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.


Topics - administrator

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 712
31

      

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.


   

32

      

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


33

      

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.


   

34

      

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.


   

35

      

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.



36

      

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.


   

37

      

By Jon Rappoport


First, a few updates. Things are moving fast.


The Chinese government has locked down Wuhan, a city of 11 million people, owing to the “threat of the coronavirus.” There are also travel restrictions in several other Chinese cities. What does all this prove?


Answer: Nothing.


It proves the Chinese government wants to install tighter controls. It doesn’t lead to the conclusion that a coronavirus is making people sick or killing them.


During the so-called Zika Virus crisis of 2016, women in several countries were told not to get pregnant, because the virus might cause brain damage in their babies. That was a form of lockdown, too. If it were instituted for good reason, we would now be seeing massive numbers of babies all over the world born with microcephaly (smaller heads and brain damage), as the virus spreads. We aren’t seeing that. I covered the Zika story extensively, and proved it was a scientific fraud. A dud.


         



      

The measures government authorities enact do not constitute proof of a harmful virus. Otherwise, presidents and kings could write science all day long simply by issuing orders.


We are now seeing photos of “people lying in the street” in Wuhan, and perhaps other Chinese cities, so-called victims of the coronavirus. What does this prove?


Answer: Nothing.


So far, I’ve seen pictures of four or five people lying in the street or on a hospital floor. In a city of 11 million people. If this, all by itself, were proof that a new coronavirus is a killer, then Los Angeles and New York—with their homeless street populations—would have no people left.


The text of a patent for a coronavirus is circulating wide and far on the Web. What does this prove?


Answer: Nothing.


Patents for many viruses are obtained all the time. More specifically, these patents discuss ways of weakening viruses or extracting material from them for the purposes of developing vaccines. I’ve read excerpts from two different coronavirus patents, one in the US and one in the UK. They both refer to vaccine development. They aren’t, as some people assume, slam-dunk evidence that researchers are cooking up a virus in a lab or weaponizing it.


Well, here is a comforting development. The Chinese researcher, Zhong Nanshan, who “discovered the SARS virus” in 2003, is now at the forefront of pronouncements about the “new coronavirus” that is shaking up China and other parts of the world.




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!
   
   


   





His mere presence on the scene is a warning sign: take a grain of salt, try a pound.


Zhong Nanshan’s 2003 SARS “pandemic” was a dud. A WHO (World Health Organization) advisory against traveling to “infected” Toronto cost merchants in the city several billion dollars. Meanwhile, a Canadian WHO biologist, Frank Plummer, told the press he was shocked by the fact that fewer and fewer SARS patients had the virus in their bodies. Actually, “fewer and fewer,” he said, was approaching ZERO. Hoax. THE PURPORTED CAUSE OF THE DISEASE WASN’T THERE. People had ordinary flu symptoms.


What do you do when this sort of embarrassment occurs? Do you confess the whole business was a mistake or a con or a hustle? Do you own up to the fact that, when people are said to be suffering from ordinary flu symptoms, and you’re calling it a new disease with a new cause, you’re wrong and you’re very, very, very sorry? Do you point out that people who don’t have the cause of a new disease in their bodies don’t have the new disease?


Of course not. You just move ahead and pray no one notices.


When you claim the grand death total from the SARS “epidemic,” worldwide, is 800 out of seven billion, and you can’t even prove those 800 died from the “SARS virus,” do you, the World Health Organization, admit your whole program of epidemic detection is a fraud? Do you pay Toronto several billion dollars for their troubles?


Of course not. You keep calling SARS an epidemic forever. You write fake histories. You do whatever is necessary to maintain your phony reputation.


And when a new possible-maybe-could-be virus surfaces in China, now, you bring the same researcher who “discovered SARS” out of mothballs, and you put him front and center.




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample




Here’s the capper. Read carefully. The World Health Organization claims that, every year, there are between three and five million cases of ordinary run-of-the-mill flu in the world, resulting in 290,000 to 650,000 deaths. The symptoms are indistinguishable from SARS. But for some reason, they don’t declare ordinary flu an ongoing epidemic. No, they choose SARS, for which the cause is absent—and they call THAT an epidemic. It caused 800 deaths, versus 290,000-650,000 deaths.


Does this make any kind of sense? Actually, it does, if they want to: increase control over the population; condition them to expect and pray for a (watch-out TOXIC) vaccine to save them; shoot up pharmaceutical profits; scare the pants off people; induce them to willingly accept greater surveillance wherever they go; step up police and military presence; enact quarantines; hypnotize populations with the idea that they’re lifelong patients under the supervision of the medical cartel; teach “safety and security” above freedom.


Just realize how right and good and true THE AUTHORITIES are, get down on your knees and thank your lucky stars they’re here protecting the health of everyone on the planet. They’re the Church of Biological Mysticism, and they want you as a devoted member.


Amen.



(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.


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.


   

38

      

By Chris Menahan


The leftist cultural imperialists who took control of Virginia last election thanks to immigration and demographic shifts are going full steam ahead with their plan to fundamentally transform the state into a mirror image of San Francisco.



         



      

From CNN:



The Virginia state Senate voted Wednesday to advance a “red flag law” bill, one of many gun safety measures Democrats are looking to move through the state Legislature after taking control of both chambers.


The bill — SB 240, also known as an extreme risk protective order — creates a procedure for authorities, including law enforcement officers and attorneys, to apply for an emergency substantial risk order to prohibit “a person who poses a substantial risk of injury to himself or others from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm.” Under the proposal, if such an order is issued, a judge or magistrate can issue a search warrant to remove firearms from that person.


The state Senate passed the measure in a party-line vote of 21-19. It now moves to the state House of Delegates for consideration.


Jake Rubenstein, a spokesman for Virginia House Speaker Eileen Filler-Corn, said later Wednesday that the chamber “will deliver” on demands for “common sense gun violence protections.”



Rural Virginians who are being run over by these cultural imperialists should seriously take a look at seceding and joining West Virginia.



39

      

By Terry Trahan


If you’ve been watching the news in the last few days, you are sure to be aware of the Gun Rights Rally held in Richmond, VA. And, depending on which news you watch, your ideas of what happened, who attended, what the rally was about, and how it proceeded could be radically different than the person next to you at work.


On one side, it was a show of force or terrorism by ‘white nationalists’, militias, supremacists, etc…


And on the other, it was a diverse and peaceful rally to show the state government of the Commonwealth of VA to not intrude further on Constitutional Rights.


And while I definitely fall on the side of the latter, I cannot think of a better real-time example of the value of not just information, but trusting the sources, evaluating bias, and the value of collecting information from other, opposing sources and viewpoints in order to make good decisions for your survival in the urban area.



         



      
The value of good intelligence

In the USE&E approach, information and intelligence (in the military sense, not the intellectual sense) are some of the most valuable things we can have. It helps us make decisions, lets us see what may be happening in our world that we need to prepare for, and gives us a view of enemies, allies, neutral parties, resources, and other things to make our lives better.


The first rule of intelligence gathering is to listen to it all, but believe none of it until you can verify it independently. This is especially true when you are inclined to trust the source.


A popular saying in old journalism schools is: “If your mother says she loves you, verify it with three sources.” This goes double for life-saving or actionable intel. As much as you might like a radio host, you should take their information at face value until you can get it from a few different sources.


There are a few reasons why.


What is the reason for the information?

In a mass media endeavor, information is not the prime reason for a show. Advertisers are.


There is a certain alternative host that is known as the greatest water filter salesman in history, and this is for a reason. No matter what knowledge he puts out, his primary job is delivering for advertisers.


It doesn’t mean his information is wrong or right, it means you need to take it for what it is, and get other, corroborating stories that will either prove or disprove it.


Look out for willful disinformation and propaganda

The next category is watching out for willful disinformation. This is probably the most common and rampant occurrence when seeking sources. The cause is usually easy to see if you can maintain a neutral viewpoint as you are consuming the news or information.


Mostly, it is doled out as half-truths dressed up as the full truth in order to advance an agenda, make someone look good or bad, or distract you from seeing the whole picture. The worst of it plays into your biases to keep you docile, or even worse, thinking that you are doing something worthwhile when in reality, you are just being kept busy and out of the way.


A nasty side effect is that you will usually share the disinformation, thus spreading it to different people, and roping them into that loop. This takes advantage of the normal human instinct to share what we find important and helpful with those close to us.


On a smaller scale, like work, for example, most of us have experience with the coworker that will half-lie for their own benefit, file false HR grievances to sabotage the competition, or various other acts using information as a weapon. This is the same thing I was talking about above, just on a different scale.


The final category is outright propaganda used to steer a population or a person into a false belief or false action.






We can see examples of this all around us, and the mainstream media’s behavior over the last few years can be used as a model to learn about this.


Why you have to watch out for bad intel

Now, after all of that, here is why I find it important to talk about this. As mentioned above, information is a currency all it’s own. It enables us to make proper decisions and act when needed.


But there are other reasons that looking at these things is important. Time is the most valuable resource we have. We need to spend our time wisely, and wasting it on false information is dangerous. It takes our time away from things that will really help us in the world we live in and makes us waste even more time worrying about things that do not matter. Neither of these things makes our lives better or our prepping worthwhile.


Another reason is that we need to watch against being guided or steered into harmful action, or inaction that benefits others but not ourselves.


The main reason, however, is the need to make the decisions for the lives we live now, and the lives we want to live in the future. If we continuously follow rabbit trails, swallow unproven conspiracies, let media inflame and enrage us, we are not living and preparing for our lives. We are reacting to others and living for them.


In the end, prepping and surviving requires us to act in our own best interest. We cannot do that if we do not have clear sight and a calm mind. We cannot help others if we do not know what is actually happening.


We cannot make allies and find helpers if we have a false picture of who to trust or believe.


In this case, we can become our own worst enemies. We are the only ones that can deceive ourselves to the point of danger. The more information we can trust, the less we can be susceptible to fooling ourselves based on what others try to shovel us.


Be skeptical.


Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




Sometimes it is obvious that we are seeing a piece of disinformation, and sometimes it plays on a blindspot we have. Many of the false “be aware of this” viral posts on Facebook take advantage of our lack of knowledge of criminal behavior. Like the posts recently warning women about the zip tying of windshield wipers as a prelude to being abducted. If you don’t know how this actually happens, you will be worried about a false problem, and not looking for real danger signs, thus making you less safe.


In the future, I will be talking about warning networks, neighborhood networks, how to set up varying networks locally, and things to pay attention to in an urban environment to stay safe and prepared. We will also discuss various tricks of the trade and ways to get by. But none of that information will help if you cannot trust the sources you receive your information from.


Be skeptical.


Be realistic.


Trust your gut.


Be discerning.



Article source: The Organic Prepper


Terry Trahan has been a long term martial artist and teacher of personal protection, as well as an author for numerous publications. His experiences from being a gang member, enforcer, protection specialist, and bouncer have given his teachings a strong bent towards the practical. Fighting his way out of extreme poverty and some unsavory environs also gives him insight into survival and everyday life not often commented on. He can be contacted at terry.trahan at gmail.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.


   

40

      

By Indermit Gill


It will not be the intelligence of men who will run the future world, but rather an artificial intelligence programmed to create a global Scientific Dictatorship. This is the nature and future of Technocracy.


The Brookings Institution is an old-line establishment think-tank closely aligned with the Trilateral Commission that originally conceived the New International Economic Order; today this is known as Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy.


The underlying implication is that there will be a winner in AI that will rule the world. It doesn’t really matter who is controlling it, because the whole world will succumb. ⁃ TN Editor


         



      

A couple of years ago, Vladimir Putin warned Russians that the country that led in technologies using artificial intelligence will dominate the globe. He was right to be worried. Russia is now a minor player, and the race seems now to be mainly between the United States and China. But don’t count out the European Union just yet; the EU is still a fifth of the world economy, and it has underappreciated strengths. Technological leadership will require big digital investments, rapid business process innovation, and efficient tax and transfer systems. China appears to have the edge in the first, the U.S. in the second, and Western Europe in the third. One out of three won’t do, and even two out three will not be enough; whoever does all three best will dominate the rest.


We are on the cusp of colossal changes. But you don’t have to take Mr. Putin’s word for it, nor mine. This is what Erik Brynjolfsson, director of the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy and a serious student of the effects of digital technologies, says:


“This is a moment of choice and opportunity. It could be the best 10 years ahead of us that we have ever had in human history or one of the worst, because we have more power than we have ever had before.”






To understand why this is a special time, we need to know how this wave of technologies is different from the ones that came before and how it is the same. We need to know what these technologies mean for people and businesses. And we need to know what governments can do and what they’ve been doing. With my colleagues Wolfgang Fengler, Kenan Karakülah, and Ravtosh Bal, I have been trying to whittle the research of scholars such as David Autor, Erik Brynjolfsson, and Diego Comin down to its lessons for laymen. This blog utilizes the work to forecast trends during the next decade.


4 WAVES, 3 FACTS


It is useful to think of technical change as having come in four waves since the 1800s, brought about by a sequence of “general purpose technologies” (GPTs). GPTs are best described by economists as “changes that transform both household life and the ways in which firms conduct business.” The four most important GPTs of the last two centuries were the steam engine, electric power, information technology (IT), and artificial intelligence (AI).


All these GPTs inspired complementary innovations and changes in business processes. The robust and most relevant facts about technological progress have to do with its pace, prerequisites, and problems:



Technological change has been getting quicker. While the pace of invention may not have accelerated, the time between invention and implementation has been shrinking. While average implementation lags are difficult to measure precisely, it would not be a gross oversimplification to say that they have been cut in half with each GPT wave. Based on the evidence, the time between invention and widespread use was cut from about 80 years for the steam engine to 40 years for electricity, and then to about 20 years for IT (Figure 1). There are reasons to believe that the implementation lag for AI-related technologies will be about 10 years. With technological change speeding up and first-mover advantages as big as they have always been, the need for large and coordinated investments is growing.
Leapfrogging is practically impossible. While a special purpose technology such as landline telephones can be skipped in favor of a new technology that does the same thing such as, say, mobile phones, it is difficult for countries to leapfrog over general purpose technologies. For a country to overtake another, it must first catch up. Technological advancement is a cumulative process. Business process innovations needed to utilize the steam engine were necessary for firms to take advantage of electric power. More obviously, electricity was a precondition for information technology. Regulations that facilitate or impede technical progress, education and infrastructure, and attitudes toward the social change that accompanies new technologies matter as much as the technologies, pointing to the need for complementary policies that shape the economy and society.
Automation is labor-share reducing, not labor displacing. While the most commonly expressed concern today is that the spread of artificial intelligence will replace workers with smart machines, the effects of earlier GPTs are better summarized as reducing the share of labor earnings in value added. But the evidence also suggests that since the 1970s, automation in relatively advanced economies has put pressure on labor earnings. Put another way, the concern should not be widespread unemployment but the fact that incomes are becoming increasingly skewed in favor of capital over labor. This means that countries that have efficient arrangements for addressing distributional concerns have an advantage over those that don’t.



American Natural Superfood - Free Sample




Read full story here…



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.


   

41

      

By MassPrivateI


Over the years, I have written about the possible dangers of firefighters carrying weapons and being trained like SWAT teams. But this latest story will leave you scratching your head and wondering what the CIA’s “Signature School” has done to America’s firefighters.


Last week the University of New Mexico (UNM) announced that they have created a Wearable Emotion Facial Recognition (WEFR) device for firefighters.


The article describes an innovative new facial-recognition algorithm formulated for use in firefighting technology. The algorithm enables computing systems to identify the emotions displayed by facial expressions with 98% accuracy.


         



      

Firefighting devices will learn, which facial expressions correspond with which emotion.


What is especially noteworthy about this technology is that it is the first facial-recognition algorithm to use semi-supervised learning – a method in which researchers essentially teach a computational network how to recognize faces. This is done by inputting both labeled images (pictures of faces which have been labeled, by a researcher, with the emotional expression they display) as well as unlabeled images into a network of computational nodes programmed with the algorithm. In time, the system actually “learns” which facial expressions correspond with which emotion.


Why do firefighters need to learn about people’s emotions and why would they depend on a device to interpret them? Last I checked humans are not automatons and polygraph machines are unreliable.


A National Science Foundation search revealed that WEFR’s will be “equipped with microphones and ambient sensors.”


Equipping firefighters with microphones and emotion/facial recognition cameras essentially turns them into Federal agents.


Would anyone like to venture a guess as to why UNM created WEFRs?


UNM claims WEFRs are for first responder safety, wink, wink, and not for the $200,000+ in grant money.


Finding an accurate facial recognition algorithm is an important facet of Martínez-Ramón’s ongoing efforts to create a wearable device that would aid firefighters during life-threatening emergencies. Facial expressions are an indispensable form of human communication; a smile or a grimace can tell us whether someone is safe and happy or scared and in pain.







I think most of us would agree that a person would be happy knowing a firefighter is not going to twist an “indispensable form of human communication” into a veiled CIA excuse to equip firefighters with facial recognition.


Why would I say that the CIA is behind turning firefighters into Federal agents?


Because in 2016, an article in the Albuquerque Business First revealed that UNM is considered the CIA’s “Signature School”.


This is the same school that helped create a $1 billion dollar full mock-up smart city in the desert complete with surveillance cameras, microphones, Bluetooth monitoring devices, license plate readers, and probably Stingray cell phone surveillance equipment.


As I mentioned in 2017, UNM has a 100% job placement rate with, wait for it… the CIA, the FBI and DHS. So why would the CIA’s “Signature School” develop wearable emotion and facial recognition cameras for firefighters? I think we all know the answer to that. UNM boasts that soon every firefighter will be equipped with a microphone, emotion and facial recognition.


The anticipated result of the Next Generation Connected and Smart Cyber Fire Fighter System grant is a complex network of devices, used by firefighters throughout the country, that employs supercomputing technology to save lives. According to the grant proposal, the finished product will use microphones, cameras, body sensors, and ambient sensors to monitor oxygen levels, potential hazards, the presence of victims, and other important indicators of scene safety.


Can you imagine an entire country of emotion/facial recognition firefighters responding to smoke or odor alarms, car accidents, medical calls, drawing a person’s blood, rescuing people trapped in elevators or aiding injured people being transported in ambulances?




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




As Vox said, firefighters do a lot less firefighting; their new role is medical responders.


So the question now becomes why do we need to equip medical responders (firefighters) with the CIA’s facial and emotion recognition cameras?


Can you imagine a country filled with police facial recognition body cameras and firefighter emotion/facial recognition devices? Where does Big Brother’s need to identify everyone stop and where does Americans’ need to be left alone begin?



Top image credit


Article source: MassPrivateI Blog


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.


   

42

      

By Spiro Skouras


Do you ever wonder why the mainstream corporate media always tries to sell the public half truths, if any truth at all? Why the governments seem to only prosecute and jail members of the public and never the CEOs of companies or heads of organizations responsible for the largest and most wicked crimes?


It has long been an open secret that the banksters are the ones running the world. Governments either turn a blind eye, or are often complicit in financial criminal activity. Instead of attempting to weed out corruption, the governments often facilitate it.


The media, who is supposed to act as the watchdog to keep corruption in check, is owned and controlled by a handful of special interest groups who profit immensely due to the fact that the general public is often unaware that they are even the victims of the institutions and corporations we are indoctrinated to blindly trust.


         



      

In this interview, Spiro is joined by HSBC Whistleblower Nicholas Wilson, as Wilson exposes the ongoing crimes being committed by financial institutions to game the system and keep the world’s economy afloat.


Wilson also exposes how multiple governments and the media are not only complicit, but helping to facilitate, perhaps the world’s largest fraud in history.



Links:



‘World Economy Would Collapse’ If City of London Stopped Laundering Money, Says HSBC Whistleblower
HSBC Whistleblower Nicholas Wilson Website
Nicholas Wilson Twitter
Ketsudo
Whistleblower wins 13-year campaign against HSBC
UN Boss: Banks Only Survived The Crisis Because They Had Access To Drug Money 
Federal Reserve Admits It Pumped More than $6 Trillion to Wall Street in Recent Six Week Period 
“Too Big to Jail”: The Revolving Doors – From HSBC to the Clintons


Follow Spiro on BitChute bitchute.com/channel/spiro/ Follow on Twitter https://twitter.com/o_rips


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.


   

43

      


This is a critical update from one of the best financial commentators I know, a good friend of ours, Mr. Tom Beck, who runs PortfolioWealthGlobal.com and we’re excited to share this one with you!


The FIRST chart I’m about to show you, if you spend 15 minutes dissecting it, will lead you to understand that unless there’s a MAGIC FORMULA to continue making superior returns, we are NEAR a market event that is akin to being thrown off a raging bull.


Bank of America tracks 20 metrics, going back decades, which show whether or not stocks are expensive and overvalued.


At this point, only ONE of the twenty is not screaming BUBBLE, while a total of nineteen, or 95% of measures, are SHOUTING to beware.


         



      

Take a close look:



Courtesy: Zerohedge.com



Some of these metrics go back to the 1950s, so we’re looking at valuations from the time of the gold standard, the cold war, the Vietnam War, the oil shock, the 1990s bubble, the 2000s real estate nightmare and anything in between; this is INSANITY!


What the bulls continue saying is that the jobs market is still healthy and that there’s no incentive to be invested in commodities, since tech is where the growth is.


While that may be true, the VALUATIONS have reached such disproportion that you’re simply asking for it, if you’re not managing risk by diversifying and trimming down positions.



Courtesy: Zerohedge.com



It’s clear to see that there’s a PROBLEM with the bullish stance, then. After years of upward momentum in the employment numbers, we’re seeing the seeds of a hiring slowdown, which don’t signal the end, but forewarn that it is CLOSE BY.


Job openings plummeted by the biggest number since The Financial Crisis and just had their worst year since 2008.


The thing is that the RICH simply have an INCREDIBLE amount of wealth to deploy. As a whole, they don’t know what to do with it. The financial recovery, fueled by easy money policy, has allowed the wealthy to accumulate so much money that even after they have put all the money they’re willing to risk in the markets to work, they STILL have billions to send in the way of bond funds!



Courtesy: Zerohedge.com



While the average person is gasping for air, trying to find comfort in the fact that he even has a steady job and is able to provide for his family, the wealthy are clueless as to how to make their excess funds work for them.


That disparity will reach a boiling point in a slowdown, where the rich continue to flock to vacation spots and go out to fancy dinners and buy exotic cars, while the majority are out on the street.


If you want to point the finger, send your complaints to 33 Liberty St, New York, NY 10045, United States, where the Federal Reserve is scheming away.



Courtesy: Zerohedge.com



We are under the impression that the Federal Reserve will NOT be tightening their interest rate policy, nor shrinking their balance sheet in a material way EVER AGAIN!




Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




The world’s financial system simply cannot withstand a recession; it has become dependent on central banks and never-ending credit. It is in a DANGEROUS position.


It reminds me of the movie Speed, with Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock, where the bus had to stay over 50 MPH for the bomb not to explode.


That’s the way things are right now. You can’t slow down the bus, but you also can’t unload the passengers, since this is not a Hollywood action flick; it’s real life.


Top image: Pixabay


      
                     

ActivistPost.com absolutely loves the articles, contributed by PortfolioWealthGlobal.com


            

Of all the investment and economic commentators we're tracking, this one is, by far, part of the top echelon.


            

We read his free newsletter daily


            

In fact, he's opened-up registration to our readers, so you can subscribe to his award-winning free letter right here!


         




   
   
   

   

   
      
      
       
   
   
   




      
      
   

44

      

By Aaron Kesel


British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of the late suspected double spy Robert Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein’s accused madam, has reportedly been hacked.


According to the Daily Telegraph, Maxwell maintained a secret email server and failed to secure it.


Maxwell claims that her email server was hacked after a court unsealed approximately 2,000 pages of documents last August, according to the Daily Mail.


         



      

The extent of the breach is unknown. If emails were obtained in the hack they could showcase embarrassing information on Epstein’s clients, alleged victims, and co-conspirators in his massive sex trafficking operation.


In a newly released court document from the case of Virginia Giuffre (nee Roberts) v. Ghislaine Maxwell, the socialite’s attorneys argue for a cache of communications in the case to remain sealed. Her attorneys have said that there were “serious mistakes,” including insufficient redactions, in the August document release. One such mistake included failing to redact an email address belonging to Maxwell.


For example, it redacted a non-party’s name in one location but not another; so the media immediately gained access to that name. As another example, it redacted Ms.Maxwell’s email address (which linked to her own domain name) in one location but not another; shortly afterward hackers breached the host computer.


Maxwell stands accused of aiding Jeffrey Epstein by participating in several rape crimes by numerous female victims. Maxwell has denied all charges that she aided in the sex ring despite a plethora of evidence including victim and witness testimonies.




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!
   
   


   





It was revealed last year that Maxwell and Prince Andrew exchanged emails regarding Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre, who says she was raped by the Duke of York when she was underage and that Maxwell facilitated it.


Police have failed to act and arrest Prince Andrew despite a mountain of proof indicating his involvement. Andrew also denies all claims of his own participation in Epstein’s underage ring.


Jeffrey Epstein allegedly hung himself in August 2018—around the same time of the hack.


Since his death new evidence including burst capillaries has emerged suggesting that Epstein’s death may have in fact been murder. Dr. Michael Baden, a forensic pathologist hired by Epstein’s family, has insisted this was likely the case.




Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




Epstein’s Deutsche Bank banker Thomas Bowers killed himself by hanging a few months later. The FBI has also warned that there are credible threats to Virginia Giuffre’s life.


It is currently unknown who hacked Maxwell. Because documents and emails belonging to Maxwell have not surfaced in hacktivist circles, the hack having been perpetrated by vigilante hackers such as Anonymous is unlikely. This suggests the hack has a political or profit motive behind it (potentially blackmail or selling to the highest bidder on the dark web).



By Aaron Kesel | 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.


   

45

      

By Caitlin Johnstone


WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson gave a brief statement to the press after the latest court hearing for Julian Assange’s extradition case in London today, saying the Trump administration is arguing that the First Amendment of the US Constitution doesn’t provide press freedom protection to foreign nationals like Assange.


“We have now learned from submissions and affidavits presented by the United States to this court that they do not consider foreign nationals to have a First Amendment protection,” Hrafnsson said.


“Now let that sink in for a second,” Hrafnsson continued. “At the same time that the US government is chasing journalists all over the world, they claim they have extra-territorial reach, they have decided that all foreign journalists which include many of you here, have no protection under the First Amendment of the United States. So that goes to show the gravity of this case. This is not about Julian Assange, it’s about press freedom.”


         



      


Hrafnsson’s very newsworthy claim has as of this writing received no mainstream news media coverage at all. The video above is from independent reporter Gordon Dimmack.


This prosecutorial strategy would be very much in alignment with remarks made in 2017 by then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo.


“Julian Assange has no First Amendment freedoms. He’s sitting in an embassy in London. He’s not a U.S. citizen,” Pompeo told the Center for Strategic and International Studies.


That, like nearly every sound which emits from Pompeo’s amorphous face, was a lie. The First Amendment is not a set of special free speech privileges that the US government magnanimously bestows upon a few select individuals, it’s a limitation placed upon the US government’s ability to restrict rights that all persons everywhere are assumed to have.


This is like a sex offender who’s barred from living within 500 yards of a school claiming that the school he moved in next to is exempt because it’s full of immigrants who therefore aren’t protected by his restriction. It’s a restriction placed on the government, not a right that is given to certain people.


Attorney and Future of Freedom Foundation president Jacob Hornberger explained after Pompeo’s remarks, “As Jefferson points out, everyone, not just American citizens, is endowed with these natural, God-given rights, including life, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness. That includes people who are citizens of other countries. Citizenship has nothing to do rights that are vested in everyone by nature and God. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, that includes Julian Assange.”








Journalist Glenn Greenwald, who is himself now being legally persecuted by the same empire as Assange under an indictment which Hrafnsson in the aforementioned statement called “almost a carbon copy of the indictment against Julian Assange”, also denounced Pompeo’s 2017 remarks.


“The notion that WikiLeaks has no free press rights because Assange is a foreigner is both wrong and dangerous,” Greenwald wrote at the time. “When I worked at the Guardian, my editors were all non-Americans. Would it therefore have been constitutionally permissible for the U.S. Government to shut down that paper and imprison its editors on the ground that they enjoy no constitutional protections? Obviously not.”


Greenwald, who is a former litigation attorney, referenced a Salon article he’d written in 2010 skillfully outlining why Senator Susan Collins’ attempts to spin constitutional rights as inapplicable to foreigners would be outlandish, insane, illegal and unconstitutional to put into practice.


“To see how false this notion is that the Constitution only applies to U.S. citizens, one need do nothing more than read the Bill of Rights,” Greenwald argued in 2010. “It says nothing about ‘citizens.’  To the contrary, many of the provisions are simply restrictions on what the Government is permitted to do (‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion . . . or abridging the freedom of speech’; ‘No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner’).  And where rights are expressly vested, they are pointedly not vested in ‘citizens,’ but rather in ‘persons’ or ‘the accused’ (‘No person shall . . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law’; ‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed . . . . and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense’).”


“The U.S. Supreme Court, in 2008, issued a highly publicized opinion, in Boumediene v. Bush, which, by itself, makes clear how false is the claim that the Constitution applies only to Americans,” Greenwald wrote. “The Boumediene Court held that it was unconstitutional for the Military Commissions Act to deny habeas corpus rights to Guantanamo detainees, none of whom was an American citizen (indeed, the detainees were all foreign nationals outside of the U.S.).  If the Constitution applied only to U.S. citizens, that decision would obviously be impossible.”


“The principle that the Constitution applies not only to Americans, but also to foreigners, was hardly invented by the Court in 2008,” Greenwald added. “To the contrary, the Supreme Court — all the way back in 1886 — explicitly held this to be the case, when, in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, it overturned the criminal conviction of a Chinese citizen living in California on the ground that the law in question violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection.  In so doing, the Court explicitly rejected what Susan Collins and many others claim about the Constitution.”


These “and many others” Greenwald referred to would now include both Mike Pompeo and the Department of Justice prosecutors who are attempting to extradite and imprison Assange for publishing information exposing US war crimes.




So let’s be clear here: the Trump administration isn’t just working to establish a legal precedent which will demolish press freedoms around the world, it’s also working to change how the US Constitution operates on a very fundamental level.


Does now seem like a good time to fight against this to you? Because it sure as hell seems like that time to me.


Hrafnsson also said in this same statement that Assange’s extradition trial is going to be split into two separate dates, the first on February 24 for one week and then reconvening again for three weeks starting May 18. If you care about freedom of virtually any sort, I highly recommend paying very, very close attention.



Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, checking out my podcast on either YoutubesoundcloudApple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemit, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.


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] 4 5 ... 712