It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by LaTouffe
They are educated to lie.
Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by Mdv2
Meanwhile in America, no evidence of any coverup.
While not directly remade to radiation from Fukushima Daiichi, the quoted post (I've been quoting myself a lot lately, it would seem I've covered a lot of this material at some time or another as have a number if talented and knowledge le folks) does demonstrate official fudging when dealing with radiation data:
Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
Here is some THEY activity at it's finest for you and what's more is it's right here in America In MUD 105 precinct 9. I lived out that way up until about 6 or 7 years ago.
HOUSTON— Newly-released e-mails from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality show the agency’s top commissioners directed staff to continue lowering radiation test results, in defiance of federal EPA rules.
The e-mails and documents, released under order from the Texas Attorney General to KHOU-TV, also show the agency was attempting to help water systems get out of formally violating federal limits for radiation in drinking water. Without a formal violation, the water systems did not have to inform their residents of the increased health risk.
Data tampering, plain and simple.
So here we have a confirmed case in the US of selective sampling and reporting of radiation contamination of public water supplies. And all of this took place well before Fukushima became a concern.
“It’s a conspiracy at the TCEQ of the highest order,” said Tom Smith, of the government watchdog group Public Citizen. “The documents have indicted the management of this commission in a massive cover-up to convince people that our water is safe to drink when it’s not.”
He said it, not me. In case anyone missed it, the TCEQ is the group mentioned the BP thread linked in my sig that had air quality monitors maxed out when power was lost to the oil and chemical refineries in my area.
At the time it was reported that the instruments were providing faulty data, now I'm not so sure we weren't expose to greater contamination than we were told about back on Chernobyl day here in Texas City.
Just exactly what was it that was manipulated?
However, the TCEQ would consistently subtract off each test’s margin of error from those results, making the actual testing results appear lower than they actually were. In MUD 105’s case, the utility was able to avoid violations for nearly 20 years, thanks to the TCEQ subtractions.
It seems like someone finally found a clue. Or a conscience.
In an e-mail from Oct. 30, 2007, a TCEQ drinking water team leader began questioning a senior director about if it would be appropriate for the state agency to stop subtracting the counting error from test results to comply with all federal regulations.
This concerned person was basically told, "yeah, we know we're supposed to be counting the other way but we don't like those numbers so we will keep doing it our way instead."
And why was it reported this way? No other reason than bureaucratic ass-covering:
However, the TCEQ also told the Council: “Under existing TCEQ policy, calculation of the violation accounts for the reporting error of each radionuclide analysis. Maintaining this calculation procedure will eliminate approximately 35 violations.”
Official-level carpet sweeping of data so as to not inform the public. And who is affected by this? Many people, there are a lot of people that reside in that area one of which is highlighted in the article:
As a result, the subtracting method continued and residents of MUD 105, like Brenda Haynes, were never sent a required notice of violation. That notice would have informed them about the excessive alpha radiation in their water.
Anyone want to guess what causes this sort of radiation? Uranium and plutonium among other isotopes.
Guess where that leads...
Haynes came down with thyroid cancer while living in the MUD 105 district and continued drinking the water even after she was diagnosed. Although she will never know for certain if the water had any connection with her illness, Haynes and her husband are angry that they never were given appropriate notice about the added risks she was taking into her body while sick.
“We were put at more risk than what we thought,” said Ian Haynes, who added he and his wife would have been making different choices about what they consumed had they been warned.
This is sounding eeriy familiar to the situation in Japan.
Here are some names to add to our list of snakes. Careful, these Texas rattlers are not going to be giving you the courtesy of a warnig rattle:
The Texas Water Advisory Council, which reviewed and discussed the TCEQ testimony at a meeting on June 7, 2004, was comprised of some of the highest ranking public officials in Texas. Minutes from the TWAC’s annual report reveal that the members present that day to hear about TCEQ’s plan included then-chair of the TCEQ Commission Kathleen Hartnett White, then-Agriculture Commissioner Susan Combs, General Land Office Commissioner Jerry Patterson, Sen. Robert Duncan, and other lawmakers and state leaders.
What do these yellow-bellied, good for nothing, low-down varmints have to say about this?
A spokesperson for Commissioner Patterson wrote KHOU-TV to say, “I’ve checked with Commissioner Patterson and sent him the report and he doesn’t remember “squat” about that committee,” wrote press secretary Jim Suydam. “He won’t be calling you.”
Sounds like "shut up and quit asking questions" to me. I wonder what else there is...
The meeting summary says that “Commissioner Combs stated small towns are going broke,” and further says, “Commissioner Combs asked what would the feds do if the state didn’t enforce.” The minutes indicate that someone at the meeting said there would be federal enforcement and loss of primacy.
At the same meeting, the summary says that the EPA had already warned that if Texas didn’t implement the rules, the EPA might take over the regulation of Texas water systems. The notes say that as a result “Texas will lose $66 million if delegation of the drinking water program is lost.”
This sounds a little like a scenario I've been discussing with a friend regarding possible fuure implications of what is happening right now on a global scale. It makes me wonder if this hasn't been done on purpose so as to intentionally bring down the EPA...
Then Chair of the TCEQ Commission Kathleen Hartnett White, who also sat on the Texas Water Advisory Council, says the decision to continue the subtraction was a good one.
Along with this one
“We did not believe the science of health effects justified EPA setting the standard where they did,” said White. She added, “I have far more trust in the vigor of the science that TCEQ assess, than I do EPA.”
tell me that the people who sit in positions of responsibility are out of touch and hear only what they want to hear as long as it supports what they think. I'm guessing the Ms Hartnett White has never heard of the dangers of internal exposure to alpha emitters.
Yet another example of politicians not wanting to be answerable to this whom they serve:
Lt. Governor David Dewhurst did not respond to written questions related to this story. The only comment from his office came from a spokesperson who wrote: “Just FYI—I’m told by our legislative staff that Texas Water Advisory Council was created in 2001, but was repealed in 2007. Evidently, the statutes creating the council made it clear that that it was an advisory board only, so they made no decisions.”
So all we have are the words of an unnamed spokesperson but the content is quite telling. If the Water Advisory Council cannot make or enforce decisions, what good is it?
Aologies for this monster post, this just hit really close to home for me.
TIS, my heart goes out to you. I cannot fathom what you're going through and can only say that my wife and I have discussed taking in a Japanese family and I can say that from your posts, yours would be high on the list. This artlce I've linked, though, shows that we might not be that much better off than you.
I like this writer, he reminds me of us ATSers in that he links his sources and has done a lot of research for his piece. Maybe I will invite him here.
Source for above quotes
So, if it's happened in the past what do you think the likelyhood is of something similar happening presently or in the future?
Originally posted by AgentSmith
Due to being a bit of a knob, I was going to post a sarcastic reply about using the search function as I had already read about the article on here this morning. Imagine my dismay when I found this rather important news was lost from sight and actually took some searching to find!
What a shame space aliens, moon conspiracies and 9/11 nukes are more important than what was clearly a very real and confirmed conspiracy to lie to the public about an ongoing and very severe international incident..