"Obfuscating" At Ground Zero

(That word, used in a completely correct manner as far as I’m concerned, was spoken by Dem Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota, Ellison being Glenn Beck’s favorite congressman, of course – and why is Beck’s show still on the air anyway?).

So Christie Todd Whitman, former head of the EPA at the time of the 9/11 attacks, testified before a congressional hearing yesterday that the air around the fallen World Trade Center was safe to breathe.

I wish Dem Rep. Jerrold Nadler’s committee had called Thomas Cahill to testify either prior to Whitman’s appearance or possibly concurrent with hers, since, as noted in this prior post, Cahill, a professor emeritus of physics and atmospheric science, had called the conditions for people working at ground zero without respirators “brutal” (here is more)…

“The site was hot for months. The metals burned into fine particles. They rose in a plume and moved over people’s heads on most days. There were at least eight days when the plume was pushed down into the city. Then people tasted it, smelled it and saw it. But people who worked in the pile (of rubble) were getting it every day.”

Cahill’s data found that the pollution included very fine metals, which interfere with lung chemistry; sulfuric acid, which attacks lung cells; carcinogenic organic matter; and very fine insoluble particles such as glass, which travel through the lungs and into the bloodstream and heart.

…

Cahill’s comments echo a report issued in August (2003) by the EPA inspector general, an internal watchdog on the agency. The inspector general concluded that under White House influence, the EPA issued misleading assurances that there was no health risk from air pollution after the attack.

…

“Christie Whitman was too premature to say it was safe,” Cahill said Tuesday. “I think the EPA should have known. The EPA had its own reports saying it could be dangerous. Why didn’t the EPA bring in their own people from all over the country? They could have. Never thought of it. They did later. But not in the time that mattered.”

And it’s not as if Whitman hadn’t caved on environmental safety because of a conflict of interest before; as noted here, former National EPA Ombudsman Robert Martin complained about Whitman’s foot dragging on the cleanup of the Shattuck and Marjol hazardous waste sites.

Perhaps this was the reason why…

Citigroup owns Shattuck. Citigroup's venture capital company co-owns AMI Semiconductor with GA-TEK Inc., the parent company of Gould Electronics, Marjol's owner. Mrs. Whitman's husband John owns stock valued at between $100,001 and $250,000, according to Mrs. Whitman's financial disclosure reports. He also works for a venture capital company backed by Citigroup.

And Martin was rewarded for this public service by having his ombudsman office reassigned under the EPA inspector general by Whitman, which meant, among other things, that Martin was no longer able to supervise, hire and fire his own staff (including chief inspector Hugh Kaufman, who sought reinstatement).

It would be nice if Whitman showed an ounce of courage here and returned the favor to the people who sold her out (referring of course to the individuals at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue). Why anyone would still show allegiance to this cabal of crooks is something that defies sanity as far as I’m concerned.