UN Climate Deal “Toothless, Delusional,” Heartland Institute Says


The Heartland Institute sent a delegation of climate scientists and other expert to Paris in early December to attend the United Nations’ 21st Convention on Climate Change (COP-21), at which time they conducted a counter-conference, held news conferences, and attended official and unofficial events in Paris.

Given the presence of 40,000 environmentalists, politicians, bureaucrats, and professional protesters who attended COP-21, the ratio to the Heartland delegation (1,000 to 1) could have presented a daunting and impossible task. Nevertheless, the Heartland delegation made sure sound science, real economics, and common sense were heard in Paris. 

On Wednesday, December 16, The Heartland Institute hosted two special briefings on how The Heartland delegation was able to rain on the global warming alarmists’ parade in Paris — a noon event at the Union League Club in Chicago, with a second after-work reception at Heartland’s headquarters at 3939 North Wilke Road in Arlington Heights. Three of Heartland’s own staff members, James Taylor, Vice President, External Relations; Jim Lakely, Communications Director; and Keely Drukala, Deputy Director of Communications (whose proficiency in French was a huge asset), recounted their adventures while in France and further gave insight into the real outcome of COP-21.  Listen here to the recording of the Arlington Heights COP-21 briefing.

Heartland’s reasons for attending COP-21

But why did Heartland think it so important to send a delegation to COP-21, as it had never before attending a U.N. climate conference?  As related by Heartland’s President and CEO Joseph Bast:  Heartland’s earlier trip to the Vatican in April of this year (2015) prompted Heartland to seriously consider attending COP-21 in Paris. Particular concern arose over how the Pope was becoming a climate alarmist for the U.N. through his proclamation that humans were causing a climate crisis.  Additionally, since this nation is hemmed in by the imposed carbon restrictions which cannot be rolled back, big government had to be resisted and freedom and the free markets protected.   

On the plus side, Heartland’s Vatican event produced straight news, unlike the indisputable bias of the media here in the U.S. The result:  Heartland, while in Rome, created international news heard all around the world.

Fueled by memories of more honest reporting by the media during Heartland’s Rome sojourn – held within a stone’s throw of the Vatican — it was decided a week before the Paris summit took place that Heartland should go to Paris to attend COP-21, billed as the last chance for the assembled 196 nations to save the planet.  A request for funds ensued to send the Heartland delegation to Paris. Bags were packed, air travel arranged, and hotel reservations made at the Hotel California in Paris. 

When word got out that Heartland was going to Paris, a letter was sent by university professors in Canada, also signed by the American head to the U.N. ambassador, requesting that The Heartland Institute be criminally prosecuted for spreading lies about climate change. A letter was likewise sent to Interpol accusing Heartland of drug smuggling, which only proves that Heartland was providing an effective, unwanted challenge to those promoting climate change doctrine based on false science. It got personal for James Taylor. As one of seven individuals, accused of intimidation or harassment, he found his face on a wanted

poster plastered around Paris. 

Screen Shot 2015-12-22 at 8.28.59 AM

Heartland’s “Day of Examining the Data”

December 7, 2015, was promoted as the “Day of Examining the Data with the Heartland Institute”, starting with an hour-long press conference held at 9:00 a.m. in Paris.  Even though the time was 2:00 a.m. in Chicago, the press conference still attracted 1,800 individuals who tuned in for all or part of the program.  Protesters did try to obtain entrance into the room dressed in clown suits, but the door was blocked.  Unfortunately not a single question was asked by the media during the news conference about the science of global warming, but, as is often the situation, Heartland’s funding was questioned.

The seven hour program presented by Heartland on December 7, broken down into segments from start to finish as listed below, can be viewed here.

  • Press Conference
  • Day of Examining the Data with the Heartland Institute
  • Fred Singer, Ph.D., SEPP.
  • Robert Carter, Ph.D., NIPCC.
  • Willie Soon, Ph.D., NIPCC.
  • Christopher Essex, Ph.D., University of Western Ontario.
  • James Taylor, Heartland Institute.
  • Patrick Moore, PhD., Ecosense (on ocean acidification).
  • Patrick Moore, Ph.D., Ecosense (on energy policy).
  • Nicolas Loris, Heritage Foundation.
  • Wolfgang Muller, EIKE, general secretary of EIKE.
  • Lord Christopher Monckton, Science and Public Policy Institute.
  • Jim Lakely, Heartland Institute (wrap-up)

Briefings by staff member 

Following are COP-21 experience highlights as related at the Arlington Heights briefing:

  • James Taylor:  Al Gore was scheduled to speak at an event during COP-21.  Heartland’s James Taylor and Jim Lakely arrived early at the event to be able to sit near the front after receiving their MGO observer press tags.  Jim had a question all ready to ask Al Gore.  Five minutes before Al Gore was to speak, those assembled were told to go to the back of the room and then find their way to another room.  As would be expected, James and Jim were no longer seated near the front of the room.  Lo and behold, questions were taken only from those seated in the first 4 rows.  Jim’s question to Al Gore that wasn’t meant to be, was a good one:  I really admire people who practice what they preach.  Which mode of transportation did you take to cross the Atlantic?  What means of transportation did you use in Paris?  Certainly it wasn’t the subway!  
  • Jim Lakely:   As a team, Jim Lakely and James Taylor attended a meeting of the National Research Defense Council.  Out of the 40,000 people attending COP-21, maybe a dozen or so people were in the room.  With so few people assembled, there was no way Jim Lakely could be ignored.  Being touted by the speaker was that India was on target to receive 40% of its energy from clean power.  If India can do it, why can’t all countries do the same?  To which Jim raised these questions:  How is India reaching the 40% mark?  What percentage is from nuclear or hydro power?  The answer given could not have been pleasing to the audience (with the exception of Jim and James), for with pride the speaker revealed that India was not only renewing its investment in nuclear power, but also expanding it.
  • Keely Drukala:  As one who speaks fluent French and who travels to Paris several times a year to visit friends, Keely was well-positioned to speak about the mood of the residents of Paris in the wake of what had happened a few weeks earlier. Thinking there would be lots of protesters – besides the 1,000’s of wanted posters — Keely found Paris to be quite normal.  Parisians were going about their daily lives.  The exception was in the extra security that could be observed.  Keely found two terrorist scares experienced at the Paris airport in returning home more unnerving than her time in Paris.
  • The Heartland Institute was the only group that had an organized event in it s “Day of Examining Science.”  Its participants were outnumbered 1,000 to 1 by those attending the U.N. COP-21.

The skinny behind the COP signed proposal

As related by Joe Bast, President and CEO of The Heartland Institute, it is difficult to argue with people who are driven by emotion and not reality.  Although the treaty (really a statement of purpose as a treaty needs Senate approval) was hailed as a victory, signed instead was a hollow and toothless agreement, a single non-binding document to which all nations agreed in the wording.  As such the document is but a “delusional fantasy” with its assumption that to save the planet we only need to reduce so-called global warming to below two degrees Celsius.  Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s all about the redistribution of wealth and whose going to receive the money on a global scale.  Even this isn’t mandatory. There was no discussion about the sun’s influence on the climate. 

For President Obama the toothless deal was a way to save face and to further hail his participation in COP-21 as a major accomplishment as he leaves office.  After all, hasn’t Obama proclaimed that global warming is the biggest threat faced by the American people?   

How much are the American people willing to pay to fight global warming? Polling indicates that the issue comes in almost dead last.  At a price tag of $500 a year and more per family, there is no question the American people would soundly reject what environmentalists are proposing if they were permitted to have their say.

As Joe Bast said in his concluding thoughts:  December 12, 2015, represents the day the Global Warming movement died, and it died in Paris. 

[Originally published at Illinois Review]


Saturday, December 12, 2015

Thorner/O’Neil: Islam promoted in U.S. classrooms via Common Core


By Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil – 


Setting the stage for Islam in the classroom dates back to 2001. A situation arose in the Byron Union School District in Byron, California, after the school district instituted a three-week unit on Islam for 7th graders.  Students picked Muslim names, recited Islamic prayers, and celebrated Ramadan.

When parents sued the school on the grounds that the course was “officially endorsing a religion,” the U.S. Supreme Court rejected their appeal, leaving intact an earlier ruling by the liberal Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The ruling claimed that the Islamic unit did not violate the Constitution as it had an “instructional purpose.” The unpopular decision left its opponents asking how it was possible to know intents and ignore ultimate results. 


Enter Common Core


Another reason Islam is now being taught far more often, while religions like Christianity are not given the same attention, can be traced to the federal government and the Obama Administration at initiated and championed Common Core. The new highly controversial education system was quietly accepted, sight unseen, by most states in 2010. Opponents continue to lament that states were bribed to do so, largely with the promise states could drop the unpopular “No Child Left Behind” contract and its strict stipulations tied to student and teacher performance.   


Most parents would be both surprised and concerned to learn that their child’s education is influenced by a non-American public company (Pearson Education). The company, owned in a large part by alleged terrorism financiers, orchestrated the development and implementation of Common Core.  It helped define the standards and evaluates teacher and student performance, instead of state or federal agencies.  As a result, it could be said that the American government essentially handed over our public school education to foreign interests. The Libyan Investment Authority (with investments from Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia) funded Pearson Education’s implementation of Common Core.  The public should be aware that major financial donations from billionaire Bill Gates promoted Common Core and thus was a factor in how the controversial system caused one of the swiftest and most remarkable shifts in education policy in U.S. history. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation didn’t just bankroll the development of the Common Core State Standards, with more than $200 million, their foundation also built political support across the country, advertising and persuading state governments to make systemic and costly changes to accommodate it.     


Jeb Bush’s ties to Common Core


Why is Jeb Bush such a staunch supporter of Common Core?   Jeb has championed Common Core and claimed its implementation has improved the education standards in his state of Florida. While that may be true, it is not the standards that has caused the national controversy.   It is the federal government’s involvement in creating, promoting, and “bribing” states to accept a national education system, when the Constitution opposes such federal interference.  Bush’s ties to Common Core were through his creation of the Foundation for Excellence in Education in 2008, following his two terms as Governor of Florida.  The foundation forged an unusual role mixing politics and policy by drafting legislation and paying travel expenses for state officials and lobbying lawmakers and by connecting public officials with industry executives seeking government contracts.


Many conservatives have become skeptical of national efforts to improve education following the “No Child Left Behind Act” championed by Jeb Bush’s brother, then President George W. Bush. Jeb’s foundation is viewed as another example of powerful interests taking classroom decisions away from local control and ultimately the parents. Consider also that Bush’s Foundation has secured $5.2 million since 2010 from the Bill and Melinda Gates FoundationSubstantial amounts of money played a huge part in the design and implementation of Common Core, as teacher unions and public officials were wooed by its promoters.  There was little or no input/ involvement from teachers, parents, or the public. 


Common Core requirements for teaching of Islam


There have been many known abuses of Islam presented in our public classrooms throughout America since the implementation of Common Core.  The following are examples of such abuses:  

  • Attend public school-sponsored trips to mosques, which also required non-Muslim girls to wear head scarves;
  • Questioned whether the Holocaust was actually a political scheme created to influence public emotion;
  • Learn Islamic indoctrination points via vocabulary lessons and world history from an Islamic perspective;
  • Pledge allegiance to the flag in Arabic;
  • Have school days off for “Muslim holy days;”
  • Proselytize to younger school children by creating a pamphlet about Islam to “introduce Islam to 3rd graders” by describing Allah as the same God of Christians and Jews;
  • Recite in class the Shahada (“There is no God but Allah”) and kneel and learn to pray the Muslim call to prayer.

There is nothing necessarily wrong with children learning about Islam.  Devoting more time to learning about Islam while reducing or even excluding Christianity has huge numbers of parents complaining.  Tennessee Representative Andy Holt was one of several officials who agree that Common Core has a “strong bias in favor of Islam and needs to be removed.”  He went on to say “Many of our children are not being taught the Ten Commandments in school, but instead the Five Pillars of Islam and the “Prophet” Muhammad as a sovereign to Jesus Christ.”   Sadly, complaints from concerned parents have not been given sufficient attention, and the objectionable Common Core curriculum continues to be taught in classrooms across this nation.


Common Core Social Studies advances Islam 


Maury County, Tennessee, is in the heart of the Bible Belt.  When local church ladies discovered that school children had been forced to declare, “There is no God but Allah,” they naturally became upset.  Seventh grade students at the Spring Hill Middle School had just spent three weeks covering Islam in a Social Studies class which enraged some parents who claimed the lessons crossed the line and became more like indoctrination and proselytization.


Parents in High Mount School in Swansea, Illinois were outraged that a public school would paint a positive picture of Islam by teaching impressionable young students that Islam bears no responsibility for the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States.  Such teaching does reflect the growing trend in American education to portray Islam as a Religion of Peace, how Islam is a misunderstood force for good, or that Islam is just another world religion that is no better or worse than other religions. 


In the neighboring state of Wisconsin, Union Grove High School students were asked to pretend that they were Muslims for a 10th grade World History writing assignment.  Teacher Beth Urban asked students to write a five paragraph essay in which they were to pretend they are a Muslim male or female in the U.S.  Per instructions: “Give three examples of what you do daily for your religion and any struggles you face,” Urban instructed.  Parents questioned how this assignment related to a World History class and whether similar assignments were given for other religions. 


Regarding the text book, “World History,” it is a Common Core approved high school history textbook that is used in many states.   In Volusia County Florida, hundreds protested against the books obvious ode to Islam. And rightly so, as an entire chapter is dedicated to the virtues of Islam and not one chapter to Christianity.  A major promoter of the Common Core Islam curriculum is the Islamic Society of North America (a Muslim Brotherhood front group) along with Hamas CAIR. It behooves every parent to check whether “World History” is an approved textbook in their school districts.  


Another incident taking place in Florida which involved the controversial “World History” textbook occurred at Lyman High School.  Parent Ron Wagner was outraged when he read from part of his son’s world history book, “There is no god, but God.  Muhamad is the messenger of God.”  Ron Wagner had reason to be upset, as he was not reading the “Five Pillars of Islam” from the Quran, but rather from his son’s 10th-grade world history book.  As Wagner claimed:  “Students were instructed to recite this prayer as the first Pillar of Islam, as it was written on the board and at the teacher’s instruction.” 


A Tennessee high school decided to revise its field trip policy after a group of freshmen were taken to an Islamic mosque where they were given copies of the Quran.   A student who opted out of the trip was given a worksheet that alleged Muslims treated their conquered people better than the United States treated minorities.  The students were in an honors world studies class at Hendersonville High School and the field trips to the mosque, as well as a Hindu temple, were part of a three-week course on world religions.  Parents objected to the trips and wondered why the school would tour a mosque but not a Christian church or a Jewish synagogue.


Although not related to Islam indoctrination as was noted above via Common Core Social Studies curriculum, parents in Farmville, North Carolina want to know why their children were given a Common Core vocabulary worksheet assignment in a senior English class that promoted the Prophet Muhammad and the Islamic faith.  As stated by a Farmville Central High School student, “It really caught me off guard.”  Another student asked:  “If we are not allowed to talk about any other religions in school, how is this appropriate?”


It would be unreasonable to deny that Islam is being presented to impressionable students as a religion of peace, while avoiding the fact that Islam extremists are murdering innocent people throughout the World today.


An excellent article was written in 2007 by Ronald R. Cherry for the American Thinker:  “The Judeo-Christian Values of America. ” Everyone would benefit from reviewing these Judeo-Christian values which played a foundational role in America, beginning with the “Declaration of Independence”.  These principles and truths are what led to America’s exceptionalism, and for us to remain a great country, they must be repeatedly taught to our children at all levels of their education.  That is what will assure America remains the amazing country for which our forefathers fought and died.  Anything less must not be tolerated by parents, educators or the public.

 Immigration-overload-numbers-gamesjpeg-04801_c0-91-2900-1781_s326x190Washington Times photo

By Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O’Neil – 

Over a year ago, Kenneth Palinkas, head of the union that represents officials from both Homeland Security and Immigration Services and an immigration official himself, warned that President Obama’s lax immigration policies are potentially dangerous to Americans. He specified known problems, such as being denied urgent professional resources, enforcement tools, and mission support to secure our borders. He went on to state that the Obama Administration has widened loopholes that give an advantage to terrorists entering the United States.

There are approximately 5 million immigrants in the United States with expired visas – many of whom are from high-risk regions. Until and unless President Obama can assure the American people that the above problems have been resolved, it is ludicrous to continue allowing unprecedented numbers of foreigners into our Country. \

We know that Palinkas’ warnings were largely ignored, including his prediction that ISIS terrorists were already in the USA and targeted for radicalization. The families of loved ones who were recently slaughtered by terrorists at a Christmas Party in San Bernadino, CA, should be outraged that our government ignored expert advice and failed to provide the needed assets to protect citizens.

The victims and their loved ones paid a terrible price for that mistake in judgement. Will the recent act of terror by radicalized Muslims be a wake-up call to this administration?   Will they put forth the effort and finances that can create a better system to secure our borders?   It is not likely because to date the President has done very little to correct known problems, even in the aftermath of the worst terrorist attack since 2001.   

Obama’s statements below may be reasons for his seemingly lack of aggressive actions. They might also explain why the media, our schools, and his administration are hesitant to demand action and/or warn of the clear and present dangers of Muslim extremists.  His statements are not only strange coming from the President of the United States;  they are inaccurate.  

  • “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam;”  
  •  “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer;”
  •  “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world —  including in my own country;” 
  •  “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam;”
  •  “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance;”
  •  “Islam has always been part of America;”

Muslims Unwilling to Assimilate and Respect our Culture and Laws

There is another emerging problem with the growing number of Muslims allowed to enter America.  Since the Paris terror attacks on November 13, the State Department has admitted 237 Syrian refugees into the United States – 236 Sunni Muslims, and one Christian (0.4 percent).   

Were they properly vetted?  Were they allowed here because they respect America and want to embrace our values and customs?  These are important questions because many Muslims who have come to America seemingly have no intention of assimilating.  Instead of being grateful for being allowed entry into our country, many demand we make changes to our existing laws or concessions within our culture to accommodate their religious beliefs. Their demands often encompass changes within our schools, stores, or government, but it is never enough; they are never satisfied and we continually cave in to their demands.   Because of this action, Muslims are emboldened to make even more demands upon us. 

Consider also this Danish statistical study published in 2014 which finds that second generation Muslims are 218 percent more criminal than their parents.  Even in America, where Muslims are much better assimilated than in Europe, young Muslims are turning to “radicalism.”  This finding disputes the belief that, unlike their European counterparts, second generation Muslims are socially and economically well-integrated into American Society.    

What every American should know is that our brilliant forefathers knew there was a need for strong immigration laws for this very purpose.  The laws are for our protection; to keep our nation as the one our forefathers built and bequeathed to us. Vigilance is necessary to secure and maintain our country’s Christian/Judeo ethics. This requires a strong vigilance to maintain.  Yes, we are open to having immigrants, but when they ignore our laws and demand we make changes to accommodate them, those requests must be firmly met with denials.  Immigration laws were designed for the protection of our citizens and our families’ future. These laws have not been followed.  Now that we see the obvious problems, we must demand our immigration laws be strictly enforced.

President Obama’s remarks thanking Muslims for “building the very fabric of our nation” and claiming they were in part responsible for “the core of our democracy” is baffling and represents revisionist history.  Instead of incorporating Islam into America’s early tapestry, the writings of our Founding Fathers reveal they were at war with the creed and its adherents.  The Navy was sent by President Jefferson in 1801 to the Barbary Coast to stop Islamic pirates’ reign of terror on U.S. merchant ships.  Jefferson even read the Quran to understand what was motivating the pirates, learning that the Muslim holy book commanded the faithful to “plunder and enslave” non-Muslims.  John Adam’s son and future president, John Quincy Adams, went even further arguing that the essence of Islam is “violence and lust: to exalt the brutal over the spiritual part of human nature.”  He suggested the Quran’s commands to fight and conquer other lands “in the cause of Allah” were at odds with democracy, peace, and the Judeo-Christian ethic on which America was founded. Do our elected officials think these quotes no longer apply to Muslims today, or are they more concerned with the new political correctness permeating our nation?  

We have had a number of opportunities, i.e., the Paris massacre, to examine the consequences brought about when other countries allowed lax immigration procedures and/or open borders.  We observe how those policies created serious problems and utter chaos.  In England, blockbuster revelations surfaced of an Islamic takeover of UK public schools in April of 2013.   So outrageous were the allegations that the usually subdued and sharia-compliant British authorities initiated an investigation into the charges that devout Muslims covertly sought to “Islamize” their public schools through an operation purportedly named “Trojan Horse.”

Impact of Islam at our Schools

What is less well known is how Islamic indoctrination is being taught in our own public schools.  Our education system has been infiltrated by the same political correctness we witness in other areas of our Country.  There is an attempt to be so welcoming to the communities of new Muslims to America, that we give them special rights and continually acquiesce to their requests which sometimes border on demands.  Thus, the next generation of Americans are being brainwashed with a white-washed version of Islam. For instance, while Christian prayers, Christian traditions, the Bible, and any professions of that faith are banned from classrooms, an increasing number of schools are spending an inordinate amount of time teaching about the Quran, Muslim beliefs, practices, and their prayers to Allah.  

How could this be allowed when Islamic terrorists are willing to fight to their deaths to destroy Western values and civilization?   That startling part of their religion is not mentioned, nor is explaining what the word “Islam” means — “submission” — and that all Mohammedans are commanded to wage war against the unbelievers until and unless they submit to Islam.  Their goal is for the entire World to submit to Islam, and they are required and willing to do whatever it takes to accomplish that goal.

The Netherlands is an example of why the Obama administration needs to reconsider their willingness to accept large amounts of Muslims into their country.   They are reconsidering their very liberal immigration policies because Muslim immigrants have taken advantage of their generosity.   According to Machiel de Graaf, a member of the Dutch  anti-Islam Party for Freedom, Muslims in the country are not integrating into Dutch society and refuse to be assimilated.   He warned they also threaten Dutch identity and culture by having far more children than the Dutch.  Ahmed Aboutaleb, the Moroccan-born mayor of Rotterdam confirmed Graaf’s statements and also disagreed with the Obama administration’s suggestion that a growth in job opportunities may reduce Islamic radicalization.  It appears Jihad can take the guise of many forms; some are just less obvious than others.

Today’s American schools, especially through the new Common Core curriculum, want to be all inclusive and thus downplay the greatness of America.  They omit the radical history of Islam, continually make positive statements to describe it, and often allow extensive studies on Islam to eat up their class time.  Thus, they claim time restraints cause them to keep the study of Christianity to a minimum amount of time and even then cherry pick negatives pertaining to Christianity.  

Common Core curriculum has also been accused of having a radically revisionist view of American history that emphasizes negative aspects of our Union’s history while omitting or minimizing positive aspects.  One of the worst practices within some schools, has been to use time and money to invite Muslim speakers and their religion into the schools, with the excuse it is in the interest of establishing multicultural “tolerance” and “awareness.”   Possibly, our schools should concentrate instead on teaching about our immigration laws that mandate immigrants assimilate into our culture and highlight the differences so all students are aware of what changes need to be made.

Undoubtedly, there are those in the education system who think that a broader understanding of Islam will make it easier to rationalize barbaric acts of mass murder, such as the travesty we witnessed on September 11, 2001 and more recently the massacre in San Bernardino, Ca.

There is, however, another likely goal:  that of making all religions morally equivalent so that no specific religion is considered superior to any other.  But, that does not prove true, because there is not the same amount of attention allowed to explain other religious studies.  Some schools completely ignore religious studies, and most public schools view them as unwelcome, except, as it appears, in the case of Islam. How did this happen?  Why has it been allowed?  What can be done to make needed changes?


Tuesday, December 08, 2015

Friday, December 04, 2015


By Nancy Thorner – 

The public has been intentionally misled by industry and utility propaganda to believe that smart meters are safe because cell phones are safe. The usual defensive comment is that a smart meter will emit less Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) than a cell phone call. So why should we worry?

This link conveys the findings of Dr. George Carlo, who oversaw the comprehensive research group Wireless Technology Research (WTR) commissioned by the cell phone industry in the mid-1990s. When Carlo’s research began to reveal how there were indeed serious health concerns with cell phones, the industry sought to bury the results. Carlo’s research has since been validated by a wealth of subsequent studies and has continuing relevance given the ubiquity of wireless devices.

“The main health concern with electromagnetic radiation emitted by wireless technologies is that EMF and RF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function.”

In an article entitled “Radiation from Wireless Technology Affects the Blood, the Heart, and the Autonomic Nervous System” (November 2013), Dr. Magda Havas addresses the health conditions that most individuals would find a more imminent threat than the long-term carcinogenic effects discussed in Part 1.  According to Dr. Havas, symptoms that can appear as an early-warning signal of excessive RF radiation exposure are “fatigue, sleep disturbance, headaches, feeling of discomfort, difficulty concentrating, depression, memory loss, visual disruptions, irritability, hearing disruptions, skin problems, cardiovascular problems, dizziness, loss of appetite, movement difficulties, and nausea.” Dr. Havas has coined the phrase, “Rapid Aging Syndrome” to cover many of the health effects caused by radio frequency radiation exposure.

Is Anyone Sounding the Alarm?

In May 2015, 190 scientists from 39 nations submitted an appeal to the United Nations, UN member states, and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of risk. 

The International EMF Scientist Appeal calls upon the United Nations and the World Health Organization to address the emerging public health crisis related to cell phones, wireless devices, wireless utility [smart] meters and wireless infrastructure in neighborhoods and to substantially reduce human exposures to non-ionizing radiation.

Although it is not as well known to the public, Lloyds of London considers the risk too high to cover claims for illnesses related to RF exposure from cell phone use. The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion 32 states, “The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionizing radiation exposure through mobile phone usage. We will not make any payment on your behalf for any claim, or incur any costs and expenses, or reimburse you for any loss, damage, legal expenses, fees or costs sustained by you, or pay any medical expenses. This would include the microwave radiation and electromagnetic radiation emitted from Smart Meters.

An A. M. Best bulletin in 2013 is entitled, “Emerging Technologies Pose Significant Risks with Possible Long-Tail Losses.” RF (Radio Frequency) Radiation Risk is at the top of the list and mentions the “risks associated with long term use of cell phones”. “Insurance companies need to monitor the manner in which emerging technologies are deployed; the risks associated with their use; their residual or unintended impacts; and the manner in which the insurance policies may be called upon to cover losses.”

The Industry Has Ignored the Warnings over Decades

George Carlo, mentioned above, was head of the WTR which began in 1993 to research the possibility of brain tumors and any other health issues related to cell phone use. Six years later, frustrated over inactivity by the industry to inform and protect the public, Dr. Carlo wrote the following letter to the CEO of AT&T. 

Below are letter excerpts:

At the annual convention of the CTIA (The Wireless Association), I met with the full board of that organization to brief them on some surprising findings from our work. My understanding is that all segments of the industry were represented. At that briefing, I specifically reported: The rate of death from brain cancer among [cell phone] users was higher than the rate of brain cancer death among those who used [non-wireless] phones;

  • The risk of acoustic neuroma, a benign tumor of the auditory nerve that is well in range of the radiation coming from a phone’s antenna, was fifty percent higher in people who reported using cell phones for six years or more, moreover, that relationship between the amount of cell phone use and this tumor appeared to follow a dose-response curve;
  • The risk of rare neuro epithelial tumors on the outside of the brain was more than doubled, a statistically significant risk increase, in cell phone users as compared to people who did not use cell phones;
  • There appeared to be some correlation between brain tumors occurring on the right side of the head and the use of the phone on the right side of the head;
  • Laboratory studies looking at the ability of radiation from a phone’s antenna to cause functional genetic damage were definitively positive.

Today, I sit here extremely frustrated and concerned that appropriate steps have not been taken by the wireless industry to protect consumers. I am concerned that the wireless industry is dealing with these public health concerns through politics, creating illusions that more research over the next several years helps consumers today, and false claims that regulatory compliance means safety. Alarmingly, indications are that some segments of the industry have ignored the scientific findings and have repeatedly and falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe for all consumers including children.

The most important measure of consumer protection is missing: complete and honest factual information to allow informed judgment by consumers about assumption of risk. I am especially concerned about what appear to be actions by a segment of the industry to [enlist] the FCC, the FDA and WHO with them in following a non-effectual course.”    

Two years before Dr. Carlo wrote his letter (January 1997), “Microwave News” published “Motorola, Microwaves and DNA Breaks: ‘War-Gaming’ the Lai-Singh Experiments”. Doctors Lai and Singh were the research team that discovered how Radio Frequency microwaves could cause DNA breaks (a precursor to Cancer). An industry media strategy was immediately devised to “war-game” the science as “it could throw previous notions of RF safety into question”.

The Industry Charade Continues Even Now

In November 2015 the “Wall Street Journal” reported on a case that is pending in the courts over cell phone radiation and brain cancer. Representatives for Motorola and the other defendants referred questions to the CTIA (the wireless industry trade group), which said in a typical industry statement: “peer-reviewed scientific evidence has overwhelmingly indicated that wireless devices do not pose a public health risk for adults or children.”

However, in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, cellphone manufacturers and wireless carriers specifically acknowledge the risk posed by health-related lawsuits. “We may incur significant expenses in defending these lawsuits,” Verizon wrote in its 2015 annual filing. “In addition, we may be required to pay significant awards or settlements.”

It has come to Thorner’s attention that brain tumors developed in each of the 5 engineers who tested cell phones.   At least 4 of the 5 have since died. “Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette” was written by Robert C. Kane, Ph.D., one of the engineers who lost his life to a brain tumor.

Dr. Kane’s book, published in 2001, “is a historical accounting of the research that has been available for forty years and has been neglected or buried by an industry that will place its absolute need to sell products above the health and well-being of its own customers. What you will find here is a litany of hundreds of research studies from the 1950s through the mid-1990s… alarming in their findings of radiation exposure, DNA damage, chromosome damage, tissue damage, radiation absorption, cataract formation, tumor formation, memory loss, motor skills degradation, and more.”

As one of the developers of cellular phones, R.C. Kane knows that “RF and microwave energy can be readily absorbed within the human body and that excessive energy absorption leads to tissue damage and death.” Plus “the frequency range most efficient at depositing Radio Frequency Radiation energy deep into muscle and brain tissue was assigned to cellular phones”(the same frequency emitted by smart meters).

Following are two quotes from Dr. Kane’s book, “Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette”:

“In 1994, work by various researchers found “that a substantial amount of the Radio Frequency Radiation is deposited into the user’s brain and converted to heat. These researchers have reported that from 50 percent to more than 90 percent of the radio frequency energy is absorbed by the user.”

“That energy absorption leads to a dangerous temperature increase. Most of the temperature rise associated with the energy absorption takes place in the first 60 to 90 seconds of exposure.” The wireless industry has suggested that users ‘concerned about the effects of radiation should make short calls to reduce the hazards of operation’. From what the research data indicates, a short call would need to be much less than one minute. In other words, based on these research findings and the industry’s warnings cell phones should not be used.”

According to Dr. Kane:  “it is known that RF energy absorption causes heating in tissue that has three primary effects: (1) tissue destruction and death; (2) inhibition of normal cell growth through depression of enzyme activity; and (3) increase in membrane permeability. Since the human brain has little, if any, sensory capability, damage or trauma occurring internally will not be felt until the effects, such as heating, are so severe that they work their way outward. So, by the time a person, exposed to radio frequency radiation, feels pain at the skin that skin is irreversibly damaged, as is the deeper tissue beneath the skin.”

The Industry Creates its Own “Belief System”

In addressing the industry agenda, Dr. Kane had this to say:

“Business as usual amounts to utilizing their substantial resources to employ the various media to broadcast the industry ‘belief system’ that renounces or buries unfavorable scientific findings. A solid body of evidence confirms that: (1) cell phones expose operators to dangerous and highly damaging levels of radio frequency energy absorption; (2) the manufacturers, service providers, government, and scientists have been aware of the hazards; and (3) the manufacturers, service providers, and government have not warned the public.”

This appropriate warning came from Dr. Carlo, spotlighted earlier as head of the WTR:

“When you put the science together, we come to the irrefutable conclusion that there is a major health crisis coming, probably already underway. Not just cancer, but also learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, autism, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and psychological and behavioral problems—all mediated by the same mechanism (RFR).”

“That is why we are so worried. Time is running out.”

Part 1:    Thorner: Cell Phone Dangers: Public Deception Trumps Public Health (Part 1), Wednesday, December 2, 2015.

Wednesday, December 02, 2015

By Nancy Thorner – 

When trying to promote the safety of a product, industry will often compare the safety of their new product to other products already considered safe. Such is the case with ‘smart meters’, often compared to cell phones, despite much evidence that smart meters pose a risk to health, invade one’s privacy, and are potential fire hazards. Might cell phones, those ubiquitous, beloved objects of necessity in today’s society be anything other than safe?

“Cell phones cause cancer” declared attorney Jimmy Gonzalez, in front of the Pembroke Pines, Florida City Council.  “It should become crystal clear that cell phones do cause cancer and that the American people are not being properly warned about cell phones.” 

What followed in Pembroke Pines was a cell phone radiation resolution adopted in November 2012 that expressed the city’s “urgent concerns arising from recent medical science reports which advise of the possible and adverse health effects delivered upon those who use cell phones, including, but not limited to, cancer, as a result of the [non-ionizing] radiation emitted by cell phones”.

Recently, the city council in Berkeley, California voted unanimously 9-0 on a Cell Phone Radiation “Right-To-Know Ordinance” that requires wireless retailers to warn customers of possible radiation exposure when purchasing cell phones.  Cell phones sold in Berkeley will now come with a warning notice explaining the dangers of high radio frequency (RF) exposure.

Berkeley is the first city in the nation to have passed a cell phone radiation ordinance since San Francisco was forced to disband a similar ordinance after a two-year court battle with the CTIA (The Wireless Association). San Francisco made the tough decision after it was apparent that an ongoing court case with the CTIA could cost the city $500,000.

Research Suppressed on Health Effects

The CTIA when arguing against the “Right-To-Know Ordinance”, made the claim that consumers would be scared if a warning notice of the dangers of high RF exposure were printed on the package or readily visible at the time of purchase. This is the same information that is printed in the product manual.

It is worth mentioning that the current FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler, was once the former CEO of the CTIA and suppressed research on the health effects of cell phone radiation. In a document authored by Richard Conrad, Ph.D., Conrad states:

“Telecom lobbyists manipulate public opinion by making false proclamations through the press.  Their chief lobbyist, ‘fixer’ and generator of spin was Tom Wheeler, who is now the Chairman of the FCC – a classic example of the fox guarding the henhouse – hence the public remains without protection from non-thermal effects.  Business as usual in Washington, but in this case causing unnecessary death, disability and suffering, lack of optimum productivity, and increased health care costs.”

Sadly, Florida attorney Jimmy Gonzalez, mentioned above in his declaration that “cell phones cause cancer”, succumbed to three DIFFERENT cell phone induced cancers. ALL were caused by cell phone radiation exposure.  Each cancer developed exactly where his cell phone was held close to his body.  It was a life destroyed by a tradition of wireless profits superseding the lives of people.

The recent tragic death of “Beau” Biden, the son of Vice President Biden and former attorney general of Delaware, has once again focused attention on what seems to have been the cause of Beau’s death.  Scroll down in this article, which talks about Beau Biden’s brain cancer, where you will find a list of 23 deaths under the heading Political Brain Tumor Stats.  Little more needs to be said. May all rest in peace and may the truth be revealed. 

“Mobilize” is a movie that gives us another look at the potential dangers of cell phones. Here is an excellent rule of thumb to consider: if a study is mentioned in the media or elsewhere that does not find evidence of cell phone radiation creating health effects, check it out to ascertain if the study was industry-funded and is being used as damage control to offset independent studies that do find health effects.

Children and Cell Phone Use

What about the effects of cell phone use on children since it is now the in thing for a child to have his/her own cellphone? NBC News reported how children were being exposed to an exponentially greater amount of radio frequency than any adult will ever be in a lifetime. Dr. Devra Davis, Ph.D., writes:

“Compared with adults, research on children shows that microwave radiation is absorbed twice as much into their brain, up to triple in their brain’s hippocampus and hypothalamus and up to ten times as much into the bone marrow of the skull.  Frightening is that half of the world’s four billion cell phone users are under twenty.” 

Dr. Davis has written an eye-opening book titled “Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family.” Her book reveals the following:

Cell phone radiation is a national emergency. Emerging evidence is raising significant questions about health risks from cell phone and wireless radiation. Given the size of the potential impact, there is inadequate awareness, research, and regulation. Health experts have long been frozen out of policy-making decisions about cell phones; federal regulatory standards are set by the cell phone industry itself. Cell phone manufacturers have borrowed the playbook of the tobacco industry.

“Consumer Reports” weighs in

Even “Consumer Reports” in the September 2015 edition weighed in on the need to take precautions with cell phone use and issued “A Call for Clarity”, in which clear answers were deemed necessary as to the following substantial issues raised regarding cell phone usage:  

  • The Federal Communications Commission’s cell-phone radiation test is based on the devices’ possible effect on large adults, though research suggests that children’s thinner skulls mean they may absorb more radiation.
  • “Consumer Reports” agrees with concerns raised by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Government Accountability Office about the tests, and thinks that new tests should be developed that take into account the potential vulnerability of children.
  • We think that cell-phone manufacturers should prominently display advice on steps that cell-phone users can take to reduce exposure to cell-phone radiation.

At a time when scientists and the bio-medical community are calling for stronger EMF/RF guidelines, and fifteen countries have issued precautionary health warnings about cell phone radiation and recommendations on how to reduce risks, the wireless industry in the U.S. has opposed precautionary warnings.

Another resource conveying a similar message on institutional neglect is a book by Investigative Journalist, Norm Alster, “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by IndustriesPresumablyRegulates”, in which Alster explores how the serious health risks of wireless technology are being ignored by regulators and standard setting bodies.

How did we get to this point without a major health alert?

Ann Louise Gittleman, a “New York Times” best-selling author, wrote a book on cell phone concerns titled, “Zapped, Why Your Cell Phone Shouldn’t Be Your Alarm Clock and 1,268 Ways to Outsmart the Hazards of Electronic Pollution”. Before “Zapped” was published, Ms. Gittleman in an article titled, “Accidental Conspiracy”, explained how we got to this point without a health warning.  She wrote:

When it comes to public health, we depend upon our federal and local governments and the media to keep us safe. But what happens when these institutions miss the truth, when they fail to warn us? An unwilling Government, a silent media, an aggressive trillion dollar wireless industry: this is a perfect formula for disaster. Now we will experience the harsh reality and the cruel irony of why millions are suffering ill health at the hands of friendly fire from the very institutions we depend upon to protect us.

This question is often asked in many different situations when information vital to judging a situation is hard to come by:  What did they know and when did they know it?  Ms. Gittlemen likewise tackles that question in, “Accidental Conspiracy” by providing the following revelation:

In 1990 forty scientists at the EPA raised the alarm. They had serious concerns about the carcinogenic effects of electromagnetic fields and low-level Radio Frequency (RF) microwave radiation. They released a draft resolution proposing the classification of RF-EMF fields as a probable human carcinogen. The 393 page report titled, ‘An Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)’ raised tremendous controversy with the Federal government and industry groups. The EPA resolution was ultimately silenced by officials in the White House, apparently on the basis that such a classification of RF/EMF as a carcinogen would scare the American public.

Another 21 years would pass, with rampant proliferation of wireless devices, until in May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) categorized “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless cell phone use”. 

Lennart Hardell  (who was part of the World Health Organization committee) and Michael Carlberg later co-published an article (November 2013), entitled, “Using the Hill Viewpoints from 1965 for Evaluating Strengths of Evidence of the Risk for Brain Tumors Associated with Use of Mobile Phones.”   Based on Hill’s viewpoints and his discussion on how these issues should be used, the conclusion of Hardell’s and Carlberg’s review is that “glioma and acoustic neuroma are caused by RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones.” 

 Should IARC puts RF-EMF emissions in Group 1?

 According to the “Preamble” of the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer): “The classification of RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones should be Group 1, i.e., ‘the agent is carcinogenic to humans’, and urgent revision of current guidelines for exposure is needed.”

With mounting evidence that RF radiation is definitely carcinogenic and the fact that exposure to our population is increasing at an exponential rate, the potential consequences are catastrophic. 

 Part 2 will cover mounting evidence that is intended to wake up public perception over its oft-stated rhetoric that cell phone use is perfectly safe.  The main concern being highlighted: RF and EMF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function. 

 Also documented are claims pointing to how some segments of the industry have ignored the scientific findings, having repeatedly and falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe for all consumers including children.