Archive for category Are they turning their backs on the children?
SDSU BRAIN CANCER CLUSTER – UCSD BREAST CANCER CLUSTER – CARLSBAD CANCER CLUSTER
<>PROW CELL TOWERS/ SDSU BRAIN CANCER CLUSTER
to be futile. I then drove out to San Diego, staying the whole month of October 2009. I met with Professors Nancy Speckmann ( Rich, was her TA ) and Farid Abdel-Nour off campus for meetings. Both Professors told me that my Son spent long hours in Nasatir Hall, ROOM 131 (where most of the brain cancer victims were located ). I was told that my Son would meet with students in this room, study and grade papers, even on weekends.
After arriving back home the SDSU Administration had sent me an Epidemiological Report written by a Dr. Thomas Mack. 3rd paragraph of this report he mentions that he has,’ No known knowledge of chemical or radiation concerns and therefore are none.’ I e-mailed Dr. Mack and he called me at home. I asked him about a specific Cell Tower that is directly outside of Nasatir Hall, and room 131. Dr. Mack denied this could be the cause and SDSU BRAIN CANCER CLUSTER – UCSD BREAST CANCER CLUSTER – CARLSBAD CANCER CLUSTER
I immediately started to contact the SDSU Administration and found this to be futile. I then drove out to San Diego, staying the whole month of October 2009. I met with Professors Nancy Speckmann ( Rich, was her TA ) and Farid Abdel-Nour off campus for meetings. Both Professors told me that my Son spent long hours in Nasatir Hall, ROOM 131 ( where most of the brain cancer victims were located ). I was told that my Son would meet with.
You already know about SDSU. The UCSD campus had protests on campus in 2009 concerning a,’ Breast Cancer Cluster,’ which involved the Literature Building on campus. I cannot get the link to come up, but if you type in,’ NYTimes 2009 UCSD Breast Cancer Cluster,’ the 1st LINK. Dr. Leeka Khiefets was commisssioned by the UCSD campus to help in the investigation.
In this article, if you CLICK on FULL REPORT. Page 4 shows many other people with cancer than reported. Page 27 gives a Thanks to Jim Turman from SDG&E., for his help in the investigation. Dr. Leeka Khiefets works, and does research through the,’ Electrical Power Research Institute.’ UCSD also had an Epidemiological Report written. The proper procedures for both SDSU, and UCSD should have been Toxicology Studies. Both of these people should have been eliminated from doing a study. This was a complete conflict of interest!
http://www.10news.com/news/workers-rally-over-ucsd-cancer-cluster
http://www.10news.com/news/electromagnetic-expert-investigates-ucsd-cancer-cluster
In 2010 there was a,’ Cancer Cluster at Kelly Elementary School,’ in Carlsbad. The report I would like you to look at, will not come up. If you type in,’ Carlsbad Cancer Cluster,’ there is an article written by Dr. Thomas Mack. Dr. Mack is the one who wrote the Epidemiological Report for SDSU. These schools are Covering Up. Had any of these Schools conducted Toxicology Studies, maybe the whole Smart Grid/ Meters could have been stopped.
Here is the picture of the HPWREN cell tower at SDSU. This cell tower is on top of the Communications building on campus, and is located at the highest point. Nasatir Hall is the building on the lower left, and room 131 is the 1st floor bottom window, closest too you.
These two buildings are approximately 100-150 yards apart. In the movie, it doesn’t go into it, but notice the dead tree foliage on the surrounding trees. I took this picture in 2009 when I met these professors off campus for meetings. They are afraid to lose their jobs, but mostly their lives!
I met an emf expert on campus, fall of 2011 with a very good meter, which could not handle the emissions. The sad part about it, is there is an outdoor courtyard directly underneath this cell tower at the top of the hill. While on campus ( every day for 3 weeks with signs ) there were kids sitting under this cell tower most of the time, and for long periods of time. Below is a list of cell towers near Kelly Elementary in Carlsbad.
Virginia
From:
To: americanassociationforcellphon
Subject: Carlsbad Cancer Cluster –
Date:
|
I did a search on towers and antennas in the Kelley Elementary area of Carlsbad, CA. here is what I found. The sheer # is staggering. 59 towers, 219 antennas. No wonder the kids are sick. Distance means distance from school.
Melinda
Alert! 3 New Tower Applications found within 4.00 miles of Kelley Elementary,Carlsbad, California, United States.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LAUSD WiFi systems “Students were bleeding from the ears and nose and no incident reports were allowed by the school.” states the teacher who required medical intervention.
“Students were bleeding from the ears and nose and no incident reports were allowed by the school.” states the teacher who required medical intervention.
NOW YOU KNOW WHY DEFIBRILLATORS ARE BEING INSTALLED IN ALL THE SCHOOLS FOLKS.
In the Fall of 2014, LAUSD, the second largest public school district in the US, officially accommodated teacher Ms. Anura Lawson by approving her request to have the Wi-Fi turned off in her classroom during the 2014-2015 school year and alternatively approving a reassignment to a different school site where Wi-Fi has yet to be installed.
Lawson-Anura.Reasonable-…dation.092214-2 (1)
The Middle School teacher reported that she fell seriously ill after a wireless system upgrade in her school in Spring 2014. She described her cardiac symptoms during a May 28, LAUSD Common Core Tech Project meeting. Ms. Lawson also stated, “The students are having nosebleeds and the main offices are refusing to do incident reports. I have had two seventh grade students bleeding out of their ears.” See http://www.youtube.com/
This is the first accommodation in a US public school system for microwave sickness.
Microwave sickness, also known as electro hypersensitivity (EHS), is not widely recognized in the US. However, physicians in many other countries are familiar with this medical condition and the diagnosis is more common. EHS symptoms include: headaches, dizziness, anxiety, rapid heart beat (tachycardia)
In March 2012, the Austrian Medical Association recognized and developed EHS treatment guidelines. In the United States, adverse effects were identified before 1988 when a US Air Force Review stated that “Experimental evidence has shown that exposure to low intensity radiation can have a profound effect on biological processes.”
The LAUSD Board of Education went ahead with a wireless technology plan in February 2013, even after they were presented with numerous letters from many noted medical doctors and researchers, including the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, imploring them to use wired technology in the classroom because of the health impacts from wireless radiation. See http://wifiinschools.com/
Wireless LAUSD classrooms typically employ 30+ devices (iPads) in addition to an industrial-sized router. These devices all emit microwave radiation and represent an unprecedented level of exposure to children.
Decades of accumulated research show wireless radiation damages neurological, immune, and reproductive systems in addition to increasing cancer risk. Professor Olle Johansson, Karolinksa Institute, Stockholm Sweeden, has stated that wireless radiation exposure studies have indicated “irreversible sterility within five generations.”
“We are getting reports of headaches and cardiac issues from across the country. The time to act is now,” stated a spokesperson for the National Association for Children and Safe Technology (NACST).
NACST is an organization dedicated to raising awareness of the health impacts of wireless radiation on children. They are calling for schools to use wired Internet only. Their website details both the accumulated research showing wireless radiation’s acute as well as long term health impacts.
SOURCE:
The National Association for Children and Safe Technology
Folks this is what is going on with your children once they are dropped off at school.
This is what is going on when you keep a cell phone in your bra
this is what is going on when you drop your kids off at school
This is what is going on when you drop your kids off at school.
This is worse than a cell phone in the bra because the antenna is on his zipper. What is this doing to him? How about the young girls? Why did they put the WiFi antenna at the bottom in the middle?
This is the truth about emission levels
This is what they have to look forward to.
This is how it is all plays out right here in your own backyard.
Look gang, what is going on with this stuff isn’t going to take 5 generations to accomplish. An ipad in the lap of your child for years in a classroom will probably be 100 percent effective.
A quick look at Apple’s Important Product Information Guide for the iPad WiFi + 3G reveals that the highest SAR value for the WiFi 2.4 GHz is 1.19 W/kg and for the 1800/1900 MHz cell phone network is 1.18 W/kg, which is typical for SAR values of cell phones. What is the difference? To me, the amount of radiation possibly absorbed by the body looks pretty much the same. And when the iPad or any other tablet, for that matter, is conveniently placed in the lap or on the thighs, the distance between the Wi-Fi transmitter and the human body does not look that “much greater,” anymore. It is the same like holding a cell phone to your head. Or even worse! Since our lap lacks a skull-like shell, the whole-body exposure from an RF transmitter in the lap can be much higher, especially for adolescents and children.
RF exposure levels from the Wi-Fi transmitter(s) directly at a laptop or tablet when e.g. put in the lap or on the thighs can be as high as 120,000 µW/m2 (IMTS study on WLAN 2005) or even as high as50,000,000 µW/m2 (NRW Ministry of Environment brochure on wireless devices 2012). For comparison, the exposure limit for cell tower radiation in Canada is 10,000,000 µW/m2, in Switzerland 100,000 µW/m2, in Ukraine 24,000 µW/m2. At 2 feet from the iPad, I still measure peak levels of 5000 µW/m2. The EMF Working Group of the Austrian Medical Association considers any RF levels above 1000 µW/m2 “very far above normal” and above 10 µW/m2 “far above normal.”
The science
THERE ARE ONE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND NINETY SIX Reference Links to Peer-Reviewed Studies re RF Microwave Radiation
http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/Electrosmog-Bibliography-COLLECTIONS,28,3376
ZONA HARDENING:
YOU SEE FOLKS, YOUR DAUGHTERS EGGS ARE BEING HARDENED SO THAT THEY WILL NOT BE PENETRABLE TO SPERM. THIS IS ACCOMPLISHED BY WIRELESS MICROWAVE RADIATION EXPOSURE WHICH HAVE BEEN SHOW TO AFFECT VOLTAGE GATED CALCIUM CHANNELS AT THE CELLULAR LEVEL.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23802593
GUESS WHAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EGG HARDENING DURING FERTILIZATION TO PREVENT OTHER SPERM FROM PENETRATING?
The trigger for all of this begins with the corticle granules in your daughters’ eggs and their releasing of calcium ions from the cortical smooth endoplasmic reticulum in response to microwave bombardment. Hardened eggs equal no pregnancy unless you can get you kids in vitro procedures out of your Obamacare policy
APPLE HEADQUARTERS
The solution-You have two choices-
NOW
OR LATER -THAT IS IF THE EGGS ARE EVEN VIABLE
Why the FJUHSD crosses the line and why The Voters Within The Fullerton Joint Union High School District Should Vote “No” On Measure I
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children?, Fullerton politics, Hidden in plain view, Who's who in Fullerton politics on October 4, 2014
Why The Voters Within The Fullerton Joint Union
High School District Should Vote “No” On Measure I,
a $175,000,000 Bond Issue.
By Barry Levinson
Throughout this year I received three color brochures from the Fullerton Joint Union High School District (FJUHSD).
Each brochure mentioned that they are considering a new bond issue. Finally on
August 5th, the school board voted to place this $175,000,000 25-year
bond on the November 4, 2014 ballot. The added cost to the taxpayer
will be $19 per $100,000 of assessed property value. If your home is
assessed for $500,000, your added tax burden will be $95 per year for
25 years. Taxpayers must remember that the $175,000,000 price tag is
the principal value of the bond. We the taxpayers are on the hook for all
the interest as well, which easily doubles the total cost.
It was irresponsible that the board waited until the very last minute to
make its’ decision to place this bond before the voters. Taxpayers will
be saddled with this increase in property taxes for decades, while the
voters have only three short months to consider this huge bond issue.
What the district will not voluntarily mention is that we the taxpayers
will still be paying off the last FJUHSD bond approved in 2002 for
another 13 years.
 Marilyn Buchi |
 Andy Montoya |
 Robert N. Hathaway |
 Barbara Kilponen |
 Robert Singer Ph.D. |
The bond will be repaid over a 25-year period. However, the list of
things that the school district wants to use the bond money for are both
long-term and short-term projects. Finance 101 states that it is bad
economic policy to finance short-term projects with long-term money.
For example, a prudent person would not take out a 25-year loan to
finance the purchase of a new computer with a useful life of only 3 or 4
years.
A responsible board would have proposed this bond issue at least 3-6
months earlier in the year. It seems the board purposely waited until
the very last moment to spring this very large bond issue on the public.
A school board more concerned with transparency and openness would not have waited so long.
They still have not provided the public with
the details we will need to make an informed decision. According to one
current board member, the board members themselves have not been
given a specific accounting on how the money will be divided by school
and by project. Good governance requires better, and we the people
demand better from every member of this board and from our
Superintendent.
Do not attempt to adjust the resolution. Seeing things clearly is not my intention.
Under Superintendent’s Bond Resolution Remarks – August 2014,
Superintendent Giokaris states the following, in part:
“Bond financed projects will address facilities needs for repairs,
upgrades, and improvements in the following areas if approved by the
voters.” He goes on to state: “During the economic crisis that began in
2008/2009 and still continues, the District’s operating budget was
reduced by $14 million each year. While we have managed with 11%
fewer dollars to improve our programs and student achievement, there
is no money left to address facilities needs.”
The Superintendent is inferring that much of that $14 million yearly
reduction in the FJUHSD operating budget was taken from facilities,
including the repairs and maintenance the district now wants to
complete with part of the bond proceeds. If I do a little old fashioned
math, you will see that as much as $84 million ($14 million x 6 years)
has been diverted away from facility repair and maintenance. Now the
district wants the taxpayers to bail them out and to help cover up their
poor financial management for the last six years. I say to voters within
the FJUHSD, that we should not reward the district for their poor
decisions. Let the district acknowledge that they made poor choices in
the past and that going forward they will now live within their means.
Please note that the FJUHSD has one of the highest average payrolls of
any school district in Orange County.
There are 13 Bond Money Project Areas that are identified in the
Sample Ballot and Voter Information Pamphlet. For example one project
category is Competitive Athletic Facilities and Physical Education, which
includes to “Renovate/modernize/expand/upgrade existing facilities
district-wide”. Under Gymnasiums it includes painting. Under Sports
fields/tracks it includes all weather tracks, new and/or artificial turf.
Under Baseball/softball fields it includes field/infield renovation, newgrass and/or artificial turf.
None of the items that I have just mentioned
will last 25 years or more. Clearly repairs should have been done on a
regularly scheduled basis as part of a well thought out maintenance
plan. But your tax dollars to repay the new bond issue will be spent on
repairs and maintenance as well as long-term improvements. Why is this
important to bring up to the reader? The simple answer is that while
some of these repairs and maintenance projects will only last 5 or 10
years, we the taxpayer will be paying for it for 25 years. Does that mean
the board will come back again in another 10 years or so to ask for more
tax money to repair these items once again? Why has the district failed
to set aside the proper amount of annual funds to take care of the usual
repair and maintenance items that are very predictable?
The Superintendent states as I mentioned previously that there was a $14
million reduction in the district’s operating budget for the last 6 plus
years. Why hasn’t the district made the proper adjustments to take care
of these repair and maintenance needs of the district during that
time frame? The taxpayers deserve answers to these questions
While the school board is blindly following the new and unproven
Common Core requirements from state bureaucrats with virtually no
parental involvement or consent, the board at the same time wants a
boatload more of our hard-earned tax dollars.
I ask of you, as taxpayers, citizens and parents:
Does it sound fair that the same school board who is marching in
stride with state-wide bureaucrats to take away our local control of
our schools is asking us to give them hundreds of millions more of
our hard-earned tax dollars?
Does the fact that they either do not have or have not shared with the
public any detailed accounting of how the money will be spent by
school or by project seem open and transparent?
Does it make good fiscal sense that they have listed many projects
whose useful life will be long gone a decade or two before we finally
pay for the bond itself?
Does it make any sense that we the taxpayers should bail out the
district for their poor financial management of the school budgets for
the last six years?
The only logical answer to these questions is “No”.
Vote “No” on Measure I, the $175,000,000 FJUHSD bond issue.
From: George Giokaris <GGiokaris@fjuhsd.k12.ca.us>;
Subject: RE: Campaigning on School Property
Sent: Tue, Oct 7, 2014 12:08:56 AM
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 1:43 PM
To: George Giokaris
Subject: Campaigning on School PropertyDr. Giokaris,I heard something quite disturbing today and wanted to get your side of the story. What I heard would demonstrate a massive lapse in judgement which I just cannot fathom coming from you. I heard that you had Doug Chaffee advocating support for the bond on the Troy High School campus today and that you have PTA members using school facilities and equipment for phone banking and campaign organizing. Please let me know if any of this is true.Sincerely,
FJUHSD EMPLOYEE RANI GOYAL EMAIL CROSSES THE LINE
“Hello Indians!
I hope everyone has had a great start to their year and have settled in nicely to all that the Tribe has to offer. Attached to this email are some documents to help you understand Measure I that you will see on your ballot on November 4th. Please take a moment to look over the general information and the more specific information to FUHS. While not all the work needed at the school will get done if this measure is passed, a lot will be. This means that no matter the project, every student will benefit from the scope of work that is completed under this measure. Thank you for all you do for the school, your students and as always, Go Tribe!
Sincerely,
Rani Goyal
Principal”
______________________________________________________________________
By my reading of page 2 of this fact sheet from the California School Boards Association http://www.csba.org/Advocacy/~/media/CSBA/Files/Advocacy/ELA/2011_02_UseOfPublicResourcesForBallotMeasures.ashx, even CSBA interprets using the email list as crossing the line, and CSBA is probably one of the friendliest groups to the idea of school districts sending out school bond literature.
On page 1, CSBA notes there are three categories of activities designated by the State Supreme Court regarding public resources on election issues:
- Permissible informational activities
- Impermissible campaign activities
- Unclear activities which require further analysis based on the “style, tenor and timing” of the activity
Even if we generously interpret this document as falling in the “unclear activities” category (if we accept for the sake of argument that the email/attachment never expressly advocates). However, using the email list just two weeks before the election certainly causes “style, tenor and timing” problems.
A more reasonable interpretation that it’s impermissible campaign activities. That entire “The Why” section and possibly the last bullet of “District’s Facilities Needs” are express advocacy by my reading.
Under Education Code Section 7054, it appears either the FPPC or the DA could bring an enforcement issue against the district for this.
Cancer shields for cellphones circa 2001
13 YEARS LATER, WHERE IS THIS CHILD’S CANCER SHIELD WHILE HE AND THE OTHER FOURTEEN THOUSAND POTENTIAL VICTIMS IN ROBERT PLETKA’S FULLERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT CLASSROOMS ARE FORCIBLY EXPOSED?
THIS LAUSD TEACHER GOT ONE IN THE FORM OF THIS: Read the rest of this entry »
Cover up at the highest levels and children being taken down to the lowest.
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children?, Forced irradiation of school children, Microwave Radiation in Classrooms on September 7, 2014
Lennart Hardell’s science is a game changer and the suppression is planned, global and deeply entrenched. The more we expose it, the better.
Susan D. Foster, MSW _____________________________________________________________________________________________
August 31, 2014
Emily O’Reilly
European Ombudsman
European Commission
RE: SCENIHR Report 2014 and The Suppression of Dr. Lennart Hardell’s Science
Dear Emily O’Reilly:
In July 2014 we received individual letters from Acting Director John Ryan following our deeply and urgently conveyed concerns that scientific misconduct had occurred at SCENIHR under the direct actions of Dr. Joachim Schüz. Dr. Schüz took it upon himself to unilaterally write the epidemiology portion of SCENIHR’s report. Because SCENIHR was entrusted with examining the RF standards for all of Europe, this task and position calls for great integrity and objectivity. We are strongly suggesting both were lacking as Dr. Schüz “cherry-picked” the science that went into SCENIHR’s preliminary and then final report, purposefully and negligently omitting the five 2013 studies of independent epidemiologist Dr. Lennart Hardell of Sweden. Read the rest of this entry »
Robert Pletka, Fullerton School District Superintendant puts another 6000 iPads into Fullerton school children’s laps today
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Agenda 21, Are they turning their backs on the children?, Eugenics, Forced irradiation of school children, Microwave Radiation in Classrooms on August 27, 2014
FULLERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT ROBERT PLETKA SAYS THAT THE WIRELESS CLASSROOMS ARE “… TOTALLY SAFE FOR THE CHILDREN.”
Good evening Fullerton School District parents, this is Superintendent Bob Pletka. I am very pleased to announce that during the coming week, the District will be distributing over 6,000 iPads to all 5th through 8th grade students throughout our District as a part of our 1:1 VIP (Visual Innovation Program). California State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Torlakson, will be joining me at Valencia Park School, Wednesday, August 27, 2014 at a press conference to announce the distribution of these iPads.
We are excited that the District’s commitment to including high-level technology that reaches beyond the classroom is becoming a reality. We are also committed to being your first source of information regarding our progress. We expect that this announcement will receive broad local news coverage, and we wanted to keep you apprised. Read the rest of this entry »
Are iPads safe in the laps of school children? Why are women getting BREAST CANCER from keeping cell phones in their bras?
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children?, Forced irradiation of school children, Microwave Radiation in Classrooms on August 27, 2014
FULLERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT ROBERT PLETKA SAYS THAT THE WIRELESS CLASSROOMS ARE “… TOTALLY SAFE FOR THE CHILDREN.”
Fullerton School District Superintendent Robert Pletka
IS HE OUT OF HIS MIND? DOES HE KNOW BETTER THAN THESE FOLKS? http://wifiinschools.com/lausd-testimony.html
SO NOW THE MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION: ARE WOMEN GETTING BREAST CANCER FROM CARRYING THEIR CELL PHONES IN THEIR BRAS? Read the rest of this entry »
Flory, Fitzgerald and Chaffee’s 3-2 vote approving the Richman Park cell Tower
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children?, Forced irradiation of school children on August 26, 2014
It’ not funny ya lamebrain
I wish it was something to laugh about.
Flory, Fitzgerald and Chaffee’s 3-2 vote approving the Richman Park cell Tower-by Diane Hickey
As in the past, I am following up with the source documents/media references made during my public comments at the August 19, 2014, Fullerton City Council Meeting. The following are links to the assertions made at that meeting:
1) Resonance: Beings of Frequency
http://documentaryheaven.com/resonance-beings-of-frequency/#sthash.wtR32yBq.dpuf
“Over the last 25 years:
A number of species, which rely on the earth’s magnetic fields to navigate, have mysteriously gone into decline.
5 species of butterfly have become extinct in Britain
109 species of Arctic migratory birds have declined dramatically in numbers
36 species of Australian shore birds have decreased in numbers by 75%
10% of the world’s butterflies face extinction
45% of a Europe’s common birds have declined in numbers
50% decline in all European grassland butterflies
Bee numbers have dropped by up to 70%
62% of Asia’s migratory water birds declining or extinct
4 species of American bee decreased in numbers by up to 98%
Farmland birds falling by as much as 79%
190 different species of bird face imminent extinction”
2) Letter from the Department of the Interior to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, dated Feb 7, 2014, “regarding the adverse impact of cell tower radiation on wildlife.”
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf
3) Washington Post: Electromagnetic ‘noise’ can confuse migrating songbirds, study says
As time progresses, more information is coming out at an increasing pace in regard to the health detriments of wireless radiation.
As we all know, UC Berkeley is a well-respected education and research institution. You should be interested in the June, 2014, release from UC Berkeley, Center for Family and Community Health,Some Tips For Reducing Your Exposure To Wireless Radiation. Among those tips are:
“Turn off wi-fi on devices being used by kids.”
“ . . . use hardwired networks in schools to provide Internet access.”
Those of you that have children in the Fullerton School District (FSD) should be asking yourselves the question: Why is the FSD wireless classroom practice completely contrary to UC Berkley’s tips on wireless radiation avoidance? Or, why does FSD continue to expose the children to wireless radiation when numerous medical doctors, researchers, and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine have written letters to Los Angeles USD imploring them to use WIRED technology. Berkeley is not the only institution telling the schools to hardwire the classrooms.
The link is here:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B14R6QNkmaXuT1o0aDhWRERmYlE/edit?pli=1
Do you recall the testimonies of Drs. Martin Pall and Dr. Paul Dart before a state governmental body, the Oregon State House of Representatives Committee on Health Care? Those testimonies were sent to you a number of weeks ago; did you view them?
It is inconceivable that Mss. Fitzgerald and Flory and Mr. Chaffee voted for a cell tower at Richman Park, where children play, attend school, and reside nearby. Is it only a matter of time before these neighborhoods experience breast cancer rates 23 times higher and brain cancer rates 121 times higher than those not located near the cell tower? These were rates cited from just one study, conducted in Austria (1984-1987), and you were given this information weeks ago.
Council members Fitzgerald, Flory, and Chaffee, will your vote to allow the cell tower have set in motion the health detriments as testified to by Drs. Pall and Dart?
You were provided many resources from which to examine a topic that has a significant impact on the Richman Park community. It has been testified to that cancer and infertility are health outcomes of wireless radiation emissions, how could this vote be anything but hugely significant? Your votes defy reason, logic, and, most of all, human compassion. Certainly, none of you have the credentials to refute the information provided you.
You three council members could have, as did Messrs. Whitaker and Sebourn, cited other non-health issues for a “no” vote.
Only you know your motivations for voting for the cell tower and I can only surmise that those motivations held more significance and value to you than did the impact to the health of the Richman Park community.
Sincerely,
Diane Hickey, Co-founder
National Association For Children and Safe Technology
Jan Flory
Jennifer Fitzgerald
Doug Chaffee
Barry Levinson on Common Core Curriculum in The Fullerton School District
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children? on August 13, 2014
I report, you decide-by Barry Levinson
We Want Excellence From Our Students, Teachers and Administrators. Why Common Core will not get us there.
BARRY LEVINSON
We Want Excellence From Our Students, Teachers and Administrators. Why Common Core will not get us there.
I report, you decide.
As a concerned and involved parent of a son in a Fullerton elementary school that is instituting Common Core, I want to know how this major change will impact the quality of my son’s education.
F.S.D. Superintendent Robert Pletka-He could stop this if he wanted to.
What I have learned up until now has been anything but reassuring. My son’s school had a briefing for the parents earlier this year to discuss Common Core. We were told the following:
1. If your child does poorly on a Common Core exam, under Common Core the school will automatically dumb down the next test for your child. This process will not lead to excellence in academic achievement in my opinion. They would not be challenging the students with this scenario. There are many reasons why a student might do poorly on any given exam and to automatically dumb down future tests would be a total over reaction by the school.
2. I discussed with the administrators at the school that I believed there would be a lot of lessons learned in the first year of instituting Common Core throughout this elementary school and throughout the district. I asked at the end of the year a list of lessons learned could easily be created. I then asked would the individual schools and/or the district then make those changes to install those lessons learned the following year or would the district send the list to Sacramento and wait for their guidance. I was very saddened to learn that Sacramento has total control.
3. What real control does both the district and the individual teacher really have in the new Common Core System? In my opinion, it appears that most if not almost all of the control has been relinquished to bureaucrats in Sacramento. This is rarely a good thing.
If you believe that this change is mostly a bad thing, as parents you must let your school district board members as well as your principal know your concerns.
Clearly, this is a big step in taking away parental rights as well. The further away the real power is, the less control parents will have in the quality of the education given to their children.
Finally, I was informed that parents can legally opt out their kids from taking the Common Core tests but not the Common Core curriculum. However, I was also told that without the Common Core test scores the schools do not get money for your child, i.e. it impacts the financing of the schools.
If true, why is this important. It is important because if enough parents have their kids opt out, the schools will not be able to financially function and would have to consider dropping Common Core altogether.
Barry Levinson
HOW OUR CITY OF FULLERTON BUREAUCRACY FAILS IN ITS MOST IMPORTANT MISSION, TO PROTECT THE SAFETY OF ALL ITS CITIZENS. (ESPECIALLY THOSE SOUTH OF COMMONWEALTH AVENUE)
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children?, Forced irradiation of school children, Microwave Radiation in Classrooms on July 15, 2014
I REPORT, YOU DECIDE.-BY BARRY LEVINSON
BARRY LEVINSON
Park and Recreation Committee met last night and voted to approve the installation of an AT&T cell tower in Richman Park, a few feet away from the St Jude Medical Clinic and adjacent to the Richman Elementary School.
The final vote was 4 for approval, 1 abstention and 1 rejection. The vote broke down as follows:
Wayne Carvalho, Vice-Chair (appointed by Greg Sebourn) Yes
Erin Haselton (appointed by Jennifer Fitzgerald) Yes
Jesus Silva (appointed by Jan Flory) Yes
Scott Stanford (appointed at-large) Yes
Karen Lang-McNabb (appointed by Doug Chaffee) Abstained
Barry Levinson, Chair (appointed by Bruce Whitaker) No
Ladies and gentleman, it was approved despite the collection of 365 neighborhood citizen signatures telling the city that it does not want the cell tower to be installed. The committee was told that this neighborhood group only learned about this cell tower a week ago and that they were still actively collecting signatures and that more would be forthcoming. All public comments from the citizens, five in all were against the construction of the cell tower. No one from the public was for the cell tower.
It was also approved despite the fact that AT&T has not provided a contract document to the city. At my urging a similar document was provided as an example. We learned that the specifics of the cell tower equipment is not included in any contractual document but handled off line by the Park and Recreation Department.
The standard language in these cell tower contracts was somewhat troubling in a few key areas. For instance, it states under the Section entitled Use, the following: ”The Premises may be used by the Lessee” (that would be cell tower provider), “for any lawful activity in connection with the provision of wireless communications services by the Lessee.” According to the engineering study conducted for AT&T, the cell tower in question is “one percent of the applicable public exposure limit”. So under this standard language contract they could presumably increase the exposure almost 100 times and still be within the “legal” FCC limits according to the study. All this can be done without every being reviewed again by the Parks and Recreation Committee or the Fullerton City Council. I noted last night that this contractual language was not acceptable to me. Apparently, it was acceptable to everyone else as I was the only no vote.
I also asked if the council would be given a copy of the AT&T contract prior to their vote to approve the cell tower. The answer was that it is not provided in their agenda package because it is a standard contract approved many years ago by a former council.
I found all of the above unacceptable as I believe we were voting on an agenda item based on only verbal assurances by AT&T and very little else.
Now ladies and gentleman, I have not even yet raised the part that is most concerning to many others and me. It is the potential health risks that most of the public comment speakers addressed. Joe Imbriano, administrator of fullertoninformer.com even gave the council copies of several recent studies that detail the health risks of cell towers to the surrounding community.
Yet despite all of this, I was the only commissioner who voted against this agenda item. So now it goes before the city council for final approval. Unless all of us go to that meeting (it has not been put on the agenda as of yesterday) I suspect this cell tower will be approved.
Before the vote, I offered an alternative motion that the vote be delayed one month until our next meeting. At that time I recommended that AT&T could provide us with the proposed contract, the neighborhood group could provide the city with its final tally of all those against the project and members of the public could address the committee with a formal presentation of their concerns about the placement of this cell tower. The committee voted down that alternative motion.
I asked the members of the Park and Recreation Department present along with the other five committee members, what is the purpose of reviewing this cell tower proposal, if we do not have a contract and by law (the FCC) we are not to consider the health risks of our children and their parents that have been claimed by dozens if not 100’s of scientific studies throughout the world. Not surprisingly, no one provided me with an answer.
One last but vital point. Director Hugo Curiel reminded us that as a body we couldn’t consider the health effects of cell towers in making our decision to approve or reject the cell tower for Richman Park.
The FCC stands for the Federal Communications Commission. It has federal jurisdiction over interstate communications. Please tell me where such a group has the authority and the expertise to make it illegal to consider the potential negative and serious health effects of cell tower transmissions.
I for one stand tall and stand proud to state unequivocally that the FCC has no right to demand our silence on the issue of cell tower heath risks.
It was just another sad performance by people representing the city of Fullerton. It was sad because every concern, i.e. the lack of a contract, the health concerns and the wishes of many of the neighborhood residents, all ignored by our Parks and Recreation Department and its committee.
Fullerton’s newest cell tower proposed in Richman park. Insert school kids for firemen, insert classrooms, school campuses and parks for fire stations. Stand with us to protect our children.
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children?, Forced irradiation of school children on July 15, 2014
FULLERTON HAS PLANS FOR ANOTHER CELL TOWER
http://www.ci.fullerton.ca.us/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=9861
This one’s a doozy. It is going to be right next to Richman Elementary School, next to homes, in a park, towering right on top of The St. Jude Heritage Medical Group’s community health center. Get this- The ATT rep told the parks and rec commission that it is ILLEGAL to consider health effects in their decision. What? Is she parroting possible disinformation based on a contorted preemption case out of San Diego? Maybe or maybe not. The San Diego Court ruling on preemption is very dicey. At any rate, the ATT rep agreed to come back in 30 days with a so called “independent expert” to answer any questions regarding health effects and dangers to the public at the request of Parks and Recreation Commission.
So far, it appears that the commission has been bypassed, and it is set to be voted on by the council in July. WHERE IS THE DUE PROCESS AND THE ATT EXPERT COMING OUT AND ANSWERING THE HEALTH CONCERN QUESTIONS?
Well it sure ain’t illegal to simply read and understand the health effects and say NO based on a proprietary business decision. We have enough wireless exposure gang. We don’t need another tower, especially where they want to place this one. Are school kids and neighbors worth three grand a month? They are worth a hell of a lot more than that to me folks. Read the rest of this entry »
THE WIRELESS AGENDA-PURLOINING THEIR FECUNDITY: THE NEXT GENERATION BETRAYED, ENSLAVED AND ENDING UP DEPRAVED.
WHERE IS EVERYONE?
That is a great question that will be asked someday soon unless we wake up to what is being done to our children. I IMPLORE all of you to please read this article in its entirety. This is vital information. This may be the most important article that you have ever read in your entire life. Read the rest of this entry »
SCIENTIFIC COVER-UP AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children? on May 15, 2014
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – May 12, 2014
SCIENTIFIC COVER-UP AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS
IS THERE A SCIENTIST IN THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION’S SCENIHR & THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION WHO IS SUPPRESSING LENNART HARDELL’S SCIENCE?
By Susan Foster
In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s cancer committee, IARC, voted to classify the RF – EMF Spectrum as a 2B or “possible human carcinogen.” Worldwide attention was once again focused on the possible cancer causing effects of RF (microwave) radiation, yet in the three years since the 2B classification, two divergent paths have been taken with respect to the science focusing on cell phones and brain tumors.
On one hand, the Hardell Group from Sweden led by oncologist Dr. Lennart Hardell published five more studies in 2013 – Read the rest of this entry »
PRESSURE ON OUR CITY OFFICIALS DOES WORK WHEN ENOUGH CITIZENS STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Are they turning their backs on the children? on May 3, 2014
BY BARRY LEVINSON.
Fullerton resident Barry Levinson
UPDATE ON ORDINANCE NO. 3149 – WHIC PROTECTS CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL PREDATORS
WE STILL HAVE MUCH WORK TO DO (STARTING WITH THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON MAY 6TH) TO ENSURE OUR ORDINANCE REMAINS AN EFFECTIVE AND STRONG TOOL IN HELPING US KEEP OUR KIDS SAFE FROM SEXUAL PREDATORS
My wife Susan and I had been instrumental in getting Fullerton Ordinance No. 3149 (the Child Sex Offender Protection Law) passed in 2010. We also have been vigilant in protecting it since that time. We spoke out at the last council meeting to condemn the city for making the decision to not enforce the ordinance for the last year. And we are speaking out now to insist that the public has a role in ensuring that our ordinance does not get repealed but that it gets updated properly.
Please be assured that Susan and I will not rest until we know for sure that Ordinance No. 3149 remains strong and effective to protect the most vulnerable among us, our children! This is not a time to sit back and believe we have won! All of you must be present at our May 6th meeting to let the council, the city manager and the city attorney know that we strongly believe that a public study session must be held to allow for public comment and participation. This must take place before the council votes to accept the city manager’s and city attorney’s recommendations to direct the city attorney (with little or no specific guidance from council) to draft any and all changes and improvements to the Ordinance. We demand an open and transparent process to ensure the very best results. Although Susan and I are relieved that the repeal of Ordinance No. 3149 has been removed from the city’s consideration, we still believe the city has more work to do to ensure that this ordinance is amended and strengthened properly.
Accuracy and attention to detail must be followed to ensure that our amended ordinance makes for a strengthened and effective law. The agenda as seen at: http://ci.fullerton.ca.us/about/meetings_live.asp (click on agenda) displays a number of significant errors.
Agenda Item No. 15 begins as follows:
“In the 1990’s, the federal and state governments enacted various pieces of legislation intended to protect minors from registered sex offenders including megan’s law adopted at the federal level in 1996 and chelsea’s law and the voter-approved Jessica’s law adopted at the state level.”
Fact: Chelsea’s Law was not enacted in the 1990’s as stated above but rather was signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger in September 2010.
Fact: Jessica’s Law also known as Proposition No. 83 was passed by a vote of the people of California on November 7, 2006 – not in the 1990’s as stated in the agenda item. It was passed by a direct vote of the people agenda item as well. It does not give me comfort that these rather significant errors have been overlooked by our city manager and city attorney and issued as a formal city document.
To summarize, I need dozens of people to attend the May 6th meeting starting at 6:30 PM. Please do not assume others will attend and your presence is not necessary. It is not only necessary, it is vital that you come and speak up for the rights and safety of our children.
Why would the city manager, the city attorney and a majority of our city council be against a public study session that would both allow for the people’s participation and allow for the free flow of factual information that people like myself possess?
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Agenda 21, Are they turning their backs on the children?, Eugenics, Forced irradiation of school children, FORCED VACCINATIONS, Hidden in plain view on December 6, 2013
POOF! PRESTO!
from Microsoft Windows 8-to some a space needle and a neat photo-to those who can see-it is all laid out-a massive monument to the tools of depopulation-the syringe, RF emissions, and the entities involved in bringing it to fruition all hidden in plain view.
Gates’ dream
ANY QUESTIONS?
BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION HEADQUARTERS-GROUND ZERO FOR FORCED VACCINATIONS- Do you see these three arches in the picture of peopleless Seattle above erected as monuments to mission accomplished-depopulation
BILL GATES PUSHING VACCINES
WHAT THEY WILL DO TO EVERYONE IF WE DON’T STOP THEM
WIRELESS IS THE OTHER HALF OF THE EQUATION-
https://thefullertoninformer.com/honesty-is-such-a-lonely-word/
Recent Comments