1) An excellent article and a short video were included in Safe Tech’s Newsletter. The lies told in the UK are being told in Canada and the USA, too.
(click on photo to enlarge)
No More Lies Blog and video by Sean Carney
“Twenty-two years ago in the UK, precaution was the agreed upon policy, and public health the rallying call. But now, in 2022, wireless networks are sold to us as a necessary part of combatting “climate change,” and the precautionary principle, a crucial mechanism to protect health and human rights when science and safety are unclear, has been side-lined. Clever marketing and shrewd lobbying have swayed the UK government into a consensus that precaution is irrelevant and covered by exposure “guidelines”.”
https://safetechinternational.org/no-more-lies/
There are three links to the No More Lies video, here. Many people are watching and sharing it and if one link temporarily isn’t working, please choose another:
https://vimeo.com/734311209 (4:05 min.)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/lAjv9ZvoD0NX/
https://rfinfo.co.uk/no-more-lies/
2) Upcoming webinars with Cece Doucette. These are geared to people who are learning about wireless radiation and are open to everyone. If you know of anyone who might like to learn more, this is a great opportunity to learn from a very articulate and knowledgeable ‘teacher’.
Free Webinars: Wireless Technology Risks & Safer Solutions
“Massachusetts for Safe Technology is honored to collaborate with New Hampshire for Safe Technology in presenting these terrific introductory level discussions for citizens, public servants and health care practitioners everywhere! ”
https://www.ma4safetech.org/events
3) A short YouTube by someone who used to work for the largest telecom in Australia.
WHY BOYCOTT 5G PHONES
“The only way you would be connecting to a 5G tower or small cell is if you have a 5G-enabled phone. By boycotting 5G phones you disable the network connection. The future is literally in your hands.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmNFDAQuLmc&t=22s (2:03 min.)
Letters:
From: Lavonne Garnett (name given with permission)
To: “Don Bonner” <Don.Bonner@nanaimo.ca>
Cc: “Mayor&Council” <Mayor&Council@nanaimo.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 9:26:12 PM
Subject: Re: remove
Dear Councillor Bonner:
When I saw your subject line, I thought that perhaps you were no longer a councillor, so I looked online and found that you are. Would you please explain the “Re: remove”, as it gives the impression that you do not want to receive E-mail letters from concerned citizens.
I find it odd that you are the only City of Nanaimo Councillor, who has replied to my concern for the health of residents of our area. As Nanaimo has opted to be a model city for 5G technology, ‘model’ suggesting a trial run/experiment, it is incumbent upon the City of Nanaimo, Mayor and Councillors to practice due diligence, be aware of the biological effects of electromagnetic radiation, and act accordingly.
Would you please let me know how many 5G macro- and 5G micro-cell towers have already been installed for 5G technology in Nanaimo and how many more are to be installed? What exactly comprises a 5G model city, and for what purposes will 5G be employed? Are there cameras being installed or going to be installed in the City and in which areas? Over how many years will it take to complete the trial and in which parts of the City will it be employed? Or, will the entire City be involved?
These are questions that I think should have been brought to the residents of the City, before the decision was made to be a model for 6G. It would behoove the City to rethink its decision and consider holding off as Toronto has. There, I think they rejected the model, because of surveillance and privacy concerns. Couple that with health concerns from a massive increase in electromagnetic radiation, Mayor and Councillors are charged with the duty to protect citizens.
A fulsome response to all the above would be reassuring that concerns of the people you represent are being addressed.
Lavonne Garnett
Nanaimo, BC
—– Original Message —–
From: “Don Bonner” <Don.Bonner@nanaimo.ca>
To: Lavonne Garnett
Sent: Thursday, 4 August, 2022 12:18:11
Subject: remove
Don Bonner
Nanaimo City Councillor
Algonquin living on the
Traditional Territory of the Snuneymuxw First Nation.
250 755-6146
= = =
From: Lavonne Garnett
Sent: August 4, 2022 11:06 AM
To: mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca; ‘mayor; Mayor&Council; ‘mayor; Mayor Adams
Cc: Sharon Noble
Subject: Fwd: Update 2022-08-02 Significant dangers of 5G millimeter waves
As there seems to be a mad rush to install 5G, perhaps it behooves all of us to garner some knowledge about its biological effects, before implementing the new, experimental technology. Please see item # 1 below. Also, please respond to me to let me know what steps you and your council are taking to ensure the safety of the citizens you represent. Please note that Canada Safety Code 6 does not recognize the scientific studies that show that non-ionizing or non-thermal electromagnetic radiation is harmful to biology.
Lavonne Garnett
= = =
From: “Sharon Noble” citizensforsafertech@shaw.ca
Sent: Tuesday, 2 August, 2022 23:36:14
Subject: Update 2022-08-02 Significant dangers of 5G millimeter waves
1) There have been a very few studies on millimeter-waves that telecoms plan on using as part of their 5G technology, but health effects have been identified that go beyond damaging the skin, eyes, etc. . A new paper by Dr. Don Maisch that explains why millimeter-waves could be far more dangerous than previously thought yet governments are allowing 5G millimeter spectrum auctions and technology to proceed. I recommend reading the entire paper which is only 5 pages long. Dr. Maisch has made this technical subject easy to understand.
Brillouin Precursors, a theoretical oddity or a real concern for 5G millimetre-wave bands to be used in future high-speed telecommunications?
“When an incoming radiofrequency wave enters body tissue it normally loses an amount energy with some of the energy absorbed in the body. The depth of penetration (absorption) depends upon the frequency. The lower the frequency, the further it penetrates, and vice versa. As waves shorten in length as the frequencies increase, penetration normally reduces, until, once the waves are short enough, penetration will be minimal but still can be sufficient enough to affect most skin structures. For example, With a millimeter wavelength of 0.65 mm at 42 GHz. The waves can penetrate into the human skin deep enough to affect most skin structures located in the epidermis and dermis. However, these types of waves present other challenges. The first is that when most of the energy is focused in a small area, such as 5G antenna beam-forming, the risk of human tissue heating for anyone in the path of the beam will be increased.
… Strengthening the German court decision, the head of the Office of Technical Assessment at the German Bundestag (German parliament), Professor A Grunwald stated that it is irresponsible to introduce new technology with significantly higher frequencies without prior investigation of the consequences. In the Australian and New Zealand context, even though the telecommunications carriers are themselves indemnified against the risk of possible harm that their facilities may cause, this apparently does not carry over to the owner of the property on which the facility is located. Even though the risk for the property owner may be small the possibility of such a risk does exist, especially for new technology where questions still remain unanswered as to possible health hazards. Therefore the onus should be on the telecommunications carriers to acknowledge this risk in any rental agreement they present to prospective antenna site property owners.
Brillouin Precursor discussion paper
https://www.emfacts.com/download/BrillouinPrecursors.July_8_2022_docx.pdf
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“If you’re walking down the right path and you’re willing to keep walking, eventually you’ll make progress.” Barack Obama