New York City has released more than 170,000 pages of previously undisclosed records about air quality following the September 11, 2001, attacks, showing city officials at the time knew conditions around Ground Zero were unsafe to breathe despite repeated assurances to the public.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced the release at a news conference Tuesday.
“As the years pass and the human toll grows, we reckon with the cost of September 11th whenever another New Yorker is stolen from us too soon,” Mamdani said. “Now, close to 25 years later, more people have died from 9/11-related illnesses than were killed on the day itself.”
At least 140,000 people from all 50 states have enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Program, and 49,000 have been diagnosed with certified WTC-related cancers, according to the 9/11 Memorial. Mamdani said Tuesday that more people are eligible for assistance than are currently enrolled, including residents who lived near the site but have not received outreach and those who live outside of New York.



No, I’m going to argue that “no-holds-barred” is not “political operative” and that adjectives modify nouns. If you see the phrase “evil dog”, are you going to assume that must mean all dogs are evil?
I’d also argue that you’re wrong about what “no-holds-barred” means too. After all, this is actually from an article championing the person in question. You misread a compliment for an insult because you’re operating on the preconceived notion that both “no-holds-barred” and “political operative” are negative terms when neither are.
No, I’m going to argue that this question has nothing to do with showing that “political operative” is a pejorative term.
That didn’t stop you from trying to argue about these two above, when you believed that arguing about them out of context was in your favour. The other examples are just more inconvenient to try to twist into somehow showing “political operative” is a pejorative. And, as we’ve seen, context is not friendly to your assumption.
How do you go from “it’s wishful thinking to believe the public imagines political operatives and staffers to be like The West Wing” to “political operative is an insulting way to refer to political staffers or politicians”? This isn’t even getting into how the term is clearly and explicitly used in the headline in a way that indicates it as a neutral term that just describes a job, and that it will be used that way throughout the article.
People aren’t going to refer to their jobs in a pejorative way either. Did you forget that you were trying to say calling someone a “smart politician” is better than calling someone a “political operative”? You weren’t saying all politicians are bad so nobody would ever admit they were one.
Again, where are you getting the idea that “political operator” is a term with a negative connotation?