ePluribus Media Community || citizen journalism, for the people, by the people

9/11 Financial Safety Over Human Safety Narrative Continues

Thu Sep 21, 2006 at 11:14:00 AM EST

I was planning to take a break from my discussion of the challenges faced by the 9/11 Ground Zero health victims, and the profits over safety business model, but this additional information was impossible to ignore.

There are also breaking developments on this issue which I will cover later in the day.

In my previous posts on this issue I emphasized that a way to understand instances in which people or corporations endanger human health is explained by the profits over safety business model.

Why the Challenges Faced by 9/11 Workers Affect Us All

9/11 & The Safety Is Too Expensive Business Model

Congress Rejects Aid For Sick 9/11 Responders: Puts Financial Safety Over

9/11 Financial Safety Over Human Safety Narrative Continues

In responding to the developing illnesses of those exposed to contaminants at Ground Zero, the actions of the federal, state, and city governments have consistently followed this model.

commentary :: :: :: buzz-it!

In short, they made decisions which involved a conscious decision to endanger human health to save money (in a variety of way discussed here).
One of the individuals most responsible for the illnesses at Ground Zero is Christine Todd Whitman, the former EPA chief. It has been found by the EPA's own Inspector General and a New York District Court that Whitman affirmatively misrepresented and minimized the very real danger of exposure to contaminants at Ground Zero in the days and weeks after the attacks.

As I have said before, the reasons are many, but primary among them are the placement of financial concerns (one of which I argue was an interest in not having to pay for a comprehensive cleanup plan) above human safety concerns during the environmental response to the 9/11 attacks.

Amazingly, new information suggests that Whitman's personal circumstances provide yet another example of financial interests being placed over the interest of human safety.

It appears that both Whitman and her husband may have had a financial interest in downplaying the danger of exposure to Ground Zero.

"It is also troubling that Ms. Whitman may have had a financial conflict-of-interest, and perhaps should have recused herself from the World Trade Center case. Ms. Whitman's husband worked for Citigroup, which owns Traveler's Insurance, and Ms. Whitman's financial disclosure form shows that she and her husband own hundreds of thousands of dollars in Citigroup stock (attachment #4). According to news reports, Traveler's Insurance paid at least $500 million in claims related to 9/11, and faced thousands of other potential claims from people who suffered physical damage or had damage done to their homes and businesses. At the EPA Ombudsman hearings, people testified that insurance companies denied claims, citing EPA's declaration that the air was safe. Ms. Whitman's recusal letter to the Ethics office clearly states that she will recuse herself from matters involving the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, but curiously, does not state that she will recuse herself from matters involving Citigroup (attachment #5). As you know, the Port Authority owns the World Trade Center site, yet Ms. Whitman did not recuse herself from the case despite her connection to the Port Authority and to Citigroup. When the EPA Ombudsman raised the financial conflict-of-interest issue, as well as other problems with the Agency's response to 9/11, Ms. Whitman closed the Ombudsman's office and shut down its investigation. This matter should be investigated to determine if Ms. Whitman violated the conflict-of-interest statute in 18 USC §208 or any other related provision of law." - Excerpt of Letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, Will Whitman Be Prosecuted for 9/11 Lies?, Press Release, Congressman Jerold Nadler, Sept. 13, 2006.

If these allegation prove true, not only are they shocking, but they further frame the governmental response to the Ground Zero health problems as a case study in the profit over safety model of governance/business.

If you or your organization is interested in learning more about or working on these types of civil justice issues, please feel free to contact me at cdugger@drummajorinstitute.org.

Cyrus Dugger
Senior Fellow in Civil Justice
Drum Major Institute for Public Policy

9/11 Financial Safety Over Human Safety Narrative Continues | 3 comments (3 topical, 0 hidden)

Contractor is criminally negligent....... (none / 0) (#1)

Okay........There are protocals in place for environmental cleanup. Contractors are required to meet these protocals or not be licensed. Whoever the vacuum truck contractor was that EPA hired to clean up the streets.....knew a HEPA filter is necessary, yet none was used. This definitely needs to be researched.....who was this contractor, hired by, and fee paid (did they charge the government for HEPA filters). Where was this dust disposed? What happened with the truck filters that were used in 9/11 street cleanup (how were they disposed)and what type were they. HEPA filters are very expensive...don't know where on a vacuum truck these would be placed. The men driving these trucks....were they suited up in Hazmat gear? Were they local....cause NY had really strict mold cleanup/sick building guidelines which were used throughout the country.

here

Whitman's statement also observes that where asbestos levels have exceeded the EPA's one percent "level of concern," the "EPA has operated its 10 High Efficiency Particulate Arresting (HEPA) vacuum trucks to clean the area and then resample." She adds that the trucks have also cleaned the "streets and sidewalks in the Financial District in preparation for ... return to business." [Environmental Protection Agency, 9/18/2001] However, it is later discovered that the contractor hired to clean the streets failed to equip the vacuum trucks with the required HEPA filters. [New York Daily News, 8/14/2002; Kupferman, 2003 pdf file]

(my emphasis added)

by avahome on Thu Sep 21, 2006 at 11:32:27 PM EST

Thanks (none / 0) (#2)

Hi Avahome,

Thanks so much for all of this information. I will try and investigate it further and get back with the results.

by Lee Tilson on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 09:58:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]