Mainstream News has become the Band on the Titanic....
Alternative, Breaking, World News that Reports what the Mainstream Media Ignores.
Welcome to "The Honest Intelligence"
Please see Copyright information at bottom of page...

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Oddities and Warning Signs From the Boston Bombings - Is it too early to call this undeclared martial law? If so, what else needs to happen before we do? Curfews?

Much like the Sandy Hook shootings, the Boston bombings already have inconsistencies and oddities that need to be explored.

Did authorities know the bombings where going to occur?

Boston officials and witnesses on the scene admit that bomb sniffing dogs and roof spotters were employed before the race even began.

University of Mobile’s Cross Country Coach, Ali Stevenson, “said he saw law enforcement spotters on the roofs at the start of the race. He’s been in plenty of marathons in Chicago, D.C., Chicago, London and other major metropolitan areas but has never seen that level of security before.

The local bomb squad was also coincidentally running a “controlled explosion drill” only one mile away from the attack.

As an eyewitness reports, once the bombs went off, officials began announcing, “this is just a drill!” This logically means they were all informed of the “bomb drill” beforehand. Otherwise, why would they respond with, “this is just a drill” ?

Here are a few more oddities:

Mike Heiliger, 59, said a woman holding several bags was telling runners who were picking up their pre-race packages in downtown Boston on Saturday (April 13) that they were going to die if they participated in the event.

“I was downtown on Saturday and you know, you see these people on the street and think it’s just some nutbar,” he told The Chief from his Boston hotel on Monday. “It was a little creepy because you can identify who the runners are and I heard her say to this runner two feet away from me that, ‘If you run tomorrow you’re going to die.’”

Newsmax reports, “Screenshots of a Facebook page started floating around Monday shortly after the bombings. The page, which was reportedly created two days prior and has since been deleted, was a memorial page with the title, “Thoughts Go out To All Those Involved In The Boston Explosions.” But how could a memorial page be set up before the bombings occurred?”

And Infowars reports “An episode of the popular show Family Guy which was first aired less than a month ago eerily predicted the Boston Marathon bombings, depicting the main character detonating two bombs in addition to winning the marathon by killing the rest of the participants. . .

. . .The image of Peter killing the Boston Marathon runners even shows blood and missing limbs, a chilling reminder of the very real scenes of carnage we saw yesterday.”

These details, what happened before and during the event, are fascinating to a point but also a distraction. It is the immediate future that now must be considered carefully. Who did it and why?

Many people feel the destruction of America will be financial in nature. They point to America’s debt and horrid economy combined with the disastrous global finances as evidence.

But make no mistake, there are just as many concerned analysts that have been saying, for a longer period of time, that the destruction (or salvation) of America will be violent in nature, a second civil war. These folks believe both the tyrannical government and the militias stand ready and all that is necessary is a spark—for example, a declaration of martial law or an organized door-to-door movement to confiscate guns—to trigger hostilities.

Could this be it?

Unfortunately, the pieces are coming together.

The propaganda press is beginning to demonize the right.

CNN news host Wolf Blitzer, who has served at CNN for some 22 years and has an even longer history serving Zionism, wondered if the dirty deed was tied to “Patriot’s Day”, a state holiday in Massachusetts that celebrates the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the first battles of the American Revolution.

So, is Blitzer implying it was anti-government patriots behind the bombings? The Tea Party Revolt occurred in Boston, perhaps it was the tea-party patriots. Of course, it could have been IRS agents–yesterday was tax day, too.

CNN wasted no time parading out a “national security analyst” who proceeded to outline only two possible culprits for the bombings: al-Qaeda or “right-wing extremists.”

And it seems the government is making moves.

ABC reports, “Massachusetts National Guard increases troops in Boston from 460, at the time of the marathon, to 1,000.”

Just a quick question, why were there 460 troops initially in the city for the race?

The Boston Herald reports “Copley Square under lockdown, the Common converted into a National Guard staging area and a flood of law enforcement officials patrolling Boston.” It also reported the National Guard has secured a 15-block area.

Bay News is reporting that a no-fly zone has been established for an indefinite period of time, bridges have been closed and the Coast Guard has increased patrols in Boston Harbor.

And perhaps most concerning is that Gov. Patrick announced “that commuters should expect random bag checks.”

Without giving it much thought, you might think that random bag checks are part of the investigation. But the bombing occurred yesterday. What villain is going to be walking around a day or more after the act with a bag full of evidence?

How long are these “random” checks going to last? How do authorities decide who to “randomly” search? Apparently, all people who happen to be in Boston are suspects.

If we assume authorities are searching for bombing evidence like explosive materials or detonators then what happens if they search somebody and discover lots of cash or narcotics or a gun? Can the individual be arrested? Isn’t that an illegal search?

This makes me a little uncomfortable.

If you shut the bridges down, or even severely limit traffic flow with check-points, you have, for all effective purposes, clamped-down the city—not just a 15 block area. Plus there is a no fly zone, the National Guard is in the streets and the Coast Guard is in the harbor. And you can bet your last gold coin, the FBI and DHS has a strong presence within the city, too.

All this in just 24 hours?

No, I’m sorry, but I don’t like how this is developing. Not at all.

Is it to early to call this undeclared martial law? If so, what else needs to happen before we do?

Curfews?

source

FALSE FLAG EVENT - Authorities Announced “Drill” BEFORE Boston Explosions, and Facebook Page Created for the Boston Explosions Two Days BEFORE it Happened...

University of Mobile’s Cross Country Coach, who was near the finish line of the Boston Marathon when a series of explosions went off, said he thought it was odd there were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish lines.
 
"They kept making announcements to the participants do not worry, it's just a training exercise," Coach Ali Stevenson told Local 15.

Stevenson said he saw law enforcement spotters on the roofs at the start of the race. He's been in plenty of marathons in Chicago, D.C., Chicago, London and other major metropolitan areas but has never seen that level of security before.
 
"Evidently, I don't believe they were just having a training exercise," Stevenson said. "I think they must have had some sort of threat or suspicion called in."

CNN reports a state government official said there were no credible threats before the race.
(Editor's Note: "...no credible threats..."  He didn't say there were no threats..... )

Stevenson had just finished the marathon before the explosions. Stevenson said his wife had been sitting in one of the seating sections where an explosion went off, but thankfully she left her seat and was walking to meet up with him.

"We are just so thankful right now," Stevenson said.


Also, This afternoon, I decided to look on Facebook, to see if there was a page dedicated to the victims, and this is what I found, below.  THIS PAGE WAS CREATED ON SATURDAY THE 13TH!!!! .....TWO DAYS BEFORE THE MARATHON!
Top of Page:
Bottom of Page, Showing WHEN it Was Created!:
You can view this page yourself, at: https://www.facebook.com/TheBostonExplosions

MORE!!!!!!

YOU KNOW THE HORRIFIC PHOTO OF THE MAN WITH BOTH HIS LEGS BLOWN OFF, SUPPOSEDLY BY THE BOMB?  Look At The Photo Below!!!!  Another Crisis Actor!!!!
(They removed the photo link today, but luckily I had this saved on my computer, so have uploaded this photo today) "They" don't like being revealed!!!


I believe we will shortly have Military stop points throughout the country, implementing Marshal Law.  GOD HELP US!  I hope the militias are ready to begin the fight to get our country back, because if not, then it is too late!


Doctors: Boston Victims Had Nails, Pellets

UPDATE: Apr 16, 2013
The two bombs that ripped through the crowds at the Boston Marathon, killing three people and wounding more than 170, were fashioned out of pressure cookers and packed with shards of metal, nails and ball bearings, a source said.

Monday, April 15, 2013

Witnesses Describe Boston Marathon Blasts - FBI Takes the Lead in Boston Probe

Published on Apr 15, 2013
An Associated Press reporter and two witnesses near the twin blasts that rocked the Boston Marathon finish line Monday describe what they heard and saw.

Published on Apr 15, 2013
The FBI is taking charge in the criminal investigation of the explosions at the Boston Marathon that killed three people and injured more than 130 others. An official said 'it is a potential terrorist investigation.'

note:  Is this another 9/11 False Flag to bring Marshall law in???

Sunday, April 14, 2013

Radical Change Needed in America


Imagine a few years into the future — you are returning home from a family visit over the Thanksgiving holiday when a deer runs into the road in front of you.

You slam on the brakes, but it is too late. You hit the deer and lose control of your car, which runs off the road, flips, and, in spite of your seat-belt, you die in the crash.

Your worries are over. For your survivors, the tragedy is just beginning.

In this hypothetical future, the growth of government has continued on its present course. Do you think your death was punishment enough? The State doesn’t think so.

After all the applicable estate taxes have been charged, and automatically deducted from your bank accounts and forfeited property, the real frenzy begins.

Your family gets a bill from the police who wrote up the accident report, along with surcharges for “emotional distress” due to seeing your tattered remains, and an “Obama-Care” fine on behalf of all “first responders” involved because they were exposed to potentially hazardous fumes and bodily fluids.

Your survivors are ticketed for the deer you killed without a license, and your family’s hunting weapon — one black-powder rifle per family being the only thing still legal — is confiscated for “poaching.”

Your car’s “black box” indicates you were over the speed limit by a tiny amount, so your estate is charged a fine for your speeding, as well, plus the fine is doubled because a couple of years ago when self-driving cars were made available, at great expense, you chose to forgo that new technology and keep doing the driving.

The EPA charges your loved ones the standard fee for the gasoline spill clean-up, even though your tank was almost empty and nothing spilled. Also, since there was a small fire, a fine for polluting the air is levied, as well as a fine for the bio-hazard created as your life-blood seeped into the soil, and one for littering due to all the car parts scattered around the crash site.

It gets worse. The autopsy confirms the presence of tryptophan, due to the recent turkey dinner, so your life insurance won’t pay out — it’s the law. You were “driving under the influence.”

Did you really think the zero tolerance and ever-tightening DWI laws would remain where they stood in 2013?

You may think this scenario is far-fetched. “It can’t happen here.”

It is already happening. Americans have a choice: radically change the path that is being followed, or “stay the course” to see where it leads.


source

WAKE UP NOW!!!!!!            TOMORROW WILL BE TOO LATE!!!

 

How Obama Surrendered Sovereignty to the Criminal Banking Cartel

The U.S. government openly conceded that its sovereign authority to enforce its own laws is gone when Attorney General Eric Holder testified that the Justice Department’s failure to prosecute any big banks is based on anonymous “expert” opinions that prosecutions would destabilize the financial system.

This notion of “systemic importance” has been thoroughly discredited. According to Tim Geithner, it’s an intellectually bankrupt phrase.  What’s more, it’s been debunked both legally and empirically, which is likely one reason the DOJ’s (Department of Justice) “experts” wish to remain anonymous.

If it turns out that these “experts” are in fact agents of the big banks whose crimes are being immunized by the very entities whose discredited opinions the DOJ is relying on, then those “opinions” are nothing more than assertions of criminal sovereign immunity—a privilege that is legally limited to the President of the United States.

Since “the King can do no wrong”—the legal foundation of sovereign immunity—the real King here is the criminally immune cartel of banks, not the President, since real sovereigns don’t surrender the right to enforce their laws.  And following the long series of unprosecuted crimes by the cartel, in which the President’s own constituents are the undisputed victims, “surrender” is the most charitable description of the Obama’s acts before the banking cartel.

Inside The Criminal Banking Cartel

There are two very big and related clues as to the identity of the anonymous experts behind whose opinions U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder hides whenever explaining away his failure to prosecute big banks on the basis of their “systemic importance.”

The first, noted in an article last week by Golem XIV, is a list of international banks that parade under the rather obvious label of “Globally Systemically Important Financial Institutions,” or G-SIFIs. There are 28 banks in total, 9 of them headquartered in the U.S.:

Citigroup

Deustsche Bank

HSBC

JP Morgan Chase

Barclays

BNP Paribas

Bank of America

Bank of New York Mellon

Credit Suisse

Goldman Sachs

Mitsubishi UFJ FG

Morgan Stanley

Royal Bank of Scotland

UBS

Bank of China

BBVA

Group BPCE

Group Credit Agricole

ING Bank

Mizuho FG

Nordea

Santander

Societe Generale

Standard Chartered

State Street

Sumitomo Mitsui FG

Unicredit Group

Wells Fargo

This list of cartel members is updated annually by the Financial Stability Board, a collection of international organizations. The FSB is a global meta-body of bankers.

But the formal edifice, whether called the FSB or the NWO (hat tip Alex), really doesn’t matter, because, as Golem XIV states: “Guess which institutions provide the membership for all of the above international bodies? Yes, you got it—the big banks.”

These are the banks that are above the law in the U.S. In Part One, we mentioned four banks—Citigroup, Wells Fargo, HSBC, and UBS—whose massive crimes had been taxed at a de minimis rate by the Department of Justice rather than prosecuted. All four are on the list of G-SIFIs above.

So what, you may ask, that’s just a list compiled by some international convention of cokehead bankers, how do they make sure a rogue federal prosecutor doesn’t break ranks and haul a cartel member or two off to criminal trial?

Enter clue no. 2: Covington & Burling, the law firm from which both the head of the DOJ (Eric Holder) and the DOJ’s head of criminal enforcement (Lanny Breuer) were recruited. Actually, Breuer is no longer with the DOJ. Following a four-year stint in which “the enforcer” failed to prosecute a single big bank, Breuer has returned to Covington & Burling, where he will earn be rewarded with $4 million in annual compensation.

The significance of Covington & Burling lies in its list of current clients, which looks remarkably like the list of criminally immune cartel members above (particularly the more recognizable names): Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Wells Fargo, and ING Bank.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer have the financial motivation not to prosecute their firm’s clients. In Breuer’s case, it turned out to be $4 million of motivation. Per year.

Under any functioning system of law, of course, both Holder and Breuer would submit to screening procedures at the DOJ to insulate them from prosecutorial decisions involving their former clients. We're sure they did the same thing under our impotent system as well. But so what? When laws against crimes are a dead letter, who in his right mind would put any trust in a conflict screen?

Now commentators are starting to point out where the slippery slope of sovereign immunity for criminal banks will lead.  Jim Chanos, who detected the fraud at Enron well before it destroyed the company and its shareholders, notes that not only are criminal cartel members now motivated to continue cheating and stealing, they have a fiduciary duty to do so. (Speaking of the Enron-ization of the U.S., Eric Holder is working to release CEO Jeff Skilling from prison early in yet another act of prostrate submission before his real masters, the criminal banks.)

As Golem XIV points out, immunity extends not only to criminal behavior, but to assets that a cartel member bank acquires through crime: “if by doing those illegal things [the bank] makes out-sized profits for its shareholders and staff, that money, those profits are also above the law.”

Cyprus Vs. MF Global: The Rule Of Law Is Dead

Thus, anyone who thinks account confiscation a la Cyprus can’t happen in the U.S. is dreaming of a bygone republic.  Not only is account seizure possible in the U.S., or even likely, it is guaranteed.  Just ask MF Global’s segregated account holders or GM senior bondholders if you have any doubts.

In the MF Global case, Jon Corzine "brazenly took liquid assets like Treasuries and warehouse receipts, but not cash which would have been more quickly missed, from customer accounts to post as illegal collateral for emergency funding with a lender who must have known that they were receiving stolen goods." The lender, of course, turned out to be JP Morgan--a prominent international cartel member. Jon Corzine was of course one of Obama's top fundraisers and an alumnus of Goldman Sachs--a cartel member.

In the GM bankruptcy, the age-old pecking order of creditor priority was turned upside down, literally "rewriting law," when senior unsubordinated secured creditors' claims were trumped by payouts to junior unsecured creditors in a patently political sop to Obama's perceived union supporters.

In both cases, the black letter law that's supposed to gird markets with trust and predictablity was trampled in favor of Obama's political allies. Now that Obama has altogether surrendered the DOJ's law enforcement functionality to the criminal international banking cartel, those dangerous precedents turn out to have been short-sighted in the extreme: there is nothing left to stop the plunder of customer accounts in Cyprus from crashing like a tidal wave across U.S. shores. The timing depends only on the restraint that the banking cartel elects to show.

There is no remedy in sight, only more financial crime as Americans are robbed deeper into serfdom.  The Executive Branch is merely an agent of the criminal banking cartel for the reasons given. That fact, in turn, has cut the Judiciary out of the equation altogether: a court cannot try criminals who are never brought before it to face charges.

That leaves Congress, which in theory could initiate impeachment proceedings. But how likely is success when the Senate, which would try any impeachment cases, couldn’t even obtain the names of the DOJ’s so-called experts in the first place?

As noted in Part One, Senator Grassley asked the DOJ for the experts’ names in a letter on January 29, 2013. Eric Holder testified on March 6, more than a month later. The issue of the experts’ identities was thus as ripe as could be, but rather than obtaining the names, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee put on a clinic in how to conduct an incompetent examination:

Q. On January 29, Senator Sherrod Brown and I requested details on who these so-called 'experts' are. So far we have not received any information. Maybe you're going to but why have we not yet been provided the names of experts the DOJ consults as we requested on January 29? We continue to find out why we aren't having these high-profile cases.

A: We will endeavor to answer your letter, Senator. We did not, as I understand it, endeavor to obtain experts outside of the government in making determinations with regard to HSBC.

Just putting that aside for a minute though, the concern that you have raised is one that I, frankly, share. I'm not talking about HSBC here, that would be inappropriate. But I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if we do prosecute — if we do bring a criminal charge — it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy. I think that is a function of the fact that some of these institutions have become too large.

Again, I'm not talking about HSBC, this is more of a general comment. I think it has an inhibiting influence, impact on our ability to bring resolutions that I think would be more appropriate. I think that's something that we — you all [Congress] — need to consider. The concern that you raised is actually one that I share.

Note that Senator Grassley asked one question: why haven’t you answered our letter? Holder doesn’t answer it. Instead, he promises to supply the names later. At that point, Grassley should have put two questions to Holder. First, answer my question by explaining why you ignored our letter. Second, when will you supply the names of the “so-called experts”?

A mediocre first-year litigation associate would’ve gotten this information within seconds. But not Senator Grassley, who earned his masters degree during the Eisenhower Administration. Here is his completely irrelevant follow-up question:

Q: Do you believe that the investment bankers that were repackaging bad mortgages that were AAA-rated are guilty of fraud or is it a case of just not being aggressive or effective enough to prove that they did something fraudulent and criminal?

Huh? Not surprisingly, Eric Holder has been in no hurry to disclose the names of the “experts” retained by Covington & Burling’s clients since dancing around Grassley like a cigar store Indian. Holder has completely blown off the Senate, which has done nothing to follow up the issue.

Frankly this disgusting charade has surprised no one who’s paying any attention, coming, as it does, from the same august body that exempted itself from insider trading laws and has failed to pass any meaningful reform legislation since the 2008 meltdown, an even worse repeat of which is on its way.

On the contrary, both Congress and the Executive Branch are now just tools of fraud used by the criminal international banking cartel against the people, who for their part are drooling iDope dreams oblivious to their own last act, proving Edward Murrow right, a nation of sheep having begotten a government of wolves.

source

Department of Defense Issues Instructions on Military Support of Civilian Law Enforcement

The Department of Defense has issued an instruction clarifying the rules for the involvement of military forces in civilian law enforcement.
Soldiers from the 3rd Battalion, 321st Field Artillery Regiment, XVIII Fires Brigade train last December to “respond to an escalating civil-disturbance situation caused by unhappy simulated hurricane victims.” According to an article produced by the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, the training was designed to prepare the soldiers “for their upcoming assignment as a quick reaction and rapid response force for U.S. Army North Command in support of emergencies in the United States.”
April 14th
The instruction establishes “DoD policy, assigns responsibilities, and provides procedures for DoD support to Federal, State, tribal, and local civilian law enforcement agencies, including responses to civil disturbances within the United States.”

The new instruction titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” was released at the end of February, replacing several older directives on military assistance to civilian law enforcement andcivil disturbances.  The instruction requires that senior DoD officials develop “procedures and issue appropriate direction as necessary for defense support of civilian law enforcement agencies in coordination with the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, and in consultation with the Attorney General of the United States”, including “tasking the DoD Components to plan for and to commit DoD resources in response to requests from civil authorities for [civil disturbance operations].”  Military officials are to coordinate with “civilian law enforcement agencies on policies to further DoD cooperation with civilian law enforcement agencies” and the heads of the combatant commands are instructed to issue procedures for “establishing local contact points in subordinate commands for purposes of coordination with Federal, State, tribal, and local civilian law enforcement officials.”

In addition to defining responsibilities for military coordination with local law enforcement, the instruction describes circumstances in which direct participation in civilian law enforcement is permissible.  Under the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, U.S military personnel are generally prohibited from assisting in civilian law enforcement functions such as search and seizure, interdiction of vehicles, arrest and interrogation, surveillance or using force except for in self-defense. Though the Posse Comitatus Act originally referred only to the Army, it was extended in 1956 to include the Air Force. Subsequent DoD regulations prevent the use of the Marine Corps or Navy for civilian law enforcement functions.  In 1981, this principle was further codified in 10 USC § 375 which directs the Secretary of Defense to ensure that military activities do “not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.”

Though the Posse Comitatus Act is the primary restriction on direct DoD involvement in law enforcement functions, it does not prevent military personnel from participating in circumstances “authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.”  This includes circumstances involving “insurrection, domestic violence, or conspiracy that hinders the execution of State or Federal law” as well as actions “taken under express statutory authority.”  The DoD’s instruction includes a list of more than a dozen “laws that permit direct DoD participation in civilian law enforcement” including many obscure statutes that are more than a hundred years old.  For example, a law passed in 1882 and codified under 16 USC § 593 allows for the President to use land and naval forces to “prevent the felling, cutting down, or other destruction of the timber of the United States in Florida.”  Likewise, the Guano Islands Act of 1856 enables the President to use land and naval forces to protect the rights of a discoverer of an island covered by the Act.

Military commanders also have “emergency authority” to use military forces in civilian law enforcement functions “in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances”.  This authority is limited to actions “necessary to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order” and “provide adequate protection for Federal property or Federal governmental functions.”  In fact, an enclosure to the DoD instruction describing requirements for support of civil disturbance operations states that military commanders “shall not take charge of any function of civil government unless absolutely necessary under conditions of extreme emergency.”  According to the instruction, any “commander who is directed, or undertakes, to control such functions shall strictly limit DoD actions to emergency needs and shall facilitate the reestablishment of civil responsibility at the earliest time possible.”

Obama Approves Raising Permissible Levels of Nuclear Radiation in Drinking Water. Civilian Cancer Deaths Expected to Skyrocket

Civilian Cancer Deaths Expected to Skyrocket Following Radiological Incidents

The White House has given final approval for dramatically raising permissible radioactive levels in drinking water and soil following “radiological incidents,” such as nuclear power-plant accidents and dirty bombs. The final version, slated for Federal Register publication as soon as today, is a win for the nuclear industry which seeks what its proponents call a “new normal” for radiation exposure among the U.S population, according Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

Issued by the Environmental Protection Agency, the radiation guides (called Protective Action Guides or PAGs) allow cleanup many times more lax than anything EPA has ever before accepted. These guides govern evacuations, shelter-in-place orders, food restrictions and other actions following a wide range of “radiological emergencies.” The Obama administration blocked a version of these PAGs from going into effect during its first days in office. The version given approval late last Friday is substantially similar to those proposed under Bush but duck some of the most controversial aspects:

In soil, the PAGs allow long-term public exposure to radiation in amounts as high as 2,000 millirems. This would, in effect, increase a longstanding 1 in 10,000 person cancer rate to a rate of 1 in 23 persons exposed over a 30-year period;
  • In water, the PAGs punt on an exact new standard and EPA “continues to seek input on this.” But the thrust of the PAGs is to give on-site authorities much greater “flexibility” in setting aside established limits; and
  • Resolves an internal fight inside EPA between nuclear versus public health specialists in favor of the former. The PAGs are the product of Gina McCarthy, the assistant administrator for air and radiation whose nomination to serve as EPA Administrator is taken up this week by the Senate.
  • Despite the years-long internal fight, this is the first public official display of these guides. This takes place as Japan grapples with these same issues in the two years following its Fukushima nuclear disaster.
“This is a public health policy only Dr. Strangelove could embrace. If this typifies the environmental leadership we can expect from Ms. McCarthy, then EPA is in for a long, dirty slog,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that the EPA package lacks a cogent rationale, is largely impenetrable and hinges on a series of euphemistic “weasel words.”

“No compelling justification is offered for increasing the cancer deaths of Americans innocently exposed to corporate miscalculations several hundred-fold.”

Reportedly, the PAGs had been approved last fall but their publication was held until after the presidential election. The rationale for timing their release right before McCarthy’s confirmation hearing is unclear.

Since the PAGs guide agency decision-making and do not formally set standards or repeal statutory requirements, such as the Safe Drinking Water Act and Superfund, they will go into full effect following a short public comment period. Nonetheless, the PAGs will likely determine what actions take place on the ground in the days, weeks, months and, in some cases, years following a radiological emergency.