Purple Tang wrote:
This cat will get millions of taxpayer dollars to 'remove the asbestos' while he/she pays an illegal $200.
I remember after the Towers went down I had a running argument on a local board with some right wing tool that blamed the failure of the Towers on the fact that their flame/fire resistant was a material less effective than asbestos which wasn't used because Hippie Liberal politicians made them not use asbestos. I did some research and discovered the Towers were started and built with asbestos because there was NO regulation in place when construction began. By the time they were ready to dedicate the building, asbestos had become outlawed. Only about 20% of the existing asbestos was replaced as a result and then only in those areas where human occupation was considered a factor. The main enclosed weight bearing shafts continued to use asbestos. If they had been forced to replace all the asbestos, there is some good chance that the epidemic of health problems among first responders and local residents could have been lessened.
