• Terror attacks : Beach development : Cancer Terror attacks : Beach development : Cancer The Daily Telegraph, London — July 13 It was good and bad news. The police are to be congratulated for establishing so quickly the origins
• Terror attacks : Beach development : Cancer
Terror attacks : Beach development : Cancer
The Daily Telegraph, London — July 13
It was good and bad news. The police are to be congratulated for establishing so quickly the origins of the bombers who attacked London last Thursday. For some days the public (and victims’ families in particular) have been kept in the dark about the identity of the bodies at King’s Cross, Aldgate East, Edgware Road and Tavistock Square. Now we understand why: the police were engaged in the gruesome task of “tissue matching,” and in tracing the movements of the men who planted the bombs.
But the bad news is far worse. It seems likely that the attackers were suicide bombers, and British. They came from Yorkshire, and possibly Bedfordshire, to murder and maim their fellow citizens in the nation’s capital.
This appalling development has a simple and serious implication. Police spokesmen yesterday spoke of the help they had received from “the communities.” That British Muslims had volunteered information after the event is highly welcome. But it is inconceivable that, as four young men became sufficiently radicalised that they were prepared to immolate themselves and others, no one around them noticed. Someone – in a home, a mosque, a study group – must have had a suspicion of where things might be heading. …
There can be no “communities,” plural, when Britain is attacked – only a nation, united in common values and self-defence. The bombers killed indiscriminately, detonating explosives on the public transport system of the most multiracial, multi-religious city on earth. The diversity of the victims must now prompt a unity among all Britons, to find these killers and prevent their brothers from striking again.
Pensacola (Fla.) News Journal — July 12. 2005
So many people are saying it, that it already has become a cliche: Dennis was no Ivan.
And, of course, it’s true.
But Hurricane Dennis did one thing for sure: It blew away any lingering belief that after Ivan, we wouldn’t have to worry for years about being hit by another major hurricane. As it was, we got lucky that we weren’t hit by a storm worse than Ivan.
But the real question is whether we will learn anymore from Dennis than we did from Ivan about the way we build and live. Because if we manage to avoid another hit this storm season, the hurricane season comes every year. …
If Dennis had come from another direction, and if it hadn’t run into a patch of cool Gulf of Mexico water shortly before landfall, we could today be looking at beaches devastated beyond our wildest nightmares.
We’re past the point at which the Federal Emergency Management Agency and federally subsidized flood insurance should continue to pay to rebuild structures that should not have been built where they are.
And local governments should be rethinking how much money they are willing to put into infrastructure in high-hazard coastal areas.
The Poughkeepsie (N.Y.) Journal July 11, 2005
Environmental contaminants continue to be linked with diseases so it’s understandable that cancer prevention advocates want more research directed in this area. Federal and local organizations, as well as the American Cancer Society, must also recognize this threat and direct their resources appropriately.
Just as the link between cancer and tobacco smoke was suspected, but undocumented, in the 1950s, so today’s link between cancer and chemical contaminants is of concern.
Innovative and aggressive research is needed.
Unfortunately, since research demands exceed dollars, agencies tend to focus on known perils. …
But the American Cancer Society, which in the past decade has funded 283 grants totaling $53.8 million toward environmental contaminants, is not the sole agency to find those answers. The National Toxicology Program, the Centers for Disease Control and other federal programs also conduct research, while local state health departments are responsible for compiling data and noticing any trends that demand attention. They should cooperate, rather than compete, in their research.…
- Provided by the Associated Press