No, sorry Charlie, no cigar.

We over at The Fullerton Informer, instead, like to refer to all of her on camera derogatory implications as “inconvenient truths”, “advocacy for children’s health protected by the first amendment”, and “stepping on the exposed toes of those who aimlessly appear to walk what we believe to be a dangerous party line”.

You know, it isn’t often that a school board member comes unglued on camera over comments questioning the magnetic north of their moral compass. I believe that is exactly what we had take place at the latest meeting of the minds on 12-17-13 up at The Glendale Unified School District’s Board of Trustees meeting over the wireless classroom discussion. It kind of seemed to me that Ms. Boger’s was spinning around as she appeared to defend the trio presenting how WiFi is safe, ignoring all of the information she has been presented with, including, but not limited to the microwave transmitter in the lap business that I emailed her. Yes, she proceeded to shake it in her hot little hand as she stared right into my camera while rebuking a parent’s critique of her behavior in this whole forced irradiation exposure of school children that is quickly turning into a debacle.

I couldn’t help but notice how misinformed she appeared to be while she smugly referred to the World Health Organization’s classification process of class 2B carcinogens as exacting and yet in the same bizarre diatribe chose to poke fun at some of the things on that list as if they had no business being on that list. She appeared to be insinuating that some of the items on the WHO class 2B list, were in actuality, safe as they are or were regularly used by her mother and husband. Was she provided with the entire list like the one I read here?

It all begins around 2:35:05 and ends around 2:38:00 as she attempts to seal the fate of the children in the GUSD. I have better footage and close ups that will be released at a later date. For now, we will use GUSD’s archived feed.

While she began ranting and raving about how many degrees off she and the others are accused of being, the real real irony here becomes evident when she was calling us bullies, fear mongers and purveyors of junk science. Amazingly as she really got hot under the collar on her little soap box, she was actually holding in her hot little hand the so called junk science that was actually excerpts from and links to peer reviewed scientific studies and material, that she appeared to shake and and treat like a piece of trash.

Here is the link to what she was clutching that clearly warns against the very thing she is adamant about forcing on the children. I bet she didn’t even read it! I believe that it clearly spells out that IPads emit more radiation than cell phones and that studies involving long term use, looking past a ten year window, kind of like any kid’s mandatory stint in the GUSD’s K-12 system, showed an increased cancer risk in ADULTS! Of course our concern deals with children where there are NO studies and primarily with their prospects of suffering reproductive harm.

Goodness gracious could we have made our points any clearer?  Can we? You bet and we will five minutes at a time for the rest of her term on that board, however long that will be. Sparks were flying and rightfully so.

Like a mother down in Fullerton so eloquently stated, the FSD trustees have appeared to ignore the most significant issue they have ever had decision making power over. Will those in The GUSD? Stay tuned.

  1. #1 by amateur night on December 23, 2013 - 12:50 pm

    just another tool

    • #2 by Enrique on January 27, 2014 - 4:45 pm

      I watched the clip, and Mary Boger is way off base. The study that is the basis of this post is what was entered as evidence to the Italian supreme court when they ruled that cell phones cause cancer.

  2. #3 by Anonymous on December 23, 2013 - 2:39 pm

    Based on her behavior and smug comments, this individual clearly did not read anything she was presented with. That is terribly irresponsible for someone in her position. Mr. Kirkorian sounded like he just wanted you all to hush up and go away.

  3. #4 by JGarrison on December 23, 2013 - 6:23 pm

    Parents & Community V. School Boards

    These school boards have been left with decision making responsibility for something that they have neither the background nor expertise to decide. These are not decisions about whether to serve whole or 2% milk at the cafeteria. They are major health decisions that can have life-changing consequences for the children and teachers: cancer, infertility, ADHD, autism, cardiovascular issues, to name a few. Anyone knows that school boards should never be making these types of decisions.

    So, in going about their task of deciding, information is brought before them to make a determination. Is there consistency in the quality, amount, type, funding origin, or perspective of this information? No, as each school board accepts the roll out of wireless classrooms, their process for this decision is unique. Depending on the district’s population there may be no opposition for the plain reason that people are generally ignorant of WiFi health harms. School boards are making these decisions one-by-one, with no consistency in the integrity of the data. Each school board will try to reason why WiFi is OK, bringing it into their own personal experience. Because it doesn’t get hot to the touch, it’s OK. Because I haven’t heard there are health issues from wireless radiation, it’s OK. Because it fits within FCC guidelines, it’s OK. Because I don’t hear about it in the news, it’s OK. Because it is all over the place, it’s OK.

    Meanwhile, you have parents and community that have stumbled upon information that all says wireless radiation is very, very harmful to our children. Every week there is new information attesting to the harms. WHO scientist Dr. Anthony Miller has come out and said that if they were label wireless radiation today that it would be classified as a Class 2A probable human carcinogen. So, it probably causes cancer. The information and studies continue to accumulate. As a parent, you can’t help but fight this and there is something wrong with you if you don’t.

    The oft referred to FCC guidelines are 17 years old and do not take into account non thermal biological effects. These guidelines do not protect us, but board members point to them and use them to substantiate their decisions.

    In making these critical decisions, they are trampling all over the rights of the parents and, incredibly, they have convinced themselves that they have the right to do that. They are risking the health of our children and they have no right to do so.

    Evaluating the safety of wireless radiation emissions should never be decided by a school board, they don’t have the expertise to do so. Because the FCC can’t or won’t do their job of protecting us, the decision should be based on the Precautionary Principle which states that when there is an absence of scientific consensus you err on the side of caution. They should all recognize that this decision should not rest with them.

    So, now you have school boards fighting with the parents . . . .

  4. #5 by JGarrison on December 23, 2013 - 6:53 pm

    Parents & Community V. School Boards (cont.)

    Another critical point is that the school boards are making mandatory exposure to a Class 2a, probable carcinogen (per Dr. Miller) in the classroom. For the teachers and children there is no choice.

    They are left with no choice but to stay and have their kids irradiated for hours on end or pull them out and home school.

    WHY, when safe, wired technology is available??????

  5. #6 by mom1 on December 23, 2013 - 8:14 pm

    Looks like this GUSD board member had a meltdown of epic proportions.
    She is so outraged at her subjects who question her.

    Adjectives to describe Mary Boger’s demeanor: imperious, indignant, superior, offensive, intolerant, unsympathetic . . .

  6. #7 by David Morrison on December 23, 2013 - 8:56 pm

    I watched Ms. Bogner and the others declare that they “felt” that wifi is safe or that “junk science” is being presented. It is this kind of ignorance that brought us Fukushima. School board members and politicians have never been known to be informed but otherwise in the hands of industry and their hand outs. The wrong people wind up in places of power and influence and now we are facing a death sentence as a species because of this kind of willful ignorance and small mindedness.

    The following new study from Ukraine is UNIQUE. One of the FIRST TIMEs it uses real life readings many of us are capable of picking up with our meters. And shows the oxidative (antioxidant) damage that can be done to embryos from readings we experience in some everyday environments. SAR measures, except for cell phones, are sometimes useless because we cannot relate them to our everyday exposure.
    It is also Extremely well documented and graphed!! Hard for opponents to criticize!!

    • #8 by Joe Imbriano on December 23, 2013 - 9:29 pm

      Thank you Mr. Morrison. I could not agree with you more wholeheartedly. Those at the top know EXACTLY what this stuff does and that is why they are stepping on the gas before people wise up.

    • #9 by Anonymous on December 26, 2013 - 11:27 am

      I am always told that the US is light years ahead of the Europeans and other nations when it comes to science. That may be true when it comes to making weapons but I happen to feel that we are light years ahead of them in terms of killing ourselves. Just look at the disparity in foods that are banned overseas and not here:

      How can we trust our own government with their track record?

  7. #10 by Joe Imbriano on December 24, 2013 - 7:57 am

    LorneTrottier is the webmaster of the shill cut and paste site promoted by ROMAN SCHULZE .
    Roman Schulze is currently advising the Glendale Unified School District, and possibly The Fullerton School District, and The Acacia Elementary School foundation on how wireless is safe for the students.

    In her co-authored letter “Smart Meters Are Safe”, signed by 60 profs & published in @LeDevoir
    “Trottier is believed to be the largest donor to the Faculty of Science at McGill.”

    Mcgill university –
    “Lorne Trottier has donated $10 million towards services in information and technology at McGill. The new engineering building is called Trottier, named after Lorne Trottier.”

    “In 2006 his second gift of $12 million created two Lorne Trottier Chairs at the school, one in Aerospace Engineering and the other in Astrophysics and Cosmology.”

    *new shill fund?
    “trottier, a mcgill alumnus and engineer who founded Canadian
    computer company matrox. “It’s probably the largest gift for science promotion in Canadian history,” Schwarcz says. The funding will ensure the long-term viability of what’s become a major public science communication hub in Canada, as well as allow OSS to expand its programs, possibly as far as challenging pseudoscience promoters in court, he adds.”

    “In November 2011 Trottier gave $5.5 million to make the Symposium permanent and to fund Dr. Joseph A. Schwarcz’s McGill’s Office for Science & Society to educate the public about quackery and to “battle against charlatans.” It is believed to be the largest single gift for science promotion in Canada”

    • #11 by Anonymous on December 24, 2013 - 9:11 am

      Roman likes to cut and paste from Schulze’s go-to source for industry-spun obfuscation.

      Schulze, your lack of integrity continues to be made evident by your repeated cut and paste from, a website financed and put together by electronics industry mogul Lorne Trottier, who went so far as to hire scientists and professors to push his agenda.

      We’ve been through these reports with you before, and found that they are either outdated, cherry picked, or are easily disproven by the scientific evidence itself. This represents most of your game, and yes you and your wife have now both admitted that this is a game for you.

    • #12 by is this Roman Schulze? on January 2, 2014 - 5:04 pm

      Is this the infamous medical doctor who continues to advocate for irradiating the children?

      I don’t understand it.

      • #13 by Joe Imbriano on January 2, 2014 - 10:03 pm

        Roman was part of the agendized presentation to the Glendale Unified school board called “WiFi is safe” and can be seen on the video.

        • #14 by amateur night on January 3, 2014 - 6:38 am

          What a bunch of fools.

  8. #15 by Ray on December 24, 2013 - 3:46 pm

    It appeared from the video as if none of them really did any research. It made me sick that they were asking such basic questions. It made me sicker that they were given such misleading answers by their support staff.

    For example: EMF’s. Yes all electric and electronic devices emit EMF’s, but they are not all the same.

    For Boger to confuse Christmas lights with microwave radiation was, well – absolutely pathetic. On the other hand, she was mislead.

    What these school board members fail to grasp is that microwave radiation is extremely harmful, and that the levels emitted by these devices are off the chart.

    • #16 by Anonymous on December 26, 2013 - 9:22 am

      This is a health decision and should never be left in the hands of school boards to decide.

      This debate should never be going on at this level.

      • #17 by amateur night on December 26, 2013 - 9:09 am

        shes a tool

      • #18 by 33 degrees of separation on December 26, 2013 - 2:50 pm

        It is by design, in the hands of the inept.

    • #19 by Chantel on December 26, 2013 - 3:59 pm

      In Spokane, we have the same problem. The board members won’t look at the information,ignore the information and then act like they are experts. They act as if none of this is real. I just don’t understand. Are they all getting their marching orders from the same people?

      The behavior is very bizarre. It is hard to describe as it is not something that I have ever dealt with before. The school officials are the same way. They used to be very nice and courteous. Now, everything has changed since this was brought up.

  9. #20 by Ray on December 27, 2013 - 10:36 am

    The issue, I think, is bias.

    If you approach this issue from the angle that WiFi is relatively safe, you can find plenty of sources that substantiate the perspective.

    Then you can find sources that discredit the WiFi is harmful perspective, calling it “alarmist”, “fear -mongering”, etc.

    I think that once a school district gets to this point, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for them to do a 180.

    So what can be done about this?

    I’ve thought of putting together a rebuttal flyer that shreds the WiFi is safe angle. Will this help? I’m not sure. I’ve heard that once someone makes up their mind, no matter what information you give them, it only reinforces their opinion.

    Ideally we would approach parents first, and show them the WiFi is harmful information before they have made up their mind. Then you would discredit the WiFi is safe angle.

    I agree 100%, this is bizarre that good people will ignore so much information that shows radiation to be harmful. The bottom line is that they aren’t even looking though.

  10. #21 by Joe Imbriano on December 27, 2013 - 8:05 pm

    Here is the real issue, the meat and the potatoes:

    They all have fiber optic connectivity to the wall and the cables stop there-wireless only option by decree, by design. Nothing to see here, move along now.

    Then they are given this to read so they can figure out how to deal with people like us who aren’t buying it:

    Then I believe they all just pop the cork and call it a night. Election day is years away for some and for the others, the union lackeys just circle the wagons until the smoke clears.

    For the certificated staff, another vacation is right around the corner. For the administrators, well, they have never had to use this side of their brains before.

    For the parents, well, I believe that they believe what they are being told to believe by those that don’t want to believe what they could never believe could be true. Who would ever believe it? Well you must believe it if you are reading this.

    Folks it doesn’t get any bigger than this issue. I believe that an entire generation is on the line and in the hands of these school board members who have the power to stop this.

  11. #22 by dunce cap on January 2, 2014 - 8:31 am

    I just finished watching the video of the meeting a few times and all I can say is wow.

    Mary goes on later to compare microwaves with Christmas lights? I watched her rant and I have to ask where does some two bit school board member get off trashing scientific studies and opinions like that? Mr. Imbriano’s blog is full of links to studies and scientific opinions that are not junk science. WiFi in is a great resource as well that is commonly referenced in almost all of these articles.

    One speaker associated with the superintendent pointed out that we have been living with microwaves all along and that is simply not true. I believe Mr. Imbriano poignantly brought to everyone’s attention the fact that microwaves don’t belong here to begin with.

    I loved it when the dentist asked the experts point blank as to why WiFi is banned in some European countries. I had to laugh as they reminded me of the three stooges in living color.

    Who does Mary think she is? Did you get a glimpse of her right before she shut off her microphone?

    I think she has some serious issues, not the least of which is her prejudice towards anything that gets in the way of the school’s technology program that was clearly evident in her smug comments.

    The other board members were really way off too but nowhere near Mary.

    Glendale you deserve better.

  12. #23 by Anonymous on January 3, 2014 - 9:37 pm

    What you are spewing is no different than what they were spewing back when were children. One of the board membere even mentioned it.

    Remember when they told us not to sit near the TV? 40 years later everyone is just fine.

    • #25 by Anonymous on January 6, 2014 - 6:38 pm

      These school board members are the same all over. They are lazy, uninformed and of rather low intelligence. It is frightening to thing that they are in charge of

      • #26 by Anonymous on January 8, 2014 - 2:17 pm

        As a mother, her behavior makes me ill. She appears to be very arrogant, misinformed and emotionally unstable.

        The presentation by the experts was not impressive at all. The power point was illegible. The comparisons made to hospitals and the like are not the same as classrooms.

  13. #27 by Anonymous on January 7, 2014 - 12:37 am

    With nano-tech antennas being able to be sprayed on trees to increase connectivity to making homeless people walking 4G hotspots, this wifi blindness is quite the accomplished and accepted epidemic that unfortunately only understands two things when it comes to action taken on behalf of human health: money and bodycounts.

(will not be published)

Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved. is the legal copyright holder of the material on this blog and it may not be used, reprinted, or published without express written permission. The information contained in this website is for entertainment and educational purposes ONLY. This website contains my personal opinion and experience based on my own research from scientific writings, internet research and interviews with doctors and scientists all over the world. Do not take this website, links or documents contained herein as a personal, medical or legal advice of any kind. For legal advice, please consult with your attorney. Consult your medical doctor or primary care physician for advice regarding your health and your children’s health and nothing contained on this website is intended to provide or be a substitute for medical, legal or other professional advice. The reading or use of this information is at your own risk. Readers will not be put on spam lists. We will not sell your contact information to another company. We are not responsible for the privacy practices of our advertisers or blog commenters. We reserve the right to change the focus of this blog, to shut it down, to sell it, or to change the terms of use at our discretion. We are not responsible for the actions of our advertisers or sponsors. If a reader purchases a product or service based upon a link from our blog, the reader must take action with that company to resolve the issue, not us. Our policy on using letters or emails that have been written directly to us is as follows: We will be sharing those letters and emails with the blogging audience unless they are requested to be kept confidential. We will claim ownership of those letters or emails to later be used in an up-and-coming book,blog article,post or column, unless otherwise specified by the writer to keep ownership. THE TRUTH WILL STAND ON ITS OWN AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE-SEEK IT AT ALL COSTS!