It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Flint water crisis and EPA negligence

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 01:37 AM
link   
ETA: I put this in skunk works because I can't provide you with documentation or figures. I am basing this on years of studying environmental policy, public health, and government corruption. They make for quite a toxic stew when one stirs them up.

My first OP, but I think it needs to be explored further.

I've been watching the water crisis in Flint and I can't help but think there is a conspiracy deeper than just the local and state government covering for themselves. Considering how egregious this violation is I think that, lacking massive pressure from the EPA to bring action from the DOJ, that somebody in the EPA or a state agency under EPA delegation has dropped the ball.

Check out the Safe Water Drinking Act at www.epa.gov....

There are established standards. Mark my words, if this ever gets the investigation it deserves then the EPA is going to look very bad. It's the only reason there isn't more going on and why nobody is being charged. People should be going to prison for this. Lives have been negatively impacted forever.

In Washington the state Department of Health will make a stink over levels of secondary contaminates that are marginally over the maximum contaminate level in a public water system, contaminates that don't cause any real health effects, but somehow Flint was pushing out poison. No charges filed. I hope the civil suits go after the whole spectrum and include all the local, state, and federal entities that should have prevented this. Our president is making deals about climate change while children in his country are being handicapped by their drinking water. Bravo.
edit on 2/12/16 by Ksihkehe because: To clarify forum location. Could have been health, could have been general, could have been predictions... whatever.



(post by TheVinylPollution removed for a manners violation)

posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheVinylPollution
You're an Idiot
care to elaborate or will it get in the way of your narrative? I'd love some facts that tell a different story other than I'm seeing possible.

Congrats on using the proper version of "you're" though. Usually trolls miss out on the finer points of language.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 04:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

The EPA rep involved has already resigned along with State officials.

This is a Flint action as well as a Michigan action.

Seems complicated to throw the blame any further than that ... but, do you have any concrete evidence that EPA has some greater hand of malfeasance in this, or, is it just your most likely "usual suspect"?



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 05:46 AM
link   
Flint citizens were not being poisoned until they switched to the Flint River. A known polluted river. How about starting there. That is the one undeniable fact. The EPA, state or fed, did not make that decision. Hope they all slept well while babies were given poisoned formula. There is no way to gloss this over so stop trying and stop denying it. I love ATS, but the moderators need to let this issue rip. You don't hold back on anything else, why this one?



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Not really as you wouldn't understand, cos you're an idiot.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Ksihkehe

The EPA rep involved has already resigned along with State officials.

This is a Flint action as well as a Michigan action.

Seems complicated to throw the blame any further than that ... but, do you have any concrete evidence that EPA has some greater hand of malfeasance in this, or, is it just your most likely "usual suspect"?


Not a shred, that's why it's in the skunk works section. When you switch a class A water system source there are standards and testing involved. It just seems fishy. Large municipal water systems are regulated.

It's not my 'usual suspect' as I have never offered them up as a scapegoat for drinking water issues, ever, either here or in conversations with people.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
Flint citizens were not being poisoned until they switched to the Flint River. A known polluted river. How about starting there. That is the one undeniable fact. The EPA, state or fed, did not make that decision. Hope they all slept well while babies were given poisoned formula. There is no way to gloss this over so stop trying and stop denying it. I love ATS, but the moderators need to let this issue rip. You don't hold back on anything else, why this one?


I'm not sure why you want the mods to censor this topic because you seem to recognize how bad it was.

The decision to use the river was certainly the cause, but this kind of water system is regulated. No matter who decided to change the source there are regulations in place to assess and mitigate problems with source water. There is no reason that mitigation shouldn't have been required to control the corrosive properties of the water. It doesn't make sense to me which is why I think there is more than meets the eye.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheVinylPollution
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Not really as you wouldn't understand, cos you're an idiot.


You've obviously spent a number of years as an expert in the field of public water supply and the regulations relating to it as is evidenced by your truly fascinating insight into the Flint water crisis.

I must yield to your superior knowledge of the topic. I hope they bring you in as a consultant to lend a hand.




posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 05:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe


There was a reason. Money. The same reason the change was made in the first place. The person/s who made that decision, could not turn around and spend all the savings on treatment. Are you digging into this story for yourself or repeating what someone wanted you to know?


ETA I did no mean R.I.P, I meant let the conversation rip. There has been a stifling of this story in some places.
edit on 13-2-2016 by MOMof3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

I've not been fed anything. I work in environmental health so public drinking water is something I'm very familiar with. I run the water lab for my end of the county. People call me when they have questions about their well. I'm not just saying it's fishy because it's a topic that's hot. I really think it's odd based on experience.

At any rate it seems that conspiracy-minded folks aren't feeling my vibe, so I may be completely wrong. Not the first time and certainly not the last.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Conspiracy theories are great. But you should do your homework on this one. The truth is pretty glaring. Someone is going to prison. It just has to be found who lied about the test results from the MDEQ, the ones responsible for the tests and denying treatment.

The Emergency Manager and Snyder that started the whole thing to save money. Don't worry they are safe and wont have to pay.

Of course, the rest of us will, to pay for this man made disaster.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

As for me, I think something is seriously wrong. They said its the pipes and not the water supply, yet they aren't replacing those pipes. I don't understand why, if it's a problem related to pipes why they aren't shoving all the money they can and beginning to replace those pipes.

It's all wrong to me, and I don't understand any of it. I don't understand why federal government is sitting around sending money for birth control to latin america but supposedly doesn't have enough money to fix the water problem in Flint.

Therefore, it seems the problem must logically be more than money and more than the pipes. But exactly what the problem is, doesn't seem to be being looked into or even trying to be fixed. It's like suddenly, the government just doesn't care.

And that is an egregious wrong. I would like to know what you find out, or can figure out in time. I think if it is determined that these people will be unable to get clean drinking water here, that the money for their homes needs given to them somehow so they can have a choice to move to a location with water. Right now none of them can simply sell their houses on the market and move and they purchased these homes in good faith of having drinking water there.

If I was them though, I would pick up and go anywhere else. Even if it meant taking only the shirt on my back, but that is me. I wouldn't subject myself and my family to those conditions.


edit on 13-2-2016 by Kitana because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Kitana




They said its the pipes and not the water supply, yet they aren't replacing those pipes.

False.
time.com...
edit on 2/13/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Well that's good they start next month. I hope they do actually replace them then - its been this way for way too long!



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Kitana

Not sure $55 million will be enough.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join