9/11 Legal Suit

[Grahameeboy]

Geeze, only in America.

How can it be that New York City are liable for this?

I mean is this a risk that rescue workers take by virtue of their work?

NEW YORK - New York City is willing to enter discussions to settle a lawsuit with 9000 rescue and cleanup workers at the World Trade Center disaster site who may be sick from inhaling toxic dust, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said.

The plaintiffs are seeking damages from the city in federal court, saying they suffer from respiratory illnesses attributed to breathing toxic ash, dust and other contaminants from the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.

The city previously has attempted to convince a federal judge to dismiss the suit, though it has the benefit of a $1 ($1.33) billion federal fund established in case the city was found to have liability.

[ZeroIndex]

Hang on... firefighters and rescue workers... isn't going into dangerous places for the money they get paid their, um.... JOB!!?!?!?

[Romeo]

I'm sure if you were suffering from a terminal lung disease caused by someone covering up the truth about the hazard of your work place you'd be suing as well.

I seem to recall the city pushing for a faster cleanup at the expense of rescue worker safety - "It's safe to breathe boys, get back to work".

[Grahameeboy]

I'm sure if you were suffering from a terminal lung disease caused by someone covering up the truth about the hazard of your work place you'd be suing as well.

Probably not if I was going to die...I would have more important things on my mind

I seem to recall the city pushing for a faster cleanup at the expense of rescue worker safety - "It's safe to breathe boys, get back to work".

That may explain why then?

...............

[canarlee]

Hang on... firefighters and rescue workers... isn't going into dangerous places for the money they get paid their, um.... JOB!!?!?!?

agreed.


also



a large amount of the rescue workers were volunteers...........so why should they be able to claim/sue? they went in voluntarily, didnt they......?

[car]

Probably not if I was going to die...I would have more important things on my mind

Well, last time I thought I was going to die my first thought was "how will my wife and kids live without my support?"

Actually, I lie: my second thought was about how my family would support themselves; my first thought was "argh, my chest!"

[Grahameeboy]

agreed.


also



a large amount of the rescue workers were volunteers...........so why should they be able to claim/sue? they went in voluntarily, didnt they......?

There be some truth in that Sir.....Novus Actus Intervenien (spelling may be a bit ??).............if someone is aware of risks then that exonerates the original wrongdoer

[Usarka]

if you volunteered to help the city in a crisis or as part of your job in the fire service and broke your leg would you expect to get it patched up with city resources free of charge?

whats the difference if you broke your lungs in the process?

fuck all if you ask me......just more expensive.

[Grahameeboy]

Well, last time I thought I was going to die my first thought was "how will my wife and kids live without my support?"

Actually, I lie: my second thought was about how my family would support themselves; my first thought was "argh, my chest!"

I know what you mean but if it was a choice between spending quality time with my family or trying to sue the City, I would rather go for the former cause my family would manage..................mind you I only have my Daughter to think about and she is covered.

[Grahameeboy]

if you volunteered to help the city in a crisis or as part of your job in the fire service and broke your leg would you expect to get it patched up with city resources free of charge?

whats the difference if you broke your lungs in the process?

fuck all if you ask me......just more expensive.

They will be claiming Special Damages for loss of earnings, dependants etc, not just the body repairs.

They may well be getting medical help via Insurance or the Public Health system which does operate in the States so likely they are claiming other damages which I guess is where the grey area is.

[Usarka]

Actually, I lie: my second thought was about how my family would support themselves; my first thought was "argh, my chest!"

Those fucking aliens again eh.

[The Pastor]

if the city council made them do somthing unsafe, like couldnt provide dustmasks or somthing then you can say they are at fault,

still messed up, instead of getting sued the council should be PAYING them dubble the costs for a good serivce provided.

[Romeo]

Oh, and remember that they don't have a public healthcare system. If you're uninsured (or if the insurance companies aren't going to pay out for "9/11 related injuries") you and your family are going to have to foot the bill for your medical costs (imagine how much it would cost for a year of hospital and home care - we're talkin hundreds of thousands of dollars). It's not like these people just drop dead, then get burried. They slowly rot away from terminal lung disease over an extended period of time, so that's 1-5 years of assisted living culminating in a painful, untimely death - NOT CHEAP!

Would you enjoy your family and leave them penniless paupers, or would you fight for your family's future? Sounds like most people on here would rather have the former...

[canarlee]

they do have a public (NHS equivalent) health care system in yank land.

[Romeo]

they do have a public (NHS equivalent) health care system in yank land.

Doesn't sound like it.


For Joel Segal, it was the day he was kicked out of George Washington Hospital, still on an IV after knee surgery, without insurance, and with $100,000 in medical debt. For Kiki Peppard, it was having to postpone needed surgery until she could find a job with insurance -- it took her two years. People all over the United States are waking up to the fact that our [American] system of providing health care is a disaster.

...

An estimated 50 million Americans lack medical insurance, and a similar and rapidly growing number are underinsured. The uninsured are excluded from services, charged more for services, and die when medical care could save them -- an estimated 18,000 die each year because they lack medical coverage.

...

And most Americans know why: the United States leaves the health of its citizens at the mercy of an expensive, patchwork system where some get great care while others get none at all.

Would this happen in New Zealand?

[bomma]

a large amount of the rescue workers were volunteers...........so why should they be able to claim/sue? they went in voluntarily, didnt they......?


instead of getting sued the council should be PAYING them dubble the costs for a good serivce provided.

if you pulled someone out of their burning house and incurred some injury, would it be unreasonable for the rescuee to be grateful enough to fork out to cover the cost??

they may have been volunteers and accepted the risk but they still did a notably heroic deed, for which the council should have been grateful enough to reward....

cant say the same for the firefighters and cops and stuff though coz the risk associated is, in general, part of their job

[SPman]

I think one of the big issues is the amount of toxic and radioactive dust of all sorts, which, it is claimed, the City and Federal authorities were aware of at the time, but "forgot" to inform the rescue workers, or provide them with even basic protective gear. There are a lot of other issues as well. The end result is that 100's of workers are now ill and / or dying, when even some basic knowledge at an early stage could have prevented this.

cant say the same for the firefighters and cops and stuff though coz the risk associated is, in general, part of their job
Reasonable risk, yes! But, where risks are known at least you can take measures to prevent death or injury. Firemen don't rush into the flames wearing no protective gear! To know about dangers and not inform those working on the site, speaks to me of criminal negligence.

[ambler]

I believe the cause of the stink is:
-----
In the days and weeks following the attack the Environmental Protection Agency gave assurances to New Yorkers that the dust permeating Lower Manhattan and the smoke still emanating from Ground Zero did not pose a health risk. The agency issued five press releases within ten days of the attack assuring people that the air was safe to breathe, despite an absence of data to support such assurances. 3 In August of 2003, it was revealed that the EPA had been muzzled by the Bush administration. EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley issued a report on August 21, 2003, admitting that the reassurances were unfounded, and that the public statements of the agency were being influenced by the National Security Council, under the direction of the White House. The EPA, according to the report, had been influenced to "add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones."
-----
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/environment.html

The argument that firefighters are supposed to charge into dangerous burning buildings is a reasonable one, but consider that they do this with full knowledge of the fire they are charging into. If they also expect there to be poisonous gasses or other dangers about, then they don't go charging in without the appropriate gear.

[bomma]

I believe the cause of the stink is:
-----
In the days and weeks following the attack the Environmental Protection Agency gave assurances to New Yorkers that the dust permeating Lower Manhattan and the smoke still emanating from Ground Zero did not pose a health risk. The agency issued five press releases within ten days of the attack assuring people that the air was safe to breathe, despite an absence of data to support such assurances. 3 In August of 2003, it was revealed that the EPA had been muzzled by the Bush administration. EPA Inspector General Nikki Tinsley issued a report on August 21, 2003, admitting that the reassurances were unfounded, and that the public statements of the agency were being influenced by the National Security Council, under the direction of the White House. The EPA, according to the report, had been influenced to "add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones."

then it sounds more like the govt itself should be under the gun........i still hold that if it's part of your job, the risk of inhaling harmful substances specifically, is reasonably foreseeable if you're a bloody fire-fighter....however as they were lured there under false pretenses, this changes the whole argument!!!

they accepted the risk under the guarantee of an organisation that held under normal circumstances, would be considered a competent source. they have fuck-all right to be in such a position and mis-inform those individuals who are already risking their lives!!!

bastards :mad: