Discover more from Remote View
27,000 first responders have cancer
125,000 registered with the World Trade Centre health program
Here is a testimony from a New Yorker that was present on the day of the event that actually has a very interesting observation to talk about, this clip is from September 2020.
Here he is talking more generally, September 2023, about what cannot be said, but he repeats this key observation.
Was he describing some kind of ozone like effect, I don’t know, but if true, what would be the persistent cause of the ionisation? I have witnessed kerosene fires, I don’t ever recall them having a pervasive and long lasting ‘electrical burn-out’ smell.
Now, if one knew of a technology that would adjust the structural strength of metals, strongly affect aluminium and glass but not affect cellulose, if one also knew that it could persist for a long time after initiation and might emit something that could result in cancer, would it not behove that person to deliver a detection technology just in case that same technology were to be used by malign actors again?
What if that person could make a detector that would be able to detect the initiation of potential states that would lead to the long lasting effects that can be deleterious to biological health, would he not be morally compelled to make a device that would warn against a potentially otherwise undetectable attack?
That individual, even if there is a 95% chance they are wrong, must try to help humanity have a tool to help protect themselves from true evil.
Remote View is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.