Firefighters group takes on Giuliani over handling of 9/11

by Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON - In an effort reminiscent of the bitter "Swift Boat" campaign during the 2004 presidential race, a group of New York firefighters who lost sons in the Sept. 11 World Trade Center attacks is organizing a political committee to take on former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

A leader of the 9 /11 Firefighters and Families group met Tuesday with union leaders and political consultants, readying plans to set up a tax-exempt committee that would fund appearances and a media drive against Giuliani's campaign for the Republican nomination.

Jim Riches, a New York Deputy Fire Chief whose firefighter son was killed in the 2001 disaster, said the group aimed to raise doubts about the central premise of Giuliani's presidential campaign - his leadership role in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks. "If we have to follow him around all 2008, we'll do it," Riches said.

Lauded as "America's Mayor" for his blunt talk and compassion amid the attacks, Giuliani's political stock soared and he went on to build a multimillion-dollar consulting group emphasizing his leadership skills.

"A majority of firefighters believe that Rudy was a great leader on 9 /11," said Howard Safir, who ran New York fire and police departments under Giuliani and now heads First Responders for Rudy, a group affiliated with Giuliani's campaign.

But the former New York mayor's frequent references to Sept. 11 on the campaign trail have infuriated Riches and about 20 activists who lost firefighter sons. The New Yorkers blame Giuliani for decision-making failures that they feel contributed to the deaths.

After protesting near Giuliani fundraising events in New York to little fanfare, they now plan to raise their voices in Florida, South Carolina and other primary states seen as essential to Giuliani's path to the GOP nomination. "When he announced his plans to run for president, we felt he was doing it on the backs of our dead sons," Riches said.

The Sept. 11 group already is being compared by some political observers to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group, which damaged Democratic Sen. John F. Kerry's candidacy in 2004 by impugning his Vietnam War service in the Navy. Both groups feature a self-sustaining constituency of passionate supporters and are aided by outside political forces eager to use them as vehicles in the presidential race.

"Starting small doesn't mean you can count them out," said Stephanie Cutter, a political consultant who countered attacks as Kerry's press aide in 2004. "When the Swift Boat group started . . . they had no money and no plan. In a matter of months they had enough money to go up with an ad buy, and that triggered their relevance."

The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth raised more than $25 million for media buys. Some of the money was donated in multimillion-dollar installments from reliable Republican fundraisers such as Texas businessmen T. Boone Pickens Jr. and Bob J. Perry. Last December, the group was fined nearly $300,000 by the Federal Elections Commission for exceeding spending limits and acting in concert with GOP campaign efforts.

The Swift Boat operation made use of an Internal Revenue Service exemption that allowed so-called 527 groups - a reference to IRS code - to raise funds and participate in political debate as long as they adhered to funding and election rules.

"To the extent that new 527 groups would like to do what the Swift Boat group did in 2004 may be subject down the road to much stiffer penalties than the Swift Boat people got," said Paul S. Ryan, associate legal counsel with the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan campaign-finance watchdog group.

According to several participants in Tuesday's discussions between Riches and his supporters from the International Association of Firefighters, the Sept. 11 group is leaning toward using a 527 structure. Riches said the group already had been pledged nearly $200,000 and hoped to raise as much as $1 million for a Web site, media buys and campaign travel.

The Giuliani campaign, reeling in recent weeks from dropping poll numbers and running controversies, already has taken steps to blunt the firefighters' attacks. Heading the campaign's First Responders for Rudy, Safir has appeared on several political talk shows alongside Riches but has been careful not to engage him face to face, recognizing the delicacy of debating a Sept. 11 victim.

"We owe all families that lost loved ones on 9 /11 an unpayable debt, but finally this small group is admitting that this is a political attack with no other objective than to tarnish Mayor Giuliani's good name," Safir said Tuesday.

Earlier this year, the union produced an ad for its Web site that featured Riches and other New York firefighters criticizing Giuliani for blunders before and after Sept. 11. The New Yorkers claimed that Giuliani failed to provide first responders with proper radio equipment before the attacks and afterward sharply reduced recovery teams at the World Trade Center site even though the bodies of many firefighters had not been found.

Giuliani and his aides have long disputed the radios' role in the collapse of emergency communications on Sept. 11. In a recent interview, Safir contended that the "radios worked" but the repeaters - which can extend the range of the radios into high-rise buildings - did not.

The Sept. 11 group's effort to raise questions about Giuliani's performance before and after the attacks "takes on Rudy's strength," Republican consultant Tom Edmonds said. "I'm not sure that will go over with an American public that was impressed with what they saw."

WNYC - News - NY Lawmakers Blast Feds Over 9/11 Health Screening

WNYC - News - "NY Lawmakers Blast Feds Over 9/11 Health Screening

NEW YORK, NY December 16, 2007 —New York lawmakers say the federal government's plan to stop health monitoring for ground zero workers outside the metro area is unfair and misguided.

REPORTER: New York's congressional delegation and some ailing workers stood outside the World Trade Center site Saturday to protest this week's decision. Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney says on 9/11, people came from many places to work on the toxic rubble.

MALONEY: They came from every single state in our country, and now many of them are sick.

REPORTER: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services filed paperwork this week canceling plans to pay a company to screen the affected workers. Officials were concerned the program could cost far more money than Congress has provided."

9/11 WTC Memorial Will Betray America

The “National September 11 Memorial and Museum at the World Trade Center” foundation, under the direction of Chairman Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City is currently conducting a nationwide fundraising tour. However, what Bloomberg is not telling the American people is that the memorial will remake the WTC site so that it does not acknowledge the attacks. As per the 13 member memorial jury that dictated the memorial concept none of the authentic artifacts of the World Trade Center or 9/11 can be returned to the site “in order to preserve the integrity of the memorial.”

The jury was made up of intellectuals, artists, political appointees and one well connected 9/11 family member - who would later try and co-found upon the site the notorious “International Freedom Center” which laid responsibility for the attacks upon “an immoderate world.”

It was headed by Vartan Gregorian, born in Iran and educated in Lebanon. In his response to 9/11 he wrote “Islam, A Mosaic, Not a Monolith.” A history of Islam that told us how Muslim conquerors brought intelligence, enlightenment, and general religious tolerance while the West brought murder, plunder and religious persecution. Problems of Muslim nations today are attributed to Western colonialism and the creation of Isreal. Any transgression of Islam, no matter how barbaric, is equated with or topped by some action of the West, even if they occured ten centuries ago.

He chides Americans for their ignorance and belligerence toward Islam. Americans, he wrote, believe history is “irrelevant.” “Unfortunetly,” he wrote, “it is not.”

Except at the WTC site.

Returning any of what speaks directly to the attacks, such as the towers façade remnants or the Koenig Sphere, or identifying the victims as the “flyers of the missing” did, all that America embraced as commemorating 9/11 (because they spoke directly to the attacks) would be, the jury assured us in a brilliant display of Orwellian logic, “telling us what to think.”

Somehow, eliminating all of the authentic evidence of the crime from the site and all that we embraced as commemorating 9/11, is not “telling us what to think.”

Gazing upon the ruins of the WTC or the crushed fire trucks at the WTC site, or upon those facts of the “flyers of the missing” – “Cantor Fitzgerald, WTC 1, 104th floor” – we might conclude that the Islamic fundamentalists who attacked were “guilty” and their American targets “innocent.” We and future generations might draw from a visit to the site political and moral lessons. We, and they, might confront 9/11 and our responsibilities and obligations in response.

That, we are told, would be “didactic.” The site must be remade to eliminate that.

Instead, all history of Sept. 11, 2001 and all those authentic artifacts that speak directly to it will be discarded so that the jury can impose their own meaning upon the site.

At the WTC site, where America was attacked, a handful will control what you know in order to dictate what you think and feel.

In order that they might impose their own meaning, the jury ignored the history of the site and looked to Maya Lin’s (who sat on the jury) Vietnam War memorial for their inspiration. However, a memorial in Washington DC to a war on the other side of the world is not a viable model for a 9/11 memorial at the WTC site. No battles of Vietnam were fought on the Washington Mall; none of those soldiers whose name is on that wall died there.

The World Trade Center is the site of a vast crime against humanity. At what other place of equal or similar historical value have we discarded the history in order to impose our own meaning? Would anyone, for any reason, dismantle and dispose of the death camps at Auschwitz in order to do that? And specifically, to eliminate any moral or political lesson? Because that would be “didactic?”

Why are we doing it at the WTC?

If you discard or displace the authentic artifacts that speak directly to a history, you in effect deny it. It would be so if we did it anywhere else; it is so if we do at the WTC site.

That, however, was irrelevant to the jury.

We do not have the option of not confronting 9/11 at the WTC site. Indeed, that is what all go to the site for. The site must speak to future generations as equally as it does to us. No one may alter or omit history in order to impose their own meaning and to dictate what visitors should think and feel.

Yet this is all we are getting at the WTC site.

Bloomberg understands what the memorial must do; despite the fact that his will ignore 9/11 he claims it reminds us to “Never forget” and inspires us “Never again.” It, of course, does neither and that was the intent of the jury: to help us forget and thus inspire no more response than wallowing in the wonder of ourselves.

He is just clueless as to why. In response to the arrest of several men for allegedly plotting a jihadist threat against JFK airport his police commissioner told New Yorkers “to look at their world through the prism of 9/11.” In contrast, when neighborhood residents expressed concern, Bloomberg told them to “get a life. You have a better chance of being hit by lightening than killed by a terrorist.”

In response to the terrorists’ attacks upon America there was courage, there was heroism, there was sacrifice, there was compassion and there was wisdom. First, however, and this is the virtue from whence all those others come, there was humility. From the office workers who helped each other escape, to the firefighters who responded, from those trapped in the towers above, to the airline passengers in the skies over Western Pennsylvania. Thanks to Michael Bloomberg and the memorial jury, however, humility will not be found at the WTC site. And that is the final betrayal of 9/11.

Source: Original Article here
By Guest: Michael Burke on Dec 16, 07
For more info: see http://captbillyburke.blog.com/

Michael Burke

note: On 9/11, my brother, FDNY Capt. William F. Burke, Jr., of Eng. Co. 21 gave his life. I served on the family advisory committee on the memorial to the Lower Manhattan Development Corp and the advisory committee on the memorial and museum center.

Federal Government To Scrap Center For Those With 9/11 Health Issues

Bush White House abandons 911 World Trade Center Vets again...

December 14, 2007

The federal government's decision to cancels plans for a national processing center dealing with health problems stemming from the September 11th terrorist attacks has local lawmakers demanding answers.

The Department of Health and Human Services filed paperwork Thursday scrapping plans to hire a company to set up the center, saying it just doesn't have money to cover the $165 million cost of the project.

The center was designed to improve various September 11th-related health programs and help victims living outside of the New York area find coverage.

Five lawmakers, including Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton, sent a letter to the head of HHS asking him to further explain the move.

A noon protest is scheduled for Saturday near the World Trade Center site

World Trade Center Rescue Workers Health Problems Extend Beyond First Responders

World Trade Center Rescue Workers Health Problems Extend Beyond First Responders

World Trade Center first responders are not the only people suffering physical and mental health problems as a result of their work at Ground Zero following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Thousands of World Trade Center Emergency Workers who helped with recovery efforts in the days, weeks and months after the Twin Towers fell might also be coping with a wide variety of physical and emotional problems, says a study published in the November issue of the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

In the days after 9/11, thousands of rescue workers descended on Ground Zero to help with recovery efforts. Sifting through dust and rubble, sometimes with their bare hands, many lacked the clothing and equipment that could have kept them safe from harm. Several studies earlier this year confirmed that Ground Zero first responders were suffering from ill health as a result of their exposure to toxic dust at the site. Released in May, the initial findings of a three-year study conducted by the Mt. Sinai Medical Center found that of the 9,000 WTC first responders examined, 70-percent had suffered some type of lung ailment after the attacks, and that 60-percent still faced respiratory problems. Another report released by the FDNY in early May reported that cases of the rare lung disease sarcoidosis had risen dramatically among firefighters and EMS workers who were first responders at Ground Zero. And the New York City Department of Health also found that one in eight first responders still suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Now, the New York State Department of Health has released findings of a study that investigated the health consequences suffered by 1,423 members of the New York State Police, National Guard and Department of Transportation who worked at Ground Zero following the attacks. A small number of study participants – 110 in all – where present at Ground Zero immediately after the attacks, and where caught up in the toxic dust cloud that was created when the Twin Towers collapsed. But the vast majority of the study participants worked at Ground Zero during the last two weeks of September 2001, and they would have had somewhat less exposure to toxic dust than World Trade Center first responders. Unfortunately, according to the New York State Department of Health’s study, lessened exposure did not translate into fewer health problems.

The New York State Department of Health evaluated these World Trade Center rescue workers in 2002-2003. While the 110 rescue workers who where present at Ground Zero on September 11 reported the most frequent and severe mental and physical symptoms, such problems where the norm in far too many study participants. Nearly half had respiratory symptoms, with 30 percent reporting a dry cough. A third of the Ground Zero rescue workers reported worsening psychological problems, including sleep problems, fatigue and irritability. Unfortunately, only 3% of the World Trade Center rescue workers who participated in the study reported seeking treatment for their health problems.

Advocates for Ground Zero rescue workers say that even the federal government has not done enough to ease the suffering caused by the World Trade Center toxic dust. Public health authorities are already bracing for what might be the next wave of health problems related to the 9/11 tragedy - a surge in cancer and cancer-related deaths among rescue workers. Advocates for the workers estimate that the cost of caring for them could eventually reach $393 million each year. They want the federal government to formulate a long-term plan to monitor the health of September 11 rescue workers. Such a program would allow 9/11 rescue workers to receive health screenings and treatment at government expense.

Source:1

Report: 79 Percent Of 9/11 Firefighters Have Health Problems

Click Here to Read FDNY Report

Story by wnbc.com

NEW YORK -- A new FDNY report shows that 79 percent of firefighters in lower Manhattan on September 11, 2001 now have respiratory problems.

Some officials consider this the most credible proof yet of health problems, because the department has data about firefighters lungs from before 9/11.

Thursday Mayor Bloomberg also announced two new free clinics for residents and workers exposed to ground zero toxins on the lower east side and in Elmhurst, Queens.

Court To Hear Ground Zero Liability Case

Story at The New York Sun:

A federal appeals court's reading of an obscure Cold War-era law, passed amid fears of a Soviet nuclear attack, will decide whether the thousands who toiled at ground zero can hold the city liable for their exposure to toxins.

The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which sits in Manhattan, will hear oral arguments today on whether the city is immune from lawsuits brought by the thousands of firefighters, police officers, and construction workers who searched for survivors and cleaned up on the site of the World Trade Center.

Many of the workers say they now suffer from respiratory ailments linked to arsenic, asbestos, and other toxins found in the air and dust at the site. One estimate, by the lawyer who managed the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund, Kenneth Feinberg, places the cost of settling the suits at more than $1.5 billion.

At issue is a U.S. District Court ruling from last year that allows as many as 10,000 of those workers to press forward with suits against the city. The city is asking a three-judge panel of the federal appeals court to overturn that decision, which was handed down by Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who sits in Manhattan.

The conditions at ground zero have long been under the microscope, with workers alleging that the Environmental Protection Agency put out falsely optimistic air quality reports and that government agencies failed to ensure that workers were wearing respirators. In May, the city's medical examiner amended a woman's death certificate to state for the first time that toxic dust from the site had been a "contributory" cause of death.

But today's arguments, and ultimately whether the suits are upheld or thrown out, will not turn on any single fact about the conditions at ground zero or the city's actions in the days following the terrorist attacks. Instead, the court's decision could hinge entirely on its reading of the New York State Defense Emergency Act.

That law, enacted in 1951, grants immunity from lawsuits to the government and companies responding to an attack. While the enemy the Legislature had in mind was the Soviet Union, Judge Hellerstein's ruling found that the passage of history had not made the law irrelevant. The city, the judge wrote, was certainly entitled to immunity in the days immediately following the attack.

However, the judge said it was an open question whether that immunity extended months later, as work at ground zero continued: "As the emergency condition fades … the need for immunity diminishes and the obligations and duties otherwise imposed once again must be protected," Judge Hellerstein wrote.

A brief filed on behalf of the workers stresses that in the months after the September 11, 2001, attacks, ground zero became a work site where ordinary workplace regulations and responsibilities applied.

During the nine-month cleanup operation, the plaintiffs' brief argues, "the site had been radically transformed from a place of chaos and public emergency to an orderly construction site not unlike those the City of New York has often seen."

The city, on the other hand, contends that it is entitled to immunity for the entire duration of the recovery operation.

The city's brief stresses the law's Cold War history, noting that lawmakers in 1951 were anticipating cataclysmic attacks, from which any recovery would be slow.

"The rescue and recovery from a nuclear attack would greatly exceed — perhaps by years — the roughly nine-month period of the 9/11 rescue and recovery operation," the brief argues.

The panel hearing the case today is to consist of Judges Jon Newman, Sonia Sotomayor, and Richard Wesley.

A lawyer from the firm of Patton Boggs, James Tyrrell, will argue on behalf of the city.

The plaintiffs will be represented today by Kevin Russell of Howe & Russell, P.C., and Brian Shoot of Sullivan Papain Block McGrath & Cannavo, P.C.

"