Unknown News
"Freedom is
the fundamental
human right.
"
  We have unique bumper stickers, lapel pins, books and surprises!
This week's Unknown News  &  dialogue with our readers
About us  |  Archives  |  Contact us  |  Guidelines  |  Index  |  Mystery links  |  Stickers & pins & stuff  |

If you like what we do,
please
help us do it.
OUR PRIVACY POLICY
Unknown News
TODAY'S UNKNOWN NEWS



White House ordered 9/11 EPA lies

Associated Press

Aug. 9, 2003

WASHINGTON — An investigation by the Environmental Protection Agency's inspector general into official statements about air quality after the collapse of the World Trade Center has found that White House officials instructed the agency to be less alarming and more reassuring to the public in the first few days after the attack.

The draft of the inspector general's report also says the agency "did not have sufficient data and analyses" to make a "blanket statement" when it announced seven days after the attack that the air around ground zero was safe to breathe. "Competing considerations, such as national security concerns and the desire to reopen Wall Street, also played a role in EPA's air quality statements," the report said.

The report, which has not yet been made public, is an evaluation of the agency's overall response to the attack on the World Trade Center. One chapter focuses on the role of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, or CEQ, in helping to shape the agency's communication after the attack.

"As a result of the White House CEQ's influence, guidance for cleaning indoor spaces and information about the potential health effects from WTC debris were not included in the EPA's issued press releases," said the report, made available by people who said it was too harsh. "In addition, based on CEQ's influence, reassuring information was added to at least one press release and cautionary information was deleted from EPA's draft version of that press release."

The inspector general is an investigator within the agency who is intended to be impartial and who audits and evaluates its programs, sometimes resulting in political tensions. Officials from the agency and from the White House criticized the report yesterday.

The report bases its conclusions on changes made in two news releases and interviews with agency officials about information that was withheld.

So far, researchers have found no significant harm to those who breathed the air around ground zero, which contained increased levels of benzene, lead, mercury, PCBs, asbestos and fiberglass, though one preliminary study published this week found a slight but significant increase in the percentage of small infants born to pregnant women who were at or near the site around the time of the attack.

The EPA has been criticized before for the statements it made about air quality after the 2001 attack. At a Senate subcommittee hearing on post-Sept. 11 air quality in February, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., contended that the agency had misled the public by declaring that the air around the trade center was safe.

The report notes that the agency's official position was that the levels of asbestos in outdoor air were safe for healthy adults, but that it lacked evidence about the potential health effects of indoor air and the risks of other contaminants or the effects on more vulnerable New Yorkers, including children and the elderly.

The report notes that the agency's news releases did not mention these caveats and that "for the general public, EPA's overriding message was that there was no significant threat to human health."

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. The report also notes that an official from the White House council asked that a statement encouraging those who lived around ground zero to hire professional cleaners was deleted from a release.

The report compares two news releases with their draft versions and concludes, "Every change that was suggested by the CEQ contact was made."


Published by
Associated Press


What do you think?


This material is copyrighted by its original publisher.

It is reprinted by Unknown News without permission, solely for purposes of criticism, comment, and news reporting, in accordance with the Fair Use Guidelines of copyright material under § 107 of U.S.C. Title 17.



There's much more than this at Unknown News.


Unknown News is made possible in part
by
these fine people:

Access Quality Tutorial Service     Apocalypsopolis, by Ran Prieur     A buttload o' used books     www.chaos.org     Civil rights news and forum     Cool Graphics     Crazy T-Shirts     Call to action, call to conscience ...     Discordian Research Technology News     Eat mo shad     Free State Project     Tino Gonzales     Green Aid     Green Party of Minnesota     Humor is Dead     J Mooneyham     Jail John Ashcroft     Last Laugh     NORML     Order Out of Chaos     oreilly-sucks.com     Propaganda Matrix     Punditman's Bush cards     senior radio reporter     The Sisyphus Store     Soundbitten     SourDove.com     Steam Powered     Lisa Walsh Thomas     Use Arch for the Internet ©     Vote Bush out     Website design services     Westgarth Books     Zine World

and by sponsorships, subscriptions, and donations
from viewers like you.

Commentary:
I remember first hearing EPA concerns about the dust in live broadcasts on 9/11 then the next day or so the EPA flip-flopped on the dangers, until now?

  =John C.=

Sept. 11, 2001 Follow-up reports
on EPA lie

Commentary:
Yup. One more lie among so many.

You know, in a courtroom, when a witness is shown to be clearly lying about one detail, it calls that witness's entire testimony into doubt.

If it worked that way with presidents, we'd have ample grounds to doubt everything the Bush administration has told us about September 11, 2001.

After all; every newspaper and television account is directly or indirectly based in large part upon what the Bush administration has announced -- that they had no prior warning, that they knew
immediately Osama bin Laden was to blame, that exactly 19 hijackers were aboard those four planes, that each hijacker has been posthumously identified, etc.

So our shared public perception of what happened on September 11, and why it happened, is really built on just one assumption, universally agreed: That the Bush administration is comprised of honest people, telling the truth.

But I don't see any evidence to support such an allegation.


  =H&HH=

You can help
      We try not to whine too much or too loudly, but we are poor and this site eats a lot of time and especially money.
      Giving just a buck or two can make all the difference and keep Unknown News alive.
      Please donate or subscribe.

           
Talk to Us
Archives
If you have something to say, we'd love to hear from you. Click here for archives of recent editions of Unknown News
1234567890