alshehri in the videotape look similar to the innocent Alshehri who was framed for the attacks? Why does the mainstream media refuse to even ask these questions, instead just blithely relaying the propaganda?[/align]

[align=left]Furthermore, the other alleged hijacker in the tape, Hamza Alghamdi's original mug shot as it appeared on the splash of 19 hijackers bore, "no resemblance" to the real Hamza Alghamdi - according to his own father after being informed of his son's involvement in the attack. The Hamza Alghamdi in the new video does appear to be the same individual in the FBI's mug shot parade. As with at least seven of the hijackers, it seems that there are two of each one, and the ones that appear in the tapes are patsies or dupes.[/align]

[align=left]This is by no means a stretch when we recall that many of the hijackers were trained at secure U.S. government air bases and that the FBI had its own informants living with them.[/align]

[align=left]The credibility of the tape is not helped by the fact that a companion tape allegedly showing Abu Hamza al-Muhajir - who is being sold as the new Al-Qaeda frontman in Iraq - urging Iraqis to join with insurgents - contradicts reports that were picked up by Al-Jazeera itself, that al-Muhajir has been incarcerated in an Egyptian jail cell for the past seven years.[/align]

[align=left]As was the case with Musab Al-Zarqawi - the patsies and the fall guys are interchangeable and they can be killed, captured and recycled numerous times over without stirring the attention of a sleeping public, nearly half of which still believes Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11.[/align]

[align=left]Recall that the Pentagon's stated intention to artificially magnify Musab Al-Zarqawi's role in Iraq was followed by the release of a video tape of Al-Zarqawi threatening the infidels.[/align]

[align=left]The target of this leaked propaganda campaign to boost Al-Qaeda's profile was said to be the "U.S. home audience," and included planting fake stories in newspapers - one of which was later splashed on the front page of the New York Times.[/align]

[align=left]The formula is simple. The U.S. government needs to dangle the boogeyman in front of the public at regular intervals to prop up its flailing agenda. A course of propaganda is agreed upon, the target is identified as the "U.S. home audience," and Al-Jazeera releases a new tape.[/align]

[align=left]The hijackers were patsies, Osama bin Laden was a patsy - it doesn't really matter if they met or not. The other patsy in the video, Hamza Alghamdi, was trained at the behest of the U.S. government at the Pensacola Naval Air Station. But the video - as with most war propaganda - is aimed at the lowest common denominator and for most Joe Six Pack and Sally Soccer Moms it's enough to reinforce the official version of 9/11 and the legitimacy of the war on terror.[/align]

[align=left]The target is again the "U.S. home audience," and allied with the White House's recent announcement that it would target conspiracy theorists as terrorist recruiters, this is another lurid effort to beat back the rampaging wildfire of enlightenment created by the burgeoning 9/11 truth movement.[/align]

[align=left]9/11 Truth: Mohammad Atta & The Patsies
Bin Laden's on screen appearances routinely intersect with politically opportune moments for the Bush administration. September 11 and its fifth anniversary is still the broken record of justification for everything the Neo-Fascists are getting away with - it's the only remaining PR ploy that Americans in large enough numbers are willing to swallow. The fact that confidence in the government version of 9/11 is hanging by a thread has provoked an unprecedented backlash from the establishment and this re-hashed tape is part of that riposte.[/align]

[align=left]Regular readers won't need to be reminded of the 2001 'Osama confession tape' - rated R for ridiculous, a fat bin Laden conveniently owns up to 9/11, completely contradicting his earlier statements, on a video tape magically 'discovered' during a random house search in Jalalabad.[/align]

The April 2006 Al-Zarqawi tape followed hot on the heels of a previous Bin Laden tape that again astoundingly gave the pretext for the Bush administration to pursue its goals in Sudan, Iraq and Iran with increased worldwide support at a time when Bush's poll numbers sank to a record low of 32 per cent.

Osama just seems to employ perfect timing on every occasion to pop up right when it is most rewarding for the Neo-Cons. The October surprise in 2004, a Bush bashing Bin Laden bonanza tape, enabled George W. to secure the extra couple of points he needed to ensure re-election. Even role-playing Skull and Bones puppet John Kerry went off-script and blamed the Bin Laden video for his defeat. Veteran newsman Walter Cronkite told Larry King that the whole thing was a Karl Rove orchestrated set-up.

Expect more coincidental image boosts - gracefully supplied by Al-Qaeda - over the next few days as Karl Rove and the architects of apocalypse milk the teat of 9/11 until the cows come home.

[align=left]Osama Videos are Irrelevant
9/11 Blogger | September 8 2006
• The 9/11 truth movement has said all along that Bin Laden and the hijackers are patsies[/align]
• The 9/11 truth movement has said all along that planes could not have been hijacked and flown around the country for countless minutes unless there was a stand down by -- and an overwhelming confusion of -- the military by multiple war games with live-fly hijacking and plane-into-building exercises and false radar injects
• The 9/11 truth movement has said all along that World Trade Center 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition
So even if the newly-released video of Osama and others planning 9/11 is real (all of the previous ones linking Bin Laden to 9/11 were either faked or mistranslated), that doesn't change anything.
They could not have succeeded unless they were tipped off to the fact that multiple, overlapping war games would occur on 9/11.
They wouldn't have gotten anywhere unless the military was stopped from following standard operating procedure on 9/11.
And the Twin Towers (and building 7) still would still be standing today absent controlled demolition.
All of the Osama videos make for emotional, Hollywood-style stunts, but they don't change the fact that 9/11 was an inside job.

"The 9/11 truth movement has said all along that Bin Laden and the hijackers are patsies" -- and the proof of this is where? Oh, there isn't any. Well then, aren't you asking us to assume that's the case, take it on faith? Sorry, I like facts, not religion. And you know what they say about assuming. So, present the proof if you can. If you can't, well then, you're full of BS.

The 9/11 truth movement has said all along that World Trade Center 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition" -- and on what days were all the tens of thousands of pounds of explosives installed? And by whom? And why were they not seen by anyone working there? We're talking a crew of 20 people working around the clock for weeks to accomplish that. Any pics of those people doing the work? Any pics of their trucks full of explosives? Any witnesses that were in the towers who saw this crew going about their business? No? No. So, again, you want us to assume that what you say is true, to take it on faith. Sorry, once again, you're spouting a form of religion.

Wargames aren't a big secret, incidentally. It's not difficult to know when they are planned. In fact, it's often public knowledge, if one just asks. Even when it's not public knowledge, it's easy to figure out from observations of troop and aircraft deployments.

You keep repeating that "it was an inside job", yet continue to blather on over and over, while never being able to provide substantive proof of anything. That complete lack of substantive proof of any of these accusations just makes you look a foolish shill, nothing more than a patsy for Alex Jones and Jeff Rense and the rest of the lunatic fringe.

There is a great video on google cant remember the name but it's about 30mins long all talking about how it was a controlled and there was explosive's guy's a week before the attack. Alot of police officer's even saying it was controlled explosion and also some guy on it saying he heard explosions on the bottom floor, ill have a look for it.


How do you do that the way you copy and paste link then put it a sentence or just write something like here?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...3&q=conspiracy

I think this is it

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...978&q=cover+up

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...259&q=cover+up

Sorry think this is it.

Sorry for three posts together

PLease....People have those in there sigs...........



Nothing new......Remember....They start with a Anti American, Bush, Capitolism, slant, then lets make a movie to back up our hate.

Sounds like Propaganda.. to me.


Joe why do you hate america and all it stands for?

Edit....Post 50 times in a row... no problem, work it out if you need to :)

Because ye think you all can rule the world then start crying to other country's when you get attacked. You murder people this war didn't start at 9/11 it was revenge for attacks ye done. So what's wrong with them attacking ye ya murder there people but thats ok to you. Bush will be gone soon and ye still will be fighting a war you cant win.

America stands for freedom and democracy my ass, Bush doesnt even know the meaning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bong30

Edit....Post 50 times in a row... no problem, work it out if you need to :)

---

Haha funny aint ya. How old are you I bet a hillbilly 17 year old or something

'A guy said so', and 'some people heard explosions' -- that isn't evidence. That's a guy talking and some people, under very adverse conditions, mistaking the explosive outgassing of the entire air content of that building for a 'demolition'. Proof, real proof, would involve at least some of the following:

* Explosives detected from traces (there has been none detected)
* Witnesses seeing the installers tearing out the walls to plant demolitions
* Surveillance footage of the installers doing their work
* Admission of guilt from someone (we do have that, Osama admitted it)
* A whistleblower in the conspiracy. Anyone who had evidence of a government conspiracy would make millions blowing the whistle.

There is none of that, there is zero actual evidence of any government conspiracy, and zero evidence that there was controlled demolition -- which makes sense, because 20 people tearing walls out of the building and planting explosives for a couple of weeks would undoubtedly have attracted attention.

There are paranoid people spouting unsubstantiated BS (some of them for monetary gain, like Jones), but that's all there is. Unsubstantiated BS is apparently enough for the less educated members of society, which is both interesting and unfortunate, but for the rest of us, well, we require real evidence.