Nuke Cancer from 9/11 Revealed

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: anti72


The nuclear theory is the only one that explains all the observed phenomena. Willy Rodriguez heard the first detonation, just moments, maybe seconds, before the plane hit.

Then address these issues the proves no nukes used on 9/11....

Then how did the buckling of the towers start at isolated sections about 70 and 80 floors above the ground.

The video in this thread shows the isolated buckling in areas relative to jet impacts.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/
www.metabunk.org...

The collapse started on isolated floors and was top down. Not a sudden downward shift seen in all floors or a bottom up shock wave. A detention at the foundation would run the risk of the building going sideways.

Windows at the base of the towers showed no buckling indicative of a shock wave up out of the ground.

There still would have been an EMP pulse that would have disrupted broadcasts and video.

There still would have been obvious radiation and contamination.

No proof metal and material at the WTC was activated or radiated.

originally posted by: Oannes
The truth about a missile hitting the pentagon will come out. Same with World trade center 7 being "pulled" (Enron anyone)? And the "collapse" of the world trade towers 1&2 (thermite, directed energy weapon). This world is run by old, evil, rich bastards. This soon will come to an end. We have forgotten that this planet is really in control. She can feel all that we do to her, and each other. A re-balancing is going to happen soon.

Not even speaking of the jet liners? Perfect timing. Lots of people saw the jets including the one in Washington. My cousin saw the Pentagon jet from the parking lot of the mall at Crystal City. I hate to tell you, but it was airplanes, not thermite, not even a starship with phasers.

Some 10,000 cancer patients have been associated with ground zero exposure.

What keeps damaging, a few molecules of radioactive nuclear fallout, or the same of asbestos?

a reply to: serpo

Might you offer anything to show that asbestos was involved?

Do any samples taken show the presence of asbestos?

Hint: the condition "asbestosis" in humans is very hard on the lungs, but it does not cause the type of cancers observed in those exposed at WTC.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: serpo

Might you offer anything to show that asbestos was involved?

Do any samples taken show the presence of asbestos?

Hint: the condition "asbestosis" in humans is very hard on the lungs, but it does not cause the type of cancers observed in those exposed at WTC.

According to the most recent health survey conducted by the registry in 2016:

At least 352 people have been diagnosed with asbestosis.

In addition, at least 444 people were diagnosed with pulmonary fibrosis. Exposure to asbestos
and other fibers in 9/11 dust may have contributed to these cases.

Nearly 16% have been diagnosed with cancer. For comparison, about 8% had been diagnosed with cancer in 2007.

Approximately 35% report seeking medical care for shortness of breath.

Nearly 70% of recovery personnel have suffered from lung problems, including World Trade Center cough syndrome.

Now if they could find similar evidence of 'radiation'

linked 9/11 cancer...

a reply to: Salander
The towers were completed in 1972....asbestos was used.... but asbestos was banned in 1971.
The cost, to the new owner (Larry Silverstein), of abatement not removal of the asbestos would be more than the cost of buildings. But he did not have to pay any money.... in fact he put terrorism insurance on them and made an absolute fortune.

9-11 Research: Asbestos in the WTC
911research.wtc7.net...

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Salander
The towers were completed in 1972....asbestos was used.... but asbestos was banned in 1971.
The cost, to the new owner (Larry Silverstein), of abatement not removal of the asbestos would be more than the cost of buildings. But he did not have to pay any money.... in fact he put terrorism insurance on them and made an absolute fortune.

9-11 Research: Asbestos in the WTC
911research.wtc7.net...

He must have been gutted about the loss of income, having to mpay off his mortgage and having to pay for rebuilding

a reply to: mrthumpy
What loss of income?
Larry made money from the 9/11 event.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: mrthumpy
What loss of income?
Larry made money from the 9/11 event.

Sure he did. Apart from all the money he lost of course

a reply to: mrthumpy
What money did he lose?

If I buy something for £1 and insure it and am given £1000 if it disappears.... how much money have I lost?

a reply to: wmd_2008

Thanks for the reply. To which registry do you refer?

a reply to: serpo

But they have. Do you not watch TV at all? Jon Stewart has been talking about the Zadroga Bill for many years. They just had a congressional hearing about it a few months back.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: mrthumpy
What money did he lose?

If I buy something for £1 and insure it and am given £1000 if it disappears.... how much money have I lost?

Depends how much money you could have made from it, how much you still owe on it and how much it costs to replace. This isn't rocket science

a reply to: mrthumpy
Ok so if it is not rocket science then tell me... how much does he owe for it?
What did he build to replace it? How much did the replacement cost?

How much did he buy the building for?
How much insurance money did he recieve?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: mrthumpy
Ok so if it is not rocket science then tell me... how much does he owe for it?
What did he build to replace it? How much did the replacement cost?

How much did he buy the building for?
How much insurance money did he recieve?

You mean it's never crossed your mind to look any of that information up? Dear me

a reply to: mrthumpy
I have.......
However you seem to be in the know so where are your answers to the questions so everyone can see your reckonings.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: mrthumpy
I have.......
However you seem to be in the know so where are your answers to the questions so everyone can see your reckonings.

Yeah of course you have. Not my reckonings though, just the facts that anyone can look up if they want to

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Asbestos was banned after 1971

North Tower had lower 1/3, 37 floors, with asbestos in the spray on fireproofing

Asbestos was being removed or encapsulated, hard coating applied to prevent flaking , as the tenant spaces were
renovated when the tenant moved out

a reply to: mrthumpy

They come across to readers as your reckonings...