[5G – BC Hydro – BC MLA Contact List – Brain Scans – California Assembly Members Contact List – Cell Towers – EHS – FCC Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Sec 704) – FortisBC – GCHQ – Health – IAFF International Association of Fire Fighters – Kaspersky Lab – Letters from Susan Foster, EM-Radiation Research Trust, to Cecilia M. Aguiar-Curry re Firefighters’ Exemption from Ben Hueso & Bill Quirk SB 649 Microcells / Small Cells Public Right-of-way Siting Legislation – Mary Beth Brangan – Michael Shalyt – Microsoft Windows Software – NotPetya Cyber Hacking Ransomware Attacks – NSA EternalBlue – Smart Grid / Smart Meters Security – Veracode – WannaCry | BC – Canada – Australia – Denmark – EU – France – Germany – Israel – Italy – Netherlands – South Korea – Spain – Poland – Russia – Ukraine – UK – California, USA]
1) Another series of major hacking attacks that seem to have started in Ukraine and moved into Europe, hitting banks, etc. More victims are likely.
(click on photos to enlarge)
Nuclear plant – Chernobyl and power grid http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/database/?pageid=event_update&edis_id=CID-20170627-58794-UKR
2) In the UK, the concerns about cybersecurity and hacking of the smeters and grid are great, according to industry insiders. So far, BC Hydro and FortisBC appear unconcerned about these dangers, relying on encryption only which will not protect us in the evident of a cyber-attack or accident.
Power industry significantly concerned of cyber-threats, says industry exec
“A possible target for these cyber-attacks are the smart meters being installed across the UK’s homes by the end of 2020 to provide more accurate meter readings. To ensure the data transported to and from these meters, the Capita-run DCC, the network setup the handle its transport, has been given critical national infrastructure status…
Michael Shalyt, an Israeli expert renowned for protecting critical national infrastructure said in a statement: “A future attack that aims to cripple normal operations might be destructive in nature – and not only disruptive. A somewhat sophisticated attacker can cause physical damage to equipment and product – by giving commands to industrial equipment that puts the process in a damaging state and forging the reported physical state. Such an attack can shut down operations for months – not only days.””
3) The Coalition website has been updated with email contacts for all the current BC MLAs. They are at:
or directly via:
4) The firefighters in California have been exempted from having microcells installed on their fire stations, and I would expect they will object to having them outside the stations too. Please see in “Letters” the letter from Susan Foster, who was responsible for having cell towers removed from fire stations in the USA (and in Canada, too, I believe) after many firemen suffered serious health problems. These firemen understand and appreciate the health risk associated with microwave radiation. Given all the risks to their health from their jobs, they don’t need more. Please note in the linked letter, there is a minor error with the number of people estimated to be sensitive. 3% is actually 1.17 million, not 11.7 million. I have mentioned this to Susan.
Firefighters suffered serious health effects from cell towers, now they fight microcells / small cells.
5) IF the bill in California passes re microcells, the public will lose all control over the right of way where utility poles are situated. The Bill gives the telecoms the right to put anything there, not just small cells. This is truly outrageous and we need to begin the fight to educate here before a similar law passes. Who knows, maybe it already has!!
This past week I became aware of an exemption for fire stations. It is, to the best of my understanding in this ever-changing bill, the only clear exemption: “The small cell is not located on a fire department facility.” I do not know if this exempts fire department property in addition to the facility and have requested clarification.
Fire stations were one of the first preferred commercial sites for cell tower placement. They are usually located near main roads so provide coverage to densely populated areas and passing cars. They also generate revenue for the city and the department.
Many firefighters have become ill, and in 2004 I organized a pilot study of firefighters exposed to RF radiation 24/7 from a tower on their station for 5+ years. We found brain abnormalities, delayed reaction time, lack of impulse control, and cognitive impairment in all six men. My filing with the FCC detailing our study results can be found here: https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7022117660.pdf . We never had funding to conduct a larger study, but this small pilot study has served a valuable purpose with objective evidence of harm through SPECT brain scans and T.O.V.A. testing.
What is significant about the fire station exemption in SB 649 is that the exemption was given to the firefighters throughout California based on health. As most of you know, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Sec 704) prohibits the denial of a tower based on environmental concerns, and the courts have interpreted this as health. Therefore this appears to be the first exemption in a law (still awaiting passage) granted for health concerns.
Attached [https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Opposition-to-SB-649-Letter-to-California-Assembly-Member-Cecilia-M.-Aguiar-Curry-by-Susan-Foster-for-the-Radiation-Research-Trust-June-22-2017.pdf] is my letter to the California Assembly stating my support for the firefighter exemption, yet pointing out the firefighters are the strongest of the strong, and if they are impaired from working in stations with cell tower exposure — something California acknowledges through the granting of this exemption, it is only logical to exempt the rest of the population which is inherently more vulnerable.
Yesterday I was able to confirm with a high ranking IAFF union official that the exemption was requested by the firefighters based on concerns about their health.
UPDATE: On June 23 a late amendment was offered that takes this bill from horrible to Orwellian. It states:
As amended, the bill is no longer limited to just “small cells.” SB 649 now applies broadly to all telecommunications providers and the equipment they use from “micro-wireless” to “small cell” to “macro-towers.” It’s clear from the direction of this bill, that the intent is not about 5G wireless deployment, but rather local deregulation of the entire telecommunications industry.
This latest version places a new ban on city/county regulation of placement or operation of “communication facilities” within and outside the public right of way far beyond “small cells.” This new language would extend local preemption of regulation to any “provider authorized by state law to operate in the rights of way,” which can include communications facilities installed for services such as gas, electric, and water, leaving cities and counties with limited oversight only over “small cells.”
Thank you to Mary Beth Brangan for bringing it to our attention. Bottom line: Almost all cell towers will get over the counter approval. If California residents, and there are many of us, are moved to contact their Assembly Members re SB 649, here is how you find them: http://assembly.ca.gov/assemblymembers. To all others, what starts in California never stays in California. It spread across the country and around the world. Efforts like SB 649 are being readied in multiple states.
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“We can´t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them”
~ A. Einstein