Let your voice be heard!

Currently, there is an unnerving amount of legislation circulating around that aims to remove barriers to the end of landlines, remove barriers to unleashing 5G, or remove barriers to something that would in some other way harm our health or safety. If you do not approve of 5G antennas outside your window and being forced to have no landline, take action by making your voice heard!
**Stay up to date with Wireless Action — Subscribe to our YouTube Channel**

 

AT&T Service Notice Changes

American Telephone & Telegraph Corporation has reneged on its promise to wait until 2020 before beginning its dismantling of PSTN landlines. Many AT&T customers are now receiving this change in service notice. There is much discussion about the meaning, scope, timing and implementation of the notice AT&T customers are receiving. Basically, it says that unless you call and cancel your service with them in within 30 days, you automatically agree to allow them to install new network equipment on your property, which includes co-locating antennas, and that you agree to pay all the electric charges for this new network equipment. They are trying to expand their network using our real estate and have us pay to waste electricity broadcasting microwaves 24/7. Basically, everyone is agreeing to this change unless they call and cancel their phone service within 30 days. Opt-in by default again. Most don’t even realize that this could potentially be the end of their actual ‘landline’. Currently, AT&T is saying that the ONLY other option is to cancel your service with them, which is hardly an option in service areas where they remain a RBOC/landline monopoly. If/when you pay your AT&T bills, pay using a check and write “Paid under protest” on the memo line. Do not allow AT&T to install any new equipment on your property without full disclosure of what it is, what it does, and how it differs from your current service. Get a signed confirmation from anyone who trespasses to do this work that they have accomplished the requests you made of them (prepare a sheet ahead of time if you are under threat of forced installation just like Smart Meter installs.) So far, Bettye J. Saxon from AT&T External Affairs, has clarified that “First, to be clear, we continue to sell and support traditional home phone service for our customers. We are not cancelling anyone’s service. We sent traditional home phone customers a message with their bill to inform them of a change to their Residential Service Agreement that allows us to upgrade their network while continuing to provide home phone service. This does not indicate any change to the customer’s actual service or that AT&T is canceling the customer’s service. The update to the service agreement only applies in situations where we are upgrading the customer’s service by providing new network facilities and need access to the customer’s property to install equipment. Customers will be given advanced notice before any such service upgrades… We are not taking away anyone’s landline, the new services that we are referring to happens to be services like (GigaPower) Fiber to the Home and Broadband delivered wirelessly. Both types of services have to ordered by the customer.” However, what another spokesperson said that unequivocally, that “the notice” does, indeed, mean that we would be losing our landline and getting VoIP and that if we aren’t happy with that we can take our business elsewhere, to a company that is providing landline service. Make it clear in your letters and calls of protests that you object to the end of analog, copper landlines, and that you do not consent to any wireless antennas, devices, or appliances on your property. And if AT&T is not letting your keep your (or get a) landline, pass on what their External Affairs spokesperson said the 15th of June (above). Voice your opposition to any termination to analog, copper landline service.

Why does this matter? Some new customers have already been denied landlines, and AT&T pushed U-verse on them as the only option, which requires equipment to be installed on the house, just as they’re describing in this service notice. They then end up with a VoIP phone that is digital and requires internet access and electricity. This is the beginning of the dismantling of our analog landlines. We know that AT&T has been begging the FCC to let it happen for many years, and is targeting 2020. But this process has already been underway for a very long time. In some places it’s already a done deal. It’s going on now, and there’s not much more time to fight back and prevent this from happening. Come July 1, AT&T will start threatening our phone service if we don’t comply with the installation of electrical equipment on our homes that will begin to ‘migrate’ us from analog to digital. By law, AT&T cannot disconnect someone’s copperline service. They have not been authorized by law to do that. AT&T can’t switch out the network, and they can’t disconnect copperline and put in fiber. However, the notice bypasses any regulatory approval and states that a customer, by paying their bill, allows AT&T to do anything they want. This issue MUST be addressed ASAP by everyone, even if you don’t have landline phone service from AT&T! Landline deregulation is already a HUGE problem — check out the map below:

b2-reynolds-landlines-transfer-frame-1458

  1. Call the CPUC to ask what this notice means and lodge a complaint: Public Advisor’s Office — (415) 703-2074 (At the recording, don’t select any of the options. There will be silence at the end and then you will be transferred to a person. Ask them how to file a formal complaint*.) Their office MUST receive many, many calls! When you call you MUST be persistent about filing a formal complaint! Demand that the PUC representative takes down your name, telephone number, and request to file a formal complaint. You must be persistent! Demand that the CPUC defend our rights!
  2. Call the CPUC Consumer Affairs Branch — 1 (800) 649-7570. They will take your information and can explain about filing a complaint and the process.
  3. Write a formal letter of protest* (especially if you are one of their landline subscribers) to AT&T showing you paid for service beyond 30 days under duress of losing telephone service and immediately objected to the new terms.
  4. Complain to AT&T general customer support by telephone and complain: 1 (800) 331-0500
  5. Call AT&T’s landline support number and complain: 1 (800) 288-2020. Ask for a center manager and let them know you object to the loss of your landline**. Get the location and employee ID number of the person you spoke with and their name, too, if they will supply it.
  6. File an informal complaint with the Consumer Affairs Branch. Include a copy of your account number, a copy of the change of residential service notice, and any correspondence with AT&T. Explain it in your complaint letter**.
  7. File a formal complaint with your PUC/PSC about AT&T’s residential service agreement changes in your state ASAP. In a formal complaint, you have to show how you have been harmed. When you file a complaint**, email TURN (see next step) that you have done so, summarizing for them the complaint, so that they can add to their list. They are considering filing a complaint themselves. You can also file a complaint through TURN’s website. Give them permission to being added to their complaint and provide your phone number to them. You can put TURN’s name down as a referring agency when you file a formal complaint, as this adds weight to your complaint. Complaints by mail can be directed to (CPUC Consumer Affairs Formal Complaints 505 So. Van Ness San Francisco, CA 94102) and complaints by telephone can be directed to the non-toll-free number (415) 703-2074, #1, 2, 1, 4, 0 to get to a person that you can complain to. See link for toll-free number. Click here to file a formal complaint.
  8. Email the Utility Reform Network (TURN) amontez@turn.org — California residents only. Let them know you filed a complaint at the CPUC and briefly describe what you said in the complaint**. They investigate trends. The more people they hear from, the bigger the issue for them. If you have questions or AT&T is not servicing your copper landline, call them at (415) 929-8876.
  9. Contact Commissioner Clifford Rechtschaffen: (415) 703-1840.
  10. Contact Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves: (415) 703-2971
  11. Contact Commissioner Carla Peterman
  12. Contact Commissioner President Picker: (415) 703-2444, who is interested in emergency services.
  13. Contact Commissioner Liane Randolph: (415) 703-2156.
  14. Contact your congressional reps and Senators. Send them a copy of the complaint or summarize your complaint, and ask for their help. Ask for a freeze on this policy, an investigation, and public hearings on customer needs and copperline landlines.
  15. Show up at the regularly scheduled CPUC business meetings* and speak out! We can speak in open comments before the scheduled agenda.
  16. Telephone your local radio station (using your landline)! Write editorials*** to your local newspaper! See this article that was recently published in the Montery Herald.
  17. Call your state and federal elected officials, using the information in this document.
  18. Attend city council and board of supervisor/county officials meetings; attend any and all in neighboring communities and counties. The public and elected officials don’t know about these proposals. Please inform in person as many of these municipal governments as possible. Since many of these meetings are televised, the message goes to a wider audience.
  19. Is your neighborhood on NextDoor.com? Are you? If the answer to both of those questions is yes, use it! Post questions like “Does anyone here object to cell towers in the neighborhood?”. Share information about local protests against cellular towers and alert neighbors as to how they can get involved to save their landlines and fight 5G. Be prepared to respond to a lot of not-so-nice feedback. So, in order to be credible, make sure what you post can be well-cited, especially if you post in the Silicon Valley areas.

*Upcoming CPUC Business Meetings (All in San Francisco unless otherwise noted)

  • Thursday, June 15th – Sacramento
  • Thursday, June 29th
  • Thursday, July 13th
  • Thursday, August 10th
  • Thursday, August 24th
  • Thursday, September 14th

**Here are some points to include on the telephone and in your complaint:

  • Request that the CPUC holds a hearing on this change
  • Request that this change is put on hold until there is a hearing and public discussion
  • There is no provision or opt-out or willingness to serve the EMF-disabled no reasonable accommodation [rep said I could cancel my service if I didn’t agree]
  • If you are homebound or disabled or depend on your landline for emergency services access and do NOT have an option for ‘disconnected’ service
  • If you have unreliable access to mains power
  • Impossible deadline for the consumer to make any changes — 30 days or July 1
  • No public discussion of this service agreement change – AT&T seems to be moving ahead of regulatory approval
  • Access to emergency services are often most essential when there is no power
  • Changes from copperline service to wireless or with new electric connections could worsen disabling health effects for the EMF-disabled, including the installation on neighboring buildings, homes, or units.
  • Inadequate method of alerting public – a little insert in the monthly bill
  • Vague open-ended change – whatever AT&T wants to do or install on our homes is agreed to — AT&T proposals since 2009 are that they want to discontinue copperline exchange landline service
  • Costly and inconvenient for the public
  • Some people have had the same phone number for decades – hugely inconvenient and disruptive to set up and to notify people as well as costly if they were to change
  • May have to purchase new equipment to switch to another system
  • Will have to find a new service provider if they don’t agree with AT&T.
  • Energy intensive
  • Consumer cost of electricity for new systems.
  • There is no 911 or emergency service or telephone service with VoIP or digital service in power outages. Copperline landlines normally work in a power outage and provide 911 and all other phone needs.
  • Notice is misleading, threatening, and coercing. Changes have not been approved by the CPUC. AT&T is asking for a blank check with this notice. We do not consent.

***California Newspaper Contact Information: Editorials/Letters to the Editor
These are not all the newspapers in California, but some of the regional ones. Keep your letters at 150 words max; newspapers may edit them. The shorter it is, the better chance of being published. If you are sending your letter to an email address, include your full name, mailing address, city of residence, landline telephone number, and email address. See www.scientists4wiredtech.com if you want talking points on SB 649.

ACR 62 – 5G wireless network technology

This measure would urge policymakers in federal, state, and local government to work in cooperation with one another to modernize and streamline the processes that will enable rapid deployment of the small cell wireless infrastructure that supports 5G wireless networks and that will bring the many benefits of this important new technology to communities across California.

Sneaking onto the scene is Assembly Concurrent Resolution 62. Resolved by the Assembly of the State of California, the Senate thereof concurring, That the Legislature urges policymakers in federal, state, and local government to work in cooperation with one another to establish technology neutral policies and modernize and streamline the processes that will enable rapid deployment of the small cell wireless infrastructure that supports 5G wireless networks and that will bring the many benefits of this important new technology to communities across California It’s already passed the Assembly and Senate Committees it was referred to and looks like it’s due for a final vote.

Go to Sacramento and lobby the Assembly about SB 649 and this resolution. Everyone has to be a leader to the maximum extent possible, stepping out of comfort zones. Posting on Facebook or sending out to a few friends isn’t going to stop this. It takes in person, face-to-face speaking up. If someone is too sick to do that, then they can request a meeting with an elected official’s aide in a park or someplace that doesn’t have wireless. Please be creative and find multiple ways to make the implications of this issue loud and clear.

CA SB-649 — Passed Senate 32-1! Onto the Assembly for its committees.

SB 649 would steamroll local government’s ability to regulate the placement of 5G wireless infrastructure in YOUR neighborhood and would remove barriers to the small-cell siting process. To get a sense of where this is going, over 80 cities in Ohio have filed lawsuits opposing a similar bill, Ohio Senate Bill 331. Opposition to SB649 is growing, but opposition without action is inadequate. More information at The Microwave FactorS4WT, and SSM. Read about its passage in the Senate, 32-1, here. SB649 was essentially paid for by AT&T et al. — AT&T gave a $25,000 check to the legislator who introduced this bill… and whose side do you think Assembly Member Quirk will be on after getting a $500,000 check for a project in his area? No surprise that the Senate voted 32-1 in favor of SB649 on May 31st — you can watch the recording here starting from 8:31:52. The Appropriations Committee met on 5/15 and the Governance and Finance Committee on 4/26 to discuss SB649. You can read about the April 26th testimony here. Already, Verizon is ready to cut the 5G ribbon — there is no time to lose! SB 649 will be heard on Wednesday, June 28th at 1:30pm in State of California Assembly Local Government Committee. The bill will also be heard in Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee. Although SB 649 is not yet calendared for this committee, it is eligible to be heard on the very same day at the same time, June 28th at 1:30 p.m.

  1. To comment, lick here and login; if you have not registered you will need to do so.
  2. After you register click the circle “oppose” and send your comments (2000 characters) to the author. If you are representing a group please sign as such. Before you click submit, copy your comments into a separate email. Send the same comments to your State Senator.
  3. CITE FACTS, NOT “CONCERNS”. The latter get your comments dismissed out of hand. HEALTH DECREMENTS AND INCREASED HEALTHCARE COSTS, INTERFERENCE WITH PUBLIC SAFETY, ENVIRONMENTAL HARM, THE LACK OF RF/MW RADIATION MONITORING, IMPOSITIONS UPON LOCAL CONTROL, PROBLEMS WITH TELECOMS YOUR CITY HAS HAD, and many more problems may be cited. Read this page before commenting.
  4. Here is a template to use as a starting pointThe [name of your group or I] urge(s) you to withdraw SB 649 with its proposed amendments in RN 17 08941, related to the permitting of wireless and small cell telecommunications facilities. This proposal unnecessarily and unconstitutionally strips local authority over public property and shuts out public input and local discretion by eliminating consideration of the human health and safety, aesthetic, environmental, and consequential economic impacts of so-called “small cells.” Using the misleading term “small cell”, proponents claim falsely that there would be little impact. They do not even consider the fact that the “small cell’s” deployed electromagneticradiation interferes with biological electrical functioning, as in whole-body neurologic functioning and cellular electrophysiology in humans, animals, insects, and plants. The cumulative size specifications of all the so-called “small cells”, their infrastructural and associated equipment, deploy radiation in the whole, far in excess of that of a single “small cell”. The radiation intensity approaches that of a microwave weapon called a maser. With many different simultaneous wavelengths, this radiation penetrates human and animal bodies at all depths, while particularly targeting the major organs: brain, heart, thyroid, thymus, lungs, breasts, kidneys, genitalia, and eyes. Bees, butterflies, birds, and other pollinators, already extremely vulnerable from previous wireless infrastructures and pesticides, with their body and antenna size approaching those of the various wavelengths to be deployed under SB 649, are even more absorbent of such radiation, and would have no escape from it anywhere. As such, they would likely be gone within 1-5 years. This proposal would prohibit local discretionary review of “small cell” wireless antennas, including equipment collocated on existing structures or located on new “poles, structures, or non-pole structures,” including those within the public right-of-way and buildings. The proposal preempts adopted local land use plans by mandating that “small cells” be allowed in all zones as a use by-right, including all residential zones. As such, the proposal provides a de facto exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the installation of such facilities, and precludes consideration by the public of the health and safety, aesthetic, nuisance, and environmental impacts of these facilities, all of which are of particular importance when the proposed location of facilities is within a residential zone and in rural areas that are the remaining habitat for animals, beneficial insects and plantlife. SB 649’s use of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) definition of a “small cell” includes other equipment such as electric meters, concealment, telecom demarcation boxes, ground-based enclosures, battery backup power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cutoff switches, cables, or conduits. The proposal allows an unlimited number of antennas of less than three cubic feet each or six cubic feet for all antennas, while placing no height restrictions on the pole. The proposal also unconstitutionally preempts local authority by requiring local governments to make available sites they own for the installation of a “small cell.” While the city may place “fair and reasonable terms and conditions” on the use of city property, the proposal does not provide the city with any discretion to deny a “small cell” to be located on city property except for fire department sites. In effect, this measure unconstitutionally gives control of public property to private telecommunications companies, while also precluding local governments from leasing or licensing publicly owned property. SB 649 strips local government of its authority to protect the quality of life of our residents, and to protect public property and the public right-of-way from relatively unconstrained access by small cells. Outrageously, it requires local governments to approve “small cells” in all land use zones, including residential zones, through a ministerial permit, thereby shutting the public out of decisions that could affect the aesthetics of their community and the quality of their environment. Clearly, the Bill is irrational in its demands and must be withdrawn. For these reasons, [name of your group or I] urge you to withdraw SB 649.
  5. Read the following updates on SB649 from StopSmartMeters! – 5/10 and 5/15.
  6. Links below to the Legislative Calendar with deadlines and the Appropriations Rules. It has a deadline of June 2 for a full Senate vote – that’s very fast. After that, it moves to the Assembly.
  7. Contact the Appropriations Committee Senators by phone, fax and email. Also call/fax/cc your local senator.
  8. Fill out the form here to get your comments into public record.
  9. The Senate voted 32-1 in favor of SB649 on May 31st, and you can watch the recording here from 8:31:52 until the end. The Appropriations Committee met on 5/15 and the Governance and Finance Committee on 4/26 to discuss SB649. You can read about the April 26th testimony here.
  10. Write letters to your editor! Here is an article that was published in the East Bay Times. Joshua Hart, StopSmartMeters!, was also interviewed by the Public News Service.
  11. A suggestion from a lobbyist is to form organizations, which have to be at least two people. This organization can then send a letter to oppose SB 649. These could be new or existing neighborhood groups, moms or dads groups, kids groups, church groups, enviro groups, political groups, professional groups, etc. If your organization (established or just formed) is going to send an oppose letter on SB 649, the deadline for the next legislative analysis is this Thursday by 5 pm (earlier is better). Send it to both: For Sen Ben Hueso (author), to Nidia Bautista <nidia.bautista@sen.ca.gov> For Assemblyperson Aguiar-Curry, Chair of Local Government Committee, to Angela Mapp <angela.mapp@asm.ca.gov>.

 

FCC Dockets 17-79 (and 15-180 & 16-421) – Reply Comments due July 17!

The FCC wants to “Accelerate Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment” and “Revising the Historic Preservation Review Process for Wireless Facility Deployments”. These dockets are to accelerate the deployment of 5G by preempting local government siting authority. Please take a moment to file a comment in this docket too. Since the dockets are very similar, possibly identical, file the same comment if you don’t have time to tweak it! More information about these dockets can be found here, here, and hereSend in comments and documents!

 

FCC Docket 17-84: Landline Retirement – Reply Comments due July 17!

Docket 17-84 will revisit plans for copper landline retirement and also focus on broadband deployment and regulations for pole attachments. Right now, file a comment today with the FCC in support of the motion for a deadline extension to file comments in Docket 17-84! Here are few things this ruling aims to do:

  1. Read this FCC release, starting on page 18.
  2. Click here for notice; click here for proposed rule.
  3. Antennas on light poles could be coming to your area! Watch this 2 minute video.
  4. Here is an excerpt from the proposal linked in Step 1: We seek comment on whether Section 253 of the Act provides the Commission with authority to preempt state laws and regulations governing service quality, facilities maintenance, or copper retirement that are impeding fiber deployment. Do any such laws “have the effect of prohibiting the ability of [those incumbent LECs] to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service?” Are such laws either not “competitively neutral” or not “necessary to preserve and advance universal service, protect the public safety and welfare, ensure the continued quality of telecommunications services, and safeguard the rights of consumers,” such that state authority is not preserved from preemption under Section 253(b)? Commenters arguing in favor of preemption should identify specific state laws they believe to be at issue. Would preemption allow the Commission to develop a uniform nationwide copper retirement policy for facilitating deployment of next-generation technologies? Are there other sources of authority for Commission preemption of the state laws being discussed that we should consider using?
  5. Please take a moment to file a comment regarding this docket! When submitting your filing, submit backup documents into the record. Links may not be considered “in the record”. Submit as many documents as you can — research, etc. If there are duplicate postings by others, then the FCC can’t miss them and this will be a valuable record for the future. In your comment please state facts, emphasize safe alternatives, use specific evidence for supporting your views. Please include specific symptoms and experiences you have had. Over 4 MILLION people have written in regarding FCC Docket 17-108 (Restoring Internet Freedom). That kind of ‘enthusiasm’ is exactly what’s needed here to defeat this docket! Call, email, and tweet everyone you know to chip in their ballot in saying NO to this docket.

 

North Carolina HR.310 and SB.377

The North Carolina General Assembly (NCGA) and the telecom industry are in the process of ramrodding through legislation that will allow 5G facilities to be collocated with other utility facilities (poles, water towers, city buildings) in the public rights-of-way of our neighborhoods, greenways and conservation lands or on other types of property, excluding single-family residences. If you live in a single family home near a light post, for example, or a single family home in a mixed use district, 5G will be broadcast very near you. If you live in a multi-family residence such as a condominium or an apartment building or duplex, you could be forced to broadcast 5G because the facility could be attached to your home. All of this without public input! Here is a news report of one neighborhood that was caught off guard and is pushing back. The NCGA convened a panel of industry stakeholders and local government representatives, but they failed to seek input from private citizens. Thursday, May 18, 2017, Laura Combs attended the House Energy Committee meeting where this bill was discussed and she strongly objected to it. One representative reported that not all local governments support the bill. There are multiple problems with the bill from democracy and public health perspectives. Unfortunately, the last House Committee approved the legislation. None of the Representatives truly understood the Health Concerns, and there is a Social Justice issue as well – and none of them got that. Representative Butler spoke up regarding the health concerns, so if she is your representative, please give her a thank you! This bill will get House approval and then go to the Senate. When the time is right, we will need to email the Senate in opposition to the bill, so stay tuned! Please know that your voices matter and you are making a difference. Contact Laura Combs at movingstronglyforward@yahoo.com with questions.

  1. Contact the EPU Committee. Tell them to say NO to smart-meters, smart-meter mandates, 5G towers, and analog opt-out fees!
  2. If you are able, please donate! Funds promote opt-out requirements in North Carolina.
  3. Call and email your North Carolina Senator and Representative! The [utilities] have until July 1st to report back on alternatives.
  4. OPPOSE HB 310. Tell the House Finance Committee (the bill’s final committee stop in the House) the following — Vote NO on HB 310 because:
    • It is a threat to our Democracy, our health, our homes and our property values. No citizen input was sought! Local governments are being forced to accept this technology because the legislation prohibits them from rejecting it!
    • It is a threat to our Democracy because the primary bill sponsor, Representative Saine, has received over $20,000 in campaign contributions from the telecom industry (per Project Vote Smart), he is a Senior Chair of the Finance Committee, and citizens are not considered stakeholders even though our lives, homes and public lands will be affected. 
    • Collocation of 5G facilities in your neighborhood could affect your health. Under this legislation, telecom companies will be able to site facilities near or on your homes.
    • The most recent and best available information from the U.S. National Toxicology Program shows that radiofrequency radiation emitted by 5G towers, cell phones and smart meters could increase cancer risk. We should be able to be safe in our homes!
  5. Write editorials to your local paper. See this article on HB310 authored by Laura Combs and this article on North Carolinian 5G legislation.

Email Addresses for Finance Committee Members (copy and paste into BCC field): Bill.Brawley@ncleg.net;Jason.Saine@ncleg.net;Kelly.Hastings@ncleg.net;Susan.Martin@ncleg.net;Mitchell.Setzer@ncleg.net;John.Szoka@ncleg.net;Kelly.Alexander@ncleg.net;John.Blust@ncleg.net;Jeff.Collins@ncleg.net;Nelson.Dollar@ncleg.net;Rodney.Moore@ncleg.net;Harry.Warren@ncleg.net;Jay.Adams@ncleg.net;Chaz.Beasley@ncleg.net;John.Bell@ncleg.net;John.Bradford@ncleg.net;Deb.Butler@ncleg.net;Becky.Carney@ncleg.net;Ken.Goodman@ncleg.net;Destin.Hall@ncleg.net;Edward.Hanes@ncleg.net;Cody.Henson@ncleg.net;Yvonne.Holley@ncleg.net;Julia.Howard@ncleg.net;Bert.Jones@ncleg.net;Jonathan.Jordan@ncleg.net;David.Lewis@ncleg.net;Graig.Meyer@ncleg.net;Marcia.Morey@ncleg.net;Robert.Reives@ncleg.net;Bob.Steinburg@ncleg.net;Scott.Stone@ncleg.net;Linda.Williams@ncleg.net;Phil.Berger@ncleg.net;Tim.Moore@ncleg.net

 

Illinois SB1381 and SB1839 and HB2691 (Telecoms-IP Based Services)

With the Illinois Telecommunications Act set to expire July 1, AT&T’s legislation (Senate Bill 1381/House Bill 2691) would allow the company to end service to 1.2 million business and residential landlines once the Federal Communications Commission gives final approval. And it would axe Illinois’ best local phone deals, the “Consumer’s Choice” calling plans, which are under a state-mandated rate freeze. SB1381/HB2691 would remove the December 31, 2020 expiration date for landlines and allow Illinois telecoms, such as American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T) to dismantle landline service for Illinoisans as soon as July 1, 2017. Furthermore, all remaining voice communication would be “upgraded” to digital, rather than analog, technologies and would require customer-premises mains power for operation. The Senate has almost unanimously passed this bill already and the bill has been assigned to the House Public Utilities Committee. It is prudent that the Illinois House of Representatives, particularly the Public Utilities Committee, be briefed and informed about the dangers of this bill before they vote on it. If possible, tell your legislators to protect the Telecom Act and reject Senate Bill 1381 and House Bill 2691 by calling a special AARP Illinois Telecom Hotline, 1 (844) 220-5552 — tell Governor Rauner to veto AT&T’s deregulation bill, Senate Bill 1839. Read about SB1839 here. More info here. And please check out this great resource guide on how to combat SB1839 hereHere are the available addresses for the PU Committee:  bphelps118@gmail.com;illinois32district@gmail.com;RepDistrict3@gmail.com;butler@ilhousegop.org;lindachapalavia@il83dist.com;repjgordon@gmail.com;repjayhoffman@gmail.com;repjones.jones@gmail.com;repmitchell@earthlink.net;esims@repelgiesims34.com;spain@ilhousegop.org;statereplarrywalshjr@gmail.com;41districtdirector@gmail.com;welter@ilhousegop.org;office@repkeithwheeler.org

 

Illinois SB1451 – Small Wireless Facilities

SB1451 provides that local authorities MAY NOT prohibit, regulate, or charge for the collocation of small wireless facilities, including mounting and operation. Furthermore, the bill provides that small wireless facilities WILL NOT be subject to zoning review and approval and that small wireless facilities WILL NOT be subject to routine maintenance. This bill substantially diminishes home rule powers. Per Amendment #3, this act would not apply to the City of Chicago. The Senate has passed this bill already and the bill has been assigned to the House Public Utilities Committee. It is prudent that the Illinois House of Representatives, particularly the Public Utilities Committee, be briefed and informed about the dangers of this bill before they vote on it. Here are the available addresses for the PU Committee:  bphelps118@gmail.com;illinois32district@gmail.com;RepDistrict3@gmail.com;butler@ilhousegop.org;lindachapalavia@il83dist.com;repjgordon@gmail.com;repjayhoffman@gmail.com;repjones.jones@gmail.com;repmitchell@earthlink.net;esims@repelgiesims34.com;spain@ilhousegop.org;statereplarrywalshjr@gmail.com;41districtdirector@gmail.com;welter@ilhousegop.org;office@repkeithwheeler.org

Microsoft Has Decided To Irradiate Children At Home

Microsoft has partnered with Mid-Atlantic Broadband Communities to bring the Internet to students in rural Virginia in Charlotte and Halifax counties. Their new Homework Network will deliver broadband internet access at home to thousands of K-12 students for free. The Homework Network in Virginia uses the so-called White Space technology, pioneered by Microsoft as part of its Affordable Access Initiative, which uses unused low-band spectrum often referred to as TV white space. Leveraging this technology, the network wirelessly extends existing broadband from local schools to students’ homes. Using TV white space equipment from U.S.-based Adaptrum, internet access is delivered via base stations installed on towers at or near fiber-connected schools and client radios installed at students’ homes. The network is being installed by local internet service provider B2X Online.
Microsoft could have chosen to connect students’ homes using copper or fiber-optics, but they opted to deploy a Class 2B carcinogen in everyone’s homes. These poor students will not only be irradiated constantly at school, but they will also be irradiated at home. This is clearly a violation of Microsoft’s Corporate Social Responsibility.
Microsoft, like most other companies, has made it next-to-impossible to get into contact with them on the web or by email. Please call Microsoft can complain. Here are some contact methods:

  1. Call 1 (800) 642-7676
  2. If you are disabled, you may also call 1 (800) 936-5900
  3. You can live-chat with Microsoft Customer Support as well. Let them know you would like to file a complaint about it.

 

Michigan House Bill 4220 – Analog Utility Meter Choice

The Energy Policy Committee members in Lansing need to see new faces in support of Analog Utility Meter Choice. Is that new face, yours? If you have not yet attended an Energy Policy Committee meeting in Lansing this year, please consider doing so. Here’s the 2017 schedule for House of Representatives. The Energy Policy Committee meets on Tuesdays at 9 AM in Room 519 of the House Office Building (or HOB), also known as the Anderson Building. We have two more Tuesdays (June 13, and June 20) before our representatives leave Lansing for almost two months and work more in their individual districts. If you haven’t been to Lansing yet this year, please consider going this coming Tuesday, June 13, or the following Tuesday, June 20, and attend the Energy Policy Committee meeting. On the large round table outside of room 519 is a stack of cards (see image). Please fill-out one of the cards and hand it to one of the clerks inside the meeting room. On the card you can simply state that you support HB 4220, no-fee Analog Utility Meter Choice legislation. You don’t have to speak to do this. Typically what happens is at the end of the meeting, Chairman Gary Glenn will read your card, stating your support for all ears to hear. If you have any reservations or questions about going to Lansing and attending one of the Energy Policy Committee meetings, please reply to this email, or call Jeanine Deal at (269) 965-0461. She is happy to help you with any of your questions or concerns. Please share this with everyone you know in Michigan. Thank you for supporting HB 4220! We only need a couple more votes to get HB 4220 out of the Energy Policy Committee, and on to the full House of Representatives. We are so close to achieving this!

 

Massachusetts House Bill 2030 – As currently worded… OPPOSE!?

Although this bill is being promoted by activists, the bill, as currently worded, would not eliminate the use of Wi-Fi in schools. It would simply altered how it is used. The body of scientific evidence does not indicate that wireless can be used safely, in any amount, for any duration. The first sentence of this bill reads “The department of elementary and secondary education shall develop best practices and guidance for the purchase and installation of wireless internet service in schools.” Notice how nothing about opposing, eliminating, or restricting the installation of wireless in schools is mentioned. Neither is anything about wireless networking, which the industry will certainly extort as a loophole. Please comment now, opposing the bill in its CURRENT FORM, and asking that “wireless networking” explicitly be one of the parameters mentioned in the bill, and that the bill restricts or will not allow wireless networking or Internet access in any form. Currently, this is a red herring bill confusing to elected officials and the public and misrepresenting how easy, practical, and secure it is to use wired connections.

Massachusetts S.1864, S.108, and S.1268 – Bills to support!

Two of the Massachusetts bills look like they will be scheduled for public hearing in mid-to-late June — the first Massachusetts bill hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, June 20 and we believe the second bill will be scheduled for that same day. We will be most grateful if you can prepare testimony to submit. Once the second bill’s hearing date has been posted, the list of legislators to submit to will be posted here. For those who may be in a position to join us, each person who signs up to speak before 1:00 p.m. is given three minutes. The hearings will likely go from 1-4 p.m. with bills on many topics being heard. We will ask in advance if special consideration can be made to let those with EHS testify sooner rather than later. We might just be able to make inroads at the state level with some very caring public servants! See below for more details about the bills. S.1268 may come up for hearing in December and will “Resolve creating a special commission to examine the health impacts of electromagnetic fields will look at non-industry-funded science and recommend public protections”. Click here for more information about MA bills, but note that not all of the bills mentioned are necessarily GOOD and should be supported (i.e. MA HB 2030).

S.1864  An Act relative to utilities, smart meters, and ratepayers’ rights gives utility customers the no-fee choice of retaining non-wireless radiation-emitting water, gas and electrical meters and refusing installation of “smart” utility meters. Sponsored by Senator Michael O. Moore and referred to the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy
 
S.108 — An Act relative to the safe use of handheld devices by children requires specific language be included on product packaging, as modeled by an ordinance unanimously passed in Berkeley, California. Sponsored by Senator Julian Cyr and referred to the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure. (Note, Senator Cyr has another bill, S. 107 for package labeling, but that won’t likely come up until late September.)
The remaining bills will likely be heard in the fall too.

 

Amend Wisconsin AB130 to REPEAL the “2013 Mobile Tower Siting Regulations”

Please take a moment to contact your state legislators. There is legislation (AB130) that gives some neighborhoods more rights to protect their residents property values (and health) by refusing to allow cell towers. Every neighborhood in every community should have that right. It is essential that the 2013 Mobile Tower Siting Regulations be repealed. Please also take a moment to contact your community leaders or other community organizations and ask that they support the effort to get the 2013 Mobile Tower Siting Regulations repealed. It is time lawmakers started protecting ALL Wisconsinite’s property values and health. Below is a sample letter to use as a starting point:

Dear Representative,

It is very important that Wisconsin repeal the 2013 Mobile Tower Siting Regulations immediately so Wisconsin communities regain the autonomy that they lost with the passage of 2013 Mobile Tower Siting Regulations. As people become more aware of the tremendous health threat that cell towers pose, cell towers and antennas (which are often attached to buildings, water towers, and hidden in church steeples) will become even more of a liability in terms of causing property values to decline. I am attaching a memo by the League of Minnesota Cities. Unfortunately, in Wisconsin the 2013 Mobile Siting Regulations prevents communities from protecting their property values and residents health. Wisconsin is at a unique disadvantage because of this legislation in ways that will become clear as you read the memo from the League of Minnesota Cities. I have also included two pieces of information about the far-reaching consequences of The Mobile Tower Siting Regulations. One is from the Legislative Reference Bureau and the other is from Wisconsin Towns Association.

AB130 doesn’t address this problem in any meaningful way. I would like to applaud the legislators working on AB130 for even tackling the issue of giving communities more control over the siting of cell towers. However, I was disappointed to see that AB130 only applies to the three least dense neighborhoods, which will usually be areas with more upscale homes. People living in city centers, rural areas, and denser neighborhoods deserve the same sort of control over cell tower/antenna placement. Furthermore, they shouldn’t have to host the inevitable additional load of antennas that are pushed out of the less dense neighborhoods. They should have the same rights as the less dense neighborhoods. The Mobile Tower Siting Regulations passed in the 2013 sharply restricts the rights of Wisconsinites to influence placement of cell towers/antennas and needs to be repealed. Then, Wisconsin communities would not be disadvantaged compared to communities in surrounding states in being able to protect citizens and the value of their properties.

I am also pasting a press release and link about the health problems inherent in 5G. The 2013 Mobile Siting Regulations will prevent communities from protecting their residents and property values to the maximum extent allowed by federal law. It is important to understand that as the authors of Wireless communication technologies: New study findings confirm risks of nonionizing radiation state “The uncertainties regarding the risks among the public [from wireless technology] are not due to unclear research findings, but to the industry’s controlling influence over politics and the media.” (attached)

Please also support alternatives to wireless by only using state funding to support wired broadband access even in rural areas and repealing the 2011 Telecommunications Modernization Act which allowed telephone companies in Wisconsin to reduce the quality of landline phone access (California defeated this attempt, thereby protecting their citizens). The 2011 Telecommunications Modernization Act also allowed telephone companies to force people onto cell phones so that they don’t have to maintain their telephone lines. We now know that cellphones cause cancer and break DNA (http://ehtrust.org/science/facts-national-toxicology-program-cellphone-rat-cancer-study/). No one should be forced to use such a dangerous device.

I know wireless devices are ubiquitous and thinking about them as dangerous may seem extreme, but the science shows otherwise. In addition to cancer and DNA breakage, they cause oxidative damage and other serious biological effects at levels far below the limits set by the FCC. This can include detrimental effects on sperm quality and fetal damage. Studies show that living near the base station antennas (often referred to as cell towers) is dangerous, increasing the risk of cancer and other adverse health effects. I am happy to provide additional links and studies.

I hope you will support amending AB130 to repeal the 2013 Mobile Tower Siting Regulations or introduce new legislation to do so. Time is of the essence.

 

MOBILE NOW Act S.19 and DIGIT Act S.88 and DIGIT Act HR.686

S.19 and S.88 follow in the footsteps of Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 by effectively taking away our rights to oppose wireless facilities on the grounds of health or environment. The MOBILE NOW Act is now on the senate floor for final vote! Call Every Senator IMMEDIATELY and Ask them to put S.19 on HOLD so that it cannot be heard by the Senate. One Senator can place a bill on HOLD and stop it! This bill lays the foundation for 5G Networks and the Internet of Things (IoT) that will require a small cell transmitter every couple of homes emitting high frequencies – 24GHz to 90GHz – of wireless radiation. These transmitters will be put in public right of ways EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH OR SAFETY REVIEW. See this helpful guidethis post from WhatIs5G, and this PSA from Cece Doucette to learn how you can take action!

  1. Call Senator Mitch McConnell Senate Majority Leaders Office First: (202) 224-2541
  2. Call EVERY Senator’s Office Now and tell them to PUT A HOLD this bill ASAP.
  3. Ask to speak to the Legislative Director explain that it is regarding pending legislation (if not available ask to speak to staff in charge of health). If not available leave a message for either one. Try not to talk to the receptionist that answers because they do not even write down that you called. Follow up with an email after you make calls. Staffers do read emails.
  4. Tell them you want the Senator to PUT A HOLD on the Mobile Now Act S.19. Talk about health effects and your experience. Tell them here have been over 24,000 studies proving its devitalizing effect on ALL biological organisms…plants and animals! You may call other state senators by dialing *67 then the Senator’s number and tell them the same thing. There are only 100 Senators, your story can make a real impact. You can also send an email by asking for the legislative director’s First and Last Name and use the standard email format: First Name_Last Name@Senator’s Last Name.Senate.gov (ex: Jane Doe in Senator Harris’s office would have this email: Jane_Doe@Harris.Senate.gov)

 

EU wants to launch “Wi-Fi 4 EU” Hotspots EVERYWHERE

Email Päivikki Ala-Honkola at paivikki.ala-honkola@consilium.europa.eu and complain/protest about this proposal. Educate about why Wi-Fi is not a good idea, specifically highlighting the health risks. Ala-Honkola is just the press contact: be sure to ask for contact information for the people in charge of this (and please pass that along to us as well). You can also reach Ala-Honkola at +32 22818648 or +32 479955086. Remember, to make an international telephone call, you must dial 011, followed by the country code (32 for Belgium).

David Morrison wants to rid Portland Public Schools of Wi-Fi!

Yup, you read that right! Finally, a school board candidate that actually cares about the health of America’s schoolchildren.

 

Tell San Fernando Valley/LAPD: VoIP is NOT a Service Upgrade!

Due to problems with the valley’s current phone system, their landline infrastructure is being gutted and will be replaced by a VoIP system, which we know is unreliable and will not work in extensive power outages. This system affects 3-1-1 calls and not 9-1-1 calls. Their current mindset is that an “upgrade” to VoIP will be an “improvement”. Please set the LAPD straight, and let them know that you DO NOT approve of this “upgrade”, especially if you live in the affected area and will be thus inconvenienced because of this change in service. Please contact the LAPD — call (818) 898-1267 and 1 (877) ASK-LAPD and (818) 898-1200 and (213) 473-3231, and submit comments here.

NHTSA-2016-0126 –  Commenting closed.

0126 would mandate V2V wireless communication in light vehicles. Here is one sample letter you could’ve used as a starting point.

 

Wireless Devices: Minimize Your Legal Risk -Thursday, October 26th, 2017 — Australia ($695 — $795)

Unified Presidential Letter Writing Campaign

We plan to write letters to the President on a regular basis. If we all send in our letters on the same day, that may be more effective. While the letters and post-card below are starting points, we encourage everyone to write their own personal letter. If we could all send emails on the same day, that would be even better. Be sure to voice your opinion to the White House as well: (202) 456-1414! We plan to repeat our calls, emails, and letters every week until the White House responds.

Letters to the President – DOCX Files (editable)
Summary Letter A
Summary Letter B
Letter 1 – Repeal Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
Letter 2 – Lower the FCC standards
Letter 3 – Ban cell phone usage among children
Letter 4 – Impose a smart-meter ban
Letter 5 – Ban Wi-Fi in schools
Letter 6 – Create “white spots” or EMR sanctuaries
Letter 7 – Remove barriers to the purchase and use of incandescent light-bulbs
Letter 8 – Recognize EHS as a valid disability/diagnosis in the US
Additional Letter 1 – Science
Additional Letter 2 – Ban Public Wi-Fi
Additional Letter 3 – Building Integrity
Additional Letter 4A – The EHS “bare-bones” template
Additional Letter 4B – The EMS filled template

Letters to the President – PDF Files (not editable)
Summary Letter A
Summary Letter B
Letter 1 – Repeal Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
Letter 2 – Lower the FCC standards
Letter 3 – Ban cell phone usage among children
Letter 4 – Impose a smart-meter ban
Letter 5 – Ban Wi-Fi in schools
Letter 6 – Create “white spots” or EMR sanctuaries
Letter 7 – Remove barriers to the purchase and use of incandescent light-bulbs
Letter 8 – Recognize EHS as a valid disability/diagnosis in the US
Additional Letter 1 – Science
Additional Letter 2 – Ban Public Wi-Fi
Additional Letter 3 – Building Integrity
Additional Letter 4B – The EMS filled template

Post Card Template
EMF Post-Card PDF file (not editable)*

*We cannot post the Publisher file due to WordPress restrictions. If you would like an editable version of the post-card, please use the Contact Form and we’ll email you a copy.

Corinne Hoisington – Promotes virtual and augmented reality headsets for kids (involves holding cell phones up to the head of developing children)

Professor, Central Virginia Community College
Email: hoisingtonc@centralvirginia.edu
Telephone: (434) 832-7682

Rick Snyder, Michigan Governor – believes smart-meters are safe since they adhere to FCC guidelines (which we know are obsolete)

Contact Information & Contact Form
Governor’s Telephone: (517) 373-3400
Constituent Relations Telephone: (517) 335-7858

Charity Could Face Investigation For Protecting Health!

La Crosse Cell Towers – 13 cell towers are being proposed

Mobilitie, the company that wants to erect these towers, withdrew their proposal of the 13 towers and is in the process of providing a “good faith” application with the citizens of La Crosse. Mayor Kabat asserts that data demands are growing, making these towers necessary, while WIZM maintains a favorable outlook on the towers, deeming them necessary and portraying those opposed to it as “luddites”.
CONTACT:
Mayor Tim Kabat – email    (608) 789-7500
WIZM AM 1410 – email        (608) 785-7914

Keith Country Day School Wi-Fi

Please read the following story from Electra-Health’s Shaun Kranish:
My wife, Lana, and I have two young daughters – 3 and 6 years of age. Our oldest daughter has been attending this school for a few years and we’ve been educating the head of school – Dr. Debra Dimke – on the dangers of WiFi. I measured the school and found high readings. After speaking with the head of school and emailing her many times, she gave us verbal (advice – make sure you get it in writing) permission to take steps to reduce the exposure without affecting the WiFi. I offered to donate my time and even lots of equipment/material to help improve the health of the school’s environment. This is my 9th year in this field – it’s my profession and job. I’ve studied from the best in the world (Dave Stetzer and many others), worked with thousands of individuals around the world to help them clean their environment, and will also very soon be certified as an electromagnetic radiation specialist (EMRS) by the International Institute of Building Biology and Ecology. I completed their electromagnetic seminars at the very top of my classes, earning the highest marks on the final exams anyone has ever gotten. This isn’t a hobby to me – it is serious work – and my desire and hope was to greatly improve the health of the school! for all of those children and my own. First I installed a remote control switch that would turn off all of the WiFi when it is not needed, and easily turn it back on temporarily when it was absolutely necessary. This proved not to work – no one would turn it back off. The WiFi was going all the time.
The next step was to shield the WiFi access points. I first did this with the Swiss Shield material, and it was very effective – 95% or better reduction! The custodian – who was there while I installed it and said nothing – removed it without letting my wife or me know. My wife was also a substitute teacher at the school, so there isn’t an excuse not to contact us. That’s ok – I came back with aluminum screen material and shielded it very carefully – this time with a material that no one should have any concerns about. Then this was removed! Once again with no notification or contact from anyone. I found out who was removing it – the school’s IT guy and one of the members of the board of trustees. My first attempts to contact him brought no response. Then an email directly to him finally got a response. The head of school, who had been leading us on that “it should be fine” and “I don’t see a problem with it” while we installed the material, now asked us stop installing the material. We had already explained that our concern level was so high that we did not feel safe having our children in the building. So with no reason – no explanation as to why the shielding material was being removed – the children at the school were left exposed to 3 WiFi access points blasting out a World Health Organization Group 2B possible carcinogenic agent. With our 2 girls out of school, a meeting was set with the head of school, the IT guy, and the technology committee head. The evening before the meeting, we received a one-line email that I quote: “We are unable to meet tomorrow evening. We will get a meeting rescheduled as soon as we can.”
Our calls the next day were unanswered and not returned. We then received this email:

“Good afternoon,
It has been a very busy day and I know you have been trying to reach me.
After much thought, I do not think it will be possible to resolve our differences. The Business Office is preparing to send you a partial refund check for tuition and fees.
Please know I sincerely wish the Kranish Family the very best. Thank you for your support to the school and our teachers.
If there is a need to discuss any Keith business, please contact Mr. David Vella. Mr. Vella may be reached at vellalundlaw@yahoo.com.
Sincerely,
Deb Dimke” 

We were being kicked out of the school for raising concerns about the health and safety of the children going there! But here is the deal, this is just the beginning. We’re not going to let willful ignorance and refusal to discuss an issue so important go unchecked. Reason and facts and logic need to step in. Apparently the appetite for wireless technology is so great that some are willing to ignore the huge mound of evidence that it’s harmful. My wife and I are going to go head on with this school and not give up. There are other concerned parents, and ultimately the parents should decide since regulators and even the school’s own administration is unwilling to be swayed by all of the science and facts surrounding the issue. There has still to this day been no explanation as to why those access points couldn’t be turned down and/or shielded. This is unacceptable to my wife and me. We are going public with this story. Please learn from us and use the information to tackle this issue with your own schools, to protect the children you care about. WiFi has been removed from many schools already, as it should be. It’s up to us. Let’s set the example and be the parents and grandparents we are called to be. The facts will be our primary weapon to win these battles. Let’s protect these children!!!

CONTACT:
Debra Dimke, Head of School           (815) 231-1114      10am-4pm Central
Keith School Technology Office       (815) 399-8850 ext. 118

Making Breast Cancer Worse

Julian Rios Cantu, an 18-year-old student has won the grand prize at the Global Student Entrepreneur Awards for creating technology that will make breast cancer worse!
Actually, that wasn’t their goal. Their goal was to detect breast cancer earlier. This boy, after nearly losing his mother to breast cancer, developed a bra with over 200 biosensors that will monitor the breasts for signs of breast cancer; this sounds great, until you realize that this data is relayed via Bluetooth to a wireless, mobile device!
Cantu and his friends won $20,000 for the invention. While their intentions are admirable, their product is not. It won’t be long before doctors start encouraging the use of this flawed product! Please learn more about this concept and then take action against the implementation of Bluetooth in its design! As currently designed, this bra will not “save millions” as it claims; it is more likely to “kill millions” instead.
This may not be as hard as it appears: Supplement Police reports that “Using low-energy Bluetooth, the EVA Auto-Exploration Bra pairs with a dedicated smartphone app, which collects the information gathered by the device and presents it to a doctor. The team at Higea Technologies haven’t yet presented any solutions that don’t involve expensive smartphone pairing, but as the EVA Auto-Exploration Bra is still in the developmental stage, it’s possible that the device may be able to present biometric data in another fashion.”
The official website of this flawed product may be found here: http://higia.tech/ – it does not appear that there is currently anyway to contact the creators – was that intentional? Companies like Facebook and other wireless corporations have eagerly supported this endeavor – even today’s youth science experiments have become increasingly dominated by the wireless industry. The creators ask “Would you entrust the life of the person you love to such a fallible method as breast self-examination?” Certainly, nobody in their right mind would entrust the life of the person they love to such a fallible product as theirs either.

Wikipedia Advance: EHS & Guy Macon

Wikipedia Articles/Pages of Conflict & Other Noteworthy Pages
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity – Article
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity – Article Talk
Guy Macon – User Talk
Nalbert123 – User Talk
Administrator’s Noticeboard: Incident Archive 943 – Nalbert123
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity – Article Talk Archive #7 – Emails
*Be sure to adhere to Wikipedia standards for encyclopedic and scientific content. Primary research should not be referenced for science-related topics, such as EHS.  Please read this article for more info about verifiability, and contact Wikipedia with any concerns you may have about bias or vandalism (even though they likely won’t listen).

Don’t know where to start? How about this article on the microwave auditory effect?

Mr. Guy Macon is a self-taught electrical engineer who takes pride in vandalizing Wikipedia, asserting that EHS does not exist and that there is no scientific basis for it, even though many reputable studies have confirmed its existence. He resorts to crude language and threats when encountering people holding viewpoints differing from his own. Furthermore, after extensive analysis of his domain, it appears that his domain’s DNS records fraudulent as well. Clearly, he is up to no good. You can slap him with a trout on Wikipedia and contact him using the information below:

Email – mailbox128@guymacon.com and domainowner255@guymacon.com *Guy Macon uses these as junk email addresses and you are unlikely to get a reply. We recommend sending him mail and telephoning him instead.

6158 Flamingo Drive
Buena Park, CA 90620-1328

(714) 670-1687     Macon (home – don’t spam)
(714) 388-8548     Mr. Macon, cell
(714) 388-8647     Mrs. Macon, cell

Smart-Meter Revolt
*Read about the smart-meter regulations in your state or territory here*

Smart Meter Doctor/Disability Letter to PUC/PSC/Utility [Template]

Day of Action

Smart Meter Day Of Action: http://actiondaytostopsmartmeters.org/
EMR Action Day: http://www.emractionday.org/
National Day Of Action

  • Brainstorm day/date
  • Logistics
  • Posters
  • Phone Calls and Emails
  • Press and Media
  • World Health Organization
  • Funding
  • Proposed Wireless tax… (i.e. 2% on all wireless contracts –> Wireless Health Effects Research)
  • Wireless Legislation