On Sept. 18, 2001, in a press release, EPA's Whitman told the public, "We are very encouraged that the results from our monitoring of air-quality and drinking-water conditions in both New York and near the Pentagon show that the public in these areas is not being exposed to excessive levels of asbestos or other harmful substances" and that "Given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York ... that their air is safe to breathe and the water is safe to drink."  Really?  Come back to work cajoled Giuliani and Bush. only a few days after the attack

This post-apocalyptic optimism was aided, was abetted by the boosters playing the ever-ready, tough-minded political-patriotic card: "Don't let the terrorists get another win by breaking the back of financial capital of the world with a physical then economic one-two punch." Many citizens not privy to the early and later medical assessments, had no reason to doubt their so-called evidence based assessment of the safety of ground zero and its environs.

I was living in L.A at the time. Angelinos were used to bad air and a brown haze. But no one could or should have gotten used to the air in lower Manhattan after 9/11 No one should or could have gotten used to the smell. Yet, for those of us not living in that area, or never visiting it, that was a dimension of the atmospheric assault that television simply could not convey. Sights? Yes. Sounds? Yes. But the dank, acrid, particulated smells? No! For that nosegay, you simply had to be there.  New Yorkers remained skeptical of the "safety", for obvious reason.  But the ground zero clean-up continued unabated, precautions unheeded.

This federal, state and local promotional blitz went on for years, despite the data coming out of local state, and federal environmental and health agencies warning about the degree of pollutedness at ground zero and environs, also warning about the possible cancerous and  respiratory consequences of breathing toxic dust and fumes.

Giuliani, Bush, Whitman and the Murdoch media continued minimizing risks and maximizing patriotism to those who would "come back," "return, move in."  NYC was offering great deals to businesses, buyers and renters to keep them from migrating elsewhere, like New Jersey. It's safe, they kept reassuring, it's safe.

Whistles began Blowing

A few years after 9/11, though, I began to hear a very different story from scientific whistleblowers, environmental experts and residents of the ground zero neighborhood.  They guested mostly on the alternative news and talk show, KPFK, the Pacifica Radio affiliate in L.A.  They talked  about the fraud being perpetrated by various governmental agencies charged with protecting people in their work and living environments, including the EPA and OSHA.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, a federal agency of the United States, regulates, workplace safety and health. These researchers reported pressure by the Bush administration to withhold slant or otherwise twist and shout results of analysis that, if released accurately, released unspun, would reveal the dangerous truths about the toxicity at ground zero for those living and working on and around the site.

 EPA scientist Dr. Cate Jenkins appeared on CBS television on September 8, 2006 and said that agency officials lied about the air quality in the weeks following September 11, 2001. She said that in her opinion the EPA knew about the toxicity of the air, and that WTC dust included asbestos and disturbingly high PH levels. She characterized the air was "as caustic and alkaline as Drano."

Juan Gonzalez, a Daily News columnist,  was the first main stream journalist to expose the health dangers at Ground Zero. He did so despite efforts by city and federal officials to discredit his reporting.

Adverse health data was being downplayed to avoid the suggestion that lower Manhattan had temporarily become the equivalent of a non-nuclear, asbestos Chernobyl. Were it not for alternative radio stations and syndicates like Pacifica and for the researchers and other employees at these various federal and state agencies, much that we now know about the true health risks of and around ground zero, would still be on a protected, need to know basis, much as the truth of the medically horrific effects of agent Orange on Viet Nam vets was strung out for decades thereby impeding proper diagnosis and treatment for so many U.S. soldiers.

You have to ask yourself, really, what is it about our political leaders and our gullible public and so much of our news media that we can mouth patriotic platitudes about our armed forces and the men and women in police, fire and medical personnel but play the gruesome game of deny, deny, and deny treatment when their duties have put their health and lives in harms way?

If the answer is that war and causality expenses are too expensive, then perhaps we might consider a few less optional, discretionary, elective wars as a remedy.  If the answer is "hurt Obama," then these politicians must be cast aside for true representatives of the people, for Lord Acton was right--power does corrupt, especially our humanity.

Big Media Effects

Then there's the media effect, a Pandora's box of often significant, often unpredictable motivational stimuli to arouse the populace, shine a light on truth and on outrageous callousness and abdication of responsibility and citizenship. The quaint term, citizenship, is an increasingly important word in this era of hyperpartisianship when party is placed above country and the term representative democracy refers to the voice of lobbyists and related special interests rather than the voice and conscience of the people.

Boom! my wife got up, went to computer and wrote a letter to CBS on the subject -- as did many others, it turns out, according to some reports in the media. 

Stewart and Fox's Smith, who ordinarily play to audiences on the left and right of the political spectrum, now stood on the same ideological platform, that of moral outrage. Many others, like CNN's Anderson Cooper, also gave the issue the extra attention it needed and put clear and palpable pressure on Republicans, Blue Dog Democratic and their constituents, and on the main stream media to do the right thing.

As the hours dwindled before the congressional Christmas recess, things were actively happening in and through both the professional and personal communications and social media. News commentators shifted gears from reporting to making the news.