Need help rebutting this anti-Bush e-mail I got from a lib

The Daily Mis-Lead ^ | May 25, 2004 | Unknown lefty

[Shepster]

BUSH IGNORES SICK 9/11 FIREFIGHTERS & COPS

Over the last month, President Bush has repeatedly recounted how he was inspired by "the courage of the firefighters and the police" [1] in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks. He recounted how, when standing atop a pile of rubble at Ground Zero, he was told by a firefighter, "Don't let me down" [2]. But more than two years later, he continues to ignore the needs of firefighters and police officers who are now suffering adverse health effects from their rescue efforts at Ground Zero. The situation has reached a head: yesterday, 1,700 cops and firefighters were forced to sue in court for the medical help they desperately need [3].

While the President's very first campaign commercial used photos of coffin draped corpses [4] being pulled from the rubble, the White House has sought to hide evidence that Ground Zero firefighters and cops were exposed to hazardous toxins. Specifically, the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) intervened to doctor EPA press releases [5] that were supposed to warn the public about toxins near Ground Zero. The press releases were modified to claim that the air was safe - despite the fact that there was not adequate scientific evidence to substantiate that claim. The CEQ was headed by James Connaughton, a former asbestos industry lawyer who represented companies in toxic pollution cases [6].

When Ground Zero firefighters and cops began getting sick, the White House tried to block $90 million in funding [7] for medical treatment. When Congress forced the Administration to accept the $90 million, the Administration then delayed the money [8] and threatened to shut down the health-screening program. Even today, the New York Police Department has been denied much needed health grants [9].

[Shepster]

Please help me rebut. I searched Snopes with no luck.

[zahal724]

I don't know much about this issue, but it doesn't seem like Bush. Anyway, what I would like to know is if these firefighters are so sick, how come it isn't making news? This seems like if this was true, then the liberals would be able to rip Bush apart. Other questions to ask: what are they sick from? Why now? How sick are they (if they are)? etc.

[SpeakingUp]

Require the accuser to show proof. Don't defend an accusation, require the accuser to defend the claim. They can't.

[Shepster]

Thanks. Good points,

[Shepster]

Thanks. Good points.

[zahal724]

Also, don't forget where this information is coming from. This is from an organization that is out to get Bush. It's very possible that if rumors start here, people will talk and Bush will be slamed. Then, before it is found out to be false (I am assuming it is, but then again...) they can remove it and deny it. Plus, technically, moveon.org never actually said anything and its reputation won't be tarnished.

[HolgerDansk]

1. This is not a federal issue. Firefighting is regulated at the state/local level; if New York didn't adequately equip its firefighters, that's not Nevada's fault.

2. This is standard fare from labor union / Democratic Party politics.

[Dr. Frank fan]

If all this is true...

...why isn't New York City taking proper care of its firefighters?

[FreeAtlanta]

First of all, why would "the White House has sought to hide evidence that Ground Zero firefighters and cops were exposed to hazardous toxins" do something that would be easily proven? This heavy slant causes me to suspect the whole e-mail, however, in the interest of fairness, why don't you go to the lefty snopes site and submit it?

I have had them post stuff that I have sent them.... albeit, they slanted their response to the left. :-( :-D

[Shepster]

I did submit it to Snopes and really don't expect a response because they are left leaning. Thanks for the response.

[Coroner]

Do akeyword search of moveon or moveon.org back to Oct, Nov., Dec of 2003. There was an article posted here I believe by Tarantino in the WSJ. The title was the daily mislead misleads or something like that. In it move on .org was exposed over and over again for lies and sources were cited. I used it on a lib friend of mine he then surrendered and slinked away!!

[Lizavetta]

the White House tried to block $90 million in funding [7] for medical treatment.... the Administration then delayed the money [8] and threatened to shut down the health-screening program.... denied much needed health grants [9].

Sorry, but this smacks of half truths typical of the anti-Bushies. Perhaps he did block funding to NY cops and firemen (and if this is indeed true WHY DIDN'T WE HEAR ANYTHING FROM GODDESS HILLARY?) but you have to ask what SPECIFICALLY the funding was for.

When catastrophes occur every charlatan and their brother finds a way to stick their dirty hands in to get their cut, and when Republicans try to eliminate overpriced education 'consultants' and 'advisors' they're accused in the press of 'cutting education'.

What you were sent is, you can be sure, NOT the whole picture.

[Osage Orange]

You wrote:

"I used it on a lib friend of mine he then surrendered and slinked away!!"

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

But....did the friend renounce their DemoMarxistSocialistLyingLib ways?

Hehehehe....

FRegards,

[wmichgrad]

A project of MoveOn.org. Hmmm. Doesn't even warrant a response as far as I'm concerned. However, I'd be curious to know what bill the $90 million was tied to that Bush originally declined to approve.

This little bit of mis-information states "When Congress forced the Administration to accept the $90 million, the Administration then delayed the money and threatened to shut down the health-screening program."

But their source reads "Congressional leaders and the White House inserted the $90 million in the 2003 omnibus spending package to pay for expanded clinical examinations for firefighters and Ground Zero workers and volunteers.

But the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which controls the money, has yet to strike a deal with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that would specify how to distribute the aid."

Their cited source makes no mention of Congress forcing Bush to do anything. And the source makes it sound like federal red tape is the issue, not Bush.

Lies, lies, lies. You don't need Snopes to defeat this crap. Just use their own words against them. Their sources don't even back up their lies.

[Coroner]

The article was by Ben Fritz on Dec. 10 2003 in opinion journal wsj.com. The article blows moveon out of the water!!!!!!!

[FreeAtlanta]

lol, keep checking back with them under the Bush category. Let us all know, if they post it and refute it...not... holding... my... breath.

[Coroner]

Here it is; http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1038557/posts

[deport]

The suit by the 1700 was filed against the City of New York.

This is posted around the internet in various web sites... The quotes are taken from various news articles since 911......

Sources:
1. Remarks by the President at Victory 2004 Luncheon, 04/20/2004, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37090
2. Remarks by the President to the American Conservative Union 40th
Anniversary Gala, 05/13/2004, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37091
3. "1,700 sue over 9/11 sickness", New York Daily News, 05/24/2004, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37092
4. "President Bush: Don't use my husband as your mascot", Salon, 03/05/2004, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37093
5. "W. House Molded EPA's 9/11 Reports", CBS News, 08/22/2003, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37094
6. "It's public be damned at the EPA", New York Daily News, 08/26/2003, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37095
7. "Cough up 9/11 aid, workers tell Bush", New York Daily News, 01/25/2003, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37096
8. "$90M in WTC aid on hold", New York Daily News, 07/10/2003, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37097
9. "1,700 sue over 9/11 sickness", New York Daily News, 05/24/2004, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2305267&l=37092

[Jorge]

Require the accuser to show proof.

Yes. Make them document their claims before you respond.

Usually they can't support their accusations, and when they try to do so, they more often than not end up providing the evidence you need to show that they've distorted the real facts.

[Tamzee]

Their sources don't even back up their lies.

Exactly. I'm very familiar with the Mis-Lead as a neighbor of mine uses it all the time. You can usually disprove whatever their claim is because they simply string together one distortion after another to manufacture a smoke-and-mirrors accusation. Just read the "sources" they point to themselves and you can easily identify each distortion and blow down the illusion.