Citizens for Safe Technology
Empowering the public to protect children
and nature from unsafe wireless technologies.
Communities and Governments / Cell Towers / Cell Phones / Meters and more.
Information and strategies exist to deal with communication technologies and infrastructure at societal levels, and facilitate awareness and proactive solutions. Hiding behind outdated Federal regulations (in Canada, Safety Code 6) does not remove the elected official's obligation to act in the best interests of the public.
To streamline your search, anywhere on the website, for a specific topic, word or phrase, please use the white search bar located under the Action Kits below.
Looking for a specific topic or a past article? Search for it below:
SMART METERS AND WOLVES' SHEEP PEN - By Mario Dufour and Esse Nemo
Mario Dufour is a Canadian documentary filmmaker based in Uruguay. He worked in Canada, Honduras, Haïti, Cambodia and in Nunavik in 90's and 2000's. Occasionally, he writes articles or editorials published in alternative monthly magazine Le Couac.
PART ONE: Global Smart Meters Roll-Out And Serfdom of Humanity
PART TWO: Smart Meters, The Meshed Network
A good example of a presentation for meetings and council hearings.
For anyone who specifically wants to challenge Safety Code 6 at a mayor and council level, or other levels of government "authority." The contents are generic, and a good example of information that can be presented to councils in under 5 minutes.
School officials could be personally liable for exposing our children to microwave radiation in our schools.Parents for Safe Schools
Follow through re. Lloyd's insurance waiver: Parents and teachers have a right to know that the Wi-Fi being installed in schools throughout the province (even those with wired internet access) emits microwave radiation that has the potential to do great harm.
"School Districts, School Boards and School Medical Health Officers should know that Lloyd's of London has now excluded any liability coverage for injuries, "Directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or contributed to by electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetism, radio waves or noise." (Exclusion 32) This would include the microwave radiation emitting from the Commercial Wi-Fi Transmitters and Wireless Devices in our schools. Lloyd's of London is one of the largest insurers in the world and often leads the way in protection, taking on risks that no one else will. See the recent A&E renewal policy, which, as of Feb. 7, 2015, excludes any coverage associated with exposure to non-ionizing radiation. http://parentsforasafeschool.blogspot.ca/2015/02/wording-for-insurance-policy.html
"In response to a request for clarification, this response was received on Feb. 18, 2015 from CFC Underwriting LTD, London, UK agent for Lloyd's: "The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion (Exclusion 32) is a General Insurance Exclusion and is applied across the market as standard. The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionizing radiation exposure i.e. through mobile phone usage."
"Will the individual people who approved the installation of a known 2b carcinogen in our schools be held personally liable for negligence? School Officials have refused to acknowledge the 1,000's of peer-reviewed, non-industry funded studies by scientists and medical experts that have been presented to them.
"Directors Insurance applies to people who are performing their duties "in good faith." But are they still protected when they have been Willfully Blind to the pleas from scientists and medical experts who have warned them over and over again of the health risks to our children? Will the fact that School Officials refuse to inform parents, teachers and students about the warnings in Safety Manuals and Disclaimers that come with wireless devices also make them liable? (Exclusion 27) Are these people guilty of not doing their job by providing our children an education in a safe school environment?
"In good faith" In contract law, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is a general presumption that the parties to a contract will deal with each other honestly, fairly, and in good faith, so as to not destroy the right of the other party or parties to receive the benefits of the contract.
"Willful blindness" (sometimes called ignorance of law, willful ignorance or contrived ignorance or Nelsonian knowledge) is a term used in law to describe a situation in which an individual seeks to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally putting him or herself in a position where he or she will be unaware of facts that would render him or her liable. This information begs the question, why would an insurance company exclude injuries from electromagnetic radiation if it were safe for children and the unborn?
Below is a another recent Endorsement Change sent out by the Maxum Indemnity Company:
Facing the Dangers and Creating Safe Limits: From Chapter 9 of An Electronic Silent Spring by Katie Singer
Here's a partial list of actions taken by international government agencies and professional organizations in response to concerns about the health and environmental effects of exposure to radio frequency radiation . . .
A Call for Best Practices with Wireless Radiation from Authorities Across the World (December 2014)
This document contains some really good questions and answers that might be useful at parent-teacher, or trustee meetings.
Letter to Government from Sharon Noble - Director of Coalition to Stop Smart Meters in BC (includes A&E Policy Document)
Premier Clark, Mr. Bennett and Mr. Reimer,
RE: Lloyd's of London excludes coverage for claims caused by exposure to non-ionizing radiation.
"Based on inaccurate information provided by ITRON, Health Canada and Dr. Perry Kendall, you have been telling people that there is no health risk due to prolonged exposure to radiation from smart meters on homes and wifi in school -- this despite your having received 100s of studies by independent researchers and many letters from scientists and doctors to the contrary.
"I am now forwarding information that should concern you even if the potential health problems these devices cause British Columbians doesn't. Even though I know that the province and BC Hydro self insure their insurance coverage, I suspect you have a stop loss agreement with protection for catastrophic claims. If this stop loss agreement doesn't already contain this waiver, soon it no doubt will exclude any claims associated with exposure to radiation from wireless devices such as cell phones, smart meters or wifi. Premier Clark, Mr. Bennett and Mr. Reimer,
"Lloyd's of London is one of the largest insurers in the world and often leads the way in protection, taking on risks that no one else will. Attached is a recent renewal policy which, as of Feb. 7, 2015, excludes any coverage associated with exposure to non-ionizing radiation. In response to clarification, this response was received on Feb. 18, 2015 from CFC Underwriting LTD, London, UK agent for Lloyd's:
"'The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion (Exclusion 32) is a General Insurance Exclusion and is applied across the market as standard. The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionising radiation exposure i.e. through mobile phone usage."
"This means that the Province (that is we, the taxpayer) will be held liable for claims from teachers and parents of children suffering biological effects from wifi in schools, from homeowners exposed to RF from mandated smart meters on homes, and from employees forced to use cell phones or exposed to wifi at work. Lawsuits in other countries have resulted in huge payments already, and it is only a matter of time before similar lawsuits are filed and won in Canada.
"Potentially those who allow such devices, after having been fully informed about the dangers, could be held liable for negligence, and directors' insurance may not provide financial protection. Directors' insurance applies when people are performing their duties "in good faith". It is hard to argue they are acting "in good faith" after having been warned by true scientific experts and by a well-respected insurer.
"Consider yourself notified once again that you could be held legally responsible for the decisions you have made."
See page seven (7) #32 below for exclusion statement re electromagnetic fields:
OTTAWA, originally posted Feb. 5, 2014 /CNW/
The original CNW heading of this release - "Canadians for Safe Technology Praise Federal Action on Cell Towers" - is misleading. C4ST supports changes to federal action on cell towers, but this federal action is still seriously lacking, as it continues to be unprotective of the public.
"Today, the Canadians for Safe Technology (C4ST) applaud federal Industry Minister, the Honourable James Moore, for his assertive action that limits cellular companies' ability to build communications towers in communities unchecked and now requires more open consultation and engagement with citizens before new cellular towers under 15m can be built. The announcement means that this outdated legislative loophole will be closed. The regulated exemption of communications towers under 15m arose during World War ll as a means of allowing ham radio operators to assist in war efforts. This loophole has allowed particularly egregious commercial sitings of towers, including in residential back yards and other sites close to occupied residences and buildings, as well as in sensitive areas that are designed to be prohibited under municipal land use policies.
"Minister Moore is to be credited for taking a huge step towards greater awareness and understanding of the potential health risks that come from more wireless radiation in our communities," said Frank Clegg, chief executive officer, C4ST,
"With today's announcement; we know that developments that include wireless radiation will require greater transparency and accountability to Canadians. I am encouraged that our federal government understands that health impacts resulting from wireless radiation should be treated seriously. I look forward to working together with Minister Ambrose to further improve wireless radiation safety standards through Health Canada's Safety Code 6."
"C4ST have long urged lawmakers to consider potential human health impacts of wireless radiation, advocating for increased transparency, education and awareness. C4ST welcomes today's news, believing it is a critical step in the right direction."
Should smartphones have a warning label on them? Some Canadian MPs say yes.
"A growing number of Canadian parliamentarians are lending their name in support of a Private Member's Bill requiring warning labels on cell phones, Wi-Fi routers and even baby monitors sold across Canada.
"Conservative MP Terence Young has introduced a bill calling for safety warnings on all such radiation-emitting wireless devices. Young has represented a federal riding in Oakville, ON since 2008.
"Known officially as Private Member's Bill C-648, An Act Respecting the Prevention of Potential Health Risks from Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation (Warning Labels for Radio Apparatus Act), the Bill was seconded by NDP Health Critic, Libby Davies.
"Young, and other supporters of his initiative, want to change the way Canadians think about wireless devices by putting cautionary information about their use and potential health hazards front and centre.
"Or on the back. Or on the box. Or some other location to be determined - the issue is complex, controversial and complicated by the small size and limited real estate on many wireless devices, much less the still hotly debated science and research surrounding electromagnetic radiation, EMR, emitted by devices from cellphones to baby monitors to smart meters and more. . . .
SEE ALSO: Warning labels for cell phones and WiFi Bill C648 to protect Canadians from radiation
Australia - Testing liability for health trends (NBN National Broadband Network)
"Two northern NSW resident action groups campaigning against NBN towers have sent blood sample results to NBN Co and its contractors in a bid to scare them off their rollout plans.
"The groups - the Friends of Condong Ridge, which opposes a tower at Clothiers Creek, and the OREAD Project in Kyogle shire - say they have taken a leaf from the book of anti-cell tower campaigners in Wales.
"Under the strategy, residents take a blood test before a cell tower is erected and send the results with a legal liability letter to the telco, its contractors and the land owner hosting the tower.
"The letter states that further pathology tests will be undertaken once the tower is in place, and threatens litigation if any trend is uncovered between the 'before' and 'after' tests. . . .
"Blood tests represent a dramatic escalation in the avenues of opposition at the disposal of residents groups, who have typically used grassroots political action and pressure on councils to stop or shift the location of tower projects. "Despite appearances, Bloom said his group was not against the rollout of fast internet.
"We're pro fast internet but we don't believe fixed wireless is a good technology," he said.
"Bloom noted that when the fixed wireless contracts were awarded in 2011, fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) was not a rollout option as per the previous Labor Government's majority fibre-to-the-premise approach.
"However, Clothiers Creek has existing copper connections, and Bloom said he wanted to test their feasibility to carry internet services that could be much faster than fixed wireless. . . .
Wikipedia entry: "The National Broadband Network (NBN) is a national wholesale-only, open-access data network and is under development in Australia. It is based on the premise that fixed line and wireless broadband connections are sold to retail service providers (RSP), who then sell Internet access and other services to consumers.
The NBN was subject to political and industry debate for a number of years, before construction actually commenced. The 2013 Federal Election and subsequent change of government from Labor to the Liberal/National Coalition prompted a strategic review to be commissioned to determine the ideal infrastructure mix to deliver fast broadband across the country as quickly as possible. The review commenced in October 2013 and is due to report to government in December 2013. . .
to Richard Adams of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) from Eileen O'Connor, Director of Radiation Research Trust
Please read and share the following amazing letter by Eileen O'Connor of the UK's Radiation Research Trust. In it, she confronts Richard Adams for failing to disclose his conflicts of interest with utility companies that are pushing smart meters throughout Europe. Mr. Adams influenced members of the European Economic and Social Committee to consider that Electro-hypersensivity (EHS) is psychosomatic, and not a physical reaction to the RF/EMR. The estimates are that 22,000,000 to 37,000,000 people in Europe alone suffer EHS, but this could be low, and definitely will be increasing, just as it is in Canada.
Note that both The Coalition to Stop Smart Meters, and Citizens for Safe Technology are signatories.
SEE ALSO: FINAL RESOLUTION EESC
". . . The Radiation Research Trust reminds Mr Adams of his duty to respect the relevant convention rights applicable before the dissemination of smart meters and draws his attention to Section 6 (1) of the Human Rights Act of public authorities 1998 which states clearly "it is unlawful for a Public Authority to act in a way which is incompatible with Convention Right." Article 6 "the right to a fair and impartial hearing" and article 8 "the right to respect for private and family life, home and possessions." The rights of people suffering with electrohypersensitivity are currently violated. It is time to apply the Convention established in the European Court of Human Rights. Any person who feels his or her rights have been violated under the Convention by a state party can take a case to the Court and call for support for the right to life, prohibition of torture and prohibition of discrimination, this is a basic requirement in policy making. The European Convention on Human Rights (formally the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) is an international treaty to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms in Europe which in democratic societies are usually afforded legal protection from the state. . . .
"Many people are now looking for justice following the milestone legal cases being won related to EMFs. As examples: in 2011, the Spanish Labour Court in Madrid declared hypersensitivity, caused in part by EMF exposure, can cause permanent disability. In 2012, the Italian Supreme Court ruled the Insurance Body for Work (INAIL) must compensate a worker who developed a tumour due to long-term, heavy use of mobile phones on the job. In 2013, the Australian government was ordered to pay claims for damaging the health of an employee with EMF sensitivity. Such rulings set a precedent for future conditions related to hypersensitivity to these microwaves.
"A new perspective is required by the telecommunications industry in order to better protect the general public, the environment and their own shareholders. The same holds true for governments. Potential risks are already being acknowledged in industry. . . .
"The clock has started ticking on liability and the time has arrived to deal with this issue as a matter of urgency . . .
"As of 18th February, 2015 European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) member Mr. Richard Adams absolutely, irrefutably has received the latest science from doctors and scientists from around the world on this issue.
"Future claims for damages to health as a result of the counter-opinion on electrohypersensitivity being accepted by the EESC could be founded on this letter . . .
One time donation: Click the donate button below and follow the instructions on the screen.
Monthly donation: If you wish to contribute every month, please select the amount from the Donation Options list below and click Subscribe. Your contribution will be sent for you every month for the amount you selected.
Citizens for Safe Technology (CST) is funded and supported solely by those who wish to help us. Thank-you for learning, sharing and helping if you can.
Meetings and events on the issue of wireless technologies in homes and communities throughout North America.
Click the button above to sign our online petition to return to hardwired computers in schools.
Click the button above to sign our online petition against Smart Meters in British Columbia.
Citizens For Safe Technology
"Wi-Fi: Is It Safe?"
Citizens for Safe Technology is a not-for-profit educational society made up of parents, grandparents, teachers, business professionals, scientists, politicians and lawyers concerned about the exponential increase in public exposure to harmful wireless technologies.
We believe a profound urgency exists to protect the unsuspecting public, especially children, youth and pregnant mothers from unsafe wireless technologies.
The content of the Citizens for Safe Technology website is provided for information purposes only. Information is subject to change without prior notice. Every effort has been taken to ensure that the information on this website is accurate, but no guarantees can be made.
Neither Citizens for Safe Technology nor its authors are liable for damages resulting from the use of information obtained from this site. The authors are not responsible for any contents linked or referred to from this website or any damages resulting from information on those sites.
The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the information on this site lies with the reader.