It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Steve Johnson, the ultimate terrorist.

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 03:05 PM
Part of this government's initial response to the destruction caused by hurricane Katrina was to remove 'some' of the pollution control standards in the surrounding states hit by the storm. On day three, they decided to remove pollution control from all fuel refineries throughout the country.
They are good about taking care of the industry before taking care of people, but that should be expected by now.
The 'waivers' initially issued by EPA were supposed to expire on 9-15-05, but since it obviously saved the oil-industry a significant amount of money in refining cost, they have decided to go against the Clean Air Act and make the 'waivers' permanent.

In Sept. 04 the National Institute of Environmental Health Science issued this statement:
"Children who live in polluted communities are five times more likely to have clinically low lung function-less than 80 percent of the lung function expected for their age. New data from the Children's Health Study suggests that pollutants from vehicle emissions and fossil fuels hinder lung development and limit breathing capacity for a lifetime."

In January '05 they issued this statement.
"Among U.S. residents, 1 in 2 men and 1 in 3 women will develop cancer at some point in their lifetimes. Research shows that environmental factors trigger diseases like cancer, especially when someone has a family history,"

Now they have increased the amount of allowable pollution to be released into our atmosphere?

My question is, if one division of our government (NIEHS) is willing to acknowledge and advise the american people of the amount of lung function and capacity we have lost due to airborne pollutants, how can another division of our government, a 'protection agency', intentionally make the problem worse?
When this government is admitting that 50% of the men and 33% of the women in this country will develop cancer in their lifetime, the facts in this case are probably better left unturned.

Is there anyway to force our government to acknowledge the effects of their own actions when they pose a conflict of interest as obvious as this does?
Can Steve Johnson be charged with malfeasance in office? By whom ?

The Arizona attorney general would not accept the charges I tried to file against the government 6 months ago. They told me to take it to the national level, but I think 'genocide' might be too outrageous of a charge to march up to the white house by myself with.

Can I file a civil suit against another citizen of this country, even if he is the director of the EPA? The only evidence I have is the information provided to us by other divisions of the same government he represents.

posted on Jan, 5 2006 @ 03:19 PM
I could have swore I put this in the 'terrorism' thread,

if it didn't get moved here by a moderator , could somebody put it where it belongs, please ?

posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 02:53 AM
well you hit the nail on the head.

also you may want to add that in the disaster area more oil has been leeked than in that tanker incident off of Alaska.

just something that didnt make it into the news.

posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 10:24 PM
Another great post submersible.

Thanks. ...Please look for an organization that might consider the case. The legal route is the only one we have left, and even that's being dismantled.

new topics

top topics

log in