Re: Re:fungicides/EPA ,etc,etc, Hey Mary
Posted by ff on 7/18/03
OK johncodie, got you, I understand. My reference is to a bias that is as simple as money and power over time.
People get burned because of suppression bias. Can't help much with the southern drawl.
On 7/18/03, johncodie wrote:
> The man is referring to building inspectors that inspected his home, that later got laws passed not making them
> not liable for thier over looking problems in bu ildings. Case in point are the people that burned to death due
> to the fireworks set off in the club, had inspections, and the current laws protect those who overlook, or look
> the other way.
> Most recent trips to Boston, and hearing a southern drawl; people what to know about how we caused such suffering
> of a class group a hundred years ago, in a period of the country called slavery and slave trade. Excuse me, what
> does that have to do with having or retaining a southern drawl.
> We proceed on down to Martha's Vineyard from the Ferry and come to a local church for tour and look to find some
> air conditioning. Well the proprietor for the church is from Bella Batra Al. We ask her where Chapaqitic is
> since we thought there would be a marker or sign, of its historical signficance. With a polite smile she respond
> that the local will be reluctant to even respond to the question.
> My point is bias between individuals, or groups may be as simple or complex as a time in history, and a way of
> life, or a geographical location on a map. If I have a southern drawl why am I guilty of slavery, while when
> asked of a historical landmark, it is a subject that is very curtly ignored.
> On 7/18/03, ff wrote:
>> Last message:
>> More clearly, consider that by the time Mr. Moultous approached persons in responsible positions, they had
>> already formed opinions based on biased/suppressed science. This places Mr. Moultous, and all others, at the
>> disadvantage of having to change opinions, almost an impossibility at that point.
>> Credibility is also an obstacle standing in the way of changing (invalid) opinions. Face it, either of us an
>> individuals are considered less credible than research and other scientists from agencies, institutiuons, and
>> Another factor that should not be over looked is the difference in perspectives, yours for example, versus an
>> agency or politician that has to deal with hundreds or thousands of similar cases, routinely. Even the most
>> sympathetic could be subject to callous from being overloaded, underfunded, and yet bombarded with pleas for
>> help on an individual or personal basis.
>> On 7/18/03, ff wrote:
>>> You are still pretty far off from anything I have tried to convey. I appreciate Mr. Moultous' effort, and
>>> regret his family's health problems, but somehow, if you want to make a change, letters like Mr. Moultous
>>> need to be recognized as potentially damaging to his effort rather than beneficial (I have written a few
>>> myself). I propose that a beneficial effort should be focused on those entities responsible for suppression
>>> bias. Then, legitimate entities are presented accurate information rather than unknowingly, having already
>>> formed invalid opinions, formed as a result of suppression bias. We will not live long enough to make
>>> accomplishments by APPEARING as a whinining, nagging, entity to others that don't want to hear it in the
>>> first place.
>>> On 7/18/03, johncodie wrote:
>>>> My first introduction to Ken Moultous on the sickbuilding board yahoo was veiwing a hospital bed that was
>>>> in his home for his son. Ken had to move back to Oklahoma to have a place to live after suffering all the
>>>> years of inactivity. At first the assumptions are wow what a whiner, or this guy must be a mental case.
>>>> But after a few years and realization that nursing homes are abusing our loved ones by neglect and finally
>>>> pass laws to protect. The unfortunate families that provide hospital home care for a loved one has little
>>>> to no laws to protect the quality of air, or housing for their most desperate citizens. While bed ridden
>>>> they are protected by the same Constitutional Rights of every other able bodied man and woman.
>>>> Bias starts with the individual and extends across state lines. As a ragging range fire threating
>>>> thousands of families across our nation, legislation is being passed to study the effects of fire on
>>>> dewelling. To much time is being lost in the time period. We need updated building codes,and laws for
>>>> TEXAS flood victims now; Minimum moisture readings within a building over a time period before it has to
>>>> be ripped open and remediated. The days of it will dry, and paint stain block over it and path it are over.
>>>> Mr. Moultous
>>>> From: KENHMOULTON@aol.com
>>>> Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:03:15 EDT
>>>> Subject: For the hearing on SB657
>>>> To: ROleary@senate.state.ma.us, KBinck@senate.state.ma.us
>>>> CC: GOffice@state.ma.us, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
>>>> HTML Attachment [ Scan with Norton AntiVirus | Save to my Yahoo! Briefcase | Download Without Scan ]
>>>> For the hearing on SB657 (please forward to the committee) -
>>>> July 17, 2003
>>>> I was unable to attend the hearing on SB657, Toxic Mold bill by Rob O'Leary, on July 16, 2003 at the State
>>>> House. My family and I are sick and recovering from the severe and unhealthy effects from the Toxic Mold
>>>> that was in our home in Centerville.
>>>> My Wife, Virginia, recently had to have eye surgery. It seems her eyes are infected from the Toxic Mold and
>>>> it caused a tumor to grow. While you listen to feel good legislation, Virginia almost lost her sight.
>>>> Remember our Toxic Mold is the direct result of the documented, in Government Public Records you have all
>>>> seen, illegal acts and failures of Massachusetts and the Town of Barnstable.
>>>> A little over a year ago we spoke before your Committee about the Toxic Mold bill we had written and
>>>> proposed. I listened to your speeches in front of the television cameras after the hearing in which you
>>>> described what needed to be changed to make my legislation acceptable.
>>>> I made the changes you stated in your television interview and resubmitted it to you as a replacement. It
>>>> was then that you showed, by your total failure to act, that your television statements were a ruse.
>>>> The bill by State Senator Rob O'Leary is a do nothing piece of legislation that will harm rather than help
>>>> in the fight against Toxic Mold. It will allow, you, the State to stall. Anybody that has been infected by
>>>> Toxic Mold does not need another biased study to be done. We need action. NOW!
>>>> We need responsible politicians to help us. Sadly, after an exhausting search over the past decade, I have
>>>> found self-serving politicians who grandstand on issues and ignore people. You speak of your sadness and
>>>> concerns before the media and then do NOTHING!
>>>> My family, like many others, lived in Toxic Mold for some years before we knew we had it. If it had been in
>>>> our workplace perhaps we could have found another job but we were not so lucky. It was where we lived, ate
>>>> and slept. It infected all of us. According to Medical, Insurance and Toxic Mold reports, our Toxic Mold is
>>>> a direct result of the combined corruption and failures of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Town
>>>> of Barnstable,
>>>> Even before I knew of the Toxic Mold I came to Beacon Hill and the state for help to fight the government
>>>> corruption of the local and state building inspectors that knowingly allowed this to happen to us. I
>>>> contacted every Governor and AG since 1993. All protected the corrupt and the corruption rather than the
>>>> citizens. All of the investigating Massachusetts agencies; Inspector General, Banking, Auditor, Treasurer
>>>> and others, turned a deaf ear to corruption.
>>>> You, the Legislature went so far as to pass a bill, without discussion or record of votes, to grant
>>>> immunity to any corrupt inspectors that broke the law. This was done to stop my efforts to have
>>>> accountability. By doing this, you, the legislature emboldened more open and widespread corruption. You
>>>> allowed the expansion and growth of Toxic Mold. You must bear the responsibility for many of the illnesses
>>>> we face from the Toxic Mold.
>>>> The State Health Department and DEP have refused my requests for them to inspect our Toxic Mold. These are
>>>> two groups that you now want to lead the study of Toxic Mold. In my opinion, they wouldn't know it was
>>>> daylight unless they held a study or read it somewhere.
>>>> The state building standards, another group you want to lead the study, is headed by Tom Rogers. As I told
>>>> you all over a year ago, he was ruled by the State as not qualified to be a building inspector but he still
>>>> holds his job. I also told you he even refused to provide reports requested in a hand delivered memo from
>>>> the AG for reports of inspector and builder corruption he had inspected. The investigation was closed. A
>>>> few years ago he even failed to respond to requests from the Legislature.
>>>> I also told you and showed you State Public Records that he said our home was unsafe and illegal due to the
>>>> illegal acts of the town and state but he refused to write a report as the law and his job required. Have
>>>> you ever bothered to question him on these violations of State Law? Why has he not been fired?
>>>> This is wonderful Massachusetts and what you say passes for Government sounds more like a third world
>>>> country where corruption is the rule rather than the exception. If you want to support O'Leary's bill, feel
>>>> free to. It is a waste of time that helps nobody. It allows those that have been asked to investigate in
>>>> the past to play a farce in your "new" effort of politics.
>>>> I call them like I see them and I call this a sucker piece of feel good legislation, that helps nobody ill
>>>> from Toxic Mold. The SD2070 that I submitted is the legislation I refined to satisfy your objections that
>>>> you expressed last year. It does what you wanted so why are you holding it prisoner? The answer is your
>>>> television comments were public relations rather than the truth.
>>>> Ken Moulton
>>>> P O Box 874
>>>> Hyannisport, MA 02647
>>>> E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
>>>> On 7/15/03, johncodie wrote:
>>>>> On 7/15/03, ff wrote:
>>>>>> You are so far off from anything I have tried to convey to you. If you want to extract the truth,
>>>>>> change your methods? Personally, and respectfully mr. johncodie, I am not going to waste any more time
>>>>>> or space while you weave in and out of various issues and events, short of the information you need to
>>>>>> reach valid conclusions.
>>>>> Personally, I have been awakened to the unsuspecting, apathetic
>>>>> public, really getting what they deserve (or to put it a better way, what they do not earn by failing
>>>>> to keep up with their civic duty, unless hit personally, they don't get involved).
>>>>> Im sorry I don't feel the same way. If you live in Boston and you don't fit in with the Kennedy bias
>>>>> then your not going to win. Talk with Ken Moltous, he left Barnstable MA to go back to Oklahoma to
>>>>> survive. He is writting legislation that is getting buried in Study. He did not did deserve the
>>>>> nonsupport to the State Officials there. I just don't think the lack of education, or fear should keep
>>>>> thehard earning taxpayers, from getting their dollars worth. It, "insurance/mortgage finance" and
>>>>> disclosure has been termed "legal stealing". Now that is an oxy-moron.
>>>>> If we don't have any protected rights, then why did everyone waste thier time celebrating the 4th this
>>>>> year? Since morals don't involve religon, it might not go around to everyone; the worst sin is being
Posts on this thread, including this one