Join 3,411 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


"There are 12,000 of us ... [a]nd we are starting to die."
September 8, 2006 12:29 PM   Subscribe

When Laura Bush showed up at my son's temporary school two weeks after the attacks for a photo op with these traumatized children, she told us that she couldn't make any promises to help us. "The PTA, not the school system, or god forbid federal government, installed a filtration system to protect our children. [... F]ive years later, I have been diagnosed and am being treated for lymphoma - a blood cancer caused by exposure to toxic chemicals. [...] Five years out there are 12,000 of us, maybe more - who knows? And we are starting to die."
posted by WCityMike (90 comments total)

 
One link DailyKos rant? C'mon...
posted by fet at 12:37 PM on September 8, 2006


Is the rate of lymphoma significantly higher in NYC residents post 9/11 than it is in those who live in similarly dense and polluted cities? Correlation is not necessarily causation.

I hate to say it, but since the POWER LINES CAUSE CANCER panic of years back, I'm not accepting anecdotal evidence re: public health claims.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 12:37 PM on September 8, 2006


I was in NYC during 9/11 and stupidly believed the EPA reports that the dust was harmless. I even turned down one of the free air filtration units that were being handed out. I told a friend who left the city with his then pregnant wife that he was overreacting, but later found out that several babies were born with abnormalities shortly after 9/11. It just didn't occur to me that my government would lie about something like that.
posted by xammerboy at 12:41 PM on September 8, 2006


For the doubters, they've already analyzed the dust and determined it causes cancer, amongst other things. Even if it was harmless there's no excusing the "editing" of the EPA warnings.
posted by xammerboy at 12:43 PM on September 8, 2006


Believe this or not, and I will not provide any additional information, but I worked with someone who told me they were made to falsify air sampling results collected in NYC weeks after the attacks. These things do happen.
posted by Big_B at 12:45 PM on September 8, 2006


Causal link or no, fear not; Hillary is making political hay out of this.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 12:46 PM on September 8, 2006


Report from NPR about treatment of "9/11 syndrome"
posted by 912 Greens at 12:56 PM on September 8, 2006


And a cancerous tumor that is hopefully shrinking into oblivion. I've lurked at this site for many months, watching all of my kindred souls writing so eloquently about the devastation of our country. It's been an oasis from the insanity that surrounds me here in NYC. But at least I see how lucky I am to able to live with mostly likeminded individuals, horrified by Bushco, unlike so many of you surrounded by ignorant, self absorbed, self righteous gluttons.

A quintessential miasmic anti-"BushCo" Kossack paragraph.
posted by blucevalo at 1:03 PM on September 8, 2006


Whitman needs to hang for this along with many others. She got on TV and straight up lied in the face of New Yorkers. And now she's letting fly some lame excuses. The air smellled bizarre in the days after, it was hard to believe that something that noxious could be safe to inhale...
posted by lovejones at 1:05 PM on September 8, 2006


...later found out that several babies were born with abnormalities shortly after 9/11.

If they were born "shortly after 9/11" then it didn't have anything to do with what happened to them. Virtually all developmental abnormalities in the womb happen in the first three months of pregnancy.

(Not to mention that this is anecdotal evidence, and an example of misleading vividness.)

On to other things: If DKos rants are acceptable FPP's, how about links to LGF?
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 1:09 PM on September 8, 2006


Right. This person has lost their home and belongings, and now has the cancer (and other maladies) because their government lied to them about their safety, but, yeah. They should be a little less, like, partisan, and uh, upset about it, you know? They just come off as petty this way, right?
posted by stenseng at 1:10 PM on September 8, 2006


Hear here, stenseng. Thanks.
posted by WCityMike at 1:12 PM on September 8, 2006


On to other things: If DKos rants are acceptable FPP's, how about links to LGF?

Agreed.
posted by blucevalo at 1:13 PM on September 8, 2006


Is there any actual scientific evidence that (a) carcinogens were present in the air after 9-11 that were not there before (i.e. that were release by the event) (b) they were released in a quantity sufficient to create a threat, (c) there are persons who were exposed to the toxins long enough to have absorbed an above-threshold amount of the toxins, and (d) ending the exposure to the toxins even does not reduce or eliminate the cancer risk.

Of course, there would be no way for the EPA to know that it was safe, but that doesn't mean that it was therefore not safe.

Rants an anecdotes make for bad policy, and it seems like some science is in order.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:14 PM on September 8, 2006


“Rage on with me.”

So he’s what, 15? 16? Or doing a poor Buddy Holly impression? I know things are tough in NYC and I’m sure the Fed screwed the pooch in many ways and Bushco especially is way more guns than butter, but I don’t buy this at all.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:15 PM on September 8, 2006


> unlike so many of you surrounded by ignorant, self absorbed, self righteous gluttons.

fuller admires toothy ruling-reptile smile in triple mirror, pats belly full of fat babies.
posted by jfuller at 1:17 PM on September 8, 2006


Pastabagel, there was asbestos on the first 64 floors of Tower #1, but NYC passed a law in 1971 that asbestos insulation could not be used in commercial structures so they stopped. Interestingly enough, in the days after 9-11 many critics said that the building might not have collapsed if asbestos insulation had been present at the upper floors. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
posted by mattbucher at 1:19 PM on September 8, 2006


"And now - five years later, I have been diagnosed and am being treated for lymphoma - a blood cancer caused by exposure to toxic chemicals. Can we connect the dots here? Do you think that maybe all of the poisonous gasses from benzene to PCBs that I breathed had anything to do with this? Asbestos, pulverized concrete, glass shards? Luckily this time I am receiving help - a great insurance policy is covering these costs. But others aren't so lucky. And luckily I have a cancer that is treatable. Others are not so lucky, with many pulmonary diseases, liver cancers, etc. "
I was about to say "Correlation is not causation," but dammit Optymus Chyme beat me to it. I'm sure that there are legitimate concerns regarding long term health risks for people at ground zero during the 9/11 series of events, but I'm not clear that it's reasonable to assume that because you have lymphoma 5 years after exposure that 9/11 was the carinogen.

According to the Lymphoma Research Foundation, there are a number of possible causes for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, one of which is exposure to "to chemicals such as pesticides, solvents, or fertilizers," although according to the websites, this is only found by "some studies."

I feel bad for the author, and I agree (in spirit at least) with many of their points regarding the ineffectiveness of the governmental response (the national response to 9/11 is one of the biggest disappointments of my (civic) life)... but I'm not clear I'd go as far as blaming their cancer on 9/11.
posted by illovich at 1:24 PM on September 8, 2006


What happened is Bush pushing off the problems until the next (or next after that) presidency. It happens all the time and will continue to happen.

Of course, it's not excusable. It's what got the national debt so ungodly high and there isn't a solution that doesn't involve some major bullet-biting.
posted by Kickstart70 at 1:25 PM on September 8, 2006


9/11 cancer cluster
posted by caddis at 1:29 PM on September 8, 2006


People who worked at the site in the days after sure do have an abnormally high level of health issues (not saying cancers, but certainly very possible), as reported in all the major news outlets, and the city did and does get stiffed over and over on DHS funds and health relief for those workers, while the administration and war cheerleaders make political hay over and over on what is essentially a tragedy to the city of New York and its suburbs, so yeah, deny away. I sure do wish people made the same kind of strident political demands (not Kos, this is their stock in trade but people like Hillary C.) about little kid heros in the inner city with epidemic levels of asthma from pollution, I'd be much less sceptical then about the political motives on both sides of the aisle.
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:37 PM on September 8, 2006


What I can't for the life of me understand is why there is such rage against the nanny state for not doing a better job of cleaning up the aftermath and not, apparently, even a moment's mild annoyance to spare for the bloody maniacs who blew up the buildings in the first place. That mindset strikes me as lunacy, beyond comprehension except as a specimen for textbooks of mental pathology.
posted by jfuller at 1:39 PM on September 8, 2006 [1 favorite]


A DKos diary, which is equivalent to an anonymous blog post.
posted by delmoi at 1:39 PM on September 8, 2006


So you're all just going to attack the messenger and ignore the message, however shaded with partisanry it may be? See, this is the problem with discourse today. We're lazy. Once we can find a weak spot in an argument, the gloves come off and the whole matter falls to pieces.

Did the debris of 9/11 cause this person's illness? Maybe. Maybe not. But the point that I took away was less about the extended after-effects for one person and more about the immediate and eventual lack of real support for the collateral victims.

People without phones and web access shouldn't be treated with phone numbers and URLs. Children shouldn't be used as a photo op. Children shouldn't have to return to a school still clouded with ash and dust. People aren't meant to breathe solid matter, so even if the dust and smoke wasn't verifiably toxic, that doesn't negate the possibility of real physiological damage, both immediate and long-term. Are these notions really up for debate?

As with Katrina, our facilities at the federal, state and municipal level in the weeks after 9/11 were not up to the task and people (parents in this case) had to make do as best they could. Five years on, 9/11 is still a political rallying cry, but it would appear that the actual victims still need help that isn't being made readilly available.

America should be better than this, so why aren't we doing something about it? That is where the discussion should lead.

But it is so much easier to just discredit the messenger, ignore their message and discard any viable facts found within.
posted by grabbingsand at 1:41 PM on September 8, 2006 [1 favorite]


I haven't seen any shortage of rage over the terrorists jfuller, but hey, keep on trollin'.
posted by substrate at 1:41 PM on September 8, 2006


Steven C. Dan Beste said:
On to other things: If DKos rants are acceptable FPP's, how about links to LGF?


Is kos a thinly-veiled hate site under investigation by the FBI?

Yes there's crap on kos, but I this warrants discussion.
posted by karson at 1:42 PM on September 8, 2006


It's been an oasis from the insanity that surrounds me here in NYC. But at least I see how lucky I am to able to live with mostly likeminded individuals, horrified by Bushco, unlike so many of you surrounded by ignorant, self absorbed, self righteous gluttons.

Man what a bitch. My sister lives in New York now and when she tells people she's from India they react like she just told them she was from India or Kenya or Mongolia or something. People in NYC have a pretty warped view of the rest of the country.
posted by delmoi at 1:43 PM on September 8, 2006


Is kos a thinly-veiled hate...

"Republican" is not an ethnicity, so it doesn't count.
posted by delmoi at 1:44 PM on September 8, 2006


The World Trade Center Health Registry is tracking the health of more than 70,000 registrants who had firsthand exposure to Sept. 11 events, but most of its studies have looked at respiratory and mental health problems.

Detailed investigations of the incidence of cancer are planned, but "it is too soon to say for cancer connections," a registry spokeswoman said.
^
posted by caddis at 1:44 PM on September 8, 2006


Oh and about air quality around Manhattan. Somehow I knew a week after the attacks that the air was bad, and that the government was lying about it. Didn't seem very surprising or notable at the time.
posted by delmoi at 1:45 PM on September 8, 2006


delmoi: "My sister lives in New York now and when she tells people she's from India they react like she just told them she was from India."

Wow, New Yorkers really are assholes.
posted by ibmcginty at 1:47 PM on September 8, 2006 [2 favorites]



I was going to quote that same "Rage on with me" line.

Yeah, rage. Always raging, always takin' it to the streets, yeah, man, burn baby burn two minutes hate etc etc ad nauseum.

But the real issue with the "netroots" is their love of the rage. They wake up every morning and check the site for their daily dose of outrage. This is why I hate politics - it's so easy for everyone to have an opinion and they never have to back it up or justify it with facts. It's just as bad at LGF, but the target is "the media", presumably run out of a mountain bunker somewhere, instead of the administration. Politics is the one intellecutal field where passions can be all that matters.

Nobody's going to rage on about whether string theory is a valid model of the universe or whether foreign trade imbalances are depressing the currency. No one is going to take it to the streets over whether Ulysses represents a seachange in the development of the novel as narrative. But you start a sentence with "Bushco" or "the liberal media" and suddenly it's "rage on with me".

If everything people like this say is true, we have an administration that stole one presidential election, rigged a second, murdered 3000 of its own citizens in a secret attack which served as a pretext to start a first war, then another, and possibly a third for "oil", all while manipulating the media, the commodities markets, the justice system and the people at large.

But then it means we also have an opposition party that is either complicit in all of this or is so hopelessly incompetent and corrupt that to support this opposition in anyway is to prolong its pathetic existence and further delay true reform. It also means that the netroots activitists whatever, and completely, blitheringly inept. All of this is true, and they can't conclusively prove any of it? How hard is is to find one insider to turn, to find one whisteblower without a sketchy past? All they can do is organize some pathetic protests.

Perhaps you've had too much raging. It's time to get to work. Get organized. Not "Daily Kos"/fat ass double-espresso in the office chair organized, I mean Planned Parenthood in mississippi/they are coming for us at any minute organized.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:47 PM on September 8, 2006


not, apparently, even a moment's mild annoyance to spare for the bloody maniacs who blew up the buildings in the first place.

Back in saner days, I'd see somebody protesting against some non-PC something or other, and I'd think, "Stupid liberal. He cares more about seeming to do something and saying all the right words than actually fixing the problem. That is the problem with the liberal mindset: it values the affirmation of symbolism above reality, it ignores the facts at the expense of the theories it loves."

And immediately after 9-11, the vast bulk of self-styled conservatives adopted this way of thinking, and your comment, jfuller, is a prime example. (I realize that it is possible that most conservatives were always this stupid and I just didn't realize it before it got so egregious, but the point stands.)

Just for you:

FUCK YOUSE BIN LADEN YOU BLOW UP MY TOWER I FUCKIN KILL YOU BIN LADEN YOU PRICK!

Don't you feel all warm and affirmed inside? And that's what apparently matters.
posted by sonofsamiam at 1:49 PM on September 8, 2006 [1 favorite]


'm sure that there are legitimate concerns regarding long term health risks for people at ground zero during the 9/11 series of events, but I'm not clear that it's reasonable to assume that because you have lymphoma 5 years after exposure that 9/11 was the carinogen.

The thing about cancer is it's not like it just has one cause. A cell can take a certain number of "insults" before becoming cancerous, and it only takes one cell to start dividing and kill you. So exposure to a carcinogen will make cancer more likely by a certain percentage. Some of the people exposed to that air might would have gotten cancer anyway, and some would not have otherwise had it, but there is no way to know which is which.
posted by delmoi at 1:49 PM on September 8, 2006


What I can't for the life of me understand is why there is such rage against the nanny state for not doing a better job of cleaning up the aftermath and not, apparently, even a moment's mild annoyance to spare for the bloody maniacs who blew up the buildings in the first place.

This comment makes absolutely no sense. Why? Because there is an enormous amount of rage.

Secondly, the bloody maniacs are dead. Remember? The government still exists, and has a responsibility to care for those harmed during the attacks, just like it had a responsibility to do everything in its power to stop them. It has failed both of these duties. Rage against maniacs does not change this fact.
posted by odinsdream at 1:49 PM on September 8, 2006 [1 favorite]


>>> What I can't for the life of me understand is why there is such rage against the nanny state for not doing a better job of cleaning up the aftermath and not, apparently, even a moment's mild annoyance to spare for the bloody maniacs who blew up the buildings in the first place.

Someone punches you in the face, bloodying your nose, breaking your jaw and sending you prostrate into the sidewalk. Naturally, if I am concerned about you, I should help you. While it is understood that I must make chase after your assailant, it is just as important that I ensure your treatment and well-being by seeing that you receive immediate medical attention. The bastard thug that hit you is on the run and will be until caught, but you're bleeding and broken right now. Best I take you to the ER myself, I'd think.

Or would you rather I give you the address of a local hospital, some gauze and leave you to find your own way?
posted by grabbingsand at 1:50 PM on September 8, 2006


What I can't for the life of me understand is why there is such rage against the nanny state for not doing a better job of cleaning up the aftermath and not, apparently, even a moment's mild annoyance to spare for the bloody maniacs who blew up the buildings in the first place. That mindset strikes me as lunacy, beyond comprehension except as a specimen for textbooks of mental pathology.
posted by jfuller at 1:39 PM PST on September 8


It shouldn't be surprising when bloody maniacs blow things up. It should be surprising when a democratic government repeatedly fucks up disaster management, despite being the richest democratic government to ever exist on the planet.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:52 PM on September 8, 2006


despite being the richest democratic government to ever exist on the planet.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:52 PM EST on September 8 [+] [!]


Technically, it's the most in debt.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:52 PM on September 8, 2006


POWER LINES CAUSE CANCER

do you mean the warblog?
posted by matteo at 1:55 PM on September 8, 2006


What I can't for the life of me understand is why there is such rage against the nanny state for not doing a better job of cleaning up the aftermath and not, apparently, even a moment's mild annoyance to spare for the bloody maniacs who blew up the buildings in the first place.


Perhaps you're just an idiot? Maybe you don't realize this, but if you disagree with someone, you may be the one who's wrong. Or you may misunderstand their position. I suspect the latter. It is entirely possible that the author is angry at both bin-laden for blowing up the buildings, and the bush administration for lying about the air quality and tricking them into getting cancer. Further, it would make sense that she would discuss both topics at different times, leading you to a mistaken conclusion about her motives and position.

If you don't know how someone feels about a particular issue, it's best to either clarify the position, or just not worry about it. If you insult someone because you don't know what their position is, then you are most certainly an idiot.

That mindset strikes me as lunacy, beyond comprehension except as a specimen for textbooks of mental pathology.

I see.
posted by delmoi at 1:55 PM on September 8, 2006



It shouldn't be surprising when bloody maniacs blow things up. It should be surprising when a democratic government repeatedly fucks up disaster management, despite being the richest democratic government to ever exist on the planet.


But the problem is that it' not surprising when the richest democratic government to ever exist blows things up either.
posted by delmoi at 1:57 PM on September 8, 2006


Pastabagel do you really read Kos? You know, the site that does daily petition drives, campaign fundraisers in key elections, tracking of polls, and calls for action of various types? Many of those people also do get off their asses and do door to door polling and voter registration, in the last election and since. They write letters, they call Congress, and yeah, they march to protect Planned Parenthood and other worthy causes.

Unless you are calling for some sort of armed revolt, it is disingenous to call all Kos readers/diarists lazy haters; maybe some are, but that's not what the site is about.

This diarist may just be an angry kid who inaccurately blames his cancer on 9/11, and maybe it's not worth an FPP, but that's no excuse for smearing all the contributors to a website you clearly don't read all that often.
posted by emjaybee at 1:59 PM on September 8, 2006


i lived 5 blocks from the wtc from sept. 1, 2001 until maybe march of 2002 and worked a few blocks away and it smelled like burning plastic/metal/something pretty much that entire time. i don't know if that means it was dangerous, but there was definitely something in the air and it was there for what i thought was a surprisingly long time.
posted by snofoam at 1:59 PM on September 8, 2006


I just want to say that the level of anecdotal evidence in this discussion, on BOTH sides, is up to my neck.

(Many critics said if there were asbestos insulation throughout the WTC they might not have collapsed. Yeah, I'll buy that unsubstantiated when I'm in the market for waterfront property in Montana. Let's see some linkage on that fact.)

I say it's appropriate to post BOTH Dailykos and Little Green Football rants, if they are insightful and interesting. You judge them on a case-by-case basis, ya know.
posted by JHarris at 2:06 PM on September 8, 2006


There's now been a few references to "angry kid" and "15 or 16" and so on. Note that the author of the article from which I quoted refers to having a "young son."
posted by WCityMike at 2:06 PM on September 8, 2006


And, from more of her comments, appears to be a single mom. Just FYI.
posted by WCityMike at 2:09 PM on September 8, 2006


i don't know if that means it was dangerous, but there was definitely something in the air and it was there for what i thought was a surprisingly long time

I lived a couple of miles away on 24th street, and I was unable to take a full deep breath for about 7-8 months thereafter. It did clear up eventually.

I can't imagine how bad it was for the people that lived and worked much closer to it, let alone those rescue and recovery workers that were litterally working right on top of the rubble every day for months. It's not all that hard to accept that more than a few people have contracted serious illnesses from promiximity to toxic fumes, is it?

I guess they probably should have cordoned the area off in a half mile radius or so to be completely safe, but that would have meant economic disaster for lower manhattan and its residents... or so somebody thought when they made the calculation not to be forthcoming about the danger.
posted by Hypnic jerk at 2:11 PM on September 8, 2006


You misunderstand me. I don't read kos every day, but I do read it many times a month, and while they are very organized and the procedural mechanics of politics, it in no way helps to build a consensus on the left on issues and policies. So what you have is people very motivated to organize door-to-door walks, phone banks and the like for very vanialla republican lite candidates, or candidates in states that have no hope of winning.

Even on the mechanics issue, they are not so great, frankly. Instead of organizing for every race, they should focuson one or two close races, and put every reader on it to do what they can. Make a big difference in one place rather than a small but ultimately inconsequential difference everywhere.

My point was directed mroe to the big picture thinking - you can simply run as being against the war. The war already started, you have to have a credible proposal to win in or a very good explanation as to why we can back out and not suffer an significant consequences.

Someone around here once responded to a statement of mine on this point by saying that the democrats dont have to run their own policies, they simply have to present themselves as the alternative. This is wrong. The democrats need to look at what Reagan did from 75-80in terms of building a platform in which every issues was unified under some ideological or philosophical framework.

The democrats have relied too long on interest group consolidation as a power base, and kos reflects this.

For example, there are some posts there about universal health coverage and a lot of posts about how the govt is lying. Has anyone tried to address the danger of universal healthcare run by a govt that can lie about health risks? Isn't the fpp here a perfect example of why govt. run universal healthcare would in practice, not in some ideal sense, but in reality, be a disaster?
posted by Pastabagel at 2:11 PM on September 8, 2006


That smell and taste was in my sinuses and throat until somewhere in the summer of 2002. It was a pretty sad smell.

What I can't for the life of me understand is why there is such rage against the nanny state for not doing a better job of cleaning up the aftermath and not, apparently, even a moment's mild annoyance to spare for the bloody maniacs who blew up the buildings in the first place.


I'm deeply pissed that the nanny state didn't provide the care and relief that THE WHOLE NOTION OF A TAX COLLECTING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITH A STANDING ARMY AND THE RIGHT OF EMINENT DOMAIN ENTITLES MY CITY TO, while NOT going after the people responsible (other than a stupid adventure in Afghanistan that didn't bring those responsible to justice, especially not those in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and now has Afghanistan churning out heroin and jihadis right and left) and instead killing my America and Iraqi brothers and sisters for purposes unknown but easily guessable. Jfuller, my dander is up today what with the 9/11 crap everywhere and so on and I know you are a silly troll, but I assure you, ass, incest, offal, vomit, that yours is the stupidest comment I have read in a long time. God speed the revolution or the end of humanity or the pint of Wild Turkey but something to scrub the awful taste of your drooling inanities from my mental palate.
posted by Divine_Wino at 2:17 PM on September 8, 2006 [1 favorite]


http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/wtc/
this might be of use
posted by Postroad at 2:19 PM on September 8, 2006


The democrats need to look at what Reagan did from 75-80in terms of building a platform in which every issues was unified under some ideological or philosophical framework.

What difference would that make if nobody is prepared to buy the soap that they're selling?
posted by blucevalo at 2:19 PM on September 8, 2006


Postroad's URL hyperlinked: World Trade Center Health Registry.
posted by WCityMike at 2:21 PM on September 8, 2006


(Many critics said if there were asbestos insulation throughout the WTC they might not have collapsed. Yeah, I'll buy that unsubstantiated when I'm in the market for waterfront property in Montana. Let's see some linkage on that fact.)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34342,00.html
http://www.mesotheliomasos.com/jobsitesWTC.php
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1247504
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25385

I could go on. Google it yourself.
posted by mattbucher at 2:41 PM on September 8, 2006


Is kos a thinly-veiled hate site under investigation by the FBI?

No, and neither is LGF.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 2:41 PM on September 8, 2006


why's everyone hating on jfuller? he was simply suggesting that the residents of new york should have taken the sensible approach and each do their own air quality testing. i should have thought of this earlier. i could have done it in the lab i have in my closet where i test each tylenol tablet to make sure it's really acetaminophen. why is it so hard for people to understand that we need to start doing these things for ourselves to save us from big government?
posted by snofoam at 2:42 PM on September 8, 2006


“Note that the author of the article from which I quoted refers to having a "young son." “

And yet it’s adolescent in word choice. Far be it for me to criticise someone’s writing or use of hyperbole (plenty of opportunities to nail me on both counts). But it reads like it was written by someone younger. Not that it’s poorly written per se. Just sounds like a younger person writing it.


“So you're all just going to attack the messenger and ignore the message, however shaded with partisanry it may be?”

Well....yeah. To wit, exhortations like: “This number will grow to become another cancer on the face of this administration. But only if people know about us and talk about us.” - seems to me like someone’s trying to take advantage of a tragic situation for political gain. Same sort of criticisms many folks had for the Bush administration and the neocons co-option of 9/11.
If I were in this guy’s shoes I’d be thinking “class action lawsuit.” I mean the World Trade Center Health Registry isn’t monitoring people at all? The EPA lied to people about the air quality (and/or the White House edited the memo by the EPA on air quality)? FEMA did nothing? Insurance didn’t want to pay off? That’s pretty damned big. I’m thinking Love Canal sorta big, PG&E (Erin Brockovich) sorta big. And he’s got potentially 12,000 people on his side of the equation? Bush is only going to be in office (theoretically) for so much longer. What then? What if a Dem gets elected? Is the government suddenly right for not monitoring these folks because the administration has changed?
(Also - screw Laura Bush, she’s not an expert on anything and she’s not in the chain of command...plus, she’s creepy lookin)

Some comment excerpts:
“I hope you fully recover. Fuck bush the fucking fucker.”

“Weezb, you rock.
Give 'em hell.  You've got a fantastic voice.
Shout your brutal story from the rooftops.
We'll stand by you all the way.
Gore - Clark in 08”

“I am so sick of the neocon "blame the victim" mentality. I hope there is a hell so that Bush and his f**kwad friends can all go rot in it.”

Oh, yeah, no LGFesque rabid partisanship there at all.


/There are some good comments too obviously. Maxschell seems to be on to something: “Do you know if there's a Ground Zero database of people so we could start to find out who has been and is being affected and how severely?”

/It is nice to see some ‘lefty’ folks bitching about what a fuckup the government can be tho. People have been saying they distrust the gubbiment have for years been relegated to the ‘crazy militia’ crowd. One can argue how small the government should or shouldn’t be, but I think many folks are at least now of one mind that there should be a lot of sunshine on how tax money is being used.
posted by Smedleyman at 2:42 PM on September 8, 2006


In the LGF link three or four comments back, I love the BUT in big-assed 48-point caps in the middle of the blockquote graf.

Real credibility-builder there, LGF fellas! Keep up the awesome work!
posted by blucevalo at 2:46 PM on September 8, 2006


I guess they probably should have cordoned the area off in a half mile radius or so to be completely safe, but that would have meant economic disaster for lower manhattan and its residents... or so somebody thought when they made the calculation not to be forthcoming about the danger.

The EPA pretty much had little choice, but to say the air was safe. How long can you keep the NYSE, investment backs, law firms closed off without causing serious financial repercussions for the city.

Some interesting studies on the health effects of 9/11 (1, 2, and 3) that indicate the phsyical and mental health effects of 9/11. However, if people are waiting for a government study to confirm that 9/11 is causing cancer it will never happen. Cancer can be caused by so many different factors and the onset varies by so much, it is nearly impossible to definitiveely link any particular cancer, even where there are clusters, to only one source.
posted by bperk at 2:47 PM on September 8, 2006


MetaFilter: mild annoyance to spare

Yeah, I'll buy that unsubstantiated when I'm in the market for waterfront property in Montana.

You do realize Montana is famous for fly fishing and has like 40 rivers and 20 major lakes, along with thousands of minor lakes?

Also, Bush lied. Rudy lied. Whitman lied. They all lied. To our faces. About everything.

Of course, as pointed out above, they more or less had to to prevent the economic collapse of NYC and possibly the nation.
posted by Ynoxas at 2:59 PM on September 8, 2006


/I should add that the tone and partisan stance leads me to suspect the post. I could well be completely wrong. In any event, no one should suffer that. Amends should certainly be made and justice done.
posted by Smedleyman at 3:00 PM on September 8, 2006


Wow, New Yorkers really are assholes.

i was born in the bronx and i'm not... no wait... never mind.
posted by quonsar at 3:08 PM on September 8, 2006


quonsar: don't worry, plenty of us are assholes and we've never even been to New York. Obligatory asshole comment: because it sucks.
posted by Kickstart70 at 3:20 PM on September 8, 2006


Is kos a thinly-veiled hate site under investigation by the FBI?

No, and neither is LGF.


Others disagree. Linking to a LGF post where he admits he's been contacted by the FBI due to comments and harassing emails really bolsters your position.

There was a comment comparing the kos comments to "rabid LGF" partisanship. There is quite a difference between "partisanship" and the "hate" shown by LGF commenters. Others have shown this.

If your curious, Glenn Greenwald chronicled the differences between LGF and Kos (see point 6).
posted by karson at 3:27 PM on September 8, 2006


Steven C. Den Beste writes "On to other things: If DKos rants are acceptable FPP's, how about links to LGF?"

If you have such a boner about it, go ahead and put one up on the front page. It'll predictably be torn to shreds in the discussion anyway.
posted by clevershark at 3:39 PM on September 8, 2006


Smedleyman writes "Oh, yeah, no LGFesque rabid partisanship there at all."

Let's take a sampling of comment from a story still on the LGF front page, shall we?

"Moderate Muslims are like moderate Nazis, moderate Communists, moderate Facists. How about a moderate Satanist? A moderate pedophile? Moderate slasher? Moderate racist?How does moderation in any branch of evil make you different in any way other than degree?" -maddogg

"A 'moderate muslim' is one who would prefer that others conduct the beheadings." - cicero05

"When you find vegan cannibals, you will find moderate Muslims." - jehu

"Hell folks, if you find a "moderate moslem" put up your umbrella quickly or reindeer droppings may be falling on your heads." - Rowane

"I do not discount the possibility of a nuclear war on a major scale because of this. This is a world war. However, saying publicly that we cannot allow Mulims to enter our lands would be a major step forward from today's situation." -Fjordman

"give me tfk, 100,000 Marines, three years and a "free" hand and I will bring back a normal world, and the 90% of the former Islamic's still alive will thank myself and the Marines for our good works, end of story." -taxfreekiller

"I've said many, many times already that this is a world war. That probably became inevitable the second we allowed Muslims to settle in our lands. The question is how bloody this war is going to be, and whether the West will survive.

If you read carefully what I'm saying, I am also advocating expelling a significant proportion of the Muslims who are already here. " - Fjordman


I don't think that Kos has too many people that can rival these "visionaries". Certainly those comments you quoted make the Kos readership seem positively milquetoast in comparison.
posted by clevershark at 4:03 PM on September 8, 2006


If you read carefully what I'm saying, I am also advocating expelling a significant proportion of the Muslims who are already here. " - Fjordman

I like how he decided he had to spell out what he was carefully saying.
posted by sonofsamiam at 5:47 PM on September 8, 2006


does the US even have 100,000 marines?
posted by delmoi at 6:06 PM on September 8, 2006


Postroad's URL hyperlinked: World Trade Center Health Registry.
posted by WCityMike at 5:21 PM EST on September 8 [+] [!]


I think admissions to the registry are closed.

The EPA pretty much had little choice, but to say the air was safe. How long can you keep the NYSE, investment backs, law firms closed off without causing serious financial repercussions for the city.

Yup, dollars are more important than people.


i was born in the bronx and i'm not... no wait... never mind.
posted by quonsar at 6:08 PM EST on September 8 [+] [!]


Bronx? That explains a lot, although I would have guessed Brooklyn. How do you deal with the CRC? (apologies if you are CRC)
posted by caddis at 6:31 PM on September 8, 2006


Another New Yorker here and while I am a stickler for evidence, I do not find unreasonable the hypothesis that the massive release of all manner of things that weren't supposed to be burned into the air by the WTC terror attacks is likely to have caused breathing problems.

I live uptown, but for weeks there was a weird chemical stink and when you went downtown, it was inescapable. People undoubtedly breathed horrific things if they were caught in the dust cloud or spent any time on "the pile," which many people did when it was still burning. It burned for weeks.

A study just came out finding 70% of a sample of some 9,500 rescue workers who rushed to aid people at the scene have lung problems. Objective tests found their lungs impaired at twice the rate expected amongst nonsmokers.

See http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/07/nyregion/07york.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


The link should have been to the coverage of the study, perhaps precluding the debate over politics or the usefulness of one anecdote. Of course, there are critiques of the study

But in this instance, I do not believe it takes a great leap to believe that health problems may have resulted from a giant toxic plume consisting of particulate matter from two of the world's tallest buildings that burned to the ground. And that these problems were not merely a result of stress-- though certainly, there's no shortage of PTSD amongst us NY'ers following the horrific event, either.
posted by Maias at 6:54 PM on September 8, 2006


does the US even have 100,000 marines?

maybe back in '03
posted by hoborg at 8:24 PM on September 8, 2006


Also, delmoi, you did mean "Indiana"?
posted by hoborg at 8:27 PM on September 8, 2006


for a city that wants to blame EVERY ill on second-hand smoke, but will not take responsibilty for the toxic cloud of 9/11 that engulfed it's own citizens for months and months is an affront to all americans. talk about hypocrites.
posted by brandz at 8:57 PM on September 8, 2006


It just didn't occur to me that my government would lie about something like that.
posted by xammerboy at 12:41 PM PST


Go through history. Read about what citizens have been told throughout history by their governments.

Then ask yourself: Is your government staffed by people who are better men than the ones in history?
posted by rough ashlar at 6:39 AM on September 9, 2006


Of course, there would be no way for the EPA to know that it was safe, but that doesn't mean that it was therefore not safe.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:14 PM PST


"Over the years, the process known as 'galvanic corrosion' had structurally degraded these buildings beyond repair. Supporting statements to this effect had been compiled, and were presented by the engineers to the building owners during the time-frame that I have described. Subsequently, both Mayor Giuiliani's Office, and the New York Port Authority, had allegedly received an order for the buildings to be completely dismantled, by 2007.""

The dismantling had to be done not by controlled demolition because of the health hazard due to its construction. That ment expensive level by level demolition.

Others knew. Why do you claim the EPA did not know?
posted by rough ashlar at 6:49 AM on September 9, 2006


both Mayor Giuiliani's Office, and the New York Port Authority, had allegedly received an order for the buildings to be completely dismantled, by 2007

Where do you get this stuff?
posted by caddis at 9:17 AM on September 9, 2006


Where do you get this stuff?
posted by caddis at 9:17 AM PST


Its in the tubes on the internet. The Smoking Gun has the claim made to Congress. You should be able to put the quote in and get output.

And if there were demo orders, they should be part of the official record....somewhere.
posted by rough ashlar at 10:07 AM on September 9, 2006


does the US even have 100,000 marines?

180,000, actually. About 20,000 in Iraq at any given time.

Just so we're completely clear, LGF is not just a non-best-of-the-web link, it has an extremely thin-skinned proprietor who will link back and gin up any such posting as a rekindling of an imagined feud, and whose minions will troll over here by the dozens, treating site policies such as bannination for personal attacks as "censorship", necessitating another LGF post on the topic of how LGF is made up of much nicer people than those nasty people over here. It's either massive insecurity, or calculated theater, and either way we don't need the headache. That is the particular reason connected to this site. It really isn't even the politics.
posted by dhartung at 12:48 PM on September 9, 2006


The EPA pretty much had little choice, but to say the air was safe. How long can you keep the NYSE, investment backs, law firms closed off without causing serious financial repercussions for the city.

What the hell? The EPA, despite what you wantonly say, did have a choice: They could choose to announce that the air was safe, or they could choose to announce that there were hazards, and describe them.

That's the EPA's job. It is not the job of the EPA to "keep the NYSE, investment backs, law firms closed off..."

That's someone else's job. Unfortunately, because of the EPA having lied, whoever had the job of deciding when stuff would reopen had no warning of health hazards.
posted by odinsdream at 1:36 PM on September 9, 2006


Call me cynical, but somehow I find your claim hard to believe rough ashlar.
posted by caddis at 2:08 PM on September 9, 2006


Call me cynical, but somehow I find your claim hard to believe rough ashlar.
posted by caddis at 2:08 PM PST


What, that such data is on the internet?

That galvanic corrosion is not a possible issue?

That there was not plans to tear down the complex in the 1980's?

What part do you hard to believe? (and I'd like to see copies of the original documents, but all I've seen is the claims)
posted by rough ashlar at 2:49 PM on September 9, 2006


What I find hard to believe is that you could fall for such tripe.
posted by caddis at 5:14 PM on September 9, 2006


Whitman needs to hang for this along with many others. She got on TV and straight up lied in the face of New Yorkers. And now she's letting fly some lame excuses. The air smellled bizarre in the days after, it was hard to believe that something that noxious could be safe to inhale...
posted by lovejones at 4:05 PM EST on September 8 [+] [!]


I live 30 miles east of Ground Zero. It took almost two days for the cloud of dust/plastic/paper/concrete to drift over my house. It smelled, mostly of concrete, but who knows what else. If it could make us cough here, two days later, what harm did those tiny shards of glass do to people living in the area? People were told very quickly that it was okay to return to their homes, without the proper tools. There was a rush, you may recall, to make things look normal again--rush the debris off site as quickly as possible, return the flags to full height in less than a week, get people back to their homes, all to show that the city was getting back to normal. No doubt at the risk of people's lives. I don't know if all the anecdotal evidence adds up but I could smell this stuff two days later. How in the world could this be healthy? And a relative who, as part of her military service, spent two months digging WITHOUT A MASK because the service was trying to act macho now has a dreadful cough that started while she was there and has scarred lungs. Being on the debris pile was worse, no doubt, but where do you think all those fumes, all that dust went? To apartments and buildings near by.
posted by etaoin at 5:14 PM on September 9, 2006


Mmm-mmm. Miners' lung, fersure. The glass dust alone would slice and dice one's lungs like a million little knives. Asbestos, finely pulverized. Lead and other heavy metals from pulverised electronics. That dust from the inside of florescent tubes. All sorts of burnt, carcinogenic compounds.

Honestly, it is absurd to think for a moment the environment was safe.

But, shit, if NYC had evacuated, it'd have been registered as The End of the World. It is simply unrealistic to imagine there'd have been a recommendation to leave. It'd cost more in human lives to spread the panic of a mass evac, than to let a few tens/hundreds of thousands of NYers die over the next thirty years.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:07 PM on September 9, 2006


But, shit, if NYC had evacuated, it'd have been registered as The End of the World. It is simply unrealistic to imagine there'd have been a recommendation to leave. It'd cost more in human lives to spread the panic of a mass evac, than to let a few tens/hundreds of thousands of NYers die over the next thirty years.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:07 PM PST


So money trumps what the law charges an agency is tasked to do.
posted by rough ashlar at 8:16 AM on September 10, 2006


Money? I'm pretty sure I said "it'd cost more in human lives," not money. Learn to read.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:40 AM on September 10, 2006


five fresh fish writes "It'd cost more in human lives to spread the panic of a mass evac, than to let a few tens/hundreds of thousands of NYers die over the next thirty years."

That's about as silly an opinion as saying that mass panic would erupt in Manhattan in the event of a major terrorist incident -- now, when there has already been one, and we've all been witness to the fact that there was in fact no mass panic. People either went home, many on foot, or stayed with colleagues if they could not get home.
posted by clevershark at 12:39 PM on September 10, 2006


I disagree. I think a mass evacuation would have freaked out everyone in the USA. I think your country would have gone even further off the deep end. I think various terrorist and anti-American groups would have taken it as an invitation to further frighten the population. And I think it would have led to a much bigger, much worse war than those in which your country is currently engaged.

By the by, this makes interesting reading.
posted by five fresh fish at 2:55 PM on September 10, 2006


“I don't think that Kos has too many people that can rival these "visionaries".”

Fair enough point. There are certainly differences between the two sites, but fanatics of whatever stripe tend to exaggerate and I don’t think there is any question Kos is biased. I’m not complaining about the post (here) itself tho’. And I do think it’s a worthwhile subject (as evidenced by the thread). Just have my suspicions about the Kos poster. Meh, I could be wrong.
posted by Smedleyman at 7:01 AM on September 11, 2006


60 Minutes: White House Officials Changed EPA Reports after 9/11
posted by homunculus at 1:18 PM on September 11, 2006


homunculus, I find that also unbelievable, but for different reasons. Seriously. What kind of madmen poison their own wells (metaphorically)? That’s reason enough to put the whole crew in jail.
posted by Smedleyman at 5:12 PM on September 11, 2006


« Older A Dozen Eccentric Westerns,...  |  "You must have shot an awful l... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments