Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - administrator

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 710
1

      

By Aaron Kesel


London police are set to deploy real-time facial recognition technology throughout the city; while the U.S. is also implementing the tech among other biometrics in the Hartsfield-Jackson Airport in Atlanta, making it the first in the U.S. to become fully biometric.


The Metropolitan Police announced that after testing facial recognition they have moved past the trial stage and are ready to permanently integrate the cameras into London. According to a report by the BBC, the cameras will be placed in locations popular with shoppers and tourists, like Stratford’s Westfield shopping center and the West End.


Each individual system will have its own “watch list” consisting of images of criminals wanted for serious and violent crimes.


         



      

Several human-rights groups have stated facial recognition is a worrying technology. One group, British human-rights group Liberty, called the move a “dangerous and sinister step.”


“This is a dangerous, oppressive and completely unjustified move,” Clare Collier, advocacy director at Liberty, said in a statement. “Facial-recognition technology gives the state unprecedented power to track and monitor any one of us, destroying our privacy and our free expression.”


This comes amid calls from politicians and campaigners in the UK to stop the police from using live facial recognition for public surveillance, BBC reported.


Facial recognition technology has shown numerous issues over the years such as racial bias. Other problems notable by Fight For The Future, which ran a campaign against implementing the technology at music venues, cited “dangers to their fans in the form of police harassment including — misidentification, deportation, arrests for outstanding charges during an event and drug use during an event, discrimination at their concerts, and fans in a permanent government database,” all very valid concerns.


Last year, Activist Post consistently reported numerous studies finding that the technology’s accuracy isn’t all it’s marketed to be. Then Big Brother Watch, a watchdog observing UK Metropolitan Police trials, stated the technology misidentified members of the public as potential criminals, including a 14-year-old black child in a school uniform who was stopped and fingerprinted by police.


In eight trials in London between 2016 and 2018, the technology gave “false positives” that wrongly identified individuals as crime suspects when an individual passed through an area with a facial recognition camera. The UK is now in the process of leaving the EU by the end of this month; the trial showed 96 percent of scans used by police to track watch list suspects were inaccurate, that’s a big deal!


Despite this, the police have now sought to deploy this dangerous technology. The EU recently discussed banning facial recognition technology as Activist Post reported.


Still, even after the UK leaves the EU, the country will remain under its laws until at least the end of 2020. So if the EU decides to ban facial recognition technology the UK may have to follow suit reversing implementation throughout London.


This decision represents an enormous expansion of the surveillance state and a serious threat to civil liberties in the UK,” Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, told The Daily Mail. “This is a breath-taking assault on our rights and we will challenge it, including by urgently considering next steps in our ongoing legal claim against the Met and the Home Secretary. This move instantly stains the new Government’s human rights record and we urge an immediate reconsideration.”


Meanwhile, in the U.S., an entire airport in Atlanta is now using biometric technology, including facial-recognition cameras and other ID systems that plug into a data backbone installed by Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The CBP aims to screen passengers with little human intervention at airports across the country, Defense One reported.


“The neat thing about what they’re doing in Atlanta is that different players within the airport environment are plugging into the same [Customs and Border Protection]-created backbone—this Traveler Verification Service—to accomplish different identity verification functions throughout the airport,” Adam Klein, the Trump-appointed chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, told Nextgov.


This is despite a Senator previously calling to roll back facial recognition technology used at airports, and the TSA themselves claiming to halt plans for screening Americans.


Last year, the Department of Homeland Security’s CBP branch claimed to have reversed a previous proposed plan to require all U.S. citizens to participate in its facial recognition entry/exit programs after backlash, as Activist Post reported.


This was after Activist Post reported that Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., called for an end to facial recognition in airports due to lack of oversight on the technology.


No matter where you look, Big Brother has been pushing the use of surveillance technology all over, not just the UK, from Amazon helping law enforcement with its Facial Rekogntion software, DHS wanting to use it for border control, to the Olympics wanting to use the tech for security.


Even retail is pushing for the technology as an anti-theft mechanism to be introduced in a thousands of stores using biometric facial recognition software from FaceFirst to build a database of shoplifters, as Activist Post reported.




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





Some of the biggest airports in the country — estimated at 16 airports across the U.S. — are now scanning us as we board international flights. While CBP expects to scale up the program to cover more than 97 percent of passengers flying outside of the U.S. by 2021, according to Nextgov.


it is all a part of President Donald Trump’s “Biometric Exit” agenda, which was originally signed into law under the Obama administration, BuzzFeed News reported.


Further, the policy director of U.S. CBP believes that facial recognition has already become essential. The agency’s head Deputy Executive Assistant Commissioner John Wagner has also hilariously said that its facial tracking technology isn’t surveillance, as Activist Post reported.


In 2017, Homeland Security clarified their position on domestic spying, stating that Americans who don’t want their faces scanned leaving the country “shouldn’t travel.”


“The only way for an individual to ensure he or she is not subject to collection of biometric information when traveling internationally is to refrain from traveling,” the DHS wrote in a document.


The rapid growth of this technology has triggered a much-needed debate to slow down the roll out. Activists, politicians, academics and even police forces are expressing serious concerns over the impact facial recognition could have on our society.


Several lawmakers have even chimed in to voice concerns about Amazon’s facial recognition software, expressing worry that it could be misused, The Hill reported.


A Senate bill introduced last March would force companies who want to use facial recognition technology on consumers to first get their consent. If that happens, as soon as the ink is dry Amazon’s Ring and Amazon’s Facial Rekognition as well as the TSA’s facial recognition devices could be banned across the U.S.


Congress under the House Oversight Committee recently held a bipartisan discussion on the issue of regulating the use of facial recognition technology and biometric cameras.




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample




House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said, “there are virtually no controls …. Whatever walk of life you come from, you may be a part of this [surveillance] process.”


The committee’s top Republican Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio.) also expressed, “It’s time for a time out” on government use of the surveillance technology.


Privacy advocate groups, attorneys, and even more recently Microsoft, which also markets its own facial recognition system, have all raised concerns over the technology, pointing to issues of consent, racial profiling, and the potential to use images gathered through facial recognition cameras as evidence of criminal guilt by law enforcement.


The ACLU also recently sued several agencies including the FBI and DHS in its fight against facial recognition technology for violating individual citizens privacy rights, Activist Post reported.


Both the ACLU and Fight For The Future, as well as numerous other groups, have called for an end to the dangerous technology and the voices are getting louder. Already, we have had several wins in this long fight and there are signs of hope. First, San Francisco banned facial recognition technology being used by the government in May of this year; then Somerville, Massachusetts, and Oakland, California followed suit. Now, the cream of the crop may happen as the EU seeks to ban the technology which has turned China into an Orwellian dictator’s wet dream.


Fight For The Future has previously launched a first-of-its-kind interactive map that tracks where in the U.S. facial recognition technology is being used and where it is being resisted, along with a tool-kit for local activists who want to help kickstart a ban in their city or state, as Activist Post reported.


Consent to be identified by the government whenever and wherever we go is approval to have the government decide whether, when, and where we are allowed to travel like China. Put bluntly: that is a very dangerous precedent to allow.



**By [@An0nkn0wledge](https://steemit.com/@an0nkn0wledge)**


Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post. Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Minds, Steemit, SoMee, BitChute, Facebook and Twitter.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

2

      

By John Vibes


Iraq’s parliament voted last month to expel the U.S. troops who have been occupying the country for nearly twenty years. However, the United States government has refused to comply with the order and has threatened harsh sanctions if they are forced to leave.


The presence of the United States military is unwelcome in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, but they have shown no signs of slowing down the so-called “war on terror.”


On Friday, massive crowds of protesters poured into the streets of Baghdad to protest against U.S. occupation and demanded that western troops to be sent home. Foreign sources including Press TV estimated the crowds at over a million, while CNN suggested that hundreds of thousands were involved in the protests. The Wall Street Journal gave the smallest estimation at “tens of thousands.” However, video and images from the protest show that actual numbers were far higher.


         



      

The protest came together after the powerful Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr called for a “Million Man March” in response to the ongoing occupation.


“We will exhaust all peaceful, political, economic, social, cultural and popular means to achieve our main goal, which is scheduling the departure of the occupation forces,” a representative for Mr. Sadr said during the protest.


The streets were flooded with Iraqis from different age groups and demographics. Children held up signs that said “no, no to America” and “no, no to occupation” as they walked with their families. The crowds were filled with Iraqi flags and signs condemning Donald Trump and the U.S. military.


Iraqi President Barham Salih tweeted an image of the protest with the caption,


Iraqis insist on a state with complete sovereignty that will not be breached, serving its people and expressing their independent national will, free from interference and dictates from abroad, a state that guarantees their security and rights in a free and dignified life, a state in security and peace with its neighbors.




This is just the largest and most recent protest in a series of demonstrations that have taken place on a regular basis since last year against U.S. military occupation and influence in Iraq.


By John Vibes | Creative Commons | TheMindUnleashed.com


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

3

      

Seattle Washington. Jan. 24, 2020. A Judge in the Children’s Hospital case that resulted in six deaths failed to disclose a critical conflict of interest, according to a prominent appellate attorney.


Judge Ken Schubert had previously allowed lawyers for the hospital that covered up evidence of mold contamination to seal the court file. Because of the judges’ conflict, advocates for the victims are calling for both an investigation and his resignation.


After increasing pressure from the international media exposure, the public, lawsuits, and families of the victims, in a televised statement Judge Schubert nervously stated that he had “second thoughts” about his previous ruling to prohibit public review of the file.


         



      

Unknown at the time was Judge Schubert’s close ties to the law firm representing Children’s Hospital. Schubert had been previously employed at the law firm Garvey Schubert, one of the two law firms that recently merged to form the firm Foster Garvey according to Schubert’s own filing with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission.


“Children’s Hospital engaged in a 15-year cover up of the deadly mold that killed six children and seriously injured eight more,” said John Scannell, a Ninth Circuit Appellate attorney. “There was at least one prior whistleblower complaint filed with the government. Children’s Hospital then hired a law firm, Foster Garvey, with close ties to the Judge. Children’s directed attorneys Adrian Winder and Andrea Bradford of Foster Garvey to sue the press to prevent the exposure of the guilty parties. Schubert allowed it. Sealing the file prevented the victim’s access to the evidence and a fair public trial,” he said. “This is absolutely inexcusable and a basic violation of Schubert’s most basic duty as a judge and trusted public official.”



King County, Washington Judge Ken Schubert



“In addition to Judge Schubert’s prior employment at the law firm Garvey Schubert, there is another serious question of conflict that needs to be answered. Did the estate of Judge Schubert’s late father, Ken Schubert, Sr., the founder of Garvey Schubert, convey to his son Judge Ken Schubert, Jr. a direct or indirect ownership interest in the firm Foster Garvey – the same law firm now representing Children’s Hospital?” said Mr. Scannell.


“This is an astonishing and blatant example of arrogance on the part of the hospital, their attorneys and law firm, as well as the judge to think they could get away with hiding the facts of the case by sealing the file and denying justice to the victims. Schubert only changed his mind and opened the file because he was caught by the press. It’s that simple.”






“Judge Schubert is now the subject of multiple complaints to the Commission on Judicial Conduct, retroactive investigations of his prior cases, and several calls for his resignation,” according to Mr. Scannell.


“If Schubert isn’t immediately removed from the bench, we can all stop pretending we live under the rule of law,” said Mr. Scannell. “This is absolutely outrageous.”


Judge Schubert could not be reached for comment.





Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




Article source: Gold Bar Reporter


Verification of quotes:


email: [email protected]


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

4

      

By Michael Boldin


With attacks ramping up from both left and right in recent years – there is no quick fix. But these 4 steps – foundational principles and some activism too – can get things moving forward for liberty.


SHOW LINKS:



JOIN TAC
Show Archives
Subscribe and Review on iTunes
Report: Trump Ramps Up Enforcement of Federal Gun Laws for Second Straight Year
The Unconstitutional Bump Stock Ban and What to do About it
Model Legislation: 2nd Amendment Preservation Act

Path to Liberty, Fast Friday Edition: January 24, 2020


         



      


Michael Boldin [send him email] is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, where this video first appeared. He was raised in Milwaukee, WI, and currently resides in Los Angeles, CA. Follow him on Twitter – @michaelboldin and Facebook.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

5

      

By Afef Abrougui


The Moroccan government has intensified its crackdown on freedom of expression, arresting several people in recent months for merely expressing their opinions, including online.


According to a local rights group, a total of 15 people have been arrested in recent months and six were convicted in December 2019 alone.


Independent journalist Omar Radi was arrested on December 26, 2019, after a public prosecutor charged him with “insulting a public servant’’ under the country’s penal code over a tweet he posted eight months earlier. In the tweet, Radi slammed a verdict by a Casablanca appeals court, which confirmed harsh prison sentences against dozens of activists of the Hirak protest movement in the Rif region. Some of the defendants, including a leading figure of the protest movement, Nasser Zefzafi, were sentenced to 20 years in jail.


         



      

Radi was released on bail on December 31. He appeared in court  on January 2, and his trial was adjourned to 5 March. However, Radi still risks up to one year in jail under the penal code if found guilty. Many more are also still in jail. Following his release, he tweeted:




Though I am free today, it is unfortunately not the case for many of our fellow citizens who remain incarcerated for expressing an opinion, anger, a joke or a song.


Rappers jailed




Rapper Gnawi. Photo is a screenshot from one of his video clips on YouTube.



On November 25, 2019, a court sentenced rapper Mohamed Mounir, known by his stage name Gnawi, to one year in jail and a fine of 1,000 dirhams (around 103 USD) for cursing the police on social media for “mistreating’’ him. His lawyer told Reuters that the authorities may in fact have targeted him over a song he and two other singers recorded and published on YouTube. The song, titled “Long Live the People’’, denounces the socio-economic conditions, corruption and torture in the country, and also contained criticism of the country’s rulers, including the king.  On January 15, a court of appeal confirmed Gnawi’s one-year-jail term.



On December 19, a court in Meknes sentenced a high-school student to three years in jail for merely posting the song’s lyrics on Facebook. The student was released on January 16, 2020.


Another rapper, Hamza Asbaar, was arrested on December 28 at a football stadium. His family told independent news site Lakome that the arrest occurred after Asbaar had performed his song “We understand’’ at the request of spectators. In the song, published on YouTube on October 20, Asbaar, who is a high school student, criticized the social and economic conditions and the rights situation in Morocco. On December 31, he was sentenced to four years in jail and a fine of 10,000 dirhams (10,000 USD) for “insulting sanctities’’.






Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





A court of appeal reduced his prison sentence to eight months on 16 January.


Crackdown on YouTubers


The crackdown has also affected individuals who have taken to YouTube to express opinions on social, political and economic issues.


On December 26, a court in Settat sentenced YouTuber Mohamed Sekkaki to four years in jail and a fine of 40,000 dirhams (4,150 USD) over a video in which he criticized the king and described Moroccans as “stupid’’, and “donkeys’’.


Another YouTuber, Mohamed Bodouh, was sentenced to three years in jail on January 7 over videos critical of corruption and the authorities.






Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




Morocco has a dire record of cracking down on freedom of expression, independent media and press freedom media.


Yasmina Abouzzouhour, an associate fellow at the Moroccan Institute for Policy Analysis (MIPA) writes:


The regime has displayed a pattern of repressing activists through judicial proceedings, sometimes under false pretexts. Indeed, famous activists perceived by the regime as dissidents- such as Radi, the journalist Hajar Raissouni, and the rapper Gnawi- are taken to court over unrelated issues, such as a supposed abortion in Raissouni’s case or a video that allegedly incited violence against the police in Gnawi’s case.


Moroccans continue to advocate for the release of all those imprisoned for expressing themselves, including activists, journalists, artists and protesters under the #FreeKoulchi [“Free everything’’] campaign.



Article source: Global Voices


Afef Abrougui is the lead editor for Advox.


Top image: Over the past fews months, authorities in Morocco arrested several individuals for expressing themselves online. Photo by user Pierre Metivier on Flickr [CC BY-NC 2.0].


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

6

      

By The Corbett Report


And now, from the palatial Corbett Report studios in western Japan, it’s time for The 3rd Annual REAL Fake News Awards. Which media organization will take home the most Dinos for their dishonest reporting?


Who will bear the shame of the biggest fake news story of the year? Find out in this year’s exciting gala broadcast!!


For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.


For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).



Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed


         



      

THE AWARD FOR FAKEST NARRATIVE ABOUT A CONTEXTLESS INTERNET VIDEO GOES TO:




CNN, The Washington Post and NBC Universal for their misreporting on the Covington High School Students.

Dishonorable mention goes to The National Review for “The Covington Students Might as Well Have Just Spit on the Cross.”
h/t to kit8642 who provides more details about the suspicious sourcing of this viral video clip in the nominations for these awards on corbettreport.com

THE AWARD FOR FAKEST FALSE FLAG COVER-UP OF THE YEAR GOES TO:




CBS News for “Chemical weapons watchdog OPCW defends Syria report as whistleblower claims bias“
More information on this story

THE AWARD FOR FAKEST CLIMATE CRUSADE OF THE YEAR GOES TO:




Time Magazine for “2019 Person of the Year – Greta Thunberg“
Please read “The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg” for more info on this story
Relevant article and video from In-This-Together.com


THE AWARD FOR FAKEST VIDEO FOOTAGE OF THE YEAR GOES TO:




ABC News for their “dramatic coverage” of “Turkey’s” military bombing “Kurd civilians” in a “Syrian border town”:

Dishonorable mentions go to Emannuelle Macron, Leo Dicaprio, Madonna and other Twitterati who posted there own fake news about the Amazon fire (h/t manbearpig)

THE AWARD FOR FAKEST ECONOMIC STATISTICS OF THE YEAR GOES TO:




The Japanese government, for their admission that 40% of the 56 key government economic releases are in fact fake, fudged or completely made up!

AND THE AWARD FOR FAKE NEWS STORY OF THE YEAR GOES TO:




ABC News for “It was unbelievable what we had. We had Clinton, we had everything.
Follow up: Scoop: ABC News/Epstein

Real Story: Epstein stories at corbettreport

Whitney Webb articles at MintPressNews
Derrick Broze on Epstein

Dishonourable mention goes to The Atlantic for “How the Epstein Case Explains the Rise of Conspiracy Theorists“

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

7

      

By Patrick Wood


Mimicking the concept of a Black Swan event, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is warning that a ‘Green Swan’ climate event could trigger a financial crisis.


Nassim Nicholas Taleb popularized the concept of a Black Swan event in his 2007 book, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. Taleb laid out three requirements: the event must be unknown and unpredictable, it must cause a massive impact and people then try to rationalize that it really was predictable after all.


Now that the BIS has guzzled the green global warming Kool-Aid, it suggests that a ‘Green Swan’ event is unpredictable as to when it will occur, but is absolutely certain that it will occur.


         



      

Bloomberg reports,



Many central banks already contribute to the effort by monitoring climate-related risks through stress tests, incorporating environmental, social and governance criteria in pension funds, or working with banks on disclosing carbon-intensive exposure to assess potential financial-stability risks. [Bank of France Governor] Villeroy says that’s simply not enough however.


The stark reality is that we are all losing the fight against climate change,” Villeroy said, advocating two solutions the European Central Bank could discuss in its upcoming strategy review: integrating climate change in all economic and forecasting models, and overhauling the collateral framework to reflect climate-related risks.


“If central banks are to preserve financial and price stability in the age of climate change, it is in their interest to help mobilize all the forces needed to win this battle,” he said. [emphasis added]



Governor Villeroy apparently reflects consensus among central bankers: we are already losing the battle against climate change, so we had better double- or triple-down our efforts to assure victory.


However, if there is a battle, it exists only in his own fantastical mind. That goes for the rest of the BIS elite and all other central bankers as well. In the real world, there is no real battle because there is no real enemy. Conceptions of climate change originated from mostly-faulty computer models and none of their predictions have actually materialized.


If people like Villeroy were not in charge of the world’s entire financial structure and system, nobody would care what they think. But they are in charge, and thanks to their own private delusions, they intend to completely flip the global financial system upside-down.


Of course, the Green Agenda is all about Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. The United Nations has convinced world political leaders that their nations will perish unless they go along with it. The global elitists behind the United Nations (e.g., members of the Trilateral Commission) have convinced the entire global banking community to go along as well.



Article source: Technocracy.News


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

8

      

By Matt Agorist


New York — In the Land of the Free, if you do not pay the State in the form of a permit before you attempt to sell a product or service to a willing customer, you can and will be extorted, kidnapped and caged, with extreme prejudice. While many folks stand behind permits for selling, one permit in New York that has nothing to do with commerce, has garnered the scrutiny of the Free thought Project. If citizens of the state wish to look up at the sky and view the stars at one of New York’s public parks, they will first have to obtain a “Stargazing permit.” Seriously.


Light pollution across the state of New York makes it hard for folks in highly populated areas to view the night sky. So, people who wish to gaze upon the stars at night have to drive many miles away to remote areas. Many of these remote areas are located in taxpayer-funded state parks.


In their efforts to squeeze every dime they can from the tax farm, bureaucrats in New York have devised a scheme to extort citizens who wish to use public parks to gaze upon the night sky. This extortion comes in the form of a $35.00 “Stargazing Permit.” If you are from out of state and wish to gaze upon the night sky from one of these locations that fee jumps to $60.


         



      

If you think that you will do anything else besides look at the night sky with this permit, think again. Within the regulations, bureaucrats explicitly point out that the “Permit allows after sunset parking for stargazing only, valid January 1 – December 31.”


permit


But that’s not all, if you want to bring your metal detector to any of these parks, there’s a permit for that too—it’s $40 to passively scan the ground in search of lost metal. Seems legit.


When conducting a news search on Google for a stargazing permit, we couldn’t find any articles calling out this ridiculous assault on liberty, so we decided to take up that task ourselves. We did find a discussion on Twitter, however, in which Neil deGrasse Tyson even chimed in.








We should also point out the obvious limits this places on underprivileged residents who may have to choose between $35 in groceries versus paying the state to look up at the stars in a public park. While $35 may not seem like that much to some folks, to others it’s the difference between sleeping with the heat on or freezing. It also serves to drastically limit the imagination and discovery of those who are unable to pay for the permit by disallowing them access to these remote dark areas.




Others are defending the permit in the thread, claiming that it allows people to enter the “closed parks” after hours. But they are clearly missing the point. If you can enter the park with a permit, then it’s not “closed” at all. It’s open to anyone willing to be extorted or who can afford it. Those who are unable to pay the government or choose not to do so for the exact same activity will be arrested and or further extorted.


Now for the irony and blatant statist hypocrisy. If you want to go after dark to look at stars on state land that you paid for through your tax dollars, you have to pay the government more money for a permit. However, if the government wants to take the most sacred land in the state and put a telescope on it to look at the stars, this is fine and dandy. If you try to protest the government’s construction of star gazing equipment on your sacred land, you can and will be kidnapped and caged.




Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




Case in point: Mauna Kea’s summit is the most sacred of all the mountains in Hawaii to many of the indigenous people. In July, when those people showed up to protest the desecration of their land with the Thirty-Meter Telescope, dozens were arrested.


“These lands were taken from us, so we have rights to them,” Kahoʻokahi Kanuha, an organizer from the Hawaiʻi Unity and Liberation Institute (Huli), a group that opposes construction on Mauna Kea says “We have a spiritual connection to them. We have a genealogical connection to them.”


Well Kanuha, you didn’t have the right permit to claim ownership of the land that was stolen from your people in the 1893, therefore, you are shit out of luck.



Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project, where this article first appeared. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Minds.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

9

      

By Peter Tocci


Author’s Note: This Summary lists discussion points in the article What Do YOU Mean When You Say “5G”? (majorly revised and updated). The full text is strongly encouraged; but two Summaries have been published for fast-trackers. This more detailed one, for those who’d rather pick and choose, and a Text Summary for those who prefer a more general sweep. Both provide a means for seeing “5G” more clearly, and quickly accessing areas of particular interest.


Introduction to Full Text


When you say, “5G” or ”Stop 5G,” please be sure you haven’t been misled about what it is, what you are opposing – or want. Most “5G” opposition presents more hysteria than fact.


“5G” (in quotes) indicates the lack of a critical distinction that forms the basis of this article. Although “5G” and its implementation are confusing enough (not even the Industry has settled all details), compounding the problem unnecessarily is the output of most opposers, which suggests they don’t really know what it is – or aren’t saying.


         



      

Opposition includes erroneous information, omissions, sometimes propaganda – and sometimes utter nonsense – alongside some truth – even from those who should know better, such as “concerned scientists”.


The “Stop 5G!” mantra irresponsibly leaves environment, people, and communities in greater jeopardy than do the ominous facts. This article attempts to raise some ‘dust’ and clear the air at the same time.


Because carrier rollouts and stories of harm are major opposition concerns, much detail is given to show how “5G” hysteria makes things worse in various cases. Safety testing, history of official awareness of harm, and opposition priorities are also discussed.


“5G” confusion revolves around some technical things, but non-techies need not be intimidated. Easily understood basics are all one needs. Like musical notes, the signals to and from devices and towers are just vibrational frequencies. Comparison ends there, however, because telecom/WiFi frequencies are microwave radiation like in your microwave oven, not acoustic.


Many people are familiar with frequency designations used in telecom/WiFi. But for a quick and easy ‘course’ in frequency (and wavelength) if needed, please read the first 4 paragraphs of The Physics section of Wireless Technology: The Plain Physics & Biophysics (the section and article need key revisions in certain specifics, but the principles remain).


Natural microwave radiation of vanishingly low power comes to Earth from the universe. It’s called the ‘cosmic background level’ – what life has evolved in. Like man-made microwave, this energy wave has electric and magnetic properties and is called an electro-magnetic field (EMF). Opinions vary on its frequency range, one being that it covers the same range as artificial microwave, 300 MHz to 300 GHz – the top section of the entire manmade radio frequency spectrum (3 KHz to 300 GHz).


Telecom/WiFi microwave is greatly amplified compared to the background. It’s also digital. It’s an artificial, amplified, digital, polarized, modulated (pulsed) electrical and magnetic force.


All biological systems have electrical and magnetic properties as well. Thus, why you can be electrocuted; and why magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) does what it does.


Despite “5G” hysteria, all telecom/WiFi signals are fundamentally identical: Life-negative.


Their electromagnetic force interferes with critical functions controlled by the very low-power, highly sensitive electrical/magnetic properties of living systems — regardless of frequency or any power level, including far below what would ‘microwave’ (heat or cook) you.


If an electrical device causes static or otherwise interferes with a radio (as in static), music system, or any electrical circuit, it’s called “radio frequency” (RF) interference. The FCC strictly regulates this.


Wireless telecom/WiFi radio frequency interference gives living systems inaudible static. By embracing scientific fraud, the FCC very poorly regulates this. One reason is, it can’t be properly regulated anyway – and they know it.


While acknowledging that 2G-4G is seriously harmful, even ultimately fatal (but only if not properly ‘managed,’) opposers argue (with a straight face) that “5G” frequencies and infrastructure will make a terminal situation worse. More fatal (no laughing now).


Instead of “Stop Wireless!” they emphasize the “new” threat. Which it is not, fundamentally. Several ploys are ‘em-ployed’ to ‘make cases,’ as we’ll see.


The horrendous threat that opposition hysteria warns of is not “5G” per se, but wireless ‘techn-all-the-G’s’ per se. Wireless epitomizes the long-standing willingness of techno-adults to wreck the planet, poison the kids, and create illness in numerous ways, for money, convenience, and entertainment — the three main selling points of wireless ‘technolo-G’. 






With few exceptions, “5G” opposers cling to the fatal hope of continuing with 3G/4G wireless – via proper use and management, of course. There have been appeals by scientists to (corrupted) official bodies, asking for what can’t exist – safe, safer, or biologically based exposure limits. This is discussed in more detail in the ‘physics’ article above.


There is also every manner of device, gadget, clothing, shrouds, paint and metal to protect humans from a pathological threat that shouldn’t even exist. This is considered sane and clever. And does it make business.


While business is being made, the worst threat by far proceeds – ecosystem damage/collapse. It gets mentions in the hysteria, but rarely the keen, priority-one emphasis it demands.


Some assertions below are solid, others “depend,” some are of necessity speculation. Things can change rapidly. Therefore, anyone having verifiable information clarifying, enhancing, correcting, or, especially, refuting anything said here, PLEASE share via Comments. The goal is truth.


By reviewing this material, the reader should be well equipped to evaluate the output of pundits/scientists, websites, forums, summits, writers and reporters stressing the “5G crisis”.


Bullet Summary


Corresponding Section titles precede the bulleted items.


Particulars/Warnings



Hysterical opposition to “5G” has created dangerous misconception, beginning with careless misuse of the very term “5G”.
When most people say “5G” they refer to its ‘extremely high frequency’ (EHF) range of microwave radiation, often called “millimeter wave” (MMW). This is inaccurate, confusing and dangerous. EHF and 5G EHF are specified.
At least 4 Important distinctions must be kept in mind for understanding and discussing “5G,” especially one between the two 5G’s – high frequency 5G and mid-band to low-band 5G.
Some terms are suggested to clear confusion and enhance discussion. “5G millimeter wave” (5Gmmw) for high frequency; “5G mid-/low-band” (5Gmlb) for traditional 2G-4G frequencies being called 5G (more below). “Enclosure” houses antennas. A “fixture” is a mounted enclosure.
Common, confusing warnings are discussed: 1) “5G small cells are not small”; 2) the installations can be “hundreds of pounds, right in your front yard”; and 3) antennas will be densely located — “every few homes.”
The term “small cell” is misused, being applied to enclosures and/or fixtures instead of the area covered by antenna range. 5Gmmw has short range, thus its cell is small. ‘Making cases’.
MMW easily blocked, even by leaves and heavy rain, gets worse with increasing frequency requiring more fixture locations. Hysteria rarely notes that 5Gmlb is a large cell and is not blocked.
“FLD” is for fixture location density. Common warnings about implementation are in serious question at this writing (more later).
Small cells are not new, not created for “5G”. There are traditionally three kinds.
From the outset: Opposition implies 5G is small cells/MMW. Typically careless statement given as example.
“The skin’s sweat ducts act as receiving antennas for 5G” is speculative, based on a stretched interpretation of an Israeli study. Study details reviewed. Wording of its “warning-flag” conclusion applies conceptually to all G’s. Harm was known decades before 2G (see History of Official Awareness).
Insufficient correlation to say sweat ducts are “5G” antennas. Making cases?
“5G is a weapon” is based carelessly on the military’s ADS system that heats the skin. No correlation with commercial 5G mobile. MMW is no more weapon than 2G-4G.
2G began as a military weapon and was adapted to telecom. Entire wireless telecom system is a weapon.
All telecom/WiFi wireless frequencies, 2G-4G, will cook you at sufficiently high power levels. Telecom 5Gmmw at commercial levels will not.
A powerful Air Force radar system, Pave Paws, will cook you in a nanosecond at 450 MHz, so forget whine about “5G weapon.”
No ADS power range found, but did find a military “directed energy” study.
Power of microwave ovens and towers/phones compared. ADS configuration chosen to limit penetration depth.
No wattage output for 5G MLB or MMW antennas found, but did find Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of a 5Gmmw antenna for 28 and 38 GHz and compared with FCC standard.
SAR discussed – useless for assessing radiation absorption or comparing phones.
“5G” per se opposition creates dangerous false sense of security encouraging continued use of pathological 3G/4G/WiFi wireless devices. Techno-humans adept at sickening and killing themselves, poisoning the kids, and destroying environment for money, convenience and entertainment.

Safety Testing



“5G has not been safety tested” is a ploy. That the FCC and Industry openly admit this is sometimes tossed into the pot of “5G” atrocities, whereas, the basic issue is wireless tech per se.
In 1996, FCC finally adopted ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992, covering frequencies from 3 KHz to 300 GHz, in which range all MMW is included. The latest is ANSI/IEEE C95.1-2019.
FCC assertion that “5G” poses no risk and needs no testing is same fraud used to make assurances about 3G in 1996: “No heat, no harm.” This author warned of this response to “Stop 5G” in the 2/2019 article Could Opposition to 5G (per se) Be Ill Advised?
Huge volume of science beginning in the 1950s brings up question whether *proper* testing was ever done.
FCC discredits or merely dismisses existing science. This blatant criminality is clearly revealed by older historical documents (see History of Official Awareness below).
“Current FCC exposure limits are outdated.” All official testing is fraud, can’t be “outdated.”
“Outdated” always comes with the even more irresponsible suggestion that “safe”, “safer”, or “biologically based” exposure limits are needed, when no such thing can exist.

More detail on the original testing cited two in sections of Wireless Technology: Ultra Convenient. Endlessly Entertaining. Criminally Instigated. Terminally Pathological.


5G Rollouts



Where infrastructure is concerned, emphasis from the outset in mainstream opposition has been on millions of new, closely spaced installations nationwide, up and down ‘Your Street USA.’ But things seem to be developing differently. Even the Industry hasn’t settled on final arrangements (pun intended).
A new “5G NR” international wireless standard covers two frequency ranges, FR1, FR2. One, for current bands below 6 GHz (3G/4G, i.e., 5Gmlb). Two, for 5Gmmw. WiFi remains separate for now
5G NR defines new protocols for MLB, providing at least 35% more 4G speed, while being called 5G without distinction. 5Gmlb can use same towers as 4G, has same range and penetration, but new antennas.
5G NR entails several new technologies needing only a mention, including “MIMO” antennas for small cells and beamforming (more later).
Plans being made to market 5G in an unlicensed 3.5 GHz band of the Citizens Broadband Radio Service. MLB called 5G.
Apparently, current smartphones can be updated to process 5Gmlb; but 5Gmmw will require new (expensive) phones. Field tests: Samsung Galaxy S10 (good shot of 5Gmmw antenna/node in first article). Both advise ‘holding off’ on new, 5G phones.
Two possible motives behind “5G” hysteria are addressed.
Two dissections of news stories causing 5G rollout confusion – the UK’s 6/26/19 Glastonbury Festival and a notable 9/21/19 protest in Bern, Switzerland. Neither report clarifies which “5G” was involved.
Glastonbury protest article laced with dubious statements, notably the wearingly repeated hysteria that “5G” constitutes a “massive experiment on all species”.
Implied is that 2G-4G were not experiments. Paradox: They were and were not. Distinctions must be made.
Crucial to keep in mind that all deleterious effects of EMF/RF were well understood by the wider scientific community, the UN/WHO, militaries and governments by the mid-1970s.
Decision made long ago to put life/people at risk (see History of Official Awareness).Thus, thus the yes/no experiment is not IF harm, but when, and how the explosion will play out.
“Good” news: Human health collapse could be prevented – by ecosystem collapse. Race is on.
What’s happening ‘on the ground.’ The two 5G FR setups can be illustrated by looking at what just three carriers are doing: T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon.
T-Mobile has announced a nationwide 5Gmlb rollout at 600 MHz.
Sprint’s plans are to run in the 2.5 GHz band using “massive” MIMO (more below). Which means it’s not bothering with MMW at all (although plans a merger with T-Mobile, who is).
Verizon’s “5G Ultra Wideband” (UWB) called “Verizon 5G Home Internet” is being run in Houston, Indianapolis, LA and Sacramento. Verizon says this is MMW (5Gmmw). But it “…will also deploy 5G technology on lower frequency bands including 700 MHz-2500 MHz frequency range…”
Sacramento seems a most enthusiastic victim host. Website features Verizon UWB installation at citizen’s home, City officials attending. Sacramento also prides itself on attaining “Smart City” status (more below).
Verizon’s 5Gmmw, for mobile, is being offered/tested in urban areas – could be its final destination.
Santa Rosa typifies cities forestalling “5G” for precautionary reasons. Right move, very wrong reason, with 3G/4G still operating. Again, the danger of “5G” hysteria.
The forgoing rollouts are all being called 5G. Drawing most early 5G protest was, and is, the expected need for millions of closely spaced fixtures nationwide. There now seems to be serious question about this.
A report on new Qualcomm smartphone 5Gmmw antennas also covers antennas for MLB: “…a four-member family of radio modules designed for larger cell 5G coverage – that is, outside the dense urban areas and indoor environments… (5Gmlb, emphasis added).
It’s widely held that the Internet of Things (IoT) is specific to 5Gmmw, but two Israeli Qualcomm techs say 4G can handle it. Probably 4Gmlb.
Some opposers say MMW isn’t needed for car-to-car communication. The attempted deployment of smart utility meters on (4G) WiFi supports what the Qualcomm techs say.
5Gmlb makes sense for IoT, if IoT’s exclusive to MMW, and if that won’t be everywhere (on the ground), it trashes the concept.
I didn’t invest time trying to find where dense fixture locations are happening in neighborhoods. Rollout info suggests only populous areas. Readers who’ve seen this anywhere are asked to share in Comments.
If FLD is occurring outside major cities or populous areas, question arises about the purpose.
Verizon CEO Lowell McAdams said in an interview that FLD is “…one of the myths about 5G…” True, but not the whole truth. McAdam touted 5Gmmw for Smart cities, driverless cars and virtual reality.
No matter the 5G version, wireless per se is the foundation for managing/controlling every aspect of daily life with “Smart” technology.
None of the above means things can’t change. MLB rollout could be precursor to an FLD/MMW invasion or satellite saturation in outlying areas. Speculation on MMW future and interface between ground and satellite purposes and services.
Parenthetical discussion of Sacramento-City web page showing total-surveillance/human-control system rapidly gestating under auspices of “Smart City for public safety/benefits” – especially “Projects in Progress”. Note promise of “STEM,” the nationwide programming for turning kids into corporate plug-ins.
STEM promises techno-shiny future, and exerts direct impact — to advantage or disaster. But the former hasn’t begun to “justify” the sum of the latter. Imagine the potential chaos once a Smart City become hackers target.

Reports of  Harm



Mostly confusion in these reports, all implying 5Gmmw. No clear indication of which “5G” is involved in most cases – 5Gmmw or 5Gmlb.
People see new infrastructure and assume MMW.
All harms reported thus far are classic 2G-4G symptoms. Most are the “Electrohypersensitivity (EHS) type (“EHS,” a misnomer, see Idaho story near end of this section).
RF meters have been used to support claims of harm, but ordinary meters can’t read MMW. Such meters are professional, expensive, technical equipment.
A true 5G phone would ID MMW and MLB, but no meter shows frequencies, so even a pro one wouldn’t reveal which frequencies are present.
Long-term previous exposure plays into “5G” harm. Harm “verified” by ordinary meters proves 4G harm, one way or another.
One hawker claims its ordinary meter can read “5G,” a ruse brought to you by hysteria.
For most situations, meters not much use for most people – no safe exposure level (see History of Official Awareness below).
Meters sometimes useful for people using shielding, etc, but symptom improvement doesn’t mean harm stops..
Differences between MMW effects and long-reported classic 2G-4G effects can tentatively identify 5G frequency type.
MMW potentially threatens skin and eyes. A study irresponsibly (underhandedly?) cited in an article to prove “5G” has heart effects is exposed.
Study also implies that any microwave frequency at sufficient power can cook and kill you.
Possible, but still speculative, that 5Gmmw can cause MLB effects, because conductive body tissues can carry induced currents deep into the body.
MIMO (‘my-mo’) antenna tech has been used for MLB for more than a decade. The new development is “massive” MIMO, or many antenna elements in one enclosure for aiming beams of radiation.
One question is whether massive MIMO antenna arrays themselves pose a greater threat than traditional antennas. It’s possible. It seems one could get caught in a ‘crossfire’ of beams, although a sea of radiation hardly seems better.
Aiming doesn’t necessarily mean higher power hitting you just because the beam is focused. Relaying beams avoids high power output per beam.
Hysteria often warns of an outrageously high increase in power output with “5G” and “small cells.” For a few reasons, this seems unlikely.
Details of several typical news reports. Most demonstrate fatal error of thinking that shutting down or moving a tower will make people safe or “safer” in general (no one’s talking ecosystem). Three show the effect of 5G hysteria – one outrageously, and one, a general concern about wireless, per se.
Story of a Sacramento family alleging harm from Verizon antenna installed near home illustrates confusion. Testimony before Sacramento City Council, 6/25/19 – with mayor present.
Type of antenna not given, but probably a MMW fixture for “5G Home Internet”. Verizon 5G UWB launched 10/1/19 in Sacramento — again with the mayor attending.
Strange that testimony date precedes stated launch date. Maybe there had to be tests. Maybe the PR announcement date was carefully chosen for whatever reason.
Opening video display screen says, “Children Sick After 4G/5G Small Cell Installation…” What does that mean? Incident suggests MMW effect, but still shows need to know what you mean when you say “5G” – or “4G/5G”.
Mother seems to understand the general threat of wireless (although she commits the “outdated” faux pas), but her suggestion that “shielding” solved the illness won’t be taken seriously.
Typically too, she seems not to consider that power level below heating, along with antenna proximity, make little to no difference in terms of ongoing harm.
Even if new 5Gmlb antennas pose greater health risk, it’s academic, because the ‘pre-5G’ endgame is the same – fatal.
Outrageous opposition-induced hysteria from Gateshead in UK about “5G” from street lights. Dangers of LED lights cited.
News report from Cincinnati shows folks in the dark about 5G, thanks to hysteria. Story from Ripon, San Joaquin County, CA, shows better awareness of wireless threat. Both show dangerous thinking about shutting down/moving tower (no one talking ecosystem).
An RT America report on Cincinnati, based on the original story, is cited as accurate example of common confusion, misleading information and “5G” hype sprinkled with fact.
Original 9/20/19 story (now includes update) a case of “new infrastructure/hysteria. No one seems to have been upset by 4G wireless or its towers previously. It’s a tall, cylindrical “mystery tower” that people fear will soon be sending out “5G signals”..
9/27/19 update shows interview with concerned nurse. “5G-hysteria” victim lacks understanding of wireless, will feel safer if that tower with the ‘unknown effects’ goes away. Will she be safer?
Tall, new-look tower with cylindrical fixture (shown in picture and video). Looks nothing like Verizon’s 5Gmmw antenna seen in phone report in the 5G Rollouts section.
Update also says it’s a Sprint tower, so can’t be MMW. “5G” fear an assumption driven by hysteria.
What’s in cylindrical fixture and its specific functions are anyone’s guess.
Update also notes that shorter, cylindrical black towers are popping up — Verizon’s. Verizon spokesman confirms they’re new small cellular towers currently broadcasting 4G LTE, but convertible to future “5G” (similar to Sprint’s story?), meaning what?
3/12/19 San Joaquin report also concerns tall tower with cylindrical fixture “too close to school.” No 5G fear, more general awareness of wireless danger. ‘Cluster’ of cancer victims.
Three teachers and four students with various cancers since 2016 Also 22 year-old former male student. No mention of whether teachers and young man were exposed to any other towers/devices. Just that nasty tower…
Ripon case interesting for several reasons. Independent expert contradicted official assurance that tower tested OK. Shows common ignorance: “…kids are still developing and shouldn’t be exposed.”
Sprint shut tower down, agreed to relocate. Good PR, suggests industry/towns will back down.
Two more reasons: First is overlooked threat of imminent disaster due to long-term exposure and probably cumulative effect (see History of Official Awareness below).
Second reason, bogus advice ‘distance is your friend’ — the argument for slow death over quicker death, or futility of “reducing exposure.” Greater distance can make things worse.
Any antenna to which any living thing is exposed is too close.
Reducing exposure comes in two forms – usage tips and lower exposure limits. Both futile.
Clever warnings for humans worsen ecosystem damage.
Reliance on power level to determine safety is largely a convenience, not science. Several other factors make determination too complex. They keep it simple-y deadly.
Harm stories indicate people seem to think it just happened. Fatal error. Felt or not, effects can occur any time during or after exposure, so no way of knowing they weren’t ‘due’ anyway.
(Dear reader, based on what’s been shared here, see what you think of this short Verizon promo)
An organization called EHS Idaho collects reports on incidence and effects in the Idaho population of electrohypersensitivity (EHS). Term misleading. “OES” – Overt ElectroSensitivity – suggested.
An estimated 35% of the Idaho population suffers mild to moderate symptoms, with 3% to 10% “devastating, life-altering.”
Estimated 100 million suffer ‘OES’ globally. As bad as this is, it’s not nearly as bad as things could quickly and easily get. Call this “pre-terminal disaster.”



Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




A Big Question



Illness caused by wireless radiation not new or unique to it, even though lists and categories of issues attributed to it.
Question: how much of today’s ecosystem decline and rampant illness – all known prior to wireless era – is attributable in whole or part to wireless tech (or even the whole range of RF we ’bathe’ in)?
If officials even know (doubtful), they’re not telling. I suggest no one knows (although the perpetrators might be more aware), and not that many seem even to care; but it’s almost certainly huge.
For sick users — much habituated, obsessed, and addicted — seeing and feeling nothing doctors attribute to wireless, there’s little incentive to quit 3G/4G.
But quitting 3G/4G – at the retail level – must be done for survival, and that’s how to beat 5G — on the ground, anyway. Allowing 4G to continue, with any level of exposure, potentiates the noted imminent effects – eco-collapse and massive *overt* health crises.

It’s going to explode, folks.



Manifesto: Anyone who understands the fatal threat but still uses wireless technology – for whatever tiring, self-involved ‘excuse’ – or for the promise of safe exposure limits and exposure reduction – is irradiating our source of life and fellow humans directly, with devices and by supporting the tower system ‘bathing’ everything 24/7. Such a user is an accessory before and during the fact to criminal behavior leading to ecocide and slow genocide. And, some researchers say, global enslavement in the technosphere.
If we don’t stop 3G/4G, welcome all 5G. I Surrender will mercifully hasten an end to the coming agony.

History of Official Awareness




One historical document acknowledging harm FCC denies is 1981 WHO report, Environmental Health Criteria: Radiofrequency and Microwaves. Biologic Effects and Health Hazards of Microwave Radiation: Proceedings on International Symposium 1973.

Very long report covers frequencies from 100 KHz to 300 GHz, but telecom/WiFi harm for last three decades has come from digital 2G-4G frequencies.
Quotes from document summary given, revealing ruthless deception. It’s all most people need to read. Section 1.1.6. admits safe level should be “…close to natural background levels”. Natural background microwave is analog, not artificial, digital, polarized or modulated (pulsed).

So there is a safe, “biologically based” limit after all: zero.



Safety “not technically feasible.” Assumption that technology more important than environment and human health.
Notes and quotes from a presentation at 2009 Whole Health Expo reveal knowledge of harm since the 1950s. No indication in Summary if 1973 Warsaw Symposium or 1981 WHO reviewers were aware.
No indication in Summary that Symposium/WHO were aware of military microwave stealth-weapon research begun in 1950s. What eventually became 2G.

Examining Priorities



Worth repeating: The most dire threat is to ecosystem, not humans. No exposed living thing is immune.
Environment suffers in hysteria background.
No form/amount of human protection protects Nature.
threat to planet isn’t just about radiation, but about the entire process involved in creating it. One thing is certain about most technology, regardless of benefit – its toxic.
German study cited suggests insects in alarming decline globally.
Threat to planet isn’t just about radiation, but about process of creating it..
From resource acquisition (especially mining) to disposal, technology is toxic to planet and biosphere. Wireless covers the whole process.
“Wired” systems will not stop this assault.
The attitude revealed in the WHO document about safety – “not technically feasible” – hasn’t changed.
If one isn’t careful, one might conclude “5G” opposers think humans can do quite well without the planet.
Most hysteria focused on ground antennas, while well more than 50,000 new satellites are underway and proposed, a horrific threat.
Heavy pollution produced by each launch, as well as massive removal of atmospheric oxygen. dynamic graph linked.
Much still up in the air on satellites. Plan seems to be shoot them up first, answer proprietary questions later, dismissing anyone else’s.
In Europe there are calls for science papers on satellite/5G integration. There is an appeal to ‘stop 5G in space’, but popular emphasis remains disproportionately on ground installations.
Arrogant FCC has flatly dismissed legitimate concerns raised by NASA, NOAA and more. Does such arrogance suggest level of power beyond corporate/governmental?
Might such arrogance indicate a certain level of supra-CorporateGovernmental power from which this atrocity originates?
Best way to beat 5G on the ground is to reject all current wireless (3G/4G) at the commercial level. This could well impact satellites also.
Outcry on satellites – and drones, for that matter – should drown out the ones on earthbound antennas.

Conclusion



Taking into account what physics and biophysics suggest about power levels and biosensitivity respectively; and what the WHO document (and other historical documents) report about effects and safe level; what’s known about unnoticed effects accumulating over time in living systems; and the fact that environment and humans have been exposed for almost 3 decades now, does anyone feel that 2G-4G wireless isn’t, of itself, a quite sufficient terminal nightmare?
The race is on between ecosystem collapse and human health collapse. Allowing classic 4G (or 5G FR1) to continue potentiates imminent disaster.
Experience shows that appeals, based on science, to governments at all levels; to national and international regulatory bodies, and so on is an exercise in futility.
It’s in the people’s hands. Give up wireless per se or give up the future – liberty first, then life. If not, then welcome all 5G. It will mercifully shorten the coming agony.


Peter Tocci is a retired massage therapist and wellness consultant with an abiding interest in exploring ‘managed’ history, nefarious covert agendas, and mainstream/mainstream-alternative news-media dereliction, distortion and suppression. He can be reached at [email protected]


© 2020, Peter G TocciAll Rights Reserved


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

10

      

By Peter Tocci


Author’s Note: This Summary is a distillation of the article What Do YOU Mean When You Say “5G”? (majorly revised and updated). The full text is strongly encouraged; but two Summaries have been published for fast-trackers. A more detailed Bullet Summary, for those who’d rather pick and choose, and this one for those who prefer a more general sweep. Both provide a means for seeing “5G” more clearly, and quickly accessing areas of particular interest.


Introduction to Full Text


When you say, “5G” or “Stop 5G,” please be sure you haven’t been misled about what it is, what you are opposing – or want. Most “5G” opposition presents more like hysteria than fact.


         



      

“5G” (in quotes) indicates the lack of a critical distinction that forms the basis of this article. Although “5G” and its implementation are confusing enough (not even the Industry has settled all details), compounding the problem unnecessarily is the output of most opposers, which suggests they don’t really know what it is – or aren’t saying.


Opposition includes erroneous information, omissions, sometimes propaganda – and sometimes utter nonsense – alongside some truth – even from those who should know better, such as “concerned scientists”.


The “Stop 5G!” mantra irresponsibly leaves environment, people, and communities in greater jeopardy than do the ominous facts. This article attempts to raise some ‘dust’ and clear the air at the same time.


Because carrier rollouts and stories of harm are major opposition concerns, much detail is given to show how “5G” hysteria makes things worse in various cases. Safety testing, history of official awareness of harm, and opposition priorities are also discussed.


“5G” confusion revolves around some technical things, but non-techies need not be intimidated. Easily understood basics are all one needs. Like musical notes, the signals to and from devices and towers are just vibrational frequencies. Comparison ends there, however, because telecom/WiFi frequencies are microwave radiation like in your microwave oven, not acoustic.


Many people are familiar with frequency designations used in telecom/WiFi. But for a quick and easy ‘course’ in frequency (and wavelength) if needed, please read the first 4 paragraphs of The Physics section of Wireless Technology: The Plain Physics & Biophysics (the section and article need key revisions in certain specifics, but the principles remain).


Natural microwave radiation of vanishingly low power comes to Earth from the universe. It’s called the ‘cosmic background level’ – what life has evolved in. Like man-made microwave, this energy wave has electric and magnetic properties and is called an electro-magnetic field (EMF). Opinions vary on its frequency range, one being that it covers the same range as artificial microwave, 300 MHz to 300 GHz – the top section of the entire manmade radio frequency spectrum (3 KHz to 300 GHz).


Telecom/WiFi microwave is greatly amplified compared to the background. It’s also digital. It’s an artificial, amplified, digital, polarized, modulated (pulsed) electrical and magnetic force.


All biological systems have electrical and magnetic properties as well. Thus, why you can be electrocuted; and why magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) does what it does.


Despite “5G” hysteria, all telecom/WiFi signals are fundamentally identical: Life-negative.


Their electromagnetic force interferes with critical functions controlled by the very low-power, highly sensitive electrical/magnetic properties of living systems — regardless of frequency or any power level, including far below what would ‘microwave’ (heat or cook) you.


If an electrical device causes static or otherwise interferes with a radio (as in static), music system, or any electrical circuit, it’s called “radio frequency” (RF) interference. The FCC strictly regulates this.


Wireless telecom/WiFi radio frequency interference gives living systems inaudible static. By embracing scientific fraud, the FCC very poorly regulates this. One reason is, it can’t be properly regulated anyway – and they know it.


While acknowledging that 2G-4G is seriously harmful, even ultimately fatal (but only if not properly ‘managed,’) opposers argue (with a straight face) that “5G” frequencies and infrastructure will make a terminal situation worse. More fatal (no laughing now).


Instead of “Stop Wireless!” they emphasize the “new” threat. Which it is not, fundamentally. Several ploys are ‘em-ployed’ to ‘make cases,’ as we’ll see.


The horrendous threat that opposition hysteria warns of is not “5G” per se, but wireless ‘techn-all-the-G’s’ per se. Wireless epitomizes the long-standing willingness of techno-adults to wreck the planet, poison the kids, and create illness in numerous ways, for money, convenience, and entertainment — the three main selling points of wireless ‘technolo-G’.


With few exceptions, “5G” opposers cling to the fatal hope of continuing with 3G/4G wireless – via proper use and management, of course. There have been appeals by scientists to (corrupted) official bodies, asking for what can’t exist – safe, safer, or biologically based exposure limits. This is discussed in more detail in the ‘physics’ article above.


There is also every manner of device, gadget, clothing, shrouds, paint and metal to protect humans from a pathological threat that shouldn’t even exist. This is considered sane and clever. And does it make business.


While business is being made, the worst threat by far proceeds – ecosystem damage/collapse. It gets mentions in the hysteria, but rarely the keen, priority-one emphasis it demands.


Some assertions below are solid, others “depend,” some are of necessity speculation. Things can change rapidly. Therefore, anyone having verifiable information clarifying, enhancing, correcting, or, especially, refuting anything said here, PLEASE share via Comments. The goal is truth.


By reviewing this material, the reader should be well equipped to evaluate the output of pundits/scientists, websites, forums, summits, writers and reporters stressing the “5G crisis”.


Text Summary


Particulars/Warnings


“5G” is indeed dangerous all by itself, as are all the G’s by themselves. However, most opposition is dangerous by itself. Much confusion is based on the term “5G” being flung carelessly about, even by scientists.


Important distinctions must be made, especially between 5G infrastructure and 5G high-frequency radiation; and **between high frequency 5G and mid-band to low-band 5G, the ‘classic’ signaling used for 2G-4G.


When “5G” is uttered – especially, “Stop 5G!” or “5G crisis” – it usually implies microwave radiation often called “millimeter wave” (MMW). This is confusing and potentially dangerous. Frequency ranges are discussed.


“5G” comes in two parts – the new high-frequency waves and the old 3G/4G wolves souped-up in new ‘clothing’ and being called 5G. Hysteriacs pays no attention.


New terms are introduced. “5Gmmw” (meaning millimeter wave – MMW) for the higher frequencies. “5Gmlb” (meaning mid-/low-band frequencies – MLB) is used for the souped-up 4G LTE being called 5G. A “fixture” is a mounted enclosure of antennas. “5G Hysteriac” applied to players who know better.


Routine misuse of “small cell”. A “cell’ is not an antenna or an installation. The extreme importance  of terms is brought out in the sections about rollouts and reports of harm.


Short range and easy ‘blockability’ of MMW require more fixture locations, which 5G Hysteriacs fret about, without noting the distinction that 5Gmlb makes a large cell and is not blocked. “FLD” is for fixture location density.


Small cells ARE relatively small. Also, not new, not developed for “5G”. Early deployments were in the US in 2007 and in the UK  and Europe in 2009. Opposition has led us to believe that “5G” IS small cells/MMW.


Typically careless/misleading statement: “The telecom industry is promoting the replacement of the current cellular network, known as 4G, with a new generation of higher frequency 5G wavelengths to power the “Internet of Things…”  This is either shameful unawareness or untruth/propaganda.


Two common hysterical warnings, “sweat ducts are antennas” and “5G is a weapon” are dissected. Both show that “cases” are being made about “5G” via deception. One is exposed as applicable fundamentally to all the G’s.


MMW is no more weapon than 2G-4G. Case-makers should know that wireless tech, beginning with 2G, is adapted stealth-weapon technology that uses very low power, and that the entire wireless system is a potential weapon on various levels.


Microwave ovens, powerful Air Force radar, the military Active Denial System (ADS), frequencies/bandwidths, power output levels and SAR (mostly useless) are discussed, making the point that MMW is not needed for weaponry.


Many Hysteriacs suggest that 3G/4G/WiFi can be made reasonably safe. Some concerned folks understand that impossibility, but seem too habituated and addicted to do the right thing. Techno-humans adept at sickening and killing themselves, poisoning the kids, and destroying environment for money, convenience and entertainment.


Safety Testing


A childish scare tactic: “No ‘5G’ safety studies have been conducted or funded by the Federal Communications Commission or the telecom industry, and none is planned.” Or simply, “5G has not been tested for safety,” or the like. With this ploy comes the foolish, erroneous and dangerous implication that 2G-4G were tested.


The Commission’s assertion that “5G” needs no testing is based on the fraudulent ‘testing’ it used originally to run interference for 3G in 1996: If the radiation doesn’t heat you, it can’t harm you.


Power-level exposure limits worldwide are based on a heating standard adopted by FCC in 1996, and identified as ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992. The latest is ANSI/IEEE C95.1-2019.


Peer reviewed independent science, as early as the 1950s and still going, demonstrates myriad effects at non-heating levels. Was *proper* testing ever done? 5G Hysteriacs often omit this.


The FCC discredits or merely dismisses existing science and such questions: ‘No convincing evidence exists, but we’re keeping an eye on it.’ It also ignores foreknowledge (History of Awareness below).See main text for details on the original safety testing – scientific fraud, that is.


Another childish ploy: “The current FCC exposure limit is outdated.” It implies that standards were at one time valid or sufficient. Never, for any living thing.


“Outdated” always comes with the even more irresponsible suggestion that “safe”, “safer”, or “biologically based” exposure limits are possible. New limits are proposed — in spite of the consensus that no safe level has been found for fetuses.


The foregoing is clearly demonstrated by older historical documents. See History of Awareness below.


Rollouts


From the outset, opposition emphasis has been on millions of new, closely spaced installations nationwide. But things seem to be developing differently. As noted, even the Industry hasn’t settled on final arrangements (pun intended).


The following synthesis is the result of wading through many articles. Sources vary and even disagree with each other considerably.


A new international “5G NR” wireless standard has been issued, specifying two 5G frequency ranges: 5G NR bands FR1 and 5G NR bands FR2. Number one is for current bands below 6 GHz (5Gmlb); two is for MMW — mostly 24 to 40 GHz for mobile, and higher for special applications (not mobile).


In the near term, public WiFi will remain separate at MLB, 2.45 GHz and 5 GHz, but Verizon, for example, is offering 5Gmmw home internet/WiFi (not mobile) in limited areas of four cities.


5G NR FR1 – 5Gmlb – can use the same towers as 4G, but needs new antennas. It has the same reach and penetration, but with shorter delay, while providing up to 35 percent more speed. The wireless addict’s dream. When you think about it, FR1 should really be 5G, and 5Gmmw, 6G.


Plans are also in place to use 3.5 GHz frequency, and all key players really want in. This is called 5G, mind you.


Many current phones should be able to get updates to process FR1, but a new phone is needed for FR2. Generally, the “tech” advice is not to move yet, shown in two stories about testing Samsung’s 5G  Galaxy S10 phone. What it amounts to is 5Gmmw is at a virtual “demo” stage, not full coverage and service, even in town.


Many “5G” opposers continue to use traditional 3G/4G/WiFi wireless, either knowing the danger or believing it’s safe, or will be. They just want it. A possible motive driving Hysteriacs? “5G” infrastructure hysteria distracts attention from the satellite program, a much more sinister development.


Many news stories reflect the MMW vs MLB confusion caused by “5G” opposition hysteria. Two are discussed – the 6/26 2019 Glastonbury Festival in Pilton, Somerset County, England, and the 9/21/19 protest in Bern, Switzerland. In neither case did protesters know what they were opposing, nor was it clear in reports which “5G” was involved.


Reports on unspecified 5G are laced with dubious statements, including the tiring one that “5G” constitutes a massive experiment on all species, the erroneous implication being that 2G-4G were/are not an experiment. Paradoxically, they were and were not experiments (see below). Distinctions must be made.


Crucial to keep in mind that widespread knowledge of harm existed by the mid-1970s. The decision was callously made to put life/people at risk to have the technology. What was known was later hushed in the runup to mobile telecom in 1984.


The “experiment” is not whether, but when, ongoing exposure and probable cumulative damage will manifest in a cascade of widespread intractable illness. But that fate might be avoided: Ecosystem collapse could bring the house down beforehand. The race is on — between ecosystem collapse and human-health collapse.


Implementation of the two 5G FR setups can be illustrated by looking at what just three carriers are doing: T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon. T-Mobile has announced a nationwide 5Gmlb rollout at 600 MHz.


Sprint’s plans are to run in the 2.5 GHz band using “massive” MIMO (more below). No MMW at all.


Verizon’s “5G Ultra Wideband” – “Verizon 5G Home Internet” – is MMW – 5Gmmw. But it “…will also deploy 5G technology on lower frequency bands including 700 MHz-2500 MHz frequency range (5Gmlb).


Verizon’s 5Gmmw for mobile, is being offered/tested in urban areas, which could be its final destination.


The foregoing rollouts are being called 5G.


A report on new Qualcomm smartphone antennas discusses antennas for MLB: “…a four-member family of radio modules designed for larger cell 5G coverage – that is, outside the dense urban areas and indoor environments… to work in the sub-6GHz bands…” (5Gmlb, emphasis added).


Given the information on FR1 rollouts, protest about “18 million new” closely spaced fixtures is brought into serious question.


Sacramento seems to the most enthusiastic victim host. Link to a gushing PR piece about a Verizon UWB installation at one Sacramento citizen’s home, with City officials attending.


Santa Rosa typifies cities forestalling “5G” for precautionary reasons. Right move, very wrong reason. Ecocidal, terminally pathological 3G/4G still rages, again reflecting the danger of “5G” hysteria.


It’s widely held that the Internet of Things (IoT) is specific to 5Gmmw, but two Israeli Qualcomm techies seem to disagree, saying 4G can handle it. Propaganda? Careless chatter? Safe to assume they refer to the new, faster 4G. The attempt at widespread deployment of smart utility meters on 4G WiFi reinforces what the Qualcomm techies say.


5Gmlb makes sense for IoT, because if it’s exclusive to MMW, and if that won’t be everywhere as it seems at this point on the ground (unless … satellites?), it trashes the plan to “connect” (read surveillance) of all THINGS. Including you – via phone or microchip.


None of the above means things can’t change. It’s early. The MLB rollout could be just a prelude to an FLD/MMW invasion.






In a 5/15/18 CNBC interview, Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam said that antennas in your face is “…one of the myths about 5G…” I’d say he was being coy, implying MLB.


McAdam touted 5Gmmw for Smart cities, driverless cars and virtual reality — all good reasons for planetary and health destruction. That is, “Smart” is another word for monumentally stupid and for total surveillance and centralized coordination and control of daily life.


I didn’t bother spending the rest of my life trying to find if/where FLD installations are occurring. Based on the foregoing, it would seem to be only in dense residential areas very close to or within cities. Anyone who’s seen close installations in any area, please share details in Comments.


If FLD is happening outside populous areas, question arises about purpose. And how do the many thousands of planned satellites fit into the overall picture. Possibly divvying services.


(If you’re curious, check out the total-surveillance and human-control system rapidly gestating in the name of “Smart City,” public safety/benefits etc in Sacramento. Follow the the links on the Smart-City page under “Public-Private Partnership…” at bottom, especially “Projects in Progress”. Note the promise of “STEM.” Nationwide systemic programming to make kids into corporate plug-ins or hitech drones ).


Reports of Harm


Reports of adverse effects from “5G” – almost certainly implying 5Gmmw – are unlikely/virtually impossible outside cities/populous areas. Apparently, people see new infrastructure, dense or not, or/and feel effects, and assume MMW, as in the Bern example.


“5G” harm stories consistently report classic 2G-4G symptoms existing long before anyone even heard of 5G, especially of the ‘Electrohypersensitivity’ type (“EHS,” a misnomer, see Idaho story near end of section).


Radiation/RF-level meters have been used to support claims. But RF meters top out at 8 GHz. Recall, FCC defines 5Gmmw as 24 GHz to 90 GHz. Thus, current meters can’t read MMW.


Professional (very expensive) meters cover low and high ranges, but no frequencies. Thus, anyone claiming harm from “5G” (implying mmw) should have a phone with MMW function, or have official information.


Thus, if there is harm in outlying areas when “5G” is turned on, what’s shown by existing meters? 4G, one way or another. Hysteria-induced confusion?One meter hawker claims that its product can read “5G” based on the fact that two new MLB frequencies are used for 5G. Any old meter does this. Courtesy of “5G” hysteria.


Meters aren’t really helpful for most people.  A meter might come in handy for someone with outward symptoms and using some form of shielding, for example. But symptom abatement doesn’t mean harm stops.


Differences between known effects of MMW (a growing but limited volume of science) and those of MLB might help determine the frequencies present.


MMW potentially threatens skin and eyes. More effects are being reported; but a paper cited by a prominent scientist (in a ‘5G danger’ article) to show that MMW impacts “heart rate variability” turns out to be a military directed-energy study, using virtually the “ADS” system noted earlier at 75 times FCC limit and a frequency that would not be used in mobile applications. Making cases?


MMW might cause MLB effects, but it’s a bit speculative at this point. It’s possible, however “…since nerves, blood vessels and other electrically conducting structures can carry radiation-induced currents deep into the body.” Document submitted to the UN is cited.


Antenna technology called MIMO looks to be destined for both FR1 and FR2 (a virtual necessity for MMW). The more recent development is “massive” MIMO for aiming (and receiving) beams of radiation. Aiming per se doesn’t necessarily mean higher power hitting you just because the beam is focused. Possible that massive MIMO antenna arrays themselves pose an additional threat.


Hysteria often warns of outrageously high increase in power output with “5G” and “small cells.” Worst effects are below the heating power level, and power is the lesser of several factors (see Ripon story in main text).


Details of typical news reports follow, illustrating general confusion about wireless and hysteria-induced effects. See main text for details, document-search “typical news”.


The story of a Sacramento family alleging harm from a Verizon antenna installed near the home illustrates confusion. A video shows testimony (particularly a mother’s) before the Sacramento City Council, 6/25/19 – with the mayor present.


No antenna info given, but it’s probably MMW for “5G Home Internet” (recall the PR story from 5G Rollouts — also with the mayor attending. Strange that testimony date precedes stated launch date. Maybe it was an early “Home” antenna being tested, or the PR announcement date was carefully chosen for whatever reason.


The video display screen says, “Children Sick After 4G/5G Small Cell Installation…” What does that ambiguous statement mean? Harm (cold/flu symptoms) is likely from 5Gmmw, but still reinforces the importance of knowing what we mean when we say “5G” – or “4G/5G”.


The mother seems to understand the general threat of wireless, but the suggestion that “shielding” solved the illness, even though levels “are still very high” will certainly be taken officially as “correlation,” not proof or even evidence. Typically, she’s not discovered that power level below heating, and antenna proximity, make little to no difference in terms of ongoing harm.


Bottom line: Which 5G is present is academic, since the pre-“5G” endgame is the same – fatal. Focus on “5G” is like fretting about a wildfire 10 miles away while your house is burning down.


An outrageous hysteria-induced incident hails from Gateshead, a town in northern UK. Residents claimed that new LED street lights were “emitting 5G” and causing health issues. Numerous other outlets regurgitated, with no thought given to the LED’s themselves.


Two news reports are discussed — one about Cincinnati, demonstrating that folks are in the dark about what 5G is. And a fairly well-known one from Ripon, San Joaquin County, CA shows a better general awareness of wireless threat. Both show questionable thinking that shutting down or moving a tower will make them safer in general (of course, no one’s talking ecosystem).


Lots of juicy detail in the main text on these two stories for those who want it. The Cincinnati story is one of “new infrastructure hysteria,” illustrating how “5G” opposition creates misunderstanding, unnecessary stress and drama. It involves a tall, cylindrical “mystery tower” that “people fear” will soon be sending out “5G signals”.


There’s also a link to a page containing an RT America report, a great example of common confusion, errors and “5G” hype sprinkled with fact.


Ripon story interesting. Tower was officially said to have tested within federal standards. An independent expert said it exceeded standard. Sprint subsequently shut it down and agreed to relocate, guilty or not. The move was good PR and indicates carriers/government shy away from conflict and enforcement/litigation.


Ripon is important for two more reasons. The first is the usually overlooked threat of imminent disaster from long-term exposure and cumulative effect (see History of Official Awareness below). Most kids (also embryos and fetuses) are heavily exposed in our wireless world, wherever they are – one egregious crime of the technology.


The second reason is the bogus advice that ‘distance is your friend’ — either the argument for slow death over quicker death, or the futility of “reducing exposure.” Greater distance can even make things worse.


Reducing exposure comes in two forms – usually usage tips but also lower exposure limits. Despite calls for the latter, it holds mainly for heating. For non-heating effects, any telecom/WiFi antenna to which any living thing is exposed is too close.


Lower power could even increase the threat. With regard to usage tips, even ‘weak’ and short exposures accumulate over time.


Reliance on power level to determine safety is largely a convenience (there’s that fatal word again), not science. There are several below-heating factors complicating exposure limits, including pulsing details, frequencies, and bandwidth. So they keep it simple-y deadly.


A corollary is that folks claiming harm seem to think it’s for the first time. This is fatal error. People often regard symptom abatement when a threat (e.g., a smart meter) is removed as complete recovery. More fatal error. People have no way of knowing they weren’t ‘due’ anyway. By now, the reader should know why.


(Dear reader, based on what’s been shared here, see what you think of this short Verizon promo?)





Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




An Idaho organization collects reports on the incidence and effects of what’s being called electrohypersensitivity, or EHS (the term is misleading, because no living thing is unaffected by the radiation, whether it manifests outwardly or not. “OES” – Overt ElectroSensitivity – is suggested).


An estimated 35% of the population suffers mild to moderate symptoms, with 3% to 10% “devastating, life-altering.” An estimated 100 million suffer ‘OES’ globally. As bad as this sensitivity is, it’s not nearly as bad, either in incidence or severity, as things could quickly and easily get.


You’ve heard of “pre-diabetes”? Call this “pre-terminal-disaster.”


A Big Question


Illness caused by wireless radiation is not new or unique to it. So how much of today’s environmental decline and rampant illness is attributable in whole or part to telecom/WiFi radiation (or even the whole radiation gamut to which we expose ourselves)? No one knows – or they’re not telling.


Thus even for EMF-sick users — who are much habituated, obsessed, and addicted — there’s little incentive to quit 3G/4G.


But quitting 3G/4G — at the retail level — is what must be done for survival, and that’s how to beat 5G — on the ground, anyway. Allowing 4G to continue, with ANY level of exposure, potentiates the noted imminent effects – eco-collapse and massive health crises.


It’s going to explode, folks.


Manifesto: Anyone who understands the fatal threat but still uses wireless technology – for whatever tiring, self-involved ‘excuse’ – or for the (false) promise of safe exposure limits and exposure reduction – is irradiating our source of life and fellow humans directly, with devices and by supporting the tower system ‘bathing’ everything 24/7. Such a user is an accessory to criminal behavior leading to ecocide, slow genocide and global enslavement in the technosphere.


If we don’t stop 3G/4G, welcome all 5G. It will mercifully hasten an end to the coming agony.


History of Official Awareness


Of the several historical documents acknowledging and describing the deleterious effects of artificial electromagnetic fields, the definitive one for wireless tech seems to be a 1981 World Health Organization (WHO) report.


The Summary is all one needs to read to understand that “they knew.” Excerpts and a link are provided. One section outlines the specific effects, a later section discusses exposure limits, saying the “conservative approach [euphemism for “safe”] would be to keep exposure limits close to natural background levels. However, this is not technically feasible [emphasis added]. A reasonable risk-benefit analysis has to be considered.”


Yes, technology (where war and big money lie) is more important than environment and health in some minds. “Reasonable risk-benefit”? It doesn’t say how many sick or dead per million is reasonable.


Cosmic background is 0.0000000001-0.000000000000001 µW/cm2. FCC limit: 1000 µW/cm2. Most conservative proposed “biologically based” limit: .003 – .006 µW/cm2. Importantly, however, the cosmic variety is analog, not digital, polarized or modulated (pulsed), so it might need to be ZERO.


One question is if the 1973 Warsaw International Symposium or its WHO reviewers were aware of medical and scientific research since the 1950s detailing radiofrequency and microwave effects, and that the U.S. military and others conducted microwave stealth-weapon research beginning in the 1950s. This technology essentially became wireless telecom.


Examining Priorities


Repeating: The most dire threat is to the natural world. Hysteria forgets that no form or amount of human protection does so for Nature. Continued use immeasurably intensifies that threat.



Those who offer exposure “solutions” or “tips” seem to forget that no form or amount of human protection does so for Nature.

For example, a German study has shown that 75% of the biomass of insects has disappeared in otherwise protected areas in the last quarter century or so, coinciding closely with the introduction of 2G.


Emphasized is that threat to planet isn’t just about microwave radiation, but about the entire process involved in creating it. Somewhere along the line from resource acquisition (especially mining) to disposal, most advanced technology is chemically/energetically toxic to planet and biosphere. Wireless encompasses the entire line.


Moving to “wired” telecom/WiFi will not stop this assault, nor will “Sustainable Development” and “Clean Renewable Energy.”


Based on the overall protest, if one is not careful, one might conclude it’s thought that humans can do quite well without the planet.


Another major concern is disproportionate attention on local antennas, while a massive satellite program proceeds. This could come to a total to somewhere between 50,000 and 60,000.


Launch pollution is horrendous, with no concern for consequences, such as potential damage to the ozone layer, interference with earth’s energy field, or even decline of breathable free oxygen (very cool dynamic graph linked).


Much seems to be up in the air on the satellite program. Since launches proceed in haste, the plan seems to be shoot them up first, answer proprietary questions later, dismissing anyone else’s.


NASA, NOAA, meteorologists, (and radio astronomers) have issued valid concerns about MMW. FCC has arrogantly dismissed them, too. Might such arrogance indicate a certain level of para-corporate/governmental power from which this atrocity originates?


The best way to beat 5G, on the ground at least, is to quit wireless tech flat. And reduced demand ‘down here’, will greatly reduce incentive to invest ‘up there’.


It’s strongly suggested that an outcry on satellites – and drones, for that matter – should drown the ones on earthbound antennas.


Conclusion


Taking into account what physics and biophysics suggest about power levels and biosensitivity respectively; and what the WHO document (and other historical documents) report about effects and safe level; what’s known about long-term exposure and effects not yet apparent; and the fact that environment and humans have been exposed for almost 3 decades now, does anyone feel that 2G-4G wireless isn’t, of itself, a quite sufficient terminal nightmare?


Again, a race is on between ecosystem collapse and human health collapse. Allowing 4G to continue spells disaster. Both scenarios are at the ‘deniable’ stage now. At the ‘undeniable’ stage, almost certainly the slope will have become too steep and slippery.


Experience shows that science-based appeals, to governments at all levels; to national and international regulatory bodies, and so on is an exercise in futility.


It’s in the People’s hands now, at the commercial level. Either common sense prevails over addiction and selfishness, or we wait for the race to end and hope it’s not too late.


Give up wireless per se or give up the future – liberty first, then life. If not, welcome all 5G, especially the satellites. Surrender will mercifully shorten the coming agony.



Peter Tocci is a retired massage therapist and wellness consultant with an abiding interest in exploring ‘managed’ history, nefarious covert agendas, and mainstream/mainstream-alternative news-media dereliction, distortion and suppression. He can be reached at [email protected]


© 2020, Peter G TocciAll Rights Reserved


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

11

      

By Peter Tocci


When you say, “5G” or ”Stop 5G,” please be sure you haven’t been misled about what it is, what you are opposing – or want. Most “5G” opposition presents more like hysteria than fact.


“5G” (in quotes) indicates the lack of a critical distinction that forms the basis of this article. Although “5G” and its implementation are confusing enough (not even the Industry has settled all details), compounding the problem unnecessarily is the output of most opposers, which suggests they don’t really know what it is – or aren’t saying.


Opposition includes erroneous information, omissions, sometimes propaganda – and sometimes utter nonsense – alongside some truth – even from those who should know better, such as “concerned scientists”.


         



      

The “Stop 5G!” mantra irresponsibly leaves environment, people, and communities in greater jeopardy than do the ominous facts. This article attempts to raise some ‘dust’ and clear the air at the same time.


Because carrier rollouts and stories of harm are major opposition concerns, much detail is given to show how “5G” hysteria makes things worse in various cases. Safety testing, history of official awareness of harm, and opposition priorities are also discussed.


Two Summaries have been published separately for fast-trackers. A Bullet Summary for those who’d rather pick and choose detail, and a Text Summary, for those who want a more general sweep. Both provide means for quickly accessing areas of particular interest. But reading the full text is strongly encouraged. A small number of revisions might not appear in the Summaries.


“5G” confusion revolves around some technical things, but non-techies need not be intimidated. Easily understood basics are all one needs. Like musical notes, the signals to and from devices and towers are just vibrational frequencies. Comparison ends there, however, because telecom/WiFi frequencies are microwave radiation like in your microwave oven, not acoustic.


Many people are familiar with frequency designations used in telecom/WiFi. But for a quick and easy ‘course’ in frequency (and wavelength) if needed, please read the first 4 paragraphs of The Physics section of Wireless Technology: The Plain Physics & Biophysics (the section and article need key revisions in certain specifics, but the principles remain).


Natural microwave radiation of vanishingly low power comes to Earth from the universe. It’s called the ‘cosmic background level’ – what life has evolved in. Like man-made microwave, this energy wave has electric and magnetic properties and is called an electro-magnetic field (EMF). Opinions vary on its frequency range, one being that it covers the same range as artificial microwave, 300 MHz to 300 GHz – the top section of the entire manmade radio frequency spectrum (3 KHz to 300 GHz).


Telecom/WiFi microwave is greatly amplified compared to the background. It’s also digital. It’s an artificial, amplified, digital, polarized, modulated (pulsed) electrical and magnetic force.


All biological systems have electrical and magnetic properties as well. Thus, why you can be electrocuted; and why magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) does what it does.


Despite “5G” hysteria, all telecom/WiFi signals are fundamentally identical: Life-negative.


Their electromagnetic force interferes with critical functions controlled by the very low-power, highly sensitive electrical/magnetic properties of living systems — regardless of frequency or any power level, including far below what would ‘microwave’ (heat or cook) you.


If an electrical device causes static or otherwise interferes with a radio (as in static), music system, or any electrical circuit, it’s called “radio frequency” (RF) interference. The FCC strictly regulates this.


Wireless telecom/WiFi radio frequency interference gives living systems inaudible static. By embracing scientific fraud, the FCC very poorly regulates this. One reason is, it can’t be properly regulated anyway – and they know it.


While acknowledging that 2G-4G is seriously harmful, even ultimately fatal (but only if not properly ‘managed,’) opposers argue (with a straight face) that “5G” frequencies and infrastructure will make a terminal situation worse. More fatal (no laughing now).


Instead of “Stop Wireless!” they emphasize the “new” threat. Which it is not, fundamentally. Several ploys are ‘em-ployed’ to ‘make cases,’ as we’ll see.


The horrendous threat that opposition hysteria warns of is not “5G” per se, but wireless ‘techn-all-the-G’s’ per se. Wireless epitomizes the long-standing willingness of techno-adults to wreck the planet, poison the kids, and create illness in numerous ways, for money, convenience, and entertainment — the three main selling points of wireless ‘technolo-G’.


With few exceptions, “5G” opposers cling to the fatal hope of continuing with 3G/4G wireless – via proper use and management, of course. There have been appeals by scientists to (corrupted) official bodies, asking for what can’t exist – safe, safer, or biologically based exposure limits. This is discussed in more detail in the ‘physics’ article above.


There is also every manner of device, gadget, clothing, shrouds, paint and metal to protect humans from a pathological threat that shouldn’t even exist. This is considered sane and clever. And does it make business.


While business is being made, the worst threat by far proceeds – ecosystem damage/collapse. It gets mentions in the hysteria, but rarely the keen, priority-one emphasis it demands.


Some assertions below are solid, others “depend,” some are of necessity speculation. Things can change rapidly. Therefore, anyone having verifiable information clarifying, enhancing, correcting, or, especially, refuting anything said here, PLEASE share via Comments. The goal is truth.


By reviewing this material, the reader should be well equipped to evaluate the output of pundits/scientists, websites, forums, summits, writers and reporters stressing the “5G crisis”.


Particulars/Warnings


Without any help from “5G” opposers, the “next generation” wireless is very dangerous — all by itself — as is each previous G by itself. But due to hysteria (illogic, inaccuracies and omissions), most opposition is also dangerous by itself.


Not much has changed since this PC Mag article was published in 1/2019. And that doesn’t cover all critical aspects.


Confusion begins right off the bat with the term “5G.” It’s being flung carelessly about, in articles, protests, news reports, corporate bulletins, by politicians – even by scientists, and in submissions and comments to official bodies.


Almost always implied when “5G” is uttered – especially, “Stop 5G!” or “5G crisis” – is use of the ‘extremely high frequency’ (EHF) range of microwave radiation often called “millimeter wave” (MMW). This causes misunderstanding and potential danger.


Overall, EHF is specified as 30 GHz to 300 GHz, and wavelength 10 millimeters to 1mm respectively. Only a small portion of that range is used in high-frequency 5G operation, and is defined in the US by the FCC as 24 GHz to 90 GHz.


As explained below in 5G Rollouts, for accuracy one must at least distinguish between 1) ‘small-cell’ infrastructure and 5G/small cells per se; 2) between 5G infrastructure and 5G high-frequency radiation; 3) between antennas and their enclosures, and **4) between high frequency 5G and mid-/low-band 5G, the signaling long used for 2G-4G iterations.


New terms are offered here for consistency and for clarifying hysteria-induced misunderstanding and confusion: “5G millimeter wave” (5Gmmw) for high frequency; “5G mid-/low-band” (5Gmlb) for traditional 2G-4G frequencies being called 5G (more below). “Enclosure” is a housing for antennas (sending/receiving elements). A “fixture” is a mounted enclosure.


One might see warnings such as: 1) “5G small cells are not small”; 2) the installations can be “hundreds of pounds, right in your front yard”; and 3) antennas will be densely located — “every few homes.”


“Small cell” is regularly misused, even by the Industry. Accurately speaking, a cell is not an antenna, but the effective area/range of an antenna’s radiation. 5Gmmw has a short range, which decreases with higher frequency. Thus, its cell is comparatively small.


Also, MMW can easily be blocked, even by even leaves and heavy rain, which deficiency increases with increasing frequency. Both drawbacks can be improved with a substantial power boost, but this also becomes a problem with energy cost and exposure levels, and so is not under consideration. Energy consumption is a major concern for the industry, which is feverishly at work to solve it.


Short range and easy ‘blockability’ require more fixture locations, which hysteria frets about, rarely noting the distinction that 5Gmlb makes a large cell and is not blocked. Call it nitpicking if you will, but why not be accurate instead of creating misconception or ‘making cases’?


“FLD” is for fixture location density, and common hysteria about how it will be implemented are in serious question (more later).


One interesting discovery came up while working on this article: Small cells are small but not new, and were not developed for 5G. Small cells have long been deployed in 3G and 4G networks and have become an industry choice to deliver MMW and enable better MLB performance if needed.


Traditionally, there have been three types of small cells (more now), identified as they should be by antenna range. Some early deployments were in the US in 2007 and in the UK and Europe in 2009. “According to Small Cell Forum (who would have thought?), 18 million small cells had been deployed globally for various applications by the end of 2016.”


But haven’t we been led in a virtually deliberate way from the outset, and even continue to be, to think that 5G is small cells/MMW? Saying “5G” to indicate only these two things, or not specifying what you mean, is irresponsible, inaccurate, and misleading, as we’ll see.


A 10/8/19 bulletin from Project Censored was forwarded to me via an email group that received it from Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, director of the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley. A typically careless statement consisting of an error and a question mark says, “The telecom industry is promoting the replacement of the current cellular network, known as 4G, with a new generation of higher frequency 5G wavelengths to power the “Internet of Things…” As a generalization, this is either shameful unawareness of the current scenario or untruth/propaganda, as we’ll also see.


5G opposition also asserts that the skin’s (spiral) sweat ducts act as “receiving antennas.” This refers to an Israeli study, “The human skin as a sub-THz receiver – Does 5G pose a danger to it or not?”


Frequency ranges don’t transition abruptly, but sub-THz usually means a range of 300 GHz down to 90, which is the upper end of FCC 5Gmmw.


The study Abstract uses two unquantified terms, “sub-terahertz band” and “sub-THz region.” I think “region” is more accurate, meaning the range, or “spectrum” as understood in tech circles. “Band” is used to designate a single frequency, but also is an interval between a lower and upper frequency. For instance, a transmission between 40 and 50 MHz is a 10 MHz band (width).


Study frequencies were 75 GHz to 110 GHz. No wireless provider I’m aware of (in the US) has announced a mobile 5Gmmw service anywhere near 75 GHz. There was no explanation in the Abstract why announced commercial frequencies were not used.


Power-level exposure limits at the user end are expressed in watts per area, usually square meter or square centimeter. No such levels are provided for the targets used, but maybe that’s not relevant in this case.


The highest commercial frequency I could find being tested is in the UK (though also approved for US), is 60 GHz. At least one rural test area is reportedly using a 60 GHz “wireless mesh” (interior network of interacting antennas) for ‘super WiFi.’ Not for mobile and still not up to 75 GHz.


Interesting is that other UK rural testbeds are running unused TV bands called “TV white space” — the old VHF to UHF frequencies, mostly MHz bands. This is 5G, mind you.


However, bandwidths 71 to 76 GHz, 81 to 86 GHz and 92 to 95 GHz are available in the US for “high-density” (high power) “fixed wireless access” services: “…the operation of wireless communication devices or systems used to connect two fixed locations (e.g., building to building or tower to building) with a radio or other wireless link…”, which would have to be line-of-sight and are not for mobile.


As noted, the higher the frequency, the greater are transmission challenges, so high-density bands would be very tight beams, with minimal to no obstacles and no human exposure (watch out, pigeons). Due to excess electricity consumption, MMW signals probably won’t be power boosted sufficiently to penetrate buildings, but be brought in via cable from an external receiver, then be distributed via a wireless network.


Study conclusion: “We are raising a warning flag against the unrestricted use of sub-THz technologies for communication, before the possible consequences for public health are explored.” This seems sane enough – within the insane context called wireless telecom/WiFi. See Wireless Technology: The Plain Physics & Biophysics (needs updating).


But “unrestricted” at least suggests the impossible, that restrictions could prevent all trouble. Note also “possible consequences.” This can’t be valid for harm in general, which is a fact long understood – almost three decades before 2G came out (see History of Official Awareness).


When this warning is given, we don’t hear that the “warning flag” would apply conceptually to all G’s; presumes there is a safe dose of MLB somewhere; and, as usual, neglects the ecosystem. But — enough for protesters to say sweat ducts are “5G” antennas? Making cases? I confess I fell for this one in my early research on wireless. A more likely, but still speculative, concern is discussed in Reports of “5G” Harm.


Another common warning, “5G is a weapon,” usually refers to the military’s Active Denial System, a “non-lethal” microwave device for dispersing crowds by heating the skin. It’s a high density (power) millimeter wave at 95 GHz – hardly commercial 5Gmmw.


MMW is no more weapon than 2G-4G. Wireless telecom, beginning with 2G, is adapted stealth-weapon technology which uses very low power. The entire wireless system, not just “5G”, is a potential weapon on various levels (more below).


Also, high-enough density microwave — at a ‘lowly’ 2.5 GHz, for example — will cook you like a microwave oven (2.45 GHz). That is, through and through, unlike ADS. At commercial power levels, 5Gmmw will not.


A powerful Air Force radar system called Pave Paws at three US locations will cook you in a nanosecond at 420 to 450 MHz. Installations have two large circular arrays of antenna elements, each array radiating 580 kilowatts (!) It can detect a basketball at 12 miles, and small planes caught in the beam have blown up. So don’t swallow the rhetoric about telecom MMW weaponry.


I was unable to find a range of ADS power output, but did find a military “directed energy” study calling out 75 milliwatts per square centimeter (75 mW/cm2) at 94 GHz (see Reports of Harm). ADS power is adjustable, however, enough to be used as a lethal weapon. But – ‘making cases’ again?


Microwave ovens operate from 600 to 1200 watts. By comparison, maximum output of traditional cell towers is 10 watts – phones, 2 watts. The higher frequency/shorter wavelength was chosen for ADS to limit penetration depth. Not saying that’s a good thing, not to mention it’s misleading (see Reports of Harm).


Finding a wattage output figure for new, 5G MLB or MMW antennas proved fruitlessly time consuming (anyone?), but I did find a study establishing a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for a particular 5Gmmw antenna design for 28 and 38 GHz.


SAR is an expression of how much radiation from a phone is absorbed over time by the body. It’s expressed in watts per kilogram (W/kg). Values were “…0.37 and 1.34 W/kg [up to] 2 W/kg. Current FCC SAR standard is 1.6W/kg. This is given just for a sense of comparison, because SAR is useless for determining the amount of radiofrequency (RF) absorption in biosystems during typical conditions of use. See Safety Testing below.


Many opposers suggest that 3G/4G/WiFi can be made reasonably safe. Others understand that impossibility, but seem too habituated and addicted to do the right thing. As noted in the Introduction, techno-humans are adept at sickening and killing themselves, poisoning the kids, and destroying environment for money, convenience and entertainment.


Safety Testing


“No ‘5G’ safety studies have been conducted or funded by the Federal Communications Commission or the telecom industry, and none is planned.” Or simply, “5G has not been tested for safety”. Or the like. No such claims provide the facts.


That the FCC and Industry openly admit this is sometimes tossed into the pot of “5G” terror, whereas, the real terror is wireless tech per se. Inherent in this ploy is the erroneous implication that 2G-4G were tested (a yes and no proposition).


In 1996, FCC adopted the standard identified as ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992. There were ‘window dressings’ in 2004, 2005, and 2010, and, like the original, covered frequencies from 3 KHz to 300 GHz, in which range MMW is included. The latest is ANSI/IEEE C95.1-2019. (Overall ‘microwave’ is considered to be 300 MHz (.3 GHz) to 300 GHz.


The Commission’s assertion that “5G” poses no risk and needs no testing is based on the fraudulent IEEE ‘testing’ it adopted in 1996 to run interference for 3G. That is, if the radiation doesn’t heat you, it can’t harm you.


This author warned of this response by FCC in February 2019 as “5G” hysteria was powering up: Could Opposition to 5G (per se) Be Ill Advised? Exposure limits worldwide are based on the ANSI/IEEE C95.1 fraud.


Peer reviewed independent science, as early as the 1950s and still going, demonstrating myriad effects at non-heating levels, brings the integrity of C95.1-1992 through 2019 into question. Was *proper* testing ever done? Instead of clarifying this, hysteria makes the blanket claim. Making cases.


The FCC discredits or merely dismisses existing science and such questions: ‘No convincing evidence exists, but we’re keeping an eye on it.’ The blatant criminality of the FCC with respect to wireless/EMF is clearly demonstrated by older historical documents (see History of Official Awareness below).


Hysteria often resorts to another ‘ploy on words’ pertaining to 2G-4G, and used even by scientists, as seen near the end of this report: “The current FCC exposure limits are outdated.” The word implies that standards were at one time valid or sufficient, when they were never any such thing, for any living thing.


“Outdated” always comes with the even more irresponsible suggestion that “safe”, “safer”, or “biologically based” exposure limits are needed, when no such thing has been demonstrated or can exist. Despite this, new limits are proposed and stubbornly called for — in spite of the consensus that no safe level has even been published for fetuses.


Apparently, that’s not of sufficient concern to call for “Stop Wireless Technology!” instead of “Stop 5G!” We’ll figure that fetus part out later.


For details on the original ‘safety’ testing – scientific fraud, that is, on which power-level exposure limits worldwide are based – see Sections Cell Phone Output and Exposure Limits for Users in the article Wireless Technology: Ultra Convenient. Endlessly Entertaining. Criminally Instigated. Terminally Pathological.


Rollouts


Major emphasis from the outset in mainstream opposition has been on millions of new, closely spaced installations nationwide, up and down ‘Your Street USA,’ due to the short range and easy block-ability of MMW. But things seem to be developing differently for now, as we’ll see. As noted, even the Industry hasn’t settled on final arrangements (pun intended).


The following synthesis is the result of wading through too many articles to give credit to any one. Some sources tell varying stories about the same thing, and even disagree with each other considerably.


So here goes: A new “5G NR” international wireless standard has been issued, specifying two frequency ranges: 5G NR bands FR1 & 5G NR bands FR2. Number one is for current bands below 6 GHz (5Gmlb), such as 600MHz, 1900MHz, and 2.5GHz; two is for MMW — mostly 24 to 40 GHz for mobile, and higher for special applications (not mobile). In the near term, public WiFi will remain separate at MLB, 2.45 GHz and 5 GHz, but Verizon, for example, is offering 5Gmmw home internet/WiFi (not mobile) in limited areas of four cities.


5G NR entails several new technologies needing only a mention at this point, including especially “MIMO” antennas for small cells and ‘beamforming’ (more later).


However, 5G NR FR1 can use the same towers as 4G, but will need new antennas. It has the same reach and penetration, but with shorter delay, while providing up to 35 percent more speed. The wireless addict’s dream. When you think about it, FR1 should really be 5G, and 5Gmmw, 6G.


Plans are also in place for deployments using the unlicensed, Citizens Broadband Radio Service 3.5 GHz band, and all key players really want in. This is MLB called 5G, mind you.


Things get a bit stickier when it comes to needing a new phone or not. Many current phones should be able to get updates to process FR1, but a new phone is needed for FR2. Generally, the “tech” advice is not to move yet, and here’s an example with Samsung’s $1300 5G Galaxy S10 being tested in Chicago (good shot of a 5Gmmw “node” here).


The “hold off” sentiment is conveyed also in this article. What it amounts to at this writing is that 5Gmmw is virtually at a “demo” stage, not full coverage and service, even in town.


Many “5G” opposers continue to use traditional 3G/4G/WiFi wireless, either knowing the danger or believing it’s safe, or will be, because they just want it. A possible motive driving hysteria?


Another possible motive for “5G” hysteria, or maybe just the effect it’s having, is to create a threat on the ground to draw resistance and to distract attention from the satellite program, a much more sinister development (see Examining Priorities below).


The disconnect about dangers brings up a story that drew wide attention at the time, especially in the UK, and one that seems to present a puzzle. It’s about the 6/26 2019 Glastonbury Festival in Pilton, Somerset County, England. It’s not strictly a “rollout” story, more a system demo/test, but a decision was announced about installing “5G” network towers on festival grounds,


Despite the fact that “Glastonbury officials [said] that move will allow festival attendees to access the Internet on their smartphones at faster speeds,” the announcement created a huge protest. In this story, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G are mentioned, but “5G” is not specified as MLB or MMW — as anything, in other words. Is this hysteria-induced negligence?


The protest article is laced with dubious statements, notably the wearingly repeated one that “5G” constitutes a “massive experiment on all species”. Even some much-admired professional associates/contacts promote this irresponsible notion. I must respectfully, but strongly, disagree, because the erroneous implication is that 2G-4G were/are not an experiment. Paradoxically, they were/are and were/are not experiments. Distinctions must be made (more below).


Confusion again: “While obviously not many festival-goers are likely to have a ‘5G’ phone by June, EE will be showing off what the network can do at its stand.” Once again, unspecified 5G. So, was the Glastonbury demo about 5Gmmw or 5Gmlb? Whatever, tickets sold out in less than 45 minutes.


The grand protest by potential attendees was both tragic and macabrely amusing: They were prepared to irradiate themselves constantly in huge numbers (up to 200,000 fans in attendance potentially using phones/smartphones), but fretted over “5G”, not even knowing it could have been their beloved 4G poison…reborn. Phone radiation is often overlooked.


Similarly, reports on the 9/21/19 protest in Bern, Switzerland clearly reflect the confusion and negligent use of “5G.” This Agence France-Presse story says, “By early July, 334 antennae (sic) stations for 5G were operational across the country, authorities have told AFP.” Boy, watch out for authorities.


Antenna location and density info aren’t revealed, but it could be urban or ‘near-urban.’ The number doesn’t seem to correspond to FLD in neighborhoods, but who knows, thanks to incomplete reporting (and perhaps misled authorities). The news reader is therefore in the dark about exactly what’s going on, but probably assumes it’s MMW. Due to… “5G” hysteria?


It’s crucial to keep in mind that all deleterious effects of EMF/RF were well understood by the wider scientific community, the UN/WHO, militaries and governments by the mid-1970s (but beginning much earlier). What was known then was later hushed in the runup to digital mobile telecom in 1991-2.


The decision was callously made long ago to put life/people at risk to have the technology (see History of Official Awareness below). Thus, the yes/no “experiment” is not whether there will be harm from telecom/WiFi microwave, but the time window in which ongoing exposure damage — across all frequencies and regardless of power level — will manifest in a cascade of widespread intractable illness.


Not to worry, though, that fate might be avoided: Ecosystem collapse could bring the house down beforehand. You might hear/see, “The 5G race is on,” meaning market competition. The race of note, though, is between ecosystem collapse and human-health collapse.


In any case, here’s some of what’s happening in ‘real’ life. The two 5G FR setups can be illustrated by looking at what just three carriers are doing: T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon. Carriers are choosing service areas for FR1, FR2 very carefully.


T-Mobile has announced a nationwide 5Gmlb rollout at 600 MHz and an undisclosed application of “28 and 39” (see video), which means some 5Gmmw, almost certainly in cities.


Sprint’s plans are to run “LTE and 5G” simultaneously in the 2.5 GHz band using “massive” MIMO (more below). Which means it’s not bothering with MMW at all (although plans a merger with T-Mobile, who is).


Mentioned earlier, Verizon’s “5G Ultra Wideband” (UWB) called “Verizon 5G Home Internet” (allegedly MMW – 5Gmmw) is being run in Houston, Indianapolis, LA and Sacramento. But it “…will also deploy 5G technology on lower frequency bands including 700 MHz-2500 MHz frequency range to cover wide area” (5Gmlb), doesn’t say where.


Sacramento seems to be the most enthusiastic victim host for wireless. Here’s a gushing PR piece about a Verizon UWB installation at one Sacramento citizen’s home, with City officials attending. It features an external receiver. Sacramento also prides itself on opening the floodgates for “Smart City” status (more later).


Verizon’s 5Gmmw, for mobile, is being offered/tested in urban areas, which could be its final destination. Santa Rosa typifies cities forestalling “5G” for precautionary reasons. Right move, very wrong reason. Ecocidal, terminally pathological 3G/4G still rages, again reflecting the danger of “5G” hysteria.


The forgoing rollouts are all being called 5G. As noted earlier, drawing most early 5G protest was, and is, the expected need for “18 million new” closely spaced fixtures nationwide. Given the above information on FR1 rollouts, there seems to be serious question about this.


A report on new Qualcomm smartphone antennas supports the foregoing. It covers four bands between 26.5GHz and 40 GHz, but also antennas for MLB: “…a four-member family of radio modules designed for larger cell 5G coverage – that is, outside the dense urban areas and indoor environments… The QPM56xx RF module family works with the Snapdragon X50 modem to work in the sub-6GHz bands…” (5Gmlb, emphasis added).


One puzzle: It’s widely held that the Internet of Things (IoT) as specific to 5Gmmw, but two Israeli Qualcomm techs seem to disagree, saying 4G can handle IoT. Propaganda? Careless chatter? Who knows. It’s safe to assume, however, they refer to the new 4G/5Gmlb.


Some opposers say MMW isn’t needed for car-to-car communication. And the attempted widespread deployment of smart utility meters on 4G WiFi supports what the Qualcomm techs say. 5Gmlb makes sense for IoT, because if IoT’s exclusive to MMW, and if that won’t be everywhere (on the ground), it trashes the concept.


I didn’t bother spending the rest of my life trying to find if/where FLD installations are occurring. Anyone who’s seen close installations in any area, please share details in Comments.


Now, if FLD is occurring outside major cities or populous areas, question arises about the purpose. One, possibility of course, is optimized 5Gmlb performance, as in the past, although this shouldn’t often be necessary, due to the large cell and penetration of MLB.


In the entrained, FLD frame of mind, I was suspicious in Wireless Technology: … (The 5G Locomotive section) of Verizon CEO Lowell McAdams’ statement in a 5/15/18 CNBC interview that antennas in your face is “…one of the myths about 5G…” I’d say he was being coy, implying MLB, and being careful not to depict 5G accurately, since 5Gmmw must have increased FLD, while 5Gmlb, not for the most part.


McAdam touted 5Gmmw for smart cities, driverless cars and virtual reality, all good reasons for planetary and health destruction. But remember, all the “Smart” out there now is WiFi, for which there is no 5Gmmw (although Verizon’s UWB Home Internet might qualify). “Smart” is the wireless tech word for monumentally stupid — and for total surveillance and centralized coordination and control of daily life. See section The Real Reason for the Wireless “Season?” in Wireless Technology: ….


None of the above means things can’t change. It’s early. The MLB rollout could be just a prelude to an FLD/MMW invasion. If MMW gets a toe-hold and no one’s coming up provably sick, and people like it, it could weaken opposition and open floodgates.




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





And there’s the question of how the many thousands of planned satellites (looking now like well more than 50,000) fit into the overall picture. Obviously, coverage comes immediately to mind, such as saturation in outlying areas? For IoT? One issue for satellites, though, is increased delay time (“latency”) due to distance. There could be a ‘division of labor’ among various services, such as ground for mobile and sats for entertainment.


(And if you’re curious to see the total-surveillance and human-control system rapidly gestating in the name of “Smart City,” public safety/benefits etc. in Sacramento, follow the the links on the Smart-City page under “Public-Private Partnership…” at bottom, especially “Projects in Progress”. (See The Real Reason for the Wireless “Season?” in Wireless Technology: …)


Note the promise of the nationwide sySTEMic programming to make kids into corporate plug-ins or hitech drones: “STEM education emphasizes the value of a rigorous, interdisciplinary approach to education, allowing students to compete and succeed in a modern global marketplace.” How many dubious assumptions, claims and buzzwords in that PR flak?


STEM promises a wondrous, prosperous, techno-shiny future. It exerts direct impact — to advantage or disaster. In the developed world, the former hasn’t begun to “justify” the sum total of the latter. Speaking of which, once a city is immersed in “smart” tech, it’s likely to become a special target of hackers. Imagine the potential chaos.)


Reports of Harm


There have been various reports of adverse effects when “5G” is turned on, almost certainly implying 5Gmmw. This would seem unlikely, virtually impossible, outside cities/populous areas.


Apparently, people see new infrastructure dense or not, or/and feel effects, and apparently assume MMW is in use, as we saw in the Bern example.


“5G” harm stories consistently report symptoms existing before anyone even heard of 5G. Long before. All reported harms I’ve seen are classic 2G-4G symptoms, and mostly of the ‘Electrohypersensitivity’ type (“EHS,” a misnomer, see Idaho story near end of this section).


Radiation/RF-level meters have been used to support claims. But RF meters don’t display frequencies, only power level within a range of frequencies. Ordinary meters, costing from around $120 to $400, top out at 8 GHz. 3G/4G mobile frequencies range from 600 megahertz to 2.5 GHz in the US, with 3.5 GHz coming. WiFi is 2.4 and 5 GHz. Recall, FCC defines 5Gmmw as 24 GHz to 90 GHz. Thus, current meters can’t read MMW.


A true 5G phone would identify MMW (and MLB at this point). Professional (very expensive) meters cover low and high ranges into the upper GHz (I found one 10 MHz to 220 GHz), but also don’t display frequencies, so all frequencies present still couldn’t be identified.


Long-term exposure, perhaps a cumulative effect, is playing into “5G” harm. Thus, if there is harm when “5G” is turned on, what’s shown by existing meters? Not understood by victims and reporters? 4G, one way or another. Hysteria-induced confusion.


One hawker claims its meter can read “5G” based on the fact that two new MLB frequencies are used for 5G (mlb). Any old meter does this. This ruse brought to you by “5G” hysteria.


Meters are interesting, but not really helpful for most people. Radiation is everywhere; no amount of exposure is safe; most bio-effects below heating are power-independent; and effects may be cumulative (see History of Official Awareness below).


A meter might come in handy for someone with outward symptoms and using some form of shielding, for example. It could be seen at what level symptoms abate – which doesn’t mean harm stops. Most likely, it’s palliation, but it can still save much grief and help people function.


We can come to cautious conclusion about the frequency present by type of effect. Known effects of MMW (a limited volume of science, though growing) differ from MLB effects long reported in the voluminous dismissed science.


MMW potentially threatens skin and eyes, but more effects are being reported, although sometimes ‘stretched.’ For example, a paper cited (in an article by a prominent scientist who must remain anonymous) to show that 5Gmmw impacts “heart rate variability” was a military directed-energy study (see Author Information) using 94 GHz at 75 milliwatts per square centimeter (75 mW/cm2). That’s essentially the “ADS” system noted earlier.


Not only is 75 mW 75 times the main FCC limit (limits vary with frequency), but 94 is a frequency higher than the upper limit of 5Gmmw defined by the FCC, and certainly wouldn’t be used in mobile applications. Making cases?


It’s not that MMW can’t create MLB effects, but it’s a bit speculative at this point. It’s possible, however “…since nerves, blood vessels and other electrically conducting structures can carry radiation-induced currents deep into the body” (see section 5G is qualitatively and quantitatively different from 4G)


Antenna technology called MIMO (pron. my-mo) has been around for about a decade now for MLB. The more recent development is “massive” MIMO, meaning many antenna elements in one enclosure for aiming (and receiving) beams of radiation. It looks to be destined for both FR1 and FR2 (a virtual necessity for MMW). As noted, Sprint will use this at for 5G at 3.5 GHz.


One question is whether massive MIMO antenna arrays themselves pose an additional threat. It’s possible they have an effect different from traditional antennas. Also, it seems one could get caught in a ‘crossfire’ of many focused beams, although being immersed in a sea of radiation hardly seems better.


In any case, aiming doesn’t necessarily mean higher power hitting you just because the beam is focused. Relaying a beam from point to point (line of sight) avoids high power output per beam, since penetration of intervening structures isn’t required.


Hysteria often warns of outrageously high power output with “5G” and “small cells.” As noted, effects occur at all levels below heating, which is why 3G/4G need to go. And it would not behoove the industry for people to suddenly be suffering heat damage.


Details of several typical news reports follow. Most demonstrate the fatal error of thinking that shutting down or moving a tower is going to make people safe or “safer” in general (of course, no one’s talking ecosystem). Three show the effect of 5G hysteria – one outrageously, and one shows a more general concern about wireless, per se.


The story of a Sacramento family alleging harm from a Verizon antenna installed near the home illustrates confusion. The first video on this page shows testimony before the Sacramento City Council, 6/25/19 – with the mayor present.


The type of antenna isn’t given. But it’s probably a MMW fixture for “5G Home Internet”. We learned from the “gushing PR piece” cited in the 5G Rollouts section that Verizon 5G UWB launched 10/1/19 in Sacramento — again with the mayor attending.


It’s strange that the testimony date precedes the stated launch date. Maybe there had to be tests prior to the grand “unveiling,” so it could have been an early “Home” antenna. Or maybe the PR announcement date was carefully chosen for whatever reason.


The opening video display screen says, “Children Sick After 4G/5G Small Cell Installation…” What does that ambiguous statement mean to the person who wrote it? To the viewer? The incident suggests harm (cold/flu symptoms) from 5Gmmw but still reinforces the importance of knowing what we mean when we say “5G” – or “4G/5G”.


The mother seems to understand the general threat of wireless (although her prepared speech commits the “outdated” faux pas), but the suggestion that “shielding” solved the illness, even though levels “are still very high” will certainly be taken officially as “correlation,” not proof or even evidence.


Typically too, she seems not to consider that power level below heating, along with antenna proximity, make little to no difference in terms of ongoing harm.


Bottom line: Which 5G is present is academic, since the pre-“5G” endgame is the same – fatal. Focus on “5G” is like fretting about a wildfire 10 miles away while your house is burning down.


One of the more outrageous opposition-induced hysterias in recent times is a story from Gateshead, a town in northern UK near the North Sea, that new LED street lights (no microwave fixtures on them, just the lights) were emitting “5G” and causing health issues. This was carelessly picked up by other outlets. No one gave a moment’s thought to the likelihood that it might be LED lights themselves.


A news report from Cincinnati clearly demonstrates that folks are in the dark about what 5G is, thanks to hysteria. And a fairly well-known one from Ripon, San Joaquin County, CA, to its credit, shows a better general awareness of wireless threat. But both demonstrate questionable thinking that shutting down or moving a tower is going to make them safe or “safer” in general (of course, no one’s talking ecosystem).


Scroll down this page to see an RT America report on Cincinnati, based on the original story. Regardless of one’s opinion of RT, this one’s a great and accurate example of common confusion, misleading information and “5G” hype sprinkled with fact.


The original story from 9/20/19 (now includes an update) is a case of “new infrastructure/hysteria,” since no one seems to have been upset by 4G wireless or its towers up to this point. It involves a tall, cylindrical “mystery tower” that “people fear” will soon be sending out “5G signals”.


The 9/27/19 update shows a video interview with a concerned nurse, a conditioned “5G-hysteria” victim lacking understanding of the wireless threat. She’ll feel safer if that nasty tall tower with the ‘unknown effects’ goes away. Will she be safer?


The tall, new-look tower with the cylindrical fixture (shown in picture and video) is clearly not the massive MIMO 5Gmmw/small-cell type shown in the 5G-phone report in the 5G Rollouts section. That was Verizon’s.


The update also says the tower is Sprint’s. As noted, Sprint’s plans are to run in the 2.5 GHz band using massive MIMO. It being a Sprint tower, it’s not MMW. The “5G” fear was an assumption driven by hysteria.


So what’s in the cylindrical fixture? Could be 4G (LTE), 5Gmlb (“5G”), WiFi as well? WiMax? One question – is it MIMO? Massive? Anyone’s guess.


The update notes that shorter, cylindrical black towers are also popping up — Verizon’s. Verizon spokesman David Weissmann confirms they’re new small cellular towers currently broadcasting 4G LTE, but convertible to future “5G” (similar to Sprint’s story?), meaning what? From what we’ve seen of Verizon, probably 5Gmlb, i.e., 4G LTE on FR1 steroids.


The San Joaquin report, from 3/12/19 also concerns a tall tower with a cylindrical fixture. But this isn’t about 5G, but about “a cell tower” being too close to an elementary school in Ripon with a ‘cluster’ of cancer victims.


“All in all, three teachers and four students have been battling various cancers since 2016,” as well as a 22-year-old former male student. Of course, those teachers and that young man ‘never’ used a wireless device, and never near that tower. Nor were they exposed to another tower or anyone else’s phone. This doesn’t seem to dawn on people.


The Ripon case is interesting. An independent expert was consulted, who contradicted official assurance that the tower tested within federal standards. He said he wouldn’t send his kids there, because kids are still developing and shouldn’t be exposed – as if they’re not exposed 24/7 anywhere a phone/tower system is working, not only from towers, but many phones as well. And does he think that once you’re “developed” it’s OK?


Sprint subsequently shut it down and agreed to relocate, guilty or not. The move was good PR, and indicates that companies and municipalities will back down – probably to avoid litigation, since that could open floodgates.


Ripon is important for two more reasons. The first is the usually overlooked threat of imminent disaster due to long-term exposure (see History of Official Awareness below). It’s well known, for example, that effects from cigarette tobacco and ionizing radiation (like a hospital X-ray), are cumulative. There’s no reason wireless radiation should be any different.


Most kids are heavily exposed in our wireless world, wherever they are – many from conception, and even before that, especially to ovarian DNA damage. This is one egregious crime of the technology.


The second reason is the bogus advice that ‘distance is your friend’ — the false argument for slow death over quicker death, or the futility of “reducing exposure.” Greater distance can even make things worse. The farther the source, the greater are reflection and refraction of signals, creating a far more chaotic condition for the body to handle. Any telecom/WiFi antenna to which any living thing is exposed is too close.


Reducing exposure comes in two forms – usually usage tips but also lower exposure limits. Despite calls for the latter, it holds mostly for heating. For non-heating effects, lower power could even increase the threat, since there’s a good chance that the closer we get to the minute power levels used by biosystems for intercellular communication, a greater confusion sets in.


With regard to usage tips, ‘weak’ and short exposures accumulate over time to engender serious disease – of course, no one’s talking ecosystem, whose damage these clever warnings for humans worsen.


The problem is that reliance on power level alone to determine safety is largely a convenience (there’s that fatal word again), not science. The reader doesn’t need to understand the following terms, just that there are several factors in play, including whether the signal is continuous or pulsed, the shape of the pulsations, the rise time, fall time and duration of the pulsations, the type and depth of modulation, the frequencies, and the bandwidth.


Try to set a “safe” exposure limit based on all that. So they keep it simple-y deadly.


A corollary is that folks claiming harm seem to think it’s for the first time. This is fatal error. There are also stories wherein people or animals affected by, say, a Smart meter, regard symptom abatement when the meter is removed as complete recovery. More fatal error. People have no way of knowing they weren’t ‘due’ anyway. By now, the reader should know why.


(Dear reader, based on what’s been shared here, see what you think of this short Verizon promo?)



An Idaho organization, ehsidaho.com, collects reports on the incidence and effects of what’s being called electrohypersensitivity, or EHS. The term is misleading, because no living thing is unaffected by the radiation, whether it manifests outwardly or not. “OES” – Overt ElectroSensitivity – is suggested.




Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




An estimated 35% of the population suffers mild to moderate symptoms, with 3% to 10% “devastating, life-altering.”


Claire Edwards, a former UN staffer, top writer and wireless activist said to me in an email that an estimated 100 million suffer ‘OES’ globally. The rest of society is virtually thumbing its nose at these unfortunate people. But they’ll also suffer if this red flag is ignored: As bad as this sensitivity is, it’s not nearly as bad, either in incidence or severity, as things could quickly and easily get.


You’ve heard of “pre-diabetes”? Call this “pre-terminal disaster.”


A Big Question


Illness caused by wireless radiation is not new or unique to it, even though there are lists and categories of issues attributed to it. In medicine, a symptom can be caused by any number of influences, and a single influence can cause various symptoms.


So a big question is, how much of today’s ongoing ecosystem decline and rampant illness – that is, defined and named prior to the wireless era – is attributable in whole or part to telecom/WiFi radiation (or even the whole radiation gamut to which we expose ourselves)?


If officials even know (doubtful), they’re not telling. I suggest no one knows (although the perpetrators might be more aware), and not that many seem even to care; but it’s almost certainly huge.


Thus even for EMF-sick users — who are much habituated, obsessed, and addicted — seeing and feeling nothing doctors (oblivious) attribute to wireless, there’s little incentive to quit 3G/4G.


But quitting 3G/4G – at the retail level – is what must be done for survival, and that’s how to beat 5G — on the ground, anyway. Allowing 4G to continue, with any level of exposure, potentiates the noted imminent effects – eco-collapse and massive *overt* health crises.


It’s going to explode, folks.


Manifesto: Anyone who understands the fatal threat but still uses wireless technology – for whatever tiring, self-involved ‘excuse’ – or for the promise of safe exposure limits and exposure reduction – is irradiating our source of life and fellow humans directly, with devices and by supporting the tower system ‘bathing’ everything 24/7. Such a user is an accessory before and during the fact to criminal behavior leading to ecocide and slow genocide. And, some researchers say, global enslavement in the technosphere (see The Real Reason for the Wireless “Season?” in Wireless Technology: …).


If we don’t stop 3G/4G, welcome all 5G. Surrender will mercifully hasten an end to the coming agony.


History of Official Awareness


Of the several historical documents acknowledging the deleterious effects of artificial electromagnetic fields denied by FCC, the definitive one for wireless tech seems to be a 1981 World Health Organization (WHO) report entitled Environmental Health Criteria: Radiofrequency and Microwaves. Biologic Effects and Health Hazards of Microwave Radiation: Proceedings on International Symposium 1973. (I’ve always thought it unfortunate and instructive that “environmental health” is not about techno-human torment of Earth, but concern about just payback for the tormentor).


The report is long, covering many aspects. It covers all telecom/WiFi frequencies, including MMW; but real-world harm for the last three decades has come, and continues from digital 2G-4G frequencies.


As forthright as the WHO publication purports to be, the Summary reveals a distressing ruthlessness. It’s all most people need to read to understand that ‘they’ knew. For reader convenience, a brief review follows.


Section 1.1.3 Biological effects in experimental animals: It has been demonstrated that low-level, long-term exposure may induce effects in the nervous, haematopoietic (production of blood cells and platelets), and immuno-competent cell systems of animals. Such effects have been reported in small animals (rodents) exposed to incident power density levels as low as 0.1-1.0 mW/cm2” (“mW” = milliwatt – one thousandth of a watt). So this is one tenth of one thousandth of a watt to one thousandth of a watt per square centimeter. FCC limit: one thousandth of a watt – 1 mW/cm2 (for frequencies 1500 MHz – 100 GHz).


“The reported effects on the nervous system include behavioural, bioelectrical, metabolic, and structural (at the cellular and subcellular levels) changes. Erythrocyte production and haemaglobin synthesis may be impaired and immunological reactivity changed.” OK so far (except for exploiting/hurting animals).


Section 1.1.6: Health risk evaluation as a basis for exposure limits: … A highly conservative approach would be to keep exposure limits close to natural background levels. However, this is not technically feasible [emphasis added]. A reasonable risk-benefit analysis has to be considered.”


Is “highly conservative” a euphemism for “safe”? And what does “close” mean? In any case, the “background level,“ called the cosmic background is 0.0000000001 – 0.000000000000001 µW/cm2 (µW = microwatt – one millionth of a watt). Thus, the higher background limit (first one) is one ten billionth of a millionth of a watt (sounds like just a few electrons to me


12

      

By B.N. Frank


People and animals have been getting sick where 5G has been turned on (see 1, 2, 3, 4).  Requests for moratoriums from doctors and scientists started in 2017.  Another one was recently submitted to President Trump.  Telecom companies have still provided NO scientific evidence that it’s even safe.  Additional 5G warnings have been issued by engineers, security experts, meteorologists, NASA, NOAA, the U.S. Navy and Department of Defense (see also 1, 2, 3, 4).  Lawsuits have been filed (see 1, 2, 3, 4).  Some cities and countries have banned it.  Regardless, it continues to be installed and turned on worldwide.


So what can you do about it?  Find an event near you to oppose this insanity.


Big Thanks to The Stop 5G International team for organizing this event.  Another Global Protest Day has already scheduled for April 25th, the weekend after Earth Day.


         



      




Activist Post reports regularly about the insidious “Race for 5G.”  For more information, visit our archives and the following websites.



5GCrisis
5G Information
The 5G Summit
Whatis5G.Info
Zero5G
Environmental Health Trust
My Street, My Choice
Physicians for Safe Technology
Scientists for Wired Tech
TelecomPowerGrab.org
Wireless Information Network

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

13

      

By Rainey Reitman


This week, prosecutors in Brazil filed a criminal complaint against Glenn Greenwald, an internationally lauded journalist best known for publishing leaked documents detailing the NSA’s mass surveillance. Greenwald’s prosecution is an attempt to use computer crime law to silence an investigative reporter who exposed deep-seated government corruption. Sadly, this isn’t the first such effort and, unless we stop this drift to criminalizing journalism, it likely won’t be the last.


Greenwald has faced a prolonged and complicated legal standoff in Brazil since he published documents showing that a federal judge in Brazil colluded with prosecutors to convict former leftist president Lula da Silva. That conviction was crucial to preventing da Silva from running in the last election, which was instrumental in Brazil’s far-right president Jair Bolsonaro successfully ascending to power. Greenwald published private chat conversations, audio recordings, videos, photos, court proceedings, and other documentation provided by an anonymous source showing, among other things, the collusion between prosecutors and the judge, who has since been appointed as Brazil’s top judicial minister.


         



      

Since those articles were published, Greenwald and his family have dealt with legal threats (including a statement from President Bolsonaro that Greenwald could “do jail time”), death threats, and homophobic persecution.


Unfortunately, legal prosecution and character attacks are familiar tools used to silence investigative journalists who expose corruption. The use of cybercrime laws to do so, however, is relatively new.  This case is garnering special international attention in part because the current charges fly in the face of a decision by the Supreme Court of Brazil last year, in which the Court preemptively halted investigations against Greenwald. That decision upheld the rights of journalists to communicate directly with their sources, and stated that Greenwald’s acts deserved constitutional protection—regardless of the content published, or its impact on government interests.


In an apparent attempt to circumvent the ruling, the charges now include “intruding computer devices.”


Around the world, cybercrime laws are notoriously hazy.  This is in part because it’s challenging to write good cybercrime laws: technology evolves quickly, our language for describing certain digital actions may be imprecise, and lawmakers may not always imagine how laws will later be interpreted. And while the laws are hazy, the penalties are often severe, which makes them a dangerously big stick in the hands of prosecutors.  Prosecutors can and do take advantage of this disconnection, abusing laws designed to target criminals who break into computers for extortion or theft to prosecute those engaged in harmless activities, or research—or, in this case, journalists communicating with their sources.


In 2018, EFF published an extensive report on the use of computer crime law to criminalize security research across the Americas. We offered guidance on how cybercrime laws could better adhere to human rights standards. That includes ensuring that malicious intent is baked into laws from the beginning (“Criminal laws should clarify the definition of malicious intent or mens rea, and avoid turning general behaviors into strict liability crimes.”). Our analysis of numerous computer crime laws in North and South America made clear that many of the current laws were dangerously vague, subject to misuse and over-prosecution of harmless acts, and could have a chilling effect on security research.


With the prosecution of Greenwald, we see how the misapplication of computer crime law can also have a chilling effect on journalism and harm the public’s right to know. Coupling the vague law with the severe penalties it contains,  charging journalists as hackers may become a uniquely powerful tool for silencing those who seek to keep the rest of us informed.






While we don’t yet know all the details of the case against Greenwald, we see no actions detailed in the criminal complaint that violate Brazilian law. Journalists routinely communicate at length with sources, and in fact must do so to ascertain the veracity of any documents. Furthermore, a Brazilian Supreme Court Justice has already declared that Greenwald’s publication of leaked messages was protected under the Brazilian Constitution.





Investigative reporters are supposed to reveal corruption and wrongdoing, even when doing so draws the ire of those in power. Few journalists in our lifetime can match Greenwald’s record for fearless reporting about government abuses of power. A free society can not only tolerate the confrontational reporting of talented journalists, but will thrive when articles that reveal and challenge those in power are regularly provided to the public. It’s a mark of tyranny to prosecute reporters who truthfully report on government corruption.


EFF stands with dozens of other civil society organizations in Brazil and across the world in calling on Brazil to uphold the rule of law and drop this political prosecution of Glenn Greenwald.


Note: Both Greenwald and I serve on the board of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, and EFF serves as counsel to the organization. Greenwald was also the recipient of EFF’s Pioneer Award in 2013.







PDF iconcoalition-letter-greenwald-charges.pdf


Why EFF Stands Against the Prosecution of Glenn Greenwald



Article source: EFF.org




Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




Rainey Reitman serves as the Chief Program Officer for EFF. She focuses on organizational development, leadership development, internal systems, and ensuring that all of EFF’s programmatic teams develop and achieve impactful strategies.


Reitman is a board member and co-founder of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, a nonprofit organization that defends and supports unique, independent, nonprofit journalistic institutions. She, along with co-founders Daniel Ellsberg, Trevor Timm, and J.P. Barlow, received the 2013 Hugh M. Hefner First Amendment Award in Journalism.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

14

      

By Tyler Durden


Summary: Here’s a glimpse of new virus-related developments that occurred overnight.



Total number of confirmed cases now 900+, 26 dead.
China restricts travel for 40+ million people as the death toll surges.
Two deaths have been reported outside Wuhan.
Some residents displaying symptoms are being turned away from hospitals.
Hospitals in Wuhan make urgent pleas for help and supplies.
Beijing orders PLA medics to assist in Wuhan treating patients
UK and US governments tell citizens to avoid outbreak zones.

* * *


         



      

Update (0820ET): Over the past few hours, health officials in Nepal have announced that a student who has returned from Wuhan has been found to carry the virus. Meanwhile, officials in India are reporting three suspected cases.


As the response to the virus overwhelms hospitals in Wuhan, the central military command of the PLA, China’s army, has ordered medical personnel based in the city of Wuhan to travel to the city’s hospitals and aid doctors and nurses struggling to keep up with the influx of cases.


The order comes as experts estimate that some 4,000 individuals may have already been infected across the country.


According to the SCMP, 40 medical officers from the city’s military hospital have already started working in the intensive care unit of Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital. The 40 officers are reported to be an advance party and the General Hospital of the People’s Liberation Army in Beijing will send more in the coming days.


Staff at the PLA hospital swore an oath earlier this week promising to do everything they can to combat the virus.


A medical practitioner who worked at the PLA General Hospital said that the hospital would send staff from its infectious disease centre to help run the new hospital and quarantine centre in Wuhan once it was ready.


Staff there held an oath-taking ceremony on Wednesday pledging they would do their utmost to win the battle against the new coronavirus.


“We all swore that we will follow the order, make sacrifices if necessary and do our jobs as required and would not be afraid to suffer or even to die,” he said. “[We were told that] we triumphed over Sars and we will win again this time.”


As we noted below, Wuhan is scrambling to build a makeshift hospital from scratch on the outskirts of the city as a quarantine and treatment center for coronavirus patients. Beijing’s ability to quickly expand capacity to treat infected individuals was said to be instrumental in the fight against SARS 17 years ago.


* * *


Asian markets closed on Friday for the Lunar New Year holiday, which officially begins on Saturday. But in China, the Communist Party leadership are scrambling to contain the virus as 13 cities in Hubei Province are now under quarantine, meaning more than 40 million Chinese will be forced to spend the holiday week at home, the South China Morning Post reports.



Health authorities reported 66 more suspected cases overnight as a result of broader criteria for people showing symptoms, bringing the total number of suspected cases to 236 as of Friday morning in Hong Kong. Among those cases, more than 100 are now in isolation. Across China, Hong Kong and Macau, authorities have closed schools and suspended the start of the new semester. Even Disneyland Shanghai has announced plans to close for the holiday.




As authorities in Beijing try to convince the world that they have the outbreak under control, researchers in the US and UK have warned that the total number of cases might be closer to 4,000, according to the New York Times.


South Korea and Japan have each confirmed their second cases, while the US worries that a second case may have been discovered in Texas. Reports that an individual is under quarantine in Sydney have also emerged, while fears about a virus case in New Jersey have already been debunked.



Though it’s slightly out of date, this map is the most up-to-date accounting of the geographic dispersion of the virus.



S&P Global Ratings has issued a statement claiming that, if the situation worsens, the outbreak could knock 1.2 percentage points off China’s GDP. Yet, as the number of cases explodes despite the travel ban, the World Health Organization is insistent that the situation hasn’t risen to the level of a global pandemic – at least not yet.



Back in Wuhan, the center of the outbreak, conditions are deteriorating rapidly. Video purportedly showing the hospital at the center of the outbreak paints a picture of widespread misery as health care workers collapse on their feet, infection rates explode even among those responsible for treating patients. Local media has also reported that there aren’t enough testing kits and medical workers available to diagnose new cases.


There have even been reports of patients showing concerning symptoms being turned away from hospitals. Nice to see that their good ol’ socialized health care system is clearly so well-prepared for such an outbreak. Desperate for money and supplies, hospitals in Wuhan have resorted to begging the government and the public for help.



In the meantime, reports claim that China’s censors are removing all frightening videos from domestic social media outlets. There have been reports of people in Shanghai and in Wuhan being herded into makeshift quarantine camps erected near hospitals around the country. In some places, authorities are scrambling to build whole new hospital wings as fast as they can. Chinese officials are scrambling to build a whole new hospital in just five days.



15

      

By Jason Bermas


Despite leaked documents and whistleblowers, there is still a near blackout on the facts that have come out about what didn’t happen in Douma, Syria.


Jason covers the latest information about this ongoing cover-up that has now reached the UN where cries of “Russian propaganda” are being heard as a means to close down legitimate inquiry.


OPCW docs HERE.


         



      


 


Support Jason:


https://www.gofundme.com/f/bermasbrig…


https://rokfin.com/JasonBermas


Bitcoin – 1HHdgXD5e1DJrDqbEGWbnvzj2eb739eVVo



Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 710