Pledging Allegiance To The Corporations

Glass beach in California ~ images here

California Senate Bill 649 Vetoed by Governor Jerry Brown

It was an answer to many, many prayers.  And the results of the hard work of many, many people, and many, many activists.

SB 649 would have allowed rapid deployment of microwave-radiation-emitting-mini-cell-tower-devices quite literally everywhere throughout the state of California.  Other states have quietly passed similar laws, or are in the process.

That's probably what "driverless cars" entail as well, a very dense infrastructure, completely blanketing us in electrosmog.

The FCC is wanting to "streamline" the permitting process for this very dense wireless infrastructure, making it easier to install microwave-radiation-emitting-mini-cell-tower-devices everywhere.  SB 649 was probably an answer to telecom's prayers.  But it was vetoed late Sunday night by Governor Jerry Brown, a politician and a lawyer.  

Before you celebrate, you must read his letter.

His reasons to veto this bill are weak.

This is only a "pause"

This bill is not "dead" and could rear its ugly head once again.

It appears that Governor Brown is still pledging his allegiance to "innovated technology" being deployed "rapidly and efficiently", though "more balanced"?  What does that mean?  "More balanced"?

Does it mean health and safety will no longer be ignored?  Does it mean that years and years of research will be acknowledged?  Does it mean the people who have become sensitive to the growing blanket of electrosmog will be recognized?

Massive wireless infrastructure has never been experienced before in our history.  And there's lots of evidence warranting the precautionary approach. Yet profit is usurping people, so far. 

Governor Brown vetoed rapid deployment of dense wireless infrastructure this time around.  But it's not time to celebrate, because we're not out of the dark yet.  

We've only just begun.  

And it takes a nation.

"Smart" Meters: In-Home Surveillance For Profit

Why would utility companies spend millions to billions of dollars replacing perfectly working ANALOG meters that last 20 to 80 years or more and have withstood the test of time for safety, reliability, and accuracy, with electronic (sometimes called "smart") meters that sometimes fail upon installation, sometimes start fires, sometimes overcharge, and sometimes make customers extremely ill?

Follow the money...

Who Are You Going To Believe?

Image from this story about how "intent matters" when migratory birds are killed

The following is my three minute comment to the City of Battle Creek, City Commission, on Tuesday, February 2, 2016:

In July of last year, I stood before you and demanded a public hearing before any ordinance or anything was passed that would force smart meters upon water customers.  Instead of making smart meters mandatory, you passed a Resolution establishing an uncapped monthly charge for water customers who do not want a smart meter.  This Resolution was introduced and passed without a public hearing. 

Research on the biological effects of long-term exposure to non-thermal radiation, the form of radio frequency radiation we are being exposed to by the City's new water meters, is relatively new. 

Wireless industry funded studies show less often, while independently funded studies show more often than not, that biological harm is being done by your smart meter's non-thermal radiation.

The Bioelectromagnetic Society, established in 1978, has been studying long-term effects of non-thermal radiation, and have found, "rigorous and repeatable evidence for non-thermal physiological effects and hazards including potential carcinogenicity," Larry Burk, MD, CEHP.

Actual DNA damage has been documented by Dr. Henry Lai in the BioInitiative 2012 Report.

And Dr. Albert Manville, Adjunct Professor at Johns Hopkins University, Senior Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and one of the signatories on the Appeal warning the World Health Organization and United Nations of the emerging public health crisis from wireless technology, including the non-ionizing radiation from your smart meters, wrote: 

“While we like our electronic gadgets, the worldwide demand for these technologies of convenience only grows, as do the gargantuan profits that come from selling the devices and their services.  While human health and safety continue to be dismissed by many, growing scientific evidence is showing a dark side to cell phone, WiFi, smart meter and point-to-point technologies."  He then goes on to talk about migratory birds and how they, "now appear to be negatively affected by non-ionizing radiation." 

So the question is, who are you going to believe?  Those who stand to profit from smart meters?  Or those who have nothing to gain except public health? 

Thank you for listening.  May you all truly be blessed!

 The video of the City Commission meeting is here, and I begin speaking at about 55:05.