“The Poison Papers” Reveal EPA Collusion with Chemical Industry

The Bioscience Resource Project and the Center for Media and Democracy recently released documents revealing  decades of collusion between the chemical industry and government regulators, most notably the EPA. The documents, available at PoisonPapers.org , detail a history of secrecy and cover-ups on the part of government agencies charged with regulating the use of harmful chemicals in industry and agriculture.

While the EPA was declaring your family’s cattle tank a wetland, and fining property owners for digging a pond on their own property, it was simultaneously colluding with industry to conceal the toxicity of widely used chemical agents, and to keep such information from the public.

The Poison Papers are a compilation of over 20,000 documents obtained from federal agencies and chemical manufacturers via open records requests and public interest litigation. They include scientific studies and summaries of studies, internal memos and reports, meeting minutes, strategic discussions, and sworn testimonies.
 
The majority of these documents have been scanned and digitized for the first time and represent nearly three tons of material. The regulatory agency sources of these documents include: the EPA, the USDA Forest Service, the FDA, the Veterans Administration, and the Department of Defense. Chemical manufacturers referenced in the documents include: Dow, Monsanto, DuPont, and Union Carbide, as well as many smaller manufacturers and the commercial testing companies who worked for them.

The government regulatory agencies involved include the EPA, the USDA  Forest Service, the FDA, the Veterans Administration, and the Department of Defense. The chemical manufacturers include Dow, Monsanto, DuPont, and Union Carbide.

Much of the material was collected by environmental writer and activist Carol Van Strum, author of Bitter Fog: Herbicides and Human Rights.

In her words:

 “[T]he stark truth revealed by these 50 years of documents is that the entire pesticide industry could not exist without lies, coverups, rampant fraud, and government enablers.”

Nor without unelected government bureaucrats working in secret and answerable to no one. The EPA has a history of “actions that are illegal, unethical and incompetent,” in the words of Forbes contributor Henry I. Miller. The agency has a

 longstanding practice of buying influence by doling out hundreds of millions of dollars each year to certain favored nonprofit organizations—money that, according to the inspector general and Government Accountability Office, is dispersed with no public notice, competition or accountability. The GAO investigators documented systematic malfeasance by regulators, including: (1) making grants to grantees who were unable to fulfill the terms of the grants; (2) favoring an exclusive clique of grantees without opening the grants to competition; (3) funding “environmental” grants for activities that lack any apparent environmental benefit; and (4) failing to ensure that grantees performed the objectives identified in the grants.

The Poison Papers revelations should put the agency out of favor across the political spectrum.

What is novel in the Poison Papers is the abundant evidence that EPA and other regulators were often knowing participants or even primary instigators of these cover-ups. These regulators failed to inform the public of the hazards of dioxins and other chemicals; of evidence of fraudulent independent testing; and of widespread human exposure. The papers thus reveal, in the often-incriminating words of the participants themselves, an elaborate universe of deception and deceit surrounding many pesticides and synthetic chemicals. The chemicals most often discussed in the documents include dioxins, herbicides and pesticides (such as 2,4-D, Dicamba, Permethrin, Atrazine, and Agent Orange) and PCBs. Some of these chemicals are among the most toxic and persistent ever manufactured. Except for PCBs, almost every chemical discussed in the Poison Papers is still manufactured and sold today, either as products or as product contaminants.

Advertisements

Damned Cheek

I wasn’t going to comment on this, but Rush Limbaugh began his broadcast today once again whining about the reaction to President Trump’s comments to the French 1st Lady.  Trump expressed his view that the 1st Lady is “in such good shape.” Rush complained that a man can’t compliment a woman “these days.” And it’s all the fault of feminists.

Let’s get this straight: a gentleman does not presume to assess the physical attributes of a lady –and certainly not someone that he has just met, and certainly not out loud in public. (And if he does so in private, some of his friends will think less of him.)

This is not a new development, nor a product of feminism, but part of the code of conduct of Western Civilization.

(Compliments generally have traditionally been something of a minefield among the upper classes in the Western world. I remember a story about an English gentleman having a guest removed from his home, because the miscreant “praised my chairs.”)

Historical response to such behavior: “How dare you, sir?!”

During some periods of history, making personal remarks about a lady of one’s acquaintance might result in one’s being challenged to meet an aggrieved father, husband, brother or suitor on “the field of honor” with possibly lethal results.

Rush Limbaugh dates such behavior as beginning in the “late [19]60’s or early ’70’s.” He whines that “nobody understands manners.” But that’s because Rush Limbaugh doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Someplace, maybe in Innocents Abroad,  Mark Twain relates an incident from when he and his buddy were in Italy. Upon seeing a lovely young woman, and believing that no one around them would understand English, he exclaimed to his friend, “Look at that girl! How beautiful she is!”

The young woman replied in perfect English: “I thank the gentleman more for the apparent sincerity of the compliment than for the manner of its delivery.”

Mortified, Mark Twain immediately fled the scene, a response that I don’t doubt would be completely inscrutable to Rush Limbaugh.

And, alas, maybe to the President as well.

Linda Sarsour, Portrait of a Hater and a Hypocrite

A wolf in progressive clothing.

“Linda Sarsour is a dangerous demagogue who craves attention and revels in the spotlight. Ever the self-promoter, Sarsour is a master at manipulating leftist elements within the mainstream media into providing her with a platform to disseminate her odious views. The Washington Post is the latest press outlet to fall victim to her manipulations, allowing her to promote herself on their opinion page. This despite her well documented tribalism and anti-Semitism. She has made appearances on other left-wing media outlets as well where her rabid anti-Semitism has shamefully been left largely unchallenged by craven or ignorant hosts. ”

Read: Ari Lieberman Linda Sarsour, Portrait of a Hater and a Hypocrite

Paris Olympic Bid –and Everyday Life –in Jeopardy

Police have removed  more than 2000 migrants from the Porte de la Chapelle area of Paris, and bussed them to temporary shelters. The removal follows complaints by local residents about the deteriorating quality of life in the area.

Paris’s chances to host the Olympic Games in 2024 have been put in doubt by the Muslim migrant enclaves that visitors must navigate to enter the proposed site.

“No-go zones,” where even the police fear to enter or pursue criminal suspects, pockmark the map of Paris, making it nearly impossible for Paris residents –particularly women — to carry on their normal activities.

Areas like Place de la Chapelle, formerly a quiet square behind the Gare du Nord train station, have been transformed in a short space of time into havens for immigrant rough sleepers and drug dealers which are said to be increasingly intimidating for many people, especially women.

According go the Sunday Times of London, since 2015 a huge influx of immigrants – mostly single men – have begun sleeping in parks, on the streets and under the arches of the Metro bridges in northeast Paris.

They have been accused of verbally abusing women in the streets, routinely shouting “Bitch” and “Dirty whore”. Street robbery and drug taking have also become rife.

Visitors must pass through La Chappelle to visit the city’s stadiums. It is also near the main train stations used by many tourists.

But there’s an app for that.

A new app called  No-Go Zone has been introduced in Paris to warn people if they have entered a dangerous area. Users can also “upload current incidents, ranging from attacks to sexual assaults, and they will beamed straight to a smartphone or device.”

One Parisian reviewer said:   . . . ‘It is an indispensable application for anyone who thinks that the cultural ‘enrichment’ of non-natives is not compatible with our way of life,’ 

[L]ast month a vast clean-up operation was launched when the Olympic committee came to visit for an inspection ahead of the Games. They moved out 1600 people in 24 hours. I find it contemptible that the mayor’s office acted only when there was media attention.
A  La Chapelle resident calling herself “Laurence” recently began a petition asking President Emmanuel Macron and Socialist Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo to clean up the area.
As a woman you start adopting defensive measures. You don’t go here or there. Avoid certain routes. Take your kids to school another way. I stopped going to my tobacconist and some cafes because suddenly there were only men inside. I have to ask the teenage drug dealers politely to step aside in the foyer just so I can get to my own door.

Who is He to Judge ?

Italian police in late June broke up what is described as a “drug-fueled gay orgy” in the home of an aide to Francesco Cardinal Coccopalmerio. The Cardinal is one of Pope Francis’s top advisors.

As reported in Newsmax:

Vatican police raided a gay orgy at the apartment of a Cardinal’s aide and Pope Francis was described by Italian media as “enraged.”

The apartment, where Francesco Cardinal Coccopalmerio’s secretary lives, belongs to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, the arm charged with investigating clerical sex abuse, noted the New York Post, citing the Italian newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano.

Coccopalmerio is a key aide to Pope Francis.

Police arrested the secretary, who is a priest, after taking him to a clinic for detox from the drugs he ingested, noted the Post.

In 2013, the Pope responded “Who am I to judge?” gay clergy, when asked by reporters aboard the papal plane returning from Brazil.

“If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?” Francis told reporters, speaking in Italian but using the English word “gay.”

Francis’s words could not have been more different from those of Benedict XVI, who in 2005 wrote that homosexuality was “astrong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil,” and an “objective disorder.” The church document said men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” should not become priests.

It is unclear what has His Holiness so “enraged,” unless it is simply the inconvenience of having to bail the good fathers out of jail.

 

Congresswomen Demand Inequality for Mika

Image result for mika and joe

A growing number of female members of Congress are demanding that the President be more respectful to the ladies.

This follows a tweet by President Trump in which he called Mika Brzezinski  “low I Q Crazy Mika” and Joe Scarborough “Psycho Joe.”

As reported on Yahoo:

The stunning tweets provoked the ire of several female leaders from both sides of the aisle, who were quick to call Trump out for behavior that was “not presidential.”

“This is not okay. As a female in politics I am often criticized for my looks. We should be working to empower women,” said Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Kan.

and

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., reportedly called Trump’s tweets “distasteful.”

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, called for an end to Trump’s rhetoric. Both Collins and Capito are key votes on the controversial Republican health care legislation Trump is hoping to get through the Senate.

“This has to stop — we all have a job — 3 branches of gov’t and media. We don’t have to get along, but we must show respect and civility,” Collins tweeted.

and more from Democrats:

“This is not okay, Mr. President. Since our President clearly has a problem with women, let’s send more to Congress. Women of America, you need to run!” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

“When you ridicule a woman for her looks in front of an online audience in the millions, that is called #CyberBullying. Absolutely not OK,” said Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Ala.

Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, D-Calif., called the tweets “vile,” “despicable” and “disgraceful.”

“Two years ago this week, President Obama sang ‘Amazing Grace.’ Today, we have a president who’s amazingly graceless. These tweets are vile,” said Roybal-Allard.

“Responding to criticism w/ personal insults is not presidential. It’s not even adult. POTUS must grow up, put the phone down, get to work,” said Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif.

“Bullying women for how they look is insulting & damages the integrity of the office you hold,” said Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Ill.

“I wish @realDonaldTrump would focus more on improving #WomensHealth and less on their appearance. #TheyGoLowWeGoHigh,” said Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y.

Poor, poor, poor Mika!

That mean, mean President said something mean to poor Mika! She’s not strong enough for that! Why, she wouldn’t even have a job without her family connections! I’m not sure she can survive an unkind remark from that big, mean man!

Here is what Trump tweeted:

“I heard poorly rated @Morning_Joe speaks badly of me (don’t watch anymore). Then how come low I.Q. Crazy Mika, along with Psycho Joe, came to Mar-a-Lago 3 nights in a row around New Year’s Eve, and insisted on joining me. She was bleeding badly from a face-lift. I said no!” the commander in chief exclaimed.

Did no woman in Congress take umbrage at Trump’s calling Brzezinski “low I.Q. Crazy”? They all complain that Trump was mocking MB’s appearance, for some reason.

Mika Brzezinski has all the delicate sensibilities of a fence post. She tirelessly slanders the President. She is a consumate professional at slandering the President.  She and her Joe regularly slander the President.  

So why are the congresswomen upset with Trump’s “incivility”? Why are they harping at the President’s remarks about Mika, with not a word for poor Joe.  After all, Trump called him a “Psycho.” Such a terrible insult to Joe Scarborough’s looks!

In an op-ed in the WaPo, The Betrothed write:

More significant is Mr. Trump’s continued mistreatment of women. It is disturbing that the president of the United States keeps up his unrelenting assault on women. . ..  the 45th president is setting the poorest of standards for our children. We were heartened to hear a number of Republican lawmakers call out Mr. Trump for his offensive words and can only hope that the women who are closest to him will follow their examples. It would be the height of hypocrisy to claim the mantle of women’s empowerment while allowing a family member to continue such abusive conduct.

Yes, it’s  like the Clinton administration, when we all waited . . . and waited . . . . and waited for Hillary –the woman who would be the president today if the members of the media had their way –to rein in her rapist-husband. And as for “setting the poorest of standards for our children,” maybe The Betrothed don’t remember that all across the nation, parents shooed the kids from the room when the news came on, what with the daily fellatio update, tales of stained dresses, flashing that thong, etc., ad nauseam.

But it’s a poor analogy, because President Trump hasn’t broken any laws. Or actually hurt anyone.

So all this faux outrage amounts to “the height of hypocrisy” as The Betrothed say.