EPA's Lies after 9/11 will kill more than the attack itself

quote:

The EPA's Lies after 9/11 will kill more than the attack itself
http://benfrank.net/patriots/news/criminals/epa_lied

quote:

With New Yorkers already fuming about reports that the feds downplayed the danger of Ground Zero dust, the White House gave EPA chief Christie Whitman the power to bury embarrassing documents by classifying them "secret."

Two days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Whitman declared, "There appear to be no significant levels of asbestos dust in the air in New York City." Then on Sept. 21, Whitman reported that "a host of potential contaminants are either not detectable" or at a level the EPA considered safe.

But on Oct. 26, 2001, the Daily News slapped "Toxic Zone" on the front page and warned that "toxic chemicals and metals"were poisoning lower Manhattan.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/438649p-369566c.html

quote:

NEW YORK -- In the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center, the White House instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to give the public misleading information, telling New Yorkers it was safe to breathe when reliable information on air quality was not available.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0823-03.htm

quote:

Last month, a judge described the EPA's reassurances as "misleading" and "shocking the conscience".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4904188.stm

quote:

A program supposed to monitor the health of thousands of federal workers who answered the call of 9/11 has been lost for more than two years, the Daily News has learned.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/340738p-290928c.html

quote:

Two years have passed since the attacks, and there has been no comprehensive effort by the federal government to treat people who got sick helping out at ground zero. Incredibly, thousands of people are ill from a national disaster, and the federal government is AWOL.
http://newyorkmetro.com/n(...)/citypolitic/n_9384/

quote:

It’s too early to know with certainty how many deaths may result from the cocktail of asbestos, mercury, silica, fiberglass and other potentially hazardous materials released when the twin towers collapsed. Nor is it possible to say with certainty which health problems are related to the responders’ work in the rubble of the trade center. But it’s clear that many of the estimated 40,000 police, firefighters and other workers who came to the site to assist in rescue and recovery efforts have begun suffering from similar and sometimes serious ailments during the past four and a half years.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13088161/

quote:

January, 2006
This month, the New York congressional delegation called on the federal government to appoint a 9/11 health czar, whose first responsibility would be to find a way to track and confront the health problems rescue workers are facing.
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/health/20060130/9/1742

quote:

9/11 rescue workers get expanded benefits in N.Y.
Bloomberg says new laws could cost city up to $500 million
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/15/911.health.benefits/index.html

quote:

Three weeks after the disaster, scientists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in collaboration with the New York City Fire Department Bureau of Health Services, collected blood and urine samples from 370 firefighters working at the WTC site.

However, limitations in the study make it impossible to predict whether firefighters who responded to the WTC disaster may have had exposure to other chemicals for which biomonitoring methods do not exist as of yet, such as asbestos and fiberglass.
http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2003/111-16/ss.html

quote:

As the US government's newly appointed "health czar" John Howard confirmed to the BBC, there were between 30,000 and 50,000 people at or near Ground Zero who might have been exposed to the hazardous dust and no one really knows how many are suffering problems now.

quote:

In the same release, a section that said, "Even at low levels, EPA considers asbestos hazardous in this situation" was deleted and replaced with a section that read, in part, "Short-term, low-level exposure of the type that might have been produced by the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings is unlikely to cause significant health effects."
http://www.cbsnews.com/st(...)nal/main567489.shtml

quote:

Tuesday, August 26, 2003
"They knew and they didn't tell us the truth, and the White House told them not to tell us the truth," Clinton said, adding that she wants to find out who was responsible for pressuring the EPA.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/08/26/epa.clinton/index.html

quote:

The report says an associate administrator considered adding to a news release information on the risks of exposure to fine dust particles for the more vulnerable segments of the population.
But an official from the Council on Environmental Quality "discouraged her from doing so," the report says, arguing that information about health effects should not be in EPA news releases.

An email sent just one day after the attacks, from then-EPA Deputy Administrator Linda Fisher's chief of staff to senior EPA officials, said "all statements to the media should be cleared" first by the National Security Council, the report says.

Approval from the NSC, which is chaired by President Bush and serves as his main forum for discussing national security and foreign policy matters with his senior aides and Cabinet, was arranged through an official with the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the report said.

quote:

James L. Connaughton was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate on June 14 and appointed by President Bush on June 18, 2001 to serve as the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality
http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/connaugton-bio.html

quote:

His office pressured the Environmental Protection Agency to dramatically weaken the wording of its public statements about the air quality in New York City in the days after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_L._Connaughton

quote:

Op maandag 21 augustus 2006 17:48 schreef Wombcat het volgende:
Effe linkje neerpleuren (mag ik ook eens ) voor degene die de uitgebreide monsteranalyses van de EPA wil gaan lezen.
http://www.epa.gov/wtc/data_summary.htm

Hiervan heb ik een aantal doorgelezen, en daar kon ik toch niet direct veel overschrijdingen van grenswaarden in ontdekken.

quote:

Exposure and Human Health Evaluation of Airborne Pollution from the World Trade Center Disaster

The first measurements of some of the contaminants were on September 14, while other contaminants were not measured until September 23. Available data suggest that the concentrations within and near Ground Zero were likely to be highest in the few days following September 11. Because there are only limited data on these critical few days, exposures and potential health impacts cannot be evaluated with certainty for this time period.

http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=54667

quote:

EPA Region II officials have claimed in multiple public statements that they have no responsibility for indoor testing and cleaning of residences in lower Manhattan.
http://wtceo.org/wtcenvir(...)tobreathewhitman.htm

quote:

Rep. Nadler charged that the EPA has abrogated its responsibility to protect public health by proclaiming lower Manhattan “safe” without comprehensive data to support that statement.

quote:

On September 18th, Administrator Whitman said she was “glad to reassure the people of New York. . .that their air is safe to breathe , and their water is safe to drink.” I sincerely hope she was right. However, given that the EPA has not tested inside people's homes, despite my repeated requests for it to do so, how could the EPA have comprehensive data to support this claim either way? More importantly, when the EPA was presented with test results showing elevated levels of hazardous materials in downtown apartments, it chose to do nothing.

quote:

the Federal buildings at 290 Broadway, which houses the EPA, and 26 Federal Plaza, were tested inside and outside for high levels of hazardous materials and, when some were found, the areas were cleaned (Hepa vacuumed) by properly-trained personnel. Some sources have also indicated that even greater clean-up measures were taken.

quote:

Op maandag 21 augustus 2006 22:12 schreef huupia34 het volgende:
dus als ik het goed begrijp is op 18 september meedegedeeld dat de lucht veilig was, terwijl de meeste tests pas van latere datum zijn, toen wellicht al een hoop vervelende stoffen waren gedecimeerd, vandaar de lage gehaltes in de epa metingen.

quote:

als advocaten toegang krijgen tot de juiste documenten ( wie wat en wanneer heeft bepaald)
moet hewt volgens mij niet moeilijk zijn om de schuldigen aan te wijzen.

ik vrees alleen, dat dat waarschijnlijk niet wordt getolereerd.

quote:

Op dinsdag 22 augustus 2006 01:59 schreef mike_another het volgende:

[..]

Je verwart 2 dingen met elkaar:
1) De Amerikaanse overheid bekommert zich niet om de slachtoffers van 9/11, willen veel fouten verdoezelen, zijn niet betrouwbaar, zijn alleen in geld/olie geinteresseerd en zijn in het algemeen een stelletje corrupte prutsers.
2) Ze hebben zelf de 9/11 in scene gezet of explosieven geplaats omdat ze wisten dat het zou gebeuren.

Met punt 1 is 50% van de inwoners van Amerika en 90% van de mensen daarbuiten eens. Maar dat is geen enkel bewijs dat punt 2 waar is. Zeker als alle andere bewijzen het weerleggen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 22 augustus 2006 01:52 schreef mike_another het volgende:
Ik weet niet waar/of het vorige topic verdergaat, dus maar hier aangezien het ook aan Resonancer gericht is.

quote:

Op dinsdag 22 augustus 2006 17:18 schreef Wombcat het volgende:
Nee, ze zeggen dat het niet hun verantwoordelijkheid is om binnenshuis te reinigen, dat is niet helemaal hetzelfde.

quote:

Overigens postte ik in het vorige topic dat er uit de meetresultaten van de EPA niet bleek dat er veel asbest in de lucht was gemeten, maar daarentegen dat er wel in het puin van het WTC relatief veel asbest aanwezig was.
Kortom: geen asbest in de lucht, betekent geen direct gevaar voor de omwonenden, want asbest is pas gevaarlijk bij inademing. Als er wel asbest in het puin is, betekent dat het personeel dat het puin opruimt wel voorzorgsmaatregelen moet nemen. Speciale beschermende pakken. En gezien de claims die nu worden neergelegd vermoed ik dat die voorzorgsmaatregelen niet getroffen zijn.

quote:

Op dinsdag 22 augustus 2006 22:31 schreef Wombcat het volgende:
Als asbestverwijdering meer kost dan dat het economisch waard is, is het niet vreemd dat de waarde dan op het laagste punt komt te staan. Je moet dan veel in het gebouw gaan investeren namelijk. Vergelijk het maar ermee als je een huis kooopt waarvan je weet dat er veel aan moet gebeuren. Dat is ook minder waard dan een huis wat in tiptop-staat is.

quote:

The Statute of Liberty had to be repaired due to galvanic corrosion in air. Not what most think is possible but in ocean environments, very possible. Normally galvanic corrosion is only a factor in an electrolyte such as sea water and the stern drive on the boat - having steel and aluminum components - erodes, turns brittle and snap - it fails - if electrolytic grounding plates are not installed.

Tthe exterior cast aluminum WTC panels had been directly connected to the steel superstructure of the building, thus causing galvanic corrosion. In short, the "life cycle" of the WTC was not 200 - 300 years, more like 30 years or so.

The exterior skin of the building - in being aluminum and connected directly to the super structure - was making the building weaker every day.
http://matrixscreamer.com/otherauthors/corrosion.html

quote:

A Description of the World Trade Center

the exterior of each tower had closely spaced columns made of aluminum and steel that provide the most support for the tower.
http://www.unc.edu/course(...)gineering/index.html