SHARON KENNEDY AND THE FULLERTON OBSERVER
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Fullerton politics, the lamestream media, The twighlight's last gleaming, Who's who in Fullerton politics on October 20, 2014
Establishment protecting, status quo aficionado, Fullerton Observer publisher Sharon Kennedy.
The Observer is a local leftist paper that is about as bent on this towns leftist limousine big government liberal status quo as you can get. I believe that as of late however, it appears to be treading into some very dangerous territory with its printing of what I believe to be libelous and slanderous statements penned by Pam Keller and published by Sharon Kennedy herself that were intended to support the framing and incarceration of two totally innocent community activists, Mr. Barry Levinson and Mr. Alfredo Gutierrez by you guessed-Fullerton police chief Danny Boy Hughes. Read the rest of this entry »
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
Fullerton California Campaign Central I report, you decide. By Barry Levinson
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Fullerton politics, Who's who in Fullerton politics on October 6, 2014
Fullerton California Campaign Central
I report, you decide. By Barry Levinson
League of Women Voters Fullerton Candidate Forum, Thursday October 2.
Attendees: G. Sebourn, D. Chaffee, B. Chaffee, J. Rands, S. Paden, R. Alvarez and
L. Bennett
I rated the candidates by using both my knowledge of the issues and the candidates.
I considered whether they answered the question fully and directly; whether they
answered honestly, and how well they presented their points.
This is my rating order.
Greg Sebourn
Jane Rands
Sean Paden
Bill Chaffee
Larry Bennett
Doug Chaffee, Rick Alvarez tied for last
Greg Sebourn answered the questions directly. Both his content and his delivery
were good. I believed he gave each question some real thought before he gave his
answers. In other words, his answers did not seem rehearsed or pre-planned. That
is a good thing. We want our leaders to thoughtfully answer questions and not give
rote answers.
Grade: A-
Jane Rands also answered the questions directly. I thought it was her best
performance to date. I did disagree with a few of her comments but overall thought
she did a good job with the issues and her presentation as well.
Grade: B+
Sean Paden also answered the questions directly. His content was good but his
delivery was bad. He discussed the pension problem, which was the highlight of his
presentation. However, on one question he forgot to turn on his microphone so we
missed his first few sentences of his answer. Overall he was hard to follow because
he spoke to fast and did not speak loud enough.
Grade: C+
B. Chaffee did his best and answered all questions honestly. He is a nice man but not
qualified enough to be a good council member in my opinion.
Grade: D+
The last three candidates were very disappointing to me.
L. Bennett is a smooth talker and tries to sell himself as a real conservative who
will be a good steward of our finances. Yet he was the campaign manager for the
NO on Recall Campaign in 2012 and a staunch supporter of McKinley, Bankhead
and Jones who helped get us into this financial mess. Two of them (Bankhead and
Jones) voted for the huge police and fire pension spike back in 2002 and McKinley
got a huge bump in his pension thanks to that vote which was retroactive for all
active safely employees. That pension spike allows safety employees to retire with
90% of their last year’s pay after 30 years of service as early as 50 years of age.
McKinley hired some bad cops in my opinion that have already cost the taxpayers
approximately 2 million dollars and going higher.
Bennett kept his comments very vague. For example, he mentions the need for
pension and retire health care reform but is totally silent on how he intends to
accomplish this goal. He also does not tell us what pension reform will look like. He
also repeatedly in his campaign has mentioned that he is a consensus builder. I have
a real problem with that claim. As stated above, it was Larry Bennett who was the
campaign chairman for the No on Recall in 2012. This was a very contentious and
divisive issue, regardless of what side you were on. It was certainly not a consensus
building process.
Grade: D-
R. Alvarez gets a failing grade for two reasons. First for making at least one huge
misleading statement and two for failing either in this forum or on his campaign
website to even mention the biggest financial problem facing Fullerton taxpayers,
which is the $182,000,000 unfunded pension liability and the unfunded retiree
health insurance liability. His misleading statement concerned his position on
the Downtown Core and Corridor Project (DCCSP). He stated that he has “serious
concerns” about the DCCSP. Ladies and Gentlemen, R. Alvarez voted to approve the
DCCSP as a member of the Planning Commission just a few short months ago despite
his “serious concerns”. Enough said on that issue.
Grade: F
D. Chaffee also gets a failing grade for misinforming the public. He stated in his
closing arguments, which ladies and gentlemen are prepared remarks the following:
He said he is “supported by the Orange County League of Woman Voters”. The
moderator had to remind the audience at the end of the forum that the League is
non-partisan and NEVER ENDORSES OR SUPPORTS ANY CANDIDATE. Also in my
opinion he had a hard time coming up with the answer to why he deserves to get
reelected. Looking forward to participating in Love Fullerton Day next May did not
strike me as a really good reason to vote for or reelect any candidate.
Grade: F
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.
Cell towers and wireless microwave emissions
Posted by Joe Imbriano in cell tower dangers, Forced irradiation of school children on October 2, 2014
Wireless radiation exposure to OUR CHILDREN-THE MORAL ISSUE OF OUR TIME-Joe Imbriano Read the rest of this entry »
Fullerton California Campaign Central
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Who's who in Fullerton politics on September 29, 2014
Fullerton California Campaign Central:
I Report, Fullerton Voters to Decide-By Barry Levinson
Rating the Council candidates websites for content and for accuracy.
Rating System: If the candidate does a good job identifying the major issues, I will give them a rating as high as a C.
If the candidate does a good job spelling out specific solutions to all the problems as well, the rating can go up to an A.
If the candidates’ websites are misleading in any way they are downgraded. I believe honesty is the “best” policy. No one running for office should be allowed to either misinform or mislead the public.
- Greg Sebourn: B minus for doing a good job of identifying the issues, but failing to give any specifics for solutions. I boosted his score from a C to a B- for not embellishing his record. I believe candidates should be recognized positively for accuracy and honesty and downgraded for the opposite.
- Rick Alvarez: D minus For identifying only a few of the issues (infrastructure, economic development and public safety) with no specifics on solving our many problems. Mr. Alvarez does not even mention the huge problem of unfunded pension and retiree health care liabilities.
- Jane Rands: D minus I like her opening statement about balance. Unfortunately Rands has not provided us with much else. I know where Ms. Rands stands on most issues but she must share that information on her website.
- Sean Paden: D minus Like Ms. Rands, I know where Mr. Paden stands on many of the issues however like Ms. Rands his website is silent on all but one narrow issue. His issues segment states “Coming Soon”.
- Larry Bennett: F He mentions pension reform but takes it no further. He does not state that today’s pensions are way to generous and need to be scaled back if the city is ever to get back on a good financial footing. I downgraded him to an F for failing to fully acknowledge his past close support of McKinley, Jones and Bankhead and for some misleading comments on his website under his caption Working Together. He first states that he is a consensus builder. He was campaign chairman for the NO on the FULLERTON RECALL in 2012, a very contentious and divisive issue. He also states he is for civic openness but has defended what Councilmember’s Whitaker and Sebourn call the Fullerton Counterfeit COIN ordinance.
- Doug Chaffee: F He mentions some of the problems but like the others does not provide specific solutions. He is downgraded from a D to an F for an important inaccuracy on his website. His website states that “ Chevron, which owns the land, will work to forge a deal to sell most or all of the land to The Trust for Public Land, a national land-conservation group, city official announced Tuesday evening”. Unfortunately, the Trust for Public Land has totally bowed out of any deal approximately a month and a half ago. This is a mistake at best or at worst an intentional factual inaccuracy.
- Bill Chaffee F He earns a failing grade for not having a website.
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 »
Fullerton’s downtown skid row: Dan Hughes and Joe Felz failing Fullerton and thier Fascist solution asking for the beginning of the end of the first and fourth amendments.
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Fullerton politics, Hidden in plain view, The twighlight's last gleaming, Who's who in Fullerton politics on September 22, 2014
ONLY A GOLD RUSH MINING TOWN AFTER DARK’S GONNA HOLD A CANDLE TO DOWNTOWN FULLERTON. STEP RIGHT UP AND DON’T BE SHY BUT MOVE ALONG OR ELSE…
Want to catch just one more look into her eyes after dinner? Why go anywhere else? Why wait for the Vegas bullet train to roll into town? Downtown’s got it all north of the tracks after dark ladies and gentlemen. What is your forte, aggressive pan handling, street circuses, drugs for sale, pot smoking with the pungent odor of skunk bud? Maybe you have a taste for the underage with fake ID’s. How about the scantily clad? Read the rest of this entry »
I am very surprised-I report, you decide by Barry Levinson
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Who's who in Fullerton politics on September 13, 2014
Barry Levinson
Fullerton California Campaign Central – 53 days and counting until Election Day.
(In 24 days Absentee ballots will become available for the November 4th, 2014 Election.)
Last night I revisited all the city council candidates’ websites. I am putting together a review of them that I will be presenting in the next couple of days. But for now I would like to give all of you a brief update as I promised I would keep all of you informed.
In reading the existing websites of Jane Rands, Greg Sebourn, Larry Bennett, Rick Alvarez and Doug Chaffee, I noted no material additions (actually I did not notice any additions) to their sites. That is disappointing in that none of them have any details on how they are going to solve our city’s many problems.
Bill Chaffee has no website and at this point I have no information that one is in the works for him.
The only new activity I have personally witnessed is the addition of candidate signs being put up in more numbers throughout the city. With regard to signs, I have noticed that Mayor Chaffee has probably put up the most signs so far, followed by Mayor Pro-Tem Sebourn, Rands, Bennett and Alvarez.
I have not seen any signs for either Bill Chaffee or Sean Paden. It is interesting to note that no candidate flyers have been left at my personal residence nor have I received any mailers for the candidates as of today. I would assume that some Fullerton residents may have already begun to receive hand carried information about one or more candidates. However, I do expect to get my fair share of them starting in the next few weeks.
I was just contacted by Kim Wolfe that Sean Paden has now set up his website as of today. http://padenforfullerton.com/ However, in looking at it just now, I noticed that it is still not complete by his own admission. Under the “Issues Section” it states “Coming Soon” and all it has is a reprint of his official 200-word campaign statement. Hopefully, he will add the Issue Section quickly. My Issues Paden for Fullerton
Barry Levinson
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 »
HOW LOW CAN THEY GO?
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Fullerton politics, Government sponsored terrorism on September 5, 2014
HOW LOW CAN THEY GO?
I Report You Decide. By Barry Levinson
HOW LOW CAN THEY GO?
I Report You Decide.
A friend of mine recently made a very profound comment to me.
He said you could tell how corrupt a city is by the condition of
the infrastructure. Well if that is a correct statement ladies and
gentlemen, Fullerton ranks way up there on the corruption meter. Our
roads, our sewers and water lines are in terrible shape.
Several months ago, Republican former State Assemblyman Chris
Norby was taken into custody after the FPD came to his house as
a result of a domestic dispute. A typical he said, she said, but they
arrested only Mr. Norby anyway. Later they had to drop all charges
because there was insufficient evidence.
In my opinion, why would the FPD want to arrest someone with no
real evidence of any crime being committed? I leave it to all of you to
answer that simple question.
Well yours truly has certainly ruffled enough feathers in this town,
with my speaking out for justice for Kelly Thomas and real reform
of the FPD. I have recently been very vocal about the Downtown
Core and Corridor Project proposal calling it both a huge attempted
power grab by our City Manager, Joe Felz and a move that would
be extremely undemocratic. I have consistently reported that the
percentage of the Operating Fund Budget has to be reduced from the
approximately 80% level for salaries and benefits if this city is going
to make real strides in improving our infrastructure.
No ladies and gentlemen, as George Orwell stated many years ago
and it applies even more today, “In a time of universal deceit – telling
the truth is a revolutionary act.”
I have consistently spoken the truth and will continue to do so.
Dishonest people have and will resort to the use of personal attacks,
when the facts are not on their side. The only difference is that now
all of you know another one of their dirty little secrets.
Fullerton California Campaign Central-I report you decide-By Barry Levinson
Posted by Joe Imbriano in Fullerton politics on August 30, 2014
Barry Levinson
Fullerton California Campaign Central
As a prelude to my upcoming comments on the literature put out by each of the candidates, I decided to check their websites.
All but Bill Chaffee have listed websites for their campaigns.
I will be reporting on the content of their websites in the weeks to
come. Here are their links to their websites as follows:
http://www.padenforfullerton.com
http://www.gregsebourn.com
http://www.janerands.com
http://www.rickalvarez.us
http://www.bennettforfullerton.com
http://www.reelectdougchaffee.com
For now I want you to know that 5 of the 6 websites are up and running.
We noted that currently Sean Paden’s website is not yet available.
We will let you know when or if that status changes for Paden.
Barry Levinson
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 »
Recent Comments