2017-03-23 5G millimeter frequencies have been used by military

[Active Denial Systems 5G MM Waves Military Weapons Health Effects – BC Hydro – CBC Marketplace Wendy Mesley report on Cell Phone Safety – CIA – Data Collection by ZigBee Chips & Privacy – Doctor Devra Davis – IoT & Security – Joshua Siegel Class Action Lawsuit re Samsung Smart TVs – NHTSA-2016-0126 – Ombudsperson – Perry Kendall & Medical Health Officers – RF – V2V Vehicle-to-Vehicle Wireless Communications – WHO Conflict of Interest – WikiLeaks – William Bathgate | BC – China – EU – Korea – Russia – New Jersey & Long Beach, New York, USA] & video

1)    Dr. Devra Davis, among others, is warning that 5G use of millimeter waves could be extremely dangerous and must be studied before exposing the public to it. Military in Russia, China and the USA have used MM waves for crowd control — skin feels like it’s burning. Do we really have to have 5G transmitters outside our homes?  This is an article, with several good resources, that should be circulated to all MLAs and MPs – with a demand that this technology be stopped now before it proliferates.

“Current investigations of wireless frequencies in the millimeter and submillimeter range confirm that these waves interact directly with human skin, specifically the sweat glands…

“This work shows that the same parts of the human skin that allow us to sweat also respond to 5G radiation much like an antenna that can receive signals. We need the potential adverse health impacts of 5G to be seriously evaluated before we blanket our children, ourselves and the environment with this radiation.”

(click on photos to enlarge)

For years, the U.S., Russian and Chinese defense agencies have been developing weapons that rely on the capability of this electromagnetic technology to induce unpleasant burning sensations on the skin as a form of crowd control. Millimeter waves are utilized by the U.S. Army in crowd dispersal guns called Active Denial Systems .”


2)     On CBC “Marketplace” on Friday, March 24, the topic will be “The Secret Inside Your Phone”, an investigation into the ongoing debate about cell phone safety. If you miss it tomorrow night, it will be available online as an archive:


It is major that a well-respected, mainstream network and program is talking about this issue. Let’s hope Wendy Mesley presents recent science.

3)    This PhD thesis is on the IoT and its security problems. It is long and I have read quite a bit of it, but not the entire thing. William Bathgate, the Electrical Engineer in the US, believes it confirms our worst concerns. The way things are designed now, especially use of ZigBee chips, endangers our privacy and even our security. I strongly recommend reading section III re. the smart home. If anyone reads the entire thing and takes note of significant comments or observations (along with the page #), it would help all of us.

“Securing Personal IoT Platforms…”


4)    In the USA, there is a bill to mandate Vehicle-to-Vehicle wireless communications. Every car would have a transmitter/receiver. Imagine the RF inside this Faraday cage! Comments need to be made by April 17.  If this is mandated in the US, Canada will follow, as usual.

File a comment with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in opposition to requiring V2V technology in all new cars (Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0126).  Comments are due by April 12, 2017. Submit comment at:



The regulation along with the reasons to justify this intrusion and exposure.


Reasons for concern and how to protect yourself from RF in cars.

5)    “Samsung Hit With Privacy Class Action Over Smart TVs”

Samsung was hit with a proposed nationwide class action Friday in New Jersey federal court over its alleged practice of secretly recording consumers’ private conversations through its Smart TV devices, a capability the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has used to spy, according to a recent WikiLeaks revelation.”


The entire article is below in Letters.


I hope others will follow the lead of the writer of the next letter. Please write to Kendall as well as the Medical Health Officer of your areas. These people must be made to face science. Here are the email and phone number of the Health Officer in your area:


= = =

From:  X
Sent: March 21, 2017
To: Kendall, Perry HLTH:EX <Perry.Kendall@gov.bc.ca>; helena.swinkels@fraserhealth.ca

Subject: Why there is ‘no convincing evidence’, for anyone with the integrity to look

The link below is major press release from European organizations calling for World Health Organization to divest itself of its conflicts of interest re RF radiation and its health effects. As this trickles down, we have health officers claiming there is ‘no convincing evidence’ of harm when mountains of it are clearly visible.

The Conflict of Interest Scandal is repeating itself in the WHO: European citizens’ organisations uncover conflicts of interest between the health and radiofrequency WHO expert group and telecommunications or electric companies.

Does this trickle down to BC’s ‘smart’ meter program? Surely Gordon Campbell, upstanding citizen and the program originator, and Perry ‘no convincing evidence’ Kendall, who won his ‘Order of BC’ standing beside our smart meter forefather, would be horrified by the thought. Thankfully, that could not happen in British Columbia where we have top-notch people in place who cannot be bought.

Almost 40 organizations and European Platforms (which in turn include many regional, national or local social organizations), supported by the International EMF Alliance (IEMFA), denounce the flagrant conflict of interest of the Core Group of experts for drafting, in the current year, of a WHO Environmental Health Criteria Monograph on Radio-Frequency Fields:


Viva la ‘no convincing evidence’!!



From a member. FYI, the weblink to the Ombudsperson’s contact info:  https://www.bcombudsperson.ca/contact

= = =

I have sent the Ombudsperson this email through their online complaint form:

Originally when BC Hydro rolled out their smart meter program, they denied that smart meters could collect personal data such as when and what was plugged in in the privacy of your home. Then they admitted that smart meters could collect such data but that they would not be using this data.

I would like you to view the YouTube video at this URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uluKjzqHDz0&feature=youtu.be&t=3 , as it proves that smart meters collect data showing both when and what is used in the privacy of your home, even to the point of what particular brand name of product.

Whether BC Hydro admits to using or intending to use this data is irrelevant since it has been proven that smart meters have been hacked; therefore, criminals could access and use this data whether BC Hydro does or not. The point is this is a serious breach of personal privacy that a smart meter collects (and transmits) personal data identifying when and which (even to brand name) appliances are being used in our homes.

I am aware that BC Ombudsperson looked into this when the smart meter program began but I believe BC Hydro misled the Ombudsperson in this matter and this video proves this. Could you please reply to me regarding your position on this matter.



Samsung Hit With Privacy Class Action Over Smart TVs

By Steven Trader

Law360, New York (March 13, 2017, 1:24 PM EDT) — Samsung was hit with a proposed nationwide class action Friday in New Jersey federal court over its alleged practice of secretly recording consumers’ private conversations through its Smart TV devices, a capability the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has used to spy, according to a recent WikiLeaks revelation.
A complaint filed by Joshua Siegel claimed the Smart TV devices made by Samsung Electronics America Inc. and its Korean parent company Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. , which come with the capability to respond to human voices through a built-in “always on” recording device, are actually being used by the company to intercept and record consumers’ private communications inside their homes for profit, a violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

What’s more, Siegel contended that Samsung has failed to safeguard its devices’ capability, resulting in third parties like the CIA being able to remotely hack into the devices and turn them into hidden spying systems, as was disclosed by WikiLeaks last week in a trove of released documents purporting to reveal the full capability of the agency’s hacking arsenal.

“While Samsung has marketed the convenience of its voice-recognition capable Smart TV, it has negligently and/or recklessly failed to consider or properly address the privacy consequences of its Smart TV’s configuration, specifically its susceptibility to hacking of private consumer information,” Siegel wrote.

Representatives for Samsung did not immediately return a request for comment on Monday.

According to Siegel, Samsung explains in its privacy policy that some of the voice commands collected by the television’s voice recognition feature may be transmitted to a third-party service that converts speech to text. But what the company doesn’t disclose is the fact that everything a user says in front of the TV is recorded and shared, Siegel contended.

“Consumers have no reason to expect that defendants engaged in second-by-second tracking and recording by surreptitiously recording content and sending it back to their own servers and then transmitting that information to third parties,” Siegel wrote. “Further, defendants’ representations were not sufficiently clear or prominent to alert consumers to their practices related to defendants’ recording of consumers’ private recordings in their home.”

Samsung’s actions “are an unconscionable commercial practice” that violate New Jersey’s consumer protection law, Siegel contended.

The Long Beach, New York, resident is seeking injunctive relief and compensation for damages caused by Samsung’s deceptive and misleading practice and is looking to represent anyone in the U.S. who purchased or leased a Samsung Smart TV since January 2012, according to the complaint.

Siegel isn’t the first to take issue with Smart TV’s feature. Back in February 2015, the consumer privacy group Electronic Privacy Information Center  filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission asking for an investigation into the Samsung device.

Siegel is represented by Michael E. Berman of Berman Class Law.

Counsel information for Samsung wasn’t immediately available.

The case is Joshua Siegel v. Samsung Electronics America Inc. et al., in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. Case number was not immediately available.

–Additional reporting by Allison Grande. Editing by Christine Chun.


Sharon Noble
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters

One who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived
~ Nicolo Machiavelli

Smart Meters, Cell Towers, Smart Phones, 5G and all things that radiate RF Radiation