Home > Washington Safe Water > Press Release For Candidates

Press Release For Candidates

WASHINGTON ACTION FOR SAFE WATER
James@WashingtonSafeWater.com
www.WashingtonSafeSater.com

November 5, 2011
A PRESS RELEASE FOR CANDIDATES:

WASHINGTON ACTION FOR SAFE WATER VERY CONCERNED ABOUT LEAD, ARSENIC, AND SILICOFLUORIDE

ADDED TO OUR WATER:

A SMALL AMOUNT OF A KNOWN POISON

ADDED TO THE THING WE CONSUME MOST

IS NOT OKAY

Press Release

Videos

Golda had Stage 3 kidney disease, quit drinking Everett water, recovered kidney function

Fluoride suppliers disclaim all liability but still hide behind NSF claims of fluoride safety

 The precautionary principal should be applied

Daughter of Martin Luther King’s says this is the next civil rights issue –
because Blacks, Hispanics, and the poor are disproportionately harmed by fluoridation

Who fluoridates? Who has rejected it?

The same fraudsters who sold us tetraethyl lead sell us fluoride

To All Candidates for Office:

I write as vice-president of www.WashingtonSafeWater.com, president of www.Fluoride-Class-Action.com, and a member of www.FluorideDetective.com.

We submitted notice to Everett that the silicofluoride it adds to drinking water is the cheap, industrial grade, toxic-waste version of fluoride, that it contains lead and arsenic, and that it leaches lead from pipes.

http://fluoride-class-action.com/everett-2/notice-to-everett-7-20-11

http://fluoride-class-action.com/everett-2/notice-to-everett-8-3-2011

A separate group, Fluoride Class Action, submitted similar notice to Seattle.

http://fluoride-class-action.com/notice-of-liability-to-seattle-10-11-11

Members of Washington Safe Water and other groups “occupied” Seattle City Hall on October 31 and gave a press release. TV Channel 4 covered it.

http://www.prweb.com//releases/2011/10/prweb8920905.htm

We circulated hundreds of our fliers to those who work at and visit City Hall.

http://washingtonsafewater.com/occupy-seattle-flier-10-21-11

We have made a convincing case that fluoridation is ineffectual to reduce tooth decay and harmful to health in many ways.

http://fluoride-class-action.com/hhs/report-card-for-hhs

http://fluoride-class-action.com/hhs/comments-re-lead

Council members of Everett and Seattle are dodging this issue, pretending it does not exist. Neither has responded in writing to our charges.

What we are asking is very reasonable: Put this issue on the regular agenda of every county, city, and water district. Talk about it openly. Hold hearings. Allow extensive discussion of the issue.

Take head out of sand.

If you find that it is reasonably possible that what we are saying is true – that sensitive populations are being harmed, then support a moratorium on fluoridation for one year.

During the one-year moratorium, call in experts on all sides of the issue who will give their professional opinion. Ask them the hard questions.

Note that we are not proposing that fluoridation facilities be decommissioned. The tap would simply be turned off for one year. Fluoridation could be restarted if that is the decision.

After hearing both sides of the issue, if city council members decide that adding an industrial grade, lead-arsenic-silicofluoride cocktail to our water poses no risk to any sensitive population – including infants, diabetics, arthritics, and those with kidney disease – then they may turn the fluoride spigot back on. Otherwise they should terminate it permanently.

Some counter: Why not leave the fluoride in, hold one year of hearings, and then make the up or down decision?

Because the burden of proof should not be on those who want lead-arsenic-silicofluoride to be removed. The burden of proof should be on those who want lead-arsenic-silicofluoride to be added. The precautionary principle requires this. Instituting a moratorium is a way of shifting the burden of proof and putting it where it ought to be.

Those water districts which buy pre-fluoridated water from Everett or Seattle should demand they be provided “just water”. Everett has at least four pipelines coming down from Spada Lake, and the one extending to southwest Everett contains “just water”, as requested by a manufacturing facility there.

 

Likewise, I assume that Seattle has multiple pipelines coming down from the headwaters of the Tolt and Cedar. New pipes could be installed if necessary. Seattle and Everett should pay the full cost – or stop fluoridating altogether.

Everett spends somewhere around $200,000 per year just to pay for the fertilizer smokestack, scrubber liquor silicofluoride. Seattle spends somewhere around $350,000. There are many other costs which are incurred in order to adapt the system to handle this highly acidic, toxic waste stew.

http://washingtonsafewater.com/costs.

Until “just water” is provided, the counties, cities, and water districts should insist that Everett and Seattle indemnify them from liability in case of suit by injured parties. They should also insist that Everett and Seattle certify and demonstrate that they have insurance adequate to cover potential damage claims.

Where there is smoke, there is fire. We have gone past a prima facie case. We have made a convincing case. We have shifted the burden of proof.

Put the issue on the agenda, hold open hearings, and institute a one-year moratorium. To do less is to disregard public health and to be untrue to your oath.

Sincerely,

 

James Robert Deal, Attorney
WSBA Number 8103
James@WashingtonSafeWater.com
You must be logged in to post a comment.