Challenging our public school district’s obedience of county ‘health’ ‘orders’: District refuses to answer answer obvious questions of ‘required’ EUA injections/tests/masks, teachers’ union claims ‘option to refuse’ only means no employee kidnapping for forced injections (30 of ?)

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”  ~ George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 7

Perhaps the most helpful format for communication: 

• Summary of events from September 2020 to the most recent article, 
• Specific updates as they occur, and 
• Preview of coming events.
• History: (articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59). 

My best “shot” to explain, document, and prove the “Covid” + “vaccine” narrative are Crimes Against Humanity: a 4,700-word essay I sent to ~100 teacher colleagues in September, 2021 (received with silence to the facts, with ~20 eventual responses to be removed from such communications). My May 2022 essay to our teachers’ union Board is an excellent overview of the entire history, as is my June 14, 2022 retirement letter; both with emerging data demonstrating tremendous harm from these experimental injections (2-hour overview discussion with Professor Emeritus Jim Fetzer).

Summary (links = full documentation in those specific reports): The California “lockdown orders” necessary to “flatten the curve and keep hospitals running” have lasted since March 3, 2020. The California Emergency Services Act (ESA) is derived from California Government Code 8558 (b) requiring “beyond control” hospitals to authorize emergency dictatorial orders. Because Californians never received comprehensive hospital data, our government and corporate media “leaders” are lying in omission. Because problematic “positive cases”(and here, here) were substituted for “beyond control” hospitals, our leaders lie in commission. All testimony I’ve received from ~20 medical professionals here in NorCal report all hospitals they know of have been fully within their control throughout the “pandemic,” that hospitals have comprehensive area plans for record flu seasons they haven’t needed, and certainly didn’t need the military field hospitals or hospital ships for a real pandemic.

As a NorCal public school teacher, at the start of our school year in September 2020 I questioned our district’s leadership and teachers’ union how their negotiated policy to “obey” county “health” “orders” is legal given the above reasonable limit to dictatorial authority. I cited our mutual Oath to “support and defend” the US and CA Constitutions within their limited governing authorities. I reminded the district I merely ask them as educated professional adults to perform what we expect from all our Californian Middle School students in our State teaching standards: “Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.” (page 81). 

From September 2020 until May 1, 2022, I chose to mask identities of individuals involved to help shield them from any possible future harm when facts emerge to demonstrate to the public that these school administrators and teachers were either knowing participants, or dupes too weak in intellectual integrity and moral courage to recognize and defend literal Truth, Justice, and the American way of limited government under constitutionally-protected inalienable/Natural rights.  I named names after 20 months of district lies and prima faciecrimes.

 

After two Sept. 2020 requests, the district contact person responded by ignoring my questions, and stating HUSD employees are required to obey “California mandates” “to protect you” (disobedient staff are placed on unpaid leave up to a year). I emailed our district superintendent, school board members, my school principal and two interested teachers that we teach all high school students in US History class that the district’s position of “just following orders” is an illegal defense, and asked again how ESA limits are being honored.

After continued district silence, I filed three legal complaints: federal, state, and a grievance for district violation of worker safety by issuing apparent dictatorial and illegal policy under direct threat of employment termination, $1,000 fines per violation, and one year imprisonment under Cal. Penal Code §§ 69, 148(a)(1).

Our union (HEA) responded with support to ask the district, and communicated privately they wouldn’t pursue the grievance to arbitration because working conditions were negotiated in good faith with high approval of union members. After I probed with a few questions, I retreated with HEA to keep them as allies with me to get answers from our contractual grievance process. That said, this first Grievance finished with district and union agreement that the complaint didn’t qualify as a grievance because all district policies were in conformance to law. Neither the district nor union ever addressed my question or citation about limits of dictatorial ordering authority.

I appealed the district’s answer to our community school board for what the district redefined as a “written complaint.” From October 2 to December 18 2020 the district was silent, despite policy promising a response within 30 days of the board’s receipt. After this December 13 reminder they were out of compliance for a response, the superintendent answered that the school board upheld the district response without comment. 

I received a “non-response” after nearly 5 months from my complaint to the US Department of Justice regarding unlimited government. My complaint to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing complaint was fielded by a phone call response in December, their promise to follow-up, and silence since.

In March 2021, our NorCal public school superintendent sent all staff an email citing county deaths from COVID nearing 1,300 with 80,000 “cases.” He also asked for our professional responses to an upcoming survey. I responded with three basic questions: 

• How many of our staff and students have died of (not with) Covid? 
• What is the current and historical data for overall county deaths given controversy over causes of deaths? 
• How many staff and students have been injured by vaccines?

The superintendent ignored my emailed questions twice, which I then shared with our school’s ~100 teachers as Chair of a school Professional Learning Community (PLC) on broad educational topics directly affecting our school’s teaching and learning. A few teachers have communicated support, but our Social Science Department found no interest in this topic when I emailed them in inquiry.

Our district superintendent then "answered" my questions, and concluded with: “If you do not agree with the state and county guidelines or if you believe we are not following them, please pursue your questions and concerns with the appropriate agency.” I responded I would do so, and report my findings. 

I followed up with 14 CA government agencies over 6 weeks, with all ignoring the question of how the limit of “beyond control” hospitals was being honored for “emergency” dictatorial authority. The only answer I received referencing limits to dictatorial orders was from CA Senator Glazer’s office, who offered that a stated 60-day limit I questioned applied only to “non-safety” related orders. I hadn’t considered an American legislature would surrender forever dictatorial powers to a governor or elected officials without a time limit, as public recourse would be limited to recall (as happened with Governor Newsom, albeit with Dominion “voting” machines, but that’s another history) or electing other legislators.

Therefore, at this point in our history, school district, teachers’ union, and CA government “answers” are at this point demonstrated as intentional lies of omission to claim they answered a question about ESA to “justify” dictatorial government while leaving out any consideration of crystal-clear letter and intent requiring that our hospitals are “beyond control.” The 14 CA government agencies claim dictatorial power to close businesses, stop social gatherings, force masking, force humans to forever remain no closer than six feet from each other, and with forever dictatorial power until legislators or governor dictate otherwise, and while lying in commission that “emergency powers” are authorized by unreliable “positive” “cases.” This power is dictated with direct threat of employment termination, $1,000 fines per violation, and one year imprisonment under Cal. Penal Code §§ 69, 148(a)(1) placed at the top of every county “health” “order.”

At the end of April 2021, I wrote a lengthy and fully documented report of those 14 CA government agencies’ responses, and emailed it with a cover letter to district leadership, school board members, teachers’ union leadership, our PLC members, and school teachers. The district’s Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources immediately responded with threats of disciplinary action for unspecified violations of district policies, as did my school principal. The district never responded to my repeated requests and Grievance to cite anything I wrote to substantiate their complaints. The district has never rescinded their first of four steps for employment termination. 

Stop and appreciate the irony of public school district leadership refusing to cite factual claims while requiring it of all middle school students. Again: “Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources.” (page 81).

I appealed to our teachers’ union for relief (and here, here). After 4 emails and 15 days of silence from our union President and VP, I sent this email to 14 of the Board of Directors of our teachers’ union. Our President and VP then responded for a next step “to gain clarification regarding matters within our scope and discuss next steps, if any,” followed by a Zoom meeting. Our union President raised the topic at her regular weekly meeting with the district’s Assistant Superintendent of HR on May 25, 2021. The district then emailed meclaiming my PLC report “harasses or disparages” my colleagues “based on their political beliefs,” yet failed again to provide any documentation or explanation despite the union and my requests.

I responded with three employee grievances for apparent contract violations. 

On July 8, I spoke by phone with our teachers’ union president, who reported that the district would again consider my Grievances as employee complaints outside their contractual obligations, and the HR Assistant Superintendent admitted failure to address my requests for the district to document and explain their complaints.

On July 9, 2021 our teachers’ union held a Zoom conference with ~100 teachers to explain the tentative agreement for work conditions for the 2021 - ‘22 school year to obey “the most restrictive health measures” “ordered” by state, county or federal government. I asked the first public question on the call for our union to explain how the state has ordering authority given the strict limits of “beyond control” hospitals, with union president, VP, and another union board member responding they are still representing my question, but all legal information they’ve received is that there is no requirement to oppose ordering authority until proven in court. This answer is consistent with my observations that people are conditioned to be told what to do by “experts’” “orders.” 

The purpose of our mutual Oath is to safeguard inalienable/Natural rights against illegal “orders” from our own government. The United States rose as a nation because our own government issued “a long train of abuses and usurpations” in the form of illegal “orders.” Americans’ choices were to either surrender as colonial subjects under dictatorial rule benefiting Empire, or stand for what our mutual Oath “supports and defends.” Thomas Jefferson documented: 

“In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”  ~ Declaration of Independence

My school district’s final answer to my three employee grievances came on July 21, 2021: 

1. Teachers, staff, students and families will follow “health” “orders” because they are ordered. 
2. “Health” “orders” are whatever is ordered. The district will not respond to requests for documentation of “ordering” authority, nor even acknowledge the question was asked despite legal obligation to explain how all policies are within the limits of the law.
3. If teachers ask further questions how “health” “orders” are lawful or healthy, they will be disciplined up to termination under the “reason” that such questions “harass and/or disparage other’ political beliefs.”

On July 24 I responded to the district’s formal initiation of “disciplinary action steps” that lead to employment termination for unprofessional conduct by offering the district choice to finally cite their unsubstantiated complaints against me or withdraw the complaints and censorship, or face my attorney. On July 26, the district’s Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources responded in refusal to substantiate their claims of my unprofessional work; claiming “The District has provided you with the appropriate documentation that has sufficiently responded to your requests. At this time, there is no additional information that can be provided to you that has not already been provided.” Our teachers union President called me with analysis from her conversations with district leadership that the district is unwilling to look beyond their legal orders, and must be forced by court or legislative orders. 

I had a productive first conversation with an America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) connected attorney, who promised to converse with her team to evaluate my case for possible lawsuit support. A second conversation affirmed the strength of this case from its abundant documentation, and that the network of lawyers are filing lawsuits based on their judgment of the best cases to help the most amount of people in greatest need of protection. I promised my willingness to serve as a plaintiff if this case rises in their judgment as the most promising to litigate. I’ve been updating three law firms participating in lawsuits that have included Los Angeles USD, San Diego USD, and nearby Piedmont USD. The attorneys communicate appreciation of my professionalism, that they would enjoy representing this case, and continue to encourage my documented work for truth and justice under the law.

On September 4, 2021, I reported to my ~100 teacher colleagues my best “shot” to “red pill” them about dozens of game-changing facts corporate media never report (my published research on corporate media “reporting” lies known to be false as they were told for the many variants of the Wars on Terror). This report to teachers (at “Update 3”) is my best academic work as a scholar to publicly share comprehensive and game-changing facts to explain, document, and prove illegal “health” “orders” (and here).

On Friday September 17, our district superintendent announced the school board would address mandatory student “vaccines” on Wednesday, September 22. I responded to district and teachers’ union leadership with legal notice of their prima facie-crimes to “require” experimental medical products, and initiated another employee Grievance for contract violation guaranteeing policies in conformance to law.

On Monday September 20, the district superintendent emailed my school’s Admin Team, teachers’ union president, and me to dictate the Professional Learning Committee I chair was censored because my addressing the previous school year’s doubled failure rate with “distance learning” (the most destructive decline of student learning in district history) “is not aligned with school or district goals and may not continue. Please communicate with (school principal) how you intend to use collaboration time or participate in a PLC that is focused on standards based instruction, school, or district goals.” Consistent with history, the superintendent failed to cite anything I wrote to demonstrate his factual claims.

On Wednesday September 22, the school board voted 5-0 to “mandate” full student “vaccination” for “Covid” (again, please see my essay to ~100 teachers for absolute proofs of deserved quotation marks). The public comment session for 1-minute remarks were ~15 against and ~25 for. Four parents and two employees contacted me from my public comment including invitation to do so, which began our ongoing conversations and actions. My three employee Grievances (at that point) also gave our teachers’ union an ultimatum to honor our contract that all district policies be “in conformance with law” by standing with me against the district’s illegal “mandates” that violate US Codes 21 and 18, and California Government Code 8558 (b) that “emergency orders” authority requires “beyond control” local resources (hospitals in this case). CDC’s latest data seemed definitive proof that California and national hospitals are well within control, just as each and every one of the ~20 local doctors, nurses, and other professionals I’ve asked have told me since March 2020.

On October 2, I sent a second email to our teachers’ union President, VP, and district Board Members arguing for their legal and Oath-sworn obligation to stand with me to force the district to explain the legality of their “health” “orders” given the above crystal-clear in letter and intent legal limits (the district’s stated position is “we just follow orders, and so will you”).

On October 17, 2021 I sent another Professional Learning Committee (PLC) report to district and union leaderships + Boards, and ~100 teacher colleagues with two central topics. First: HUSD refuses to address limits to state/county/district “health orders” regarding required student and teacher use of Emergency Use Authorized medical products (EUAs), despite :

• Federal law Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) requiring EUAs be administered only and always with “option to refuse” experimental medicine.
• Article 6 of the US Constitution is explicit that federal law is superior to state law/“mandates”/“orders.” 
• California Health and Safety Codes § 24171 to § 24176 uphold federal law that every individual: “Be given the opportunity to decide to consent or not to consent to a medical experiment without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, or undue influence on the subject’s decision.”

The second topic of the October 17 PLC report is that our teachers’ union shared their position why “health orders” to “require” EUAs is lawful: the government is not kidnapping and forcibly injecting teachers. Yes, seriously; that’s their “legal” “justification”: as long as the principal isn’t tackling teachers in the hallway to forcibly inject them at will, the policy of staff forced unpaid leave respects Title 21 freedom for full choice over medical experiments. I was glad to force an answer, and didn’t pursue further as I’d still rather keep the union as a partner to force reasonable district answers.

On October 21, 2021, our teachers’ union president emailed me to declare my employee grievance void that requested the district to either cite their legal authority for EUA work requirements given the limits of three definitive laws, or to downgrade “requirements for employment” to “advice.” The “reason” given was the union claims that the district doesn’t have to cite legal authority for policy because any proofs of illegal policies “do not concern violations of the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement)” despite the CBA stating all district policies must be “in conformance with law.” Both HEA and HUSD claim that state dictatorial “orders” are sufficient legal authority to compel obedience, and both have never addressed our mutual STATE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE for We the People to serve as a check on exactly this problem of illegal dictatorial government orders. My three subsequent communications to union President, VP, and Board were unanswered.

On October 28, 2021, HUSD responded to my last employee Grievance of policy violating California Health and Safety Codes § 24171 to § 24176 by unilaterally declaring it “an email request” of an “employee complaint” “against the legality of EUAs” that they then dismissed because we all must “follow orders.” I challenged that stand, as well as challenging district refusal to answer basic questions about “official” exemptions to EUAs.

On November 14, after a week of “official silence” from district and teachers’ union, I poked them again with questions, request to meet, and predictions of dire consequences to HUSD for their official silence beyond “just follow orders.” I also admonished HEA’s tragic-comic consent to CTA’s position that “option to refuse” experimental medical treatments allows employee termination without future ability of re-hire in public education. Both embrace Orwellian-violations of definitive CA and federal laws that “option to refuse” means the individual is free to accept or decline experimental medical products “without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, or undue influence on the subject’s decision.” 

On November 15, our school principal sent an “URGENT” email “ordering” ~200 students to the quad: “All unvaccinated students will be sent home, all vaccinated student (sic) will return to class with a pass.” I discovered I was also “health ordered” home for 10 days, until I demanded documentation of definitions from the principal, and reminding him this ordering authority requires proof I was within 6 feet of a positive case for 15 minutes. After claiming no memory of the policy, the principal and I reviewed and proved “district error” (but 14 of my students were not provided this documentation for discovery of error, nor another teacher). Although my school principal admitted he lacked authority to “order” me into isolated segregation, he still obeyed district “orders” to segregate unvaxxed students. I immediately emailed the Assistant Superintendent of HR to explain and cite district ordering authority to segregate healthy unvaxxed students, which she has failed to provide over ~20 requests up to March 2022. This week also had our teachers’ union request to HUSD accepted for a December 1 “Level III” Grievance meeting with the superintendent to discuss district censorship of my PLC and taking the first step to terminate my employment due to district claims of complaints HUSD refuse to cite. HUSD continued their 6th week of failure to provide me legal definitions of the medical/religious exemption process, but agreed to meet for discussion on Dec. 3. Both of these meetings would be attended by our teachers’ union President and me. 

Ten students voiced interest in a “Truth Club,” and submitted paperwork to our Associated Student Body (ASB) with me as their club sponsor to address “the pandemic” and other game-changing areas of truth (here, here, here). On December 1 and 3 I had Zoom meetings with district leadership and our teachers’ union President regarding the previous paragraph topics. 

On December 3rd, my principal sent another “friendly reminder” for weekly Covid testing required for my continued employment. For the second time, he mistakenly revealed all email recipients who are not vaccinated. I responded with another “reply to all” to challenge my principal to explain how the “health orders” he signs are legal given federal Title 21 requirements for optional experimental medical products without coercion, or to join those of us asking questions about how these “orders” are anything other than Orwellian-illegal. The principal chose silence as his response.

For the week of December 6, I followed-up with our school principal’s silence to our questions, and my briefed classroom students requested a Zoom meeting with the district to receive answers. Students were especially motivated to receive an explanation how the district can violate “required” health “guidance” by “ordering” healthy unvaccinated students to “separate but equal” 10 days’ “medical segregation” without evidence of “exposure” to a “positive” “tested” student by being within 6 feet for 15 minutes or more. They understood I was allowed to stay on campus because HUSD has zero evidence of exposure within 6 feet for 15 minutes, but students are not allowed the same freedom for an equal education.

On Friday December 10, I received the district’s reply to our Dec. 3 meeting: the district claimed that their policy requiring employee use of EUAs or being put on unpaid leave was a “broader right” of Title 21’s right of full and fail choice to accept or decline EUAs without coercion. I responded in detail with request for another meeting for HUSD to explain their Orwellian-inversion of simple terms to claim “broader rights” include forced student segregation and forced employee unpaid leave.

On December 14, I invited the district to surrender if they wanted to avoid an upcoming meeting with ~50 students with pointed questions. HUSD announced the following day they wouldn’t enforce student “vaccine requirements.” Because of the district’s refusal to address my questions in their December 10 response, I escalated those questions into Employee Grievances and/or District Complaints. On Dec. 18, I updated ~100 teacher colleagues on breaking events.

Also on December 14, the district superintendent officially responded to placing my PLC on two months of censorship under threat of my employment termination if I continued reporting to teachers in “unprofessional conduct” they claimed since April, but repeatedly refused to cite from anything I wrote, said, or did. They withdrew the censorship under claim that the “initial” censorship was valid due to “district confusion” that my addressing a doubled student failure rate was not “focused on standards based instruction, and/or school goals, and/or district goals.” HUSD made this claim despite the PLC report in question stating in the first paragraph that the purpose of the report is to address our doubled student failure rate (btw: the reading level in the paragraph averaged at the 10th Grade level among 5 tests). HUSD claimed they needed “clarification,” and chose censorship rather than asking clarifying questions citing any concern. HUSD also chose silence over my two months of questioning to cite their concerns and alleged policy violations, including silence to two levels of my employee Grievance. My “clarification” was sufficient to remove district censorship, but not sufficient to remove district threat of my employment termination. 

After the Winter Break on January 4, 2022, our principal reported another claimed “positive” “case” of “Covid,” and “health” “ordered” 18 of my students into “separate but equal” medical segregation for 10 days of “isolated-public education.” Two students asked for my help to stand for their rights that HUSD has zero evidence they had “close contact” within 6 feet for 15 minutes to the “positive” student, as the district claimed was the rule for unvaxxed students. My question to the principal how this is legal was responded that my question was a “negative connotation” and refused to answer with promise of no further response (Update 1).

On Thursday Jan. 6 at 6:30 AM, I emailed the leaderships of HUSD and our teachers’ union of the facts, then one of the students and I met with the principal and assistant principal before school. The student, an 11th Grade female with spark and courage, further met with the APafter I left to teach classes, with the AP calling a school nurse then an assistant superintendent for help answering the question he couldn’t answer. Nobody had an answer of the district’s authority to QU-segregate students without proof of close contact. That assistant superintendent met the following morning with that student and a second segregated student (11th Grade male with quiet intelligence and strength). Both students reported that the Assistant Superintendent spent an hour trying to talk them out of their questions, claimed the district was acting “out of abundance of caution” (a talking point our principal also used). When the students insisted on answers, this assistant superintendent promised to call the county health department to ask “what to do about these two students.” Despite having no evidence of ordering authority, she maintained the district’s “health” “order” for their isolated segregation with the prima facie-illegal claim of “separate but equal” public education. 

The assistant superintendent reneged on her promise to respond no later than Monday Jan. 10 (Update 1), and ignored my three emails requesting she state who she spoke with at the county public health department, what documents were referenced, and what was discussed. Because the assistant superintendent chose silence to these reasonable requests to fulfill her promise to two of my students, I emailed the leaderships of HUSD, our teachers’ union, and our high school’s teachers on Jan. 11, and again on Jan. 12 upon no district response (minus ~12 teachers requesting exclusion). My sharing documentation of an Assistant Superintendent’s lies to two students provoked my school principal into ad hominem attack (Update 4); stating my support of two segregated healthy students were “attacks,” “trying to indoctrinate students into his way of thinking,” and “is by far the lowest I have ever seen any "educator" sink in my 16 years in the profession.” The principal defamed my professional questions on school policies as “lengthy diatribes” “I refuse to respond (to),” then gave instructions to all my teacher colleagues how to block all emails from me on any subject. I find it difficult to imagine a more unprofessional response from a school principal to a teacher’s reasonable and cited questions on district policy.

The week of Jan. 10 to 14 was distance learning via computer because the district sent home too many healthy unvaxxed staff to keep the schools open. HUSD would later that month only send home unvaxxed students “in the same indoor space” as a “positive” “test,” but not staff: another prima facie-illegal policy with motive to not close the school and no apparent “health” concern.

On January 12, I emailed to my broadest audience the documentation of the assistant superintendent ignoring my emails requesting a report how school segregation is legal that she promised my two students, given nobody at the district can explain. The only response we received from that assistant superintendent was to our first standing student who emailed the assistant superintendent requesting a report. Her “answer:” “I do not have an update on how to prove the distance before quarantining.” Please note that this non-answer does not fulfill her promise to report on what she discovered by calling the county public health department, and is similar to a student missing a promised and due report on public policy, and when asked about it after two days being late, the student answers, “I do not have an update.” 

This is a good time to mention that the California Teachers’ Association (CTA) ignored my second request for explanation how state and federal laws for optional experimental medical products can be violated by “health” “orders” (Oct. 20 and Dec. 30). I wonder why (Update 2). 

On Jan. 14, I emailed HUSD + HEA leaderships and our school’s willing teachers that two Assistant Superintendents have refused to document and explain how student segregation to isolated “separate but equal” public education is legal. I also withdrew my consent, in what I consider an excellent public essay. 

On Jan. 18, the district emailed to all staff and community members an “updated” policy to segregate unvaxxed students and staff if they were “in the same indoor space” as somebody “testing” “positive.” My response to district and union leaderships + boards included my promise for student and community complaints if I did not receive reasonable evidence authorizing “in the same indoor space.” HUSD chose silence as their response. By Friday I had 26 of my healthy unvaxxed students “health” “ordered” to isolated segregation from this “same indoor space” invented phrase, but HUSD chose not to enforce this on staff. HUSD “picking and choosing” some arbitrary “health orders” to enforce and not other arbitrary “health orders” proves a hidden political agenda (political=policy=“what is done”) to manipulate our school community, and certainly not a commitment to “health.”

On January 17, I reported to my broadest HUSD email audience that the district’s “requirement” for masks outdoors is also apparently a contrived “order” outside their authority (CDPH + CDC state “optional”), and I raise the question of HUSD fraud. On Jan. 19, our school principal emailed all staff our monthly meeting notes from Curriculum Council. Among the notes: “Share with Departments. Was emailed to all parents and students. Wear masks inside and outside at all times.” I responded to all that requiring masks outdoors is outside CDPH and CDC guidance, so therefore the policy is in apparent error. The principal replied to all with choice to ignore the facts, and defame my response as both unprofessional and unworthy of serious reply: “Aren’t you supposed to be teaching right now”? This disrespect opened the door for other staff to attack: I responded to ad hominem replies and demands for my censorship over the next ten hours. The principal never addressed the policy question, nor the unprofessional ad hominem he began in a remarkable email chain from professional educators “dedicated to factual mastery.” I conclude this to be among the most powerful evidence against the district, and for asking obviously important questions if I seek justice in a courtroom. This also validates my ongoing observation that ~98% of people cannot rise above “official” propaganda even when facts are clearly and professionally documented. I received my relative “Socrates verdict” :)

I engaged with our Social Science Department teachers (5 of 9 opted out) regarding these policies apparently outside legal limits. I offered our two hero students instructions how to file an official district complaint. I started calling the HR Assistant Superintendent during class time on speakerphone to get answers to our questions, emailed those questions to the Health Director and her, and promised to call with my classes until we got answers (we got no answers to messages we left). 

On Jan. 22 I emailed leaderships of district, teachers’ union, and school admin (not boards) repeating documentation, questions, and promise to shine brighter light on the questions. Upon no response, on Jan. 23 I filed two more Grievances for apparently illegal policies on masks and student segregation, and promised to share the Grievances with teachers inviting their filing. I also promised to assist my 26 returning students from segregated “separate but equal” education to file complaints. On Jan. 23, the Superintendent promised a “response” the following day. On Jan. 24, I received notice from the HR Assistant Superintendent to not report to work on Jan. 25 (the first of 3 days of all-school final exams for the first semester, forcing me to cancel final exams for all my students) in order to be on a 9AM Zoom call that informed me I was placed on paid administrative leave to “investigate” my January 17 email (Update 1). 

On Jan. 24 (Update 4) I received another notification from my principal that I was: “a potential close contact with a positive case in your class.  Students that are fully vaccinated can stay in school if they are not showing any symptoms. Please let us know if you have any questions, and take care.” I responded with questions how the district can order unvaxxed students home but not staff, and where in any authoritative document HUSD is empowered for their “in the same indoor space” “health” “order.” The principal did not respond, of course.

Paid administrative leave is censorship to remove my capacity to communicate with colleagues, and to stop my participation asking questions and citing apparent inconsistencies of HUSD “health” “orders” to limits of law. This censorship is because any answer HUSD has so far provided is further demonstration their “orders” are outside the law. HUSD will extend their “investigation” about how and why I asked questions (rather than answer obvious and essential questions) until the end of the school year, I predict.

On Monday Feb. 7, I Zoom-met my CTA/HEA-appointed attorney to discuss my case from a perspective to “play defense” against any likely district allegation. I framed the case as district evasion from questions that prove illegal “health” “orders” that anyone can verify by comparing “orders” to limits of definitive laws. I also requested a professional analysis of suing the district for per se defamation and any other related protections/remedies for my professional reputation, freedoms from ongoing harassment, and coercion into retirement to avoid further abuses.

On Feb. 9, 2022, the HR Assistant Superintendent managing my paid administrative leave claimed my 5 active Grievances against the district were “in abeyance” because “contractual issues to be resolved would fall within regular work duties.” She did not respond to my request to cite district authority to destroy due process with Grievances, despite my citations of all applicable contract language I could find and imagine that both gave no such authority, and reminded all of ongoing due process rights. Moreover, in reading that section of our CBA, I discovered HR has one contractual duty to me: an “updated progress report every five work days until resolution” that the district was ignoring. I responded sharply, including my union-appointed attorney, and union President + VP + CTA liaison. HR also continued silence to my repeated requests to schedule a Zoom meeting for the district’s answers to essential questions HUSD promised to answer; some questions going back to early October 2020.

On Feb. 17 after continued district silence, I offered the district’s HR Assistant Superintendent whistle-blower status by joining our side (she did not respond). On Feb. 21, I filed a 6th active employee Grievance for the district violating seven contractual rights regarding my being placed on paid administrative leave to “investigate” how and why I’m asking questions (rather than answer them). My teachers’ union/CTA claimed that despite zero contractual language in support, my rights for Grievance due process are “in abeyance” “because” that “is the practice when folks are on leave.” I appealed to the CTA-appointed attorney, who promised a progress report on what the district is actually “investigating” about me, Grievances, and the possibility of a lawsuit against HUSD for their apparent harassment and defamation.

From Episode 48 on February 24 until March 10’s Episode 49, HUSD reported to me that they have nothing to report after at least 7 weeks of “investigation” (no surprise, as my union-appointed attorney and I are in agreement that the district can, and will, extend their “investigation” until the end of the school year to evade my questions and stop my reports to HHS staff). My attorney made a new and unique claim to district “legitimate” ordering authority on March 9 that Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations section 3205(c)(9)(E) allows employer discretion for “greater protections” and therefore allows an employer to create “health” “orders” outside any guidelines. I retorted in detail such a new “answer” after 18 months of asking HUSD + all 14 of the most authoritative CA government agencies is, on its face, bullshit after-the-fact desperation, and requested answers to pointed questions. On March 3, HEA’s President agreed to take my Grievances “out of abeyance” and join my request that the Superintendent and HR Assistant Superintendent answer all my questions! I accepted, and followed-up on March 10 to check status of this intriguing promise.

On March 25, 2022 I had a Zoom call with HUSD’s Superintendent, HR Assistant Superintendent, our teachers’ union President, and our local CTA representative to address 5 employee Grievances HUSD had ignored, then claimed are “in abeyance” after they forced me on paid administrative leave to “investigate” how and why I asked questions. The superintendent claimed all district “health” “orders” are lawful because they grant “broader rights,” and that is the answer to all my questions. He refused to answer my follow-up “How is forcing me on unpaid leave for declining experimental medical products a ‘broader right’ to my Title 21 right to freely decline experimental medical products” because he claimed that is a question for the employee complaint process. The superintendent did promise to answer all questions through that process. After I read the procedures for complaints, my response back to the district is they’ve already violated that process with their choice to ignore my multiple requests for answers because they are required by law to meet with me to address my concerns. I again offered HUSD the opportunity to surrender by forcing these questions upon county and/or state rather than answer them, then to withdraw obedience if we receive no answers, or Orwellian doublespeak such as forced unpaid leave is a “broader right” for employees. The district is required to respond in writing as to their positions by Friday April 8, 2022, which includes another Grievance that I’m required by contract to not discuss until decided. I followed-up again to include another Assistant Superintendent managing the complaint process to request that the district acknowledge they’ve violated my rights, then meet with me to finally answer all my questions regarding “health” “orders” in apparent violations of multiple and superior laws.

On April 1, HUSD’s HR Assistant Superintendent sent me an email claiming to answer a question I verbally asked at our March 25th Zoom meeting, then claimed, “The District feels it has reasonably and sufficiently responded to this request for information.  Please consider this the final response to this matter.” As you’ve predicted, this public school district allegedly committed to uphold the highest academic professional standards:

• Invented a straw-man question I didn’t ask.
• Ignored my submitted written questions, some going back to September, 2020 with repeated requests for answers ~20+ times.
• “Answered” their own lie-created straw-man question, claimed they responded to my question, and asked me to shut-up: “The District feels it has reasonably and sufficiently responded to this request for information.  Please consider this the final response to this matter.”

After my response to this lying Assistant Superintendent, I asked our teachers’ union president and CTA representative, “I'm curious: is HUSD usually this evil, unprofessional to repeatedly IGNORE written questions they are legally obligated to answer honestly, and soul-suckingly addicted to lying, OR is this unusual behavior for them?”

HUSD reneged on their timeline to respond to my four Grievances (I dropped one Grievance that HUSD began performing by reporting they had no updates to report upon), and responded late on April 18. By contract, I cannot report on those Grievances’ statuses until they are decided (amended on June 14, 2022 with HUSD’s decision to reject them all). I can report that the district claims my Complaints (distinct from Grievances) have all already been addressed because the Superintendent has repeatedly dictated to employees, students, and community that we must follow orders from the state. I used the superintendent’s reply to request the Assistant Superintendent managing due process of complaints, and the Complaint Manager, to join me in my questions receiving ethical answers beyond “just follow orders.” I sent these two further communication reminding that two students have been lied to since January 10 to receive an explanation with documentation how unvaxxed students could be segregated to “separate but equal” isolated “education” without evidence of their exposure to Covid through a “close contact” (within 6 feet for 15 minutes of a “positive” “test”).

Two days later, on Friday April 22, the superintendent emailed me to claim he is “the district.” This appears as an attempt to stop the Assistant Superintendent over Complaints and the Complaint Manager from exercising our mutual Oath to support and defend limited government under Constitutional laws by comparing his non-answers to my actual questions (Update 1) for any violations of Complaint due process and laws. I responded that he speaks for his office only, and that the purpose of our Oath is for anyone and all of us to review “orders” for obvious violations of law. 

On April 25, I explicitly claimed whistleblower status to the Assistant Superintendent over Complaints and the Complaint Manager, and bcc’d the 11 parents and staff who had previously contacted me expressing support (Update 1, with one parent replying that she, too, had her Complaint ignored).  I followed with two more emails and three phone messages that these two minions all refused response, despite these follow-up emails quoting Board policy requiring HUSD to educate students and staff on health policies (not obfuscate and lie to students/staff by refusing to answer direct questions), and that HUSD continues to refuse to provide the information they received from the state for medical and religious exemptions to experimental medical products. On April 29 (Update 2), I emailed HUSD Board members with final legal notice that their employee superintendent and managed administrators refuse to honor due process of Complaints, and are covering-up apparent illegal “health” “orders.” At this point I no longer mask their identities, as they should be fully accountable to the public after 20 months of documented lies. I consider this an excellent essay to explain and document the core of HUSD’s two-part Orwellian “argument” to employees, students, and community: “Just follow orders,” and consequences for disobedience are “broader rights” granted by the district to those receiving the consequences. 

On May 5, 2022 my teachers’ union Board responded they are unlikely to support my Grievances to arbitration. I sent them the summary of indefensible district lies, crimes, and cover-ups, with questions of justice the union must accept (or be exposed as evil collaborators injecting children with poisonous “experiments”). We’ll meet via Zoom on May 17th. Our contract states that I’m to keep “all proceeding private,” but because I’m a whistleblower pointing out OBVIOUS crimes of proven deadly consequences who has been denied due process from the other parties in the contract, I must go to the public for any hope of justice. I assert legality from honoring the mutual Oath among HUSD, HEA, and me to support and defend limited government under our CA and US Constitutions. The USA and California are defined by our Constitutions, so without those limits coming first and foremost, our Oath has no meaning. Therefore, any conflict between our CBA and Oath must place our Constitutions superior to any CBA provision that would subvert them. Because I’ve abundantly demonstrated the prima facie-illegality of “health” “orders,” I am empowered by our Oath to take all reasonable actions to require official written explanations how such prima facie-illegal “health” “orders” are within the limits of law.

On May 22, I had yet to receive a decision from our teachers’ union Board, so I sent another email for clarifying choice that they must either stand for truth against OBVIOUS CTA and district lies, or bond with liars committing prima facie Crimes Against Humanity targeting children.

On May 26, HEA’s President emailed me to decline arbitration for all Grievances. This local teachers’ union, in communication with the state teachers’ union (CTA) therefore: 

• Condone proven INVENTED “health” “orders” from districts that cannot be challenged, 
• Allow school districts to ignore OBVIOUS questions from teachers, families, and students,
• Support district proven lies to “order” student and teacher segregation (if unvaxxed) despite inventing the “orders” to do so,
• Support school districts to refuse providing anyone with information about medical and religious exemptions to forced medical experiments on staff and children.

On June 14, 2022 I filed for retirement with request of settlement from HUSD for $500,000 as compensation for ending my career early, and for an openly hostile and harassing work environment. The email I sent to HUSD is an excellent summary of the two full school years of challenging my public school district’s prima facie-illegal “health” “orders” as an award-winning, and now retired, teacher.

On June 15, one of our involved HUSD parents “replied to all” with my April “Final legal notice” email to HUSD leadership to show everyone my 36-minute interview with The Healthy American leader, Peggy Hall (below). HR Assistant Superintendent Watts refused to answer my three requests to retrieve my personal belongings in my classroom after 38 years’ teaching, and after I reported this to our teachers’ union President and HHS Principal Seymour, she dictated “permission” for me to return to campus for one 99 degree late morning and afternoon (the hottest day in Hayward for the last two years). 

After a month of reflection, my observations:

• HUSD, CA, and CTA “leaders” are script-readers following orders of a covert power source because their scripts are aligned, all refuse to answer the most BASIC and REQUIRED questions, obfuscate in tragic-comedy, and engage in Orwellian lies when they “answer” instead of evade questions (my conclusions about this “covert power structure”).
• My teacher colleagues lack the intellectual integrity and/or moral courage to stand for BASIC and REQUIRED facts when they are:
• “Ordered” to accept most of our students’ families are “non-essential” workers. 
• “Required” to be shot with unlimited “medical experiments” or be segregated off campus despite their Title 21 freedom to freely decline.
• “Mandated” to wear masks indoors and outdoors (masks = another “medical experiment” with zero “official” data for outdoor use).
• Dictated to embrace school segregation for unvaxxed students and staff (despite zero “official” authority or “orders” to do so).
• My teacher colleagues’ “taking a knee” to “Covid” “orders” is continued demonstration of their inability to respond to:
• US military on-campus recruitment despite the evidence I provided that ongoing US military attacks are Orwellian illegal, with all branches of US military (and UC Berkeley and CSU East Bay’s Political Science Departments) refusing our school’s inquiry to explain legality (here, here).
• Monetary reform and public banking fully funding public education.
• Our retirement funding is criminal fraud because our required “investments” net less than 1% return, with Wall Street “experts” paid twice the net income they generate (and here). 
• Government (so-called “public”) schools are necessary public propaganda for ongoing US rogue state empire. I wrote a 2016 12-part article series titled US Public Education: Bullshit to train stupefied work animals to explain, document, and prove this extraordinary factual assertion (and here, here). 
• ~98% of the general population are defeated by “official” propaganda, so my teacher colleague responses are typical.
• Because our “leaders” are propagandists pushing for dictatorial control, and professional educators are incapable of resistance, humanity needs “friends in high places” for an option beyond work animals for psychopaths. My 9-part article series on American Revolution 2.0 at the end of this current events report is my overview that we have such assistance if we work to earn it.

36-minute interview with The Healthy American, Peggy Hall:

**

Update 1:

Report to district/teachers’ union leaderships and Boards + ~100 teacher colleagues:

Subject:

HHS Solutions: HUSD ignores federal law’s “option to refuse” EUAs, CTA/HEA claim “option” = no employee kidnapping + forced injections. HHS teachers: Do you consent?

**

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”  ~ Article 6, US Constitution

Dear HHS Colleagues (and cc’d HUSD + HEA leaderships and Boards),

HHS Solutions and Beyond! PLC considers broad issues with direct impact on HUSD/HHS teaching and learning. 

The 2020-2021 school year doubled student failure rates; a previously unimaginable disaster of teaching and learning performance. Unprecedented state/county/HUSD + HEA “health orders” were central to the worst devolution in district and school history. This school year also includes state/county/district “health orders” that students and employees must use Emergency Use Authorized medical products (EUAs) of masks and either “vaccines” or “tests,” with failure to comply ending in employment/enrollment termination. 

Teaching and learning while wearing masks removes a dimension of human expression and connection. I imagine most teachers and students would prefer removing their masks, if given the option. 

The broad issue this report covers is that yes, teachers and students have the “option to refuse” EUAs under federal law Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III), with Article 6 of the US Constitution explicit that federal law is superior to state law/“mandates”/“orders.” California Health and Safety Codes § 24171 to § 24176 uphold federal law that every individual: “Be given the opportunity to decide to consent or not to consent to a medical experiment without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, or undue influence on the subject’s decision.”

This PLC report empowers teachers’ voices and choices for “required” EUAs as part of our teaching and learning environment, with express purpose to empower teachers’ unique, powerful, and beautiful creativity for optimal student learning (in both measurable academic performance and quality of learning experience). As always, if this isn’t your style of empowerment, I’ll remove you from future HHS Solutions and Beyond! PLC reports at your request.

On October 6, I emailed the following question to Assistant Superintendent (name omitted), HEA President and VP (names omitted), and our Admin Team (because this concerns a policy they directly administer):

"How is HUSD policy to require Emergency Use Authorization medical products (tests, vaccines, etc.) on employees a lawful policy given the following facts?

• Article 6 of the US Constitution makes US federal law supreme over state law (and county law/mandates, and district policies).
• US Code Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) states that Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) products must only be administered only and always with option to refuse; that is, full power of choice without coercion or penalties. Title 21 governs FDA and all drug laws in the US.
• We all have the STATE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE to support and defend US and CA Constitutions of limited government under California and Federal Laws as cited."

(HR Assistant Superintendent name omitted) has chosen to ignore this question six times as of this writing (three times each for two topics). This was her only “answer” to my reasonable and OBVIOUS question: 

“Thank you for the affirmation to comply with the current District policy.  As you are aware the District board policies require us to follow all guidance provided by the state.”

(HR Assistant Superintendent's name omitted) response is consistent with HUSD’s claim for over a year that CA law requiring school districts to obey “health orders” is all anyone needs to know, and ignores California Government Code 8558 (b) cited by Governor Newsom in March 2020 that limits emergency ordering authority by requiring “beyond control” hospitals. That is, unless government demonstrates to We the People with objective and verifiable data that local hospitals are “beyond control,” then they have zero “emergency” ordering authority. 

This is Emperor’s New Clothes obvious, right? Please talk me down if you see another way emergency government powers are authorized when the defined “emergency” = “beyond control” hospitals doesn’t exist.

As I’ve reported since last year, all ~20 doctors, nurses, and other experts I’ve asked affirm they know of no local hospital beyond their control. HUSD has refused to explain how state/county/district policy can be legal given that reasonable limit to emergency powers, has refused to ask the county and/or state, and refused to ask even when I presented my ~35 page report last April after I asked the most authoritative 14 CA government agencies how “health orders” are lawful given that limit, and received only tragic-comic deflection, avoidance, obfuscation, and direct refusal to address the question. 

HUSD’s refusal to address lawful policy beyond “just follow orders” has been consistent over three employee grievances (two still active). I have specifically placed HUSD and HEA on legal notice.

After more than a year of my asking HEA for me to speak with the legal voices informing HEA’s conclusion of “lawful health orders,” HEA’s (name omitted) kindly responded with at least the attached CTA document, and this October 1, 2021 pro-vaccine CTA press release. HEA has refused to respond to my following October 11 reply, so I’m informing HHS teachers where their union stands on this fundamental policy greatly affecting HHS teaching and learning. My reply to HEA:

“The advice you say HEA trusts is that federal law requiring administration of Experimental Use Authorized medical products with “option to refuse” means (quoted from attached CTA document):

“The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. §360bbb-3, provides that patients be given various information about a vaccine approved through an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), including a general right to refuse such a vaccine. But this right to not be forcibly given the COVID vaccine does not prohibit employers from requiring employee vaccinations to protect the workplace.”

This “legal opinion” you trust means the “option to refuse” is solely to be free from kidnapping for forced experimental injections at will of an employer rather than the crystal-clear letter and intent of US Code Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) for full and free choice at the option of the individual.

The legal opinion you trust allows a spectrum of negative consequences that could include any penalties, such as HUSD’s unpaid leave, or apartheid, internment camps, and prosecution as a domestic violent extremist for questioning government authority.

A legitimate option does not include any element of force, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion. For CTA to claim federal law defines “option to refuse” in letter and intent of law to allow negative consequences for refusing experimental medical products is Orwellian: the inverse of reality.”

Those who question “official” Covid narratives and “health” “orders” are now considered by DHS in their National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin as engaged in “the broader sharing of false narratives and conspiracy theories” associated with “Violent Domestic Extremists” (DVEs) that “could serve as a catalyst for acts of targeted violence” through “online forums to influence and spread violent extremist narratives” (and here). 

The CDC published in Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings, CDC plans for “Covid-19”-declared house arrests, neighborhood lockdowns, evictions and/or relocations, and internment in concentration camps for “public health risks” who endanger the health of others and themselves. This threat of concentration camp targets those exercising the legal “option to refuse” experimental government injections.

Government narrative and “orders” have gone from March 2020’s emergency “two weeks to flatten the curve to keep hospitals operational,” to today’s requirement of involuntary medical experimentation on one’s body in order to receive the paperwork to earn an income and participate in society. Today’s “official rhetoric” from DHS labels those refusing to obey “orders” as potential Violent Domestic Extremists, who according to CDC can be “ordered” at gunpoint to CDC concentration camps in the name of “public health and safety.” The above documented DHS and CDC policies would last as long as the “emergency” is dictated by those “leaders” who are no longer limited by definitive and obvious laws. 

“It couldn’t happen here” is false, and refuted by the above objective and verifiable facts.

Importantly, both HUSD and HEA have ignored my admonishments of our mutual Oath to “support and defend” limits to government authority under the US Constitution. HUSD and HEA have both refused to address our Oath even once, so it does not exist in their languaged-reality since September 2020 for any recognized obligation/honor to stand for the freedoms we teach all California public school students to recognize and defend (pages 14-15, California History-Social Science Framework):

“These democratic values should be taught in the classroom, in the curriculum, and in daily life outside school. Teachers are encouraged to have students use the community to gather information regarding public issues and become familiar with individuals and organizations involved in public affairs. … Whenever possible, opportunities should be available for participation and for reflection on the responsibilities of citizens in a free society.

…Educators want students to perceive the complexity of social, economic, and political problems. They want them to be able to both comprehend and evaluate an argument and develop their own interpretations supported by relevant evidence. Educators want them to have the ability to differentiate between what is important and what is not. Students need to know their rights and responsibilities as American citizens and have both the capacity and willingness to participate in a democratic system of government. Educators want students to understand the meaning of the Constitution as a social contract that defines a democratic government and guarantees individual rights. Educators want them to respect the right of others to have different beliefs and ideas. Students need to take an active role as citizens and know how to work for change in a democratic society. The value, the importance, and the fragility of democratic institutions must be understood by all students. Only a small fraction of the world’s population now or in the past has been fortunate enough to live under a democratic form of government, and students need to understand the conditions that encourage democracy to prosper. By developing a keen sense of ethics and citizenship, students develop respect for all persons as equals regardless of ethnicity, nationality, gender identity, sexual orientation, and beliefs. Educators want students to care deeply about the quality of life in their community, the nation, and their world. The desire of educators is to have students recognize their responsibility as members of the global community to participate ethically and with humanity in their interactions with various nations, cultures, and peoples.”

I am modeling the learning we expect from all our students. When will my HHS, HUSD, and HEA colleagues stand with me?

HHS teachers and colleagues: HEA and CTA’s position is that federal law’s “option to refuse” experimental medicine is not the historically-clear legislative intent and language of the Nuremberg Code to prevent forced government medical experiments on people. The motivation for “option to refuse” is the general public’s universal outrage when informed of gruesome “medical experiments” during World War 2. HEA and CTA claim “option to refuse” is some kind of bizarre “legislative reminder” that kidnapping employees for forcible injections at the employer’s will is, duh, illegal. Seriously: if anyone can state HEA and CTA’s position more accurately, please let me know.

Unless otherwise shown from the above reasoning, CTA’s position is a lie of commission because it destroys the meaning of the word “option,” and a lie of omission to exclude definitive history of grotesque and evil human experimentation as primary motivation for passing federal and CA legislation to forever end non-consensual human experiments. 

CTA and HEA’s position is similar to:

• HHS teachers giving students an “optional” assignment they have every right to refuse, but they will fail the class if they opt to refuse. These teachers define “option to refuse” to mean the teacher will not forcibly lock students into a classroom to remain until they complete the assignment. The teachers claim “option to refuse” is somehow different from “mandatory to pass.”
• You go to a restaurant and are asked if you want the optional meal-deal. You will be charged for it either way, and they define your “option to refuse” as the waiters won’t forcibly force-feed you the meal-deal. The restaurant claims their “option to refuse” allows them to advertise a $5 dollar sandwich that can only be purchased with the $14.95 meal-deal, and never purchased alone for $5. 
• If (Principal's name omitted) told teachers they had an option to cover classes during their prep, but defined “option to refuse” as (two popular campus security officers' names omitted) won’t forcibly drag you to the coverage and lock you in the room. Teachers’ “option to refuse” has consequences of progressive discipline leading to employment termination. (Principal's name omitted) might truthfully disclose that “option to refuse” means the same thing as “required for employment.”

As a National Board Certified Teacher of US History, I factually assert that none of our historic union leaders would be proud to proclaim, “Your union has won the right for workers to not be kidnapped then forcibly injected with experimental vaccines that effected death for over 16,000 Americans! That’s what ‘option to refuse’ means for us! We protect workers’ rights to stop employers and government to tackle and inject us with whatever experiments they want whenever they want, and instead fight for unpaid leave! We fight for our union workers to be fired and forbidden to work ever again unless they obey all government ‘mandates,’ especially those expressly forbidden by federal law! Shout it, Brothers and Sisters: Unpaid leave! Unpaid leave! Unpaid leave!”

CTA and HEA’s position is exactly what California public students learn in history class often precede government tyrannies: “justified” “temporary” dictatorial “orders” that remove Rights until government claims “legitimate” power over what Rights can be exercised and how, sometime in the future when it’s “safe.” 

I would debate anyone on the above comprehensive facts, including (Social Science Department Chair's name omitted)-Herman, if challenged ;)

Colleagues, you have a voice and choice, empowered by our mutual Oath to support and defend limited government under the US and CA Constitutions. The historic purpose of such an Oath is for We the People to act as a check on abusive illegal government “orders.” Active patriotism is the foundation of US independence rather than unrepresented colonial subjects, allowed the “rights” and laws granted (dictated) by the Crown and Parliament.

Please honor our Oath that was required of all of us before we were allowed one word with the students given to our professional care.

The above data are, I professionally assert, objective facts offered in good-faith as a former AP US Government teacher with 18 years’ experience helping brief Members of Congress on ~300 policy proposals that led to two UN Summits for heads of state. 

HUSD, CTA, and HEA policy to require use of EUA medical products as a condition of employment is in prima facie violation of the following, and require a full explanation how such “health orders” are lawful, or downgraded to “health advice with full option to refuse.” Required use of EUAs: 

• Violate our HUSD-HEA contract for policies “in conformance to law” (Article 3). 
• Violate US Code Title 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) (Emergency Use Authorization products must only be administered only and always with option to refuse; that is, full power of choice without coercion or penalties). 
• Violate US Code Title 18 Section 242: DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW.
• Ongoingly violate California Government Code 8558 (b) that requires “beyond control” hospitals to authorize emergency dictatorial orders (this is the law cited by Governor Newsom “to keep hospitals operational”).
• Violate California Health and Safety Code § 24176 that upholds federal law and Nuremberg Code intent with language that cannot be made more clear that each and every individual: “Be given the opportunity to decide to consent or not to consent to a medical experiment without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, or undue influence on the subject’s decision.”
• Threaten all HUSD families and employees with student expulsion, employment termination, $1,000 fines per violation, and one year imprisonment under Cal. Penal Code §§ 69, 148(a)(1), as Alameda County Health Orders warn the public after the title of each “order.”
• Violate our mutual STATE OATH OF ALLEGIANCE to support and defend US and CA Constitutions of limited government under California and Federal Laws as cited.

The above legal arguments are shared among millions worldwide, and foundational in several US lawsuits (and here) forcing defendants to answer in court the questions they avoid from We the People about prima facie-illegal “health” “orders.” I have volunteered with attorneys networking on these cases to be a plaintiff. If any of you would like to stand with me, please speak up.

I recommend this 5-minute message from Ethics Professor Dr. Julie Ponesse, whose college employment was terminated for refusing to be injected with experimental “vaccines” at government’s will. I also recommend this 63-minute interview with international lawyer Dr. Reiner Füllmich, who explains the most important facts informing these evolving legal cases.

VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) data (click image to enhance and magnify): 

 

What does all this have to do again with my classroom teaching and learning again? 

This PLC report documents that CA/county/district EUA policies are in prima facie-violation of the laws cited, in contrast with HUSD’s stated position to follow government health orders without addressing such questions, and HEA’s position that “option to refuse” has no meaning to remain employed. Your choices and voice have direct impact on your ongoing consent for “required” EUAs in your classroom that include masks, student segregation based on vaccine status, and required experimental injections when “ordered.” 

I’m sure we’re in agreement that masks and other “health orders” greatly impact teaching success and quality of experience. For examples: 

• How does (Drama teacher's name omitted) teach successful and enjoyable acting while wearing a mask???
• How much do English teachers enjoy out-loud reading of impactful literature with all the readers masked, and how are the communications’ impacts affected? 
• Are teachers needing to remind more often that our masked students speak-up to be heard clearly? What effects do masks have on student performance and enjoyment?

I welcome and invite HUSD and HEA public responses. If HHS teachers would like to discuss, please respond to just me (not “reply to all”) to facilitate conversations among interested teachers (I am highly interested).

Thank you for your attention to the greatest changes in our teaching and learning,

**

Up next!

How will district, teachers’ union, school Admin Team, and my high school teachers respond to this report? Will broader political events trump these local actions during Red October?

Stay tuned for our next episode :)

**

I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History (also credentialed in Mathematics), with all economic factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences (and here). I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.

**

Carl Herman worked with both US political parties over 18 years and two UN Summits with the citizen’s lobby, RESULTS, for US domestic and foreign policy to end poverty. He can be reached at Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu 

Note: My work from 2011 to October 2017 is on Washington’s Blog, which the owner closed from Internet censorship in 2019, and here since. Work back to 2009 is censored by Examiner.com (blocked author pages: here, here). This means that some links in essays are inactive. If you’d like to see those articles, go to http://archive.org/web/, paste the expired link into the search box, click “Browse history,” then click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive.