Letter: The elephant in the room

In my opinion, the most important candidate issues in these election forums were not discussed — those dealing with technology and those dealing with our Constitution.

On technology: It has been an assumption, among some of the sponsors of these forums (the mass media) and also at the Broadband Forum (the Realtors association), that to have a successful life, to be au courant, to have a successful business, and even, in the case of the Broadband Forum, to keep our county pure, beautiful and unchanged, one must bring in high-speed technology, specifically “wireless” (i.e., microwave-radiation based), and not only bring it in, but force it on every corner of the county.

This is called technocracy (read Patrick Wood on technocracy). This is disregarding the health effects (brain damage, damage to DNA and cells, autoimmune disease, aggressive brain cancers, sterility, general sickness, and the list goes on), and damage to the environment (animal and plant life and our food supply).

This is manmade microwave — much higher than that found in nature, invisible, silent and so effective as a killer it is the military’s weapon of choice. Why hard-kill when undetectable soft-kill is available? (Please research the reason this spectrum of frequencies does not belong in public places and is a poison and pollutant destroying the earth, and do not use industry or government sources, who are profiting from this, but independent experts like Cindy Sage of Sage Associates, authors of “The Bioinitiative Report.”)

So the assumption that we must have this is false. However, if it is to come in, it needs to be brought in safely. Fiber optics is 100 percent safe, radiation-wise. If companies could run copper lines all over even remote areas for phone service decades ago, they can run fiber, which is faster and more reliable than “wireless” and, again, not a poison. High-speed DSL is safe. Cable connections are safe. Companies like CenturyLink and Frontier offer well-maintained copper lines and landline service, fiber optics and DSL in rural areas.

This is the smart way to go, not cell phone towers, broadband boxes on trees and roofs, repeaters on mountainsides, wireless routers, or broadband over uninsulated power lines, all of which emit high levels of radiation which sicken people and the environment.

The Comprehensive Plan makes our environment a priority, because of tourism and farming. If you blanket the county in microwave radiation you destroy what tourists come here for and what people move here for — an unspoiled and clean environment. There is a reason people do not want to vacation in Culpeper but want to vacation here, and it is not just population density.

One of the soon-to-be-former school board members is wrong when he says we can keep everything the same and bring in this technology. This is not possible. My objection to the two candidates from the school board running for supervisor is that they are trying to bring in what a group of concerned citizens who attended their school board meetings helped defeat.

If a cell phone tower is bad on school property, it is also bad on county property, or private property, where it will likewise radiate children and everyone else. Neither of these candidates seems to have researched the problem with microwave radiation’s reckless use in public places by our government and the telecommunications companies. They only appear to know one side from the propaganda and addiction being foisted on us by these sources.

During the school board’s consideration of a cell tower lease, there was much done behind closed doors, and at the hearings there was basically disdain for those presenting objections to it (“non-credible”), and arrogance that should not be migrated onto the board of supervisors.

Everyone should be well-educated on the effects of “wireless” technology, which those with electromagnetic sensitivity can describe from experience. If a person is closed to this knowledge, he/she should not be making decisions for the public.

So my question is: which of the candidates will pledge to try to bring in safe technology rather than unsafe technology, so as to really preserve this county? (Note: the Pope does not own or use a cell phone or a computer.)

Concerning our Constitution, the CSPOA (Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association), started by Sheriff Mack, has hundreds of sheriffs who have signed a pledge to protect the constitutional rights of their citizens, regardless of any overreach or law breaking by those in authority. They have said that their most important job is ensuring their constituencies have their constitutional rights respected, and this has been highly successful in fighting government excess and overreach, which is prevalent in our current political climate. I would like our candidates for sheriff to answer as to whether or not they will do likewise, should such a situation arise.

Thank you.

C. Price

Print Friendly

Share this post