By James Heddle and Mary Beth Brangan – EON
“Unlike some countries, we do not believe we should spend the next couple of years studying what 5G should be, how it should operate, and how to allocate spectrum, based on those assumptions…. Turning innovators loose is far preferable to expecting committees and regulators to define the future.” – U.S. Federal Communications Commission former Chairman Tom Wheeler (June, 2016)
“The deployment of 5G constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law.” – International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space. (2018)
5G – A Wonderful, Wireless World… or, a Looming Global Public Health Conflagration?
“If the telecommunications industry’s plans for 5G come to fruition, no person, no animal, no bird, no insect and no plant on Earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to levels of RF radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what exists today, without any possibility of escape anywhere on the planet. These 5G plans threaten to provoke serious, irreversible effects on humans and permanent damage to all of the Earth’s ecosystems.” So begins the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space.
Creeping Telecom Coup
The attempted telecommunications industry take-over that began with the Telecommunications Act of 1996 is now nearing completion as the industry-captured Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issues ever more rules restricting the rights of local elected bodies to regulate the build-out of public health-endangering and local authority-usurping 5G wireless technology – both ground- and space-based.
September 26, 2018, the FCC voted to ‘streamline’ the process for installation of their next generation technology, 5G.
From MDSafetech.org: “Far from being mobile, this technology will depend on thousands of fixed “small cell” antennae throughout cities and residential neighborhoods, about 300 meters (~1000 feet) apart. In order to function, these short wavelength radiofrequencies (6-100 Gigahertz or GHz) will be pulsing at billions of times a second (1GHz=1 Billion cycles /sec) and will be continuously emitting radiation 24 hours a day. In a addition, a newer technology which is used in the military for early warning missile radar systems, PAVE PAWS, is incorporated into these systems called phased arrays, whereby more powerful built in “beam steering” arrays scan back and forth from tower to device and from device to tower for easier connection with an individual’s movement, similar to the missile systems. Phased arrays are also used in AM and FM radio broadcast stations and proposed for automotive radar sensing. The cell phones will operate with higher power and shielding for electrical interference but no apparent shielding for the user. There has been no premarket testing for health or environmental harm. “
[ Download PDF ] (Developed by Paige Hutson)
Contrary to widespread misconception, 5G has nothing to do with better cell phone coverage or emergency response communication. The ‘small cells’ are definitely not aimed just for personal wireless services, like phones. It’s aimed at providing the internet of things connectivity and HD video wirelessly to homes and offices. And contrary to the claim that due to being blocked by trees, buildings, etc., the ‘small’ cells must be placed very close together (every 300 meters) and adjacent to homes, businesses, schools, parks, etc., Verizon’s CEO says they’ve “busted that myth.”
“We busted the myth that foliage will shut it down. I mean that was back in the days when a pine needle would stop it. That does not happen. And these things — in the 200 feet from a home, we’re now designing the network for over 2,000 feet from transmitter to receiver, which has a huge impact on our capital need going forward. So those myths have disappeared. We’re charging ahead.” (May, 2018)
Preempting Informed Consent
Like the asbestos, pesticide, tobacco and fossil fuel industries before it, the telecom industry knew ahead of time what it was doing.
Since the ‘forties, evidence had been piling up, all pointing ‘like a forest in the wind’ – as Swedish researcher Dr. Olle Johansson, a scientist at the world-renowned Karolinska Institute put it to us in an interview – toward one direction: radio frequency radiation can cause serious biological harm to human beings and other living things.
In point of fact, it can be, and has been, weaponized – as in ‘directed energy‘ technology. For example, Raytheon’s Active Denial System (ADS), or ‘pain ray’ crowd control machine.
It raises certain questions. Such as: If RF radiation has no biological effects, how can it cause pain? Pain is the body’s signal it is being damaged. How RF can cause pain without causing damage? Eyes and skin are especially vulnerable to the millimeter waves, according to Israeli scientists.
Earthly biological life evolved in a planetary environment largely free of RF radiation. We are electromagnetic beings. Our cells and nerves communicate with nano electrical charges that are interfered with by the growing, dense, intense, 24/7, ubiquitous cloud of RF communications radiations that now envelops the planet – with more to come.
That’s why, before that mounting evidence of RF bio-effects became widely known, telecom industry lobbyists convinced the U.S. Congress and President Bill Clinton to pass and sign into law the Telecommunications Act of 1996, preemptively preventing local authorities from managing the placement of radio frequency antennas on the basis of potential public health impacts.
An apt hypothetical analogy would be that the Association of American Arsonists successfully lobbies Congress and the President to outlaw local fire prevention legislation.
Both set the stage for inevitable conflagrations.
It was only the beginning of the cell phone revolution, but the telecom marketeers must have sensed they had a potentially addicting product and they wanted no impediments to its widespread and profitable distribution.
Today, as cellphone addiction is common around the world, the incidence of cell-phone-induced cancer and other diseases is sharply increasing, and an epidemic of electromagnetic-sensitivity (EMS) shows signs of spreading through the irradiated population, the tragic implications of that preemption are becoming all too clear.
Firefighters in California have actually negotiated an agreement to block installation of 5G on Fire Stations because of health concerns. See the 5 min. video below.
ConsumerWatch: 5G Cellphone Towers Signal Renewed Concerns Over Impacts on Health – KPIX Ch 5 – Video
A Worldwide 5G Roll-Out Agenda
The Appeal’s Executive Summary goes on to explain,
“Telecommunications companies worldwide, with the support of governments, are poised within the next two years to roll out the fifth-generation wireless network (5G). This is set to deliver what is acknowledged to be unprecedented societal change on a global scale. We will have“smart” homes, “smart” businesses, “smart” highways, “smart” cities and self-driving cars. Virtually everything we own and buy, from refrigerators and washing machines to milk cartons, hairbrushes and infants’ diapers, will contain antennas and microchips and will be connected wirelessly to the Internet. Every person on Earth will have instant access to super-high-speed, low- latency wireless communications from any point on the planet, even in rainforests, mid-ocean and the Antarctic.
What is not widely acknowledged is that this will also result in unprecedented environmental change on a global scale. The planned density of radio frequency transmitters is impossible to envisage. In addition to millions of new 5G base stations on Earth and 20,000 new satellites in space, 200 billion transmitting objects, according to estimates, will be part of the Internet of Things by 2020, and one trillion objects a few years later. Commercial 5G at lower frequencies and slower speeds was deployed in Qatar, Finland and Estonia in mid-2018. The rollout of 5G at extremely high (millimeter wave) frequencies is planned to begin at the end of 2018.
Despite widespread denial, the evidence that radio frequency (RF) radiation is harmful to life is already overwhelming. The accumulated clinical evidence of sick and injured human beings, experimental evidence of damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in a wide variety of plants and animals, and epidemiological evidence that the major diseases of modern civilization—cancer, heart disease and diabetes—are in large part caused by electromagnetic pollution, forms a literature base of well over 10,000 peer-reviewed studies.”
“We know that there is a massive literature, providing a high level of scientific certainty, for each of eight pathophysiological effects caused by non-thermal microwave frequency EMF exposures. This is shown in from 12 to 35 reviews on each specific effect…providing a substantial body of evidence on the existence of each effect. Such EMFs:
- Attack our nervous systems including our brains leading to widespread neurological/neuropsychiatric effects and possibly many other effects. This nervous system attack is of great concern.
- Attack our endocrine (that is hormonal) systems. In this context, the main things that make us functionally different from single celled creatures are our nervous system and our endocrine systems – even a simple planaria worm needs both of these. Thus the consequences of the disruption of these two regulatory systems is immense, such that it is a travesty to ignore these findings.
- Produce oxidative stress and free radical damage, which have central roles in essentially all chronic diseases.
- Attack the DNA of our cells, producing single strand and double strand breaks in cellular DNA and oxidized bases in our cellular DNA. These in turn produce cancer and also mutations in germ line cells which produce mutations in future generations.
- Produce elevated levels of apoptosis (programmed cell death), events especially important in causing both neurodegenerative diseases and infertility.
- Lower male and female fertility, lower sex hormones, lower libido and increased levels of spontaneous abortion and, as already stated, attack the DNA in sperm cells.
- Produce excessive intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i and excessive calcium signaling. Attack the cells of our bodies to cause cancer. Such attacks are thought to act via 15 different mechanisms during cancer causation.
“There is also a substantial literature showing that EMFs also cause other effects including life threatening cardiac effects. In addition substantial evidence suggests EMF causation of very early onset dementias, including Alzheimer’s, digital and other types of dementias and there is evidence that EMF exposures in utero and shortly after birth can cause ADHD and autism.
“Each of these effects is produced via the main mechanism of action of microwave/lower frequency EMFs, activation of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs)….”
Preemption At Work
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA) contains the following provision: “No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.”
Though challenged all the way to the Supreme Court, the TCA stands as passed, and that clause has been interpreted to also prohibit any regulation of cell tower placement on the basis of documented human health risks. The Federal Communications Commission’s regulations of RF emission levels are decades old and are not protective of human health. Recent powerful peer-reviewed studies by the U.S. National Toxicology Project and Italy’s Ramazzini Institute show clear evidence of the same rare cancers at levels much lower than what is permitted by the FCC. (The FCC opened dockets in 2013 (ET Docket No. 13-84 and ET Docket No. 03-137) to reevaluate permitted exposure levels in light of the updated science, particularly for pregnant women and children, but has not completed it.)
Nevertheless measurement of cell tower emission levels across the country reveal that even the extremely high FCC permissible levels are often exceeded by wide margins – up to over 600 % higher!. A 2013 study by the EMR Policy Network and updated in 2014 by the Wall Street Journal found one in ten cell towers were out of compliance with FCC guidelines; the FCC says it just doesn’t have the capacity to monitor the towers. Here’s a list of studies from around the world showing increased disease, blood abnormalities, suicide rates, anxiety, cancers and death rates within a 1,200 to 1,500 ft. radius of cell towers. Remember, the wireless industry intends to install millions more along our streets.
The FCC is a poster child for the concept of a ‘captured regulatory agency,’ controlled by the very industry that it is supposed to be regulating.
Its former Chairman, Tom Wheeler was a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, then President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA), before President Obama appointed him head of the FCC.
Back in June of 2016, in an address at the National Press Club in D.C. entitled ‘The Future of Wireless: A Vision for U.S. Leadership in a 5G world,’ Wheeler clearly laid out the telecom-crafted agenda that the FCC has been following since: “Stay out of the way of technological development.”
“Rule number one” he announced, “is that the technology should drive the policy rather than the policy drive the technology.”
There should be no impediments to rolling out 5G immediately – without any testing or consideration of its potential effects – and just seeing what happens. That’s why the International Appeal cited above calls this a planetary experiment with humans as the prime test subjects.
“Unlike some countries,” he scoffed, “we do not believe we should spend the next couple of years studying what 5G should be, how it should operate, and how to allocate spectrum, based on those assumptions…the future has a way of inventing itself. Turning innovators loose is far preferable to expecting committees and regulators to define the future. We won’t wait for the standards to be first developed in the sometimes arduous standards-setting process or in a government-led activity. Instead, we will make ample spectrum available and then rely on a private sector-led process for producing technical standards best suited for those frequencies and use cases.”
The Pattern Continues
Ajit Pai, the current Chair of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), is a former attorney for Verizon who publicly jokes about being that company’s puppet.
But it’s no joke. He is.
As Simple as Ajit Pai
In Pai’s upside-down, inside-out, Orwellian world-view, being the telecom industry means never having to ask permission. Internet ‘freedom’ has been saved by abolishing net neutrality.
Beam me up, Scotty, there’s no intelligent life at the FCC.
For Pai, the Telecom Act is right up there with the Bible and the Constitution as a sacred scripture that must not be disobeyed.
“In a historic and bipartisan decision in 1996,” Pai told Hillsdale College students in Michigan, “President Clinton and a Republican Congress … made it our national policy that the Internet should be ‘unfettered by federal and state regulation.’…]W]e embraced the power of the market, not government, at that critical moment.”
Furthermore gushed Pai, “….we approved new satellite constellations orbiting lower in the Earth’s orbit. These satellites, launched by companies like SpaceX, will be used to beam high-speed Internet connections back to the Earth that are as fast as services based on land.”
Welcome to the captive FCC’s wiz-bang, wonderful, regulation-free, 5G-fried world.
Pai’s FCC issued a ruling Sept. 26, 2018 that strips regulatory authority from local elected authorities over deployment of 5G wireless radio-frequency technology.
There are two vital issues involved here: democratic choice and the public good. Or, more specifically, abrogation of local elected authority and endangerment of public health and safety.
Caught flat-footed – and largely uninformed – by this telecom onslaught, city and county officials and their attorneys around the country are playing catch-up, rushing to explore what legislative measures they can take within the existing preemptive constraints.
Others are choosing to pro-actively question the legality of those pre-emptive constraints and saying, “We do not acquiesce.”
They are acting with the Legal Principle of Acquiescence in mind: ‘conduct recognizing the existence of a transaction and intended to permit the transaction to be carried into effect; a tacit agreement; consent inferred from silence. The doctrine infers a form of “permission” that results from silence or passiveness over an extended period of time.’
The U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) said in a statement that it would sue the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) if the commission does not change a proposed policy that would preempt local control in a bid to streamline installation of 5G wireless infrastructure.
The National Association of Counties is also opposing the proposal. The group told POLITICO it would “effectively prevent local governments from properly examining the impact that construction, modification or installation of broadcasting facilities may have on public health, safety and welfare of the local community.”
Cities, counties and states are balking at what they say would cede local control. In a statement, USCM CEO Tom Cochran said the “unprecedented federal intrusion” would “have substantial adverse impacts on cities and their taxpayers, including reduced funding for essential local government services, as well as an increased risk of right-of-way and other public safety hazards.” In a letter to the FCC, California’s 9th. Congressional District Representative Jerry McNerney states that though he believes 5G would be beneficial, he advocates that FCC compromise with local concerns, otherwise, he warns, “unnecessary delays” may result from future litigation.
When the FCC approved new rules on Wednesday, Sept. 26. Commissioner Rosenworcel partially dissented, saying these new rules are overreach.
“Rosenworcel said she was all for speeding 5G deployments, but with cities and states as partners. To the degree that the item shortened the time frames for state and local reviews of small cells, she agreed with the FCC approach given that the longer time frames were designed for larger buildouts, rather than the small cells that are key to 5G.
But she said the rest of the item cuts states and localities out of the process. She said it was a case of the commission telling them which fees are permissible and which are not, what aesthetic choices they get to make, without regard for the fact that a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work.
She called it extraordinary federal overreach, and likely illegal. “I don’t believe the law permits Washington to run roughshod over state and local authority,” she said. She said she worried the inevitable lawsuits would slow deployment.
She pointed out that the National Governors Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the National Conference of State Legislatures, and others had all opposed the item. Industry stakeholder reviews were laudatory, while cities echoed their ongoing concerns. ” Read more
From SmartCitiesDive: “And from a constitutional standpoint, Rosenworcel said the FCC’s order may run afoul of the 10th Amendment, which provides for local control where the federal government is not expressly given the power to legislate on an issue.
“It comes down to this: three unelected officials on this dais are telling state and local leaders all across the country what they can and cannot do in their own backyards,” she said.”
In addition to the FCC ruling – Federal Bills push to streamline wireless 5G
From the National League of Cities:
“On June 28, Senators John Thune (R-SD) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced the Streamlining The Rapid Evolution And Modernization of Leading-Edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance Small Cell Deployment Act or STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act (S.3157). The bill is focused, much like the recent FCC rulemaking efforts, on limiting the actions local governments can take on small cell wireless facility siting in an effort to make deployments cheaper, faster, and more consistent across jurisdictions.
While the FCC’s statutory authority to take these actions is questionable and can be easily challenged in court, congressional action to limit local authority would be permanently damaging. The bill would severely limit the ability of local governments in states without preemptive state small cell laws to govern wireless siting and would complicate implementation of new small cell laws in states that have passed them.” Read more:
Grassroots Organizations oppose 5G fast-track rollout and Federal 5G bills
From Grassroots Environmental Education “A new national coalition of grassroots organizations is today calling on the Federal Communications Commission to stop the fast-track rollout of 5G infrastructure, which they say will result in the involuntary exposure of millions of Americans to dangerous levels of RF microwave radiation without their knowledge or consent.”
“Freedom of choice is a fundamental American right,” says Theodora Scarato, Executive Director of Environmental Health Trust, one of ART’s supporting organizations. “The FCC has no business ignoring the science in a decision that will force American children to be involuntarily exposed to significantly increased microwave radiation 24/7 in their own homes.” Press Release
From the wireless industry’s Smart Cities Dive report on the grassroots Coalition’s letter to the FCC: “deployment of millions of new 5G antennas in neighborhoods across America will inevitably result in some antennas being located in close proximity to homes which house families of small children. Authorizing the involuntary chronic exposure of millions of American children to RF microwave radiation without knowing — or seeking to ascertain — how their lives may be impacted is an irresponsible and inexcusable action on the part of the FCC.” Read more
Many of these dedicated folks are working to educate Congress about the dangers inherent in the rollout of wireless 5G before they vote on the bills that would give the wireless telecoms carte blanche nationally.
Americans For Responsible Technology received mention under the subheading, “The coming health scare around 5G.” “A coalition of 52 grassroots organizations called Americans for Responsible Technology this week called on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to slow 5G infrastructure deployments until we can figure out the health effects.
From Whatis5G.info: “The growing body of evidence linking exposure to RF microwave radiation with biological harm is posing a serious problem for the rollout of 5G. Will the FCC eventually look at the science and find ways to deploy 5G safely, or will we expose American citizens to a proven health hazard without properly evaluating the potential impacts on their health and safety? Make your views known to your representatives in Washington. To read the science for yourself visit,
Our Town, Our Choice! A Neighborhood Broadband Survival Guide
A team of advocates has launched Our Town, Our Choice, a Neighborhood Broadband Survival Guide at http://
The organizations refer to ’emerging science linking exposure to RF microwave radiation with serious biological harm.’”
In fact, even this article in the industry online magazine, PC Magazine, notes that many people are concerned about the safety of the new 5G technology. However, it did get its author fired. The Problem with 5G.
Why Lead With Compromise? Pro-Action vs. Preemption
Some states, cities and counties are acquiescing in the face of the telecom 5G onslaught, but others are are fighting back.
In California’s North Bay Counties of Sonoma and Marin, several cities including Petaluma, Mill Valley, San Anselmo and Ross have passed ordinance measures attempting to assert their authority to the extent possible, given the preemptive legal restrictions imposed on them. [ see MyStreetMyChoice ]
Local city and county councils are scrambling to inform themselves about both the technology and their limited legal options to manage its deployment on public property as the FCC keeps upping the pressure on behalf of the telecoms, by shortening the deadlines or ‘shot clocks’ allowed for local bodies to make their decisions.
An epicenter of that scramble is California’s Marin County, just across the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco, where both the County Board of Supervisors and various City Councils are asking, “What are our options?”
Proactive vs. Preemptive – Legislative Options
Local elected bodies are preemptively constrained by the Telecom Tyranny Act of 1996 in many important ways, but they are in no way helpless in the face of the 5G onslaught. They still have some authority to be proactive. Many are joining in on legal challenges to the FCC.
In recent weeks, several jurisdictions have passed a series of ordinances on 5G deployment. But beware! It’s all too easy for lawyers to acquiesce to the current FCC demands in order to avoid lawsuits from the telecoms. Ordinances may actually streamline 5G deployment.
First of all, determine if you already have a local Telecommunications code. It may be that it offers good protection, (though one BB&K lawyer said it may not be grandfathered in) and most probably, it won’t have provisions for the 5G technology and installation along public rights of way. If adding another ordinance specific to 5G, make sure the new ordinance increases protection and doesn’t move backwards in protection. Local authorities still have some legal room to maneuver based on the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
If we had true democratic choice and a successful educational campaign to inform about the dangers of 5G, how many people would voluntarily submit to being powerfully irradiated by RF at close range 24/7? We’re facing loss of health, property value and privacy, all for the next growth industry – wireless everything. Insects, birds, plants and trees – all will be effected.
If there’s an informed decision by the city and its residents to succumb to industry demands and deploy any 5G at all, the following would be some elements of ideal protective measures in an ordinance (not an exhaustive list):
- Prohibit from both residential and mixed-use zones and their public rights of way (use industrial zones only) Include buffer zones between zones adjacent to residences, schools, businesses, health clinics, etc.
- Setbacks from any installation to homes, schools, businesses should be at least 1,500 ft. Epidemiological studies from around the world show increased illness, suicide, and cancers within 1200 to 1500 ft. radius from cell towers. https://ehtrust.org/science/cell-towers-and-cell-antennae/compilation-of-research-studies-on-cell-tower-radiation-and-health/
- Distance between ‘small cell’ installations – minimum 1,500 to 3,000 ft. Verizon boasts transmission of 2-3,000 ft. through buildings and foliage. Why install so close to buildings then? https://www.telecompetitor.com/what-verizon-has-learned-about-fixed-5g-and-how-it-will-benefit-mobile/
- Only one carrier per pole to avoid increased fire risk from overloading on poles which is a proven cause of many wildfires ( http://www.malibutimes.com/news/article_e115f3aa-02e3-11e2-811c-0019bb2963f4.html )
- Establish an upper power output limit and make sure it’s adhered to (-75dBm is enough for 5 bars on a phone and plenty coverage to call and text. http://www.mystreetmychoice.com/press.html
- Power output and RF measurement must be done regularly by an independent contractor to ensure compliance with agreed upon standards ( Studies in 2013/2014 showed 1 in 10 macro towers exceeded FCC standards – sometimes by up to 600%). These measurements should be random. Carriers have been known to reduce power when they know when measuring is being done. (http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/-1770139.htm ; https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/one-10-cell-sites-violate-fcc-rules-aimed-at-limiting-rf-impacts-says-report)
Proactive vs. Preemptive – Technological Options
However, the good news is that this profit-driven Telecom scam is totally unnecessary, because there is an environmentally safer, radiation-free, less expensive, more secure, more energy efficient alternative to provide internet service, now needed as a basic utility, that can generate much-needed income for cities and counties: municipally-owned fiber optic networks.
So in addition to passing a proactive protective “small cell” ordinance, local bodies can establish a municipal broadband fiber network of their own to provide internet service. Cities and towns in Marin County are now working to explore fiber optic networks, spurred on by the threat of 5G. Fairfax city council is proudly taking the lead.
Hundreds of other informed communities around the country are already saying ’no’ to 5G and ‘yes’ to Muni-Fiber networks that connect directly to homes and businesses – called ‘fiber to the premises.’ This takes the load off mobile devices, which will still work fine, makes most data-heavy internet access via fiber, and therefore vastly reduces the density and intensity of invisible wireless smog.
So far, more than 750 towns in the US have decided on running their own fiber.
A report by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance provides details on this growing movement.
The Fiber Broadband Association has more information on this movement.
The in-depth white paper by Dr. Timothy Schoechle, PhD, “Re-Inventing Wires: The Future of Landlines and Networks”, is a useful public policy report on the Internet and the future of landlines and wireless networks, recently published online by the National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy (NISLAPP) in Washington, D.C.
“Beacons of Hope”
At the end of September, just ahead of a legislative deadline, California Governor Jerry Brown signed two internet-related bills into law. SB 822, spearheaded by Democratic State Senator Scott Weiner, restored net neutrality despite heavy lobbying and millions spent in opposition by the telecoms. The law’s strong language makes it the most far-reaching of its kind and is now viewed as the ‘gold standard’ model for state-level internet protections.
The California law was immediately attacked by the Federal government. Within minutes of the signing, according to State Senator Weiner, Attorney General Jeff Sessions “came out of his cave and sued California to strike down the law…claiming we don’t have the power to protect internet access.”
“Well,” the Senator tweeted, “we do. We’ll fight you and win, just like we did when you sued us on protecting immigrants.””
The other bill, AB 1999, strongly supports the establishment of municipally owned optic fiber networks.
From Muninetworks.org “While major media outlets cover news about California Governor Jerry Brown’s decision to sign the state’s network neutrality bill, we’re high-fiving his signature on AB 1999. On September 30th, Gov. Brown approved the bill that eases restrictions on state rules limiting publicly owned options for rural Internet access. The change signifies what we hope to see more of – state action empowering local communities set on improving local connectivity.” Read more
Here are some key points to consider about muni-fiber:
- Creating municipally owned and administered fiber optic networks is an elegant and efficient countermeasure to the telecom industry’s attempted over-reach by means of preemptive legislation and captive FCC’s industry-friendly rulings. This could be funded by bond measures or public/private financing and investment.
- It also bypasses purported prohibitions on the consideration of health issues, vastly reducing ambient electromagnetic pollution.
- The city leases bandwidth on its fiber network to the telecoms, providing equal access at standard prices.
- Fiber systems are the most secure, reliable and energy-efficient way to deliver data – many thousands of times more energy-efficient than streaming video data wirelessly through the air as Verizon Wireless, AT&T Mobility and others intend to do.
- Broadband fiber is also far more hacker-proof, less expensive for the end users and becomes an important source of revenue for the city budget.
- Telecoms are already laying fiber cable as the foundational infrastructure of the proposed 5G buildout. It’s a matter of taking the fiber cable to the home (Fiber to Premises, FTTP). It would cost less than $100 (estimate) to run the last 100’ of fiber into each home, precluding the need to install any 5G antennas. http://mystreetmychoice.com/press.htm
- Municipal fiber would also improve fire safety, as fiber can be powered from the head end, and doesn’t require repeaters between the head end and the home, so that if power were lost during a fire, fiber to the home would continue to work, whereas wireless would fail. 5G has nothing to do with emergency communications.
- A fiber optic network established by communities or the County and owned either publicly, or in a public/private partnership with a small private company like Sonic.net would be something to seriously explore. http://sonic.net/ Sonic is a local player and privacy advocate – unlike companies such as AT&T and Verizon who are not privacy focused.
- Fiber optic to the home delivers a much greener broadband solution. http://scientists4wiredtech.com/2017/10/gov-brown-be-smart-veto-sb649/
Public Takings and Enclosure of the Commons
The Merriam-Webster Legal Dictionary defines “the wrongful acquisition of control over property” as a ‘taking.’
Wireless telecoms and their captive agency, the FCC, assert that they have unfettered access to publicly owned and paid for light poles and the public rights-of-way, and can irradiate people in their own homes. This travesty is a continuation of the so-called ‘enclosure’ process that began in Britain in the 1750’s. In the following century, thousands of Enclosure Acts were passed converting huge swaths of shared public lands into the exclusive property of large landowners.
As the Schuacher Center for A New Economics explains, “The ‘enclosure of the commons’ is arguably one of the core dynamics of neoliberal capitalism – to collude with the state to appropriate and marketize the people’s shared resources, whether they be elements of nature, culture and information.”
It’s happened with forests, federally funded drug research given to Big Pharma, privatization of public universities, and the list goes on.
“Most recently,” the Center’s webpage continues, “we have seen the fierce attempts by telecom and cable companies to seize control over access to the Internet in order to convert that great commons into a closed marketplace. Enclosures amount to a massive theft and dispossession of common wealth for private gain.”
That makes the citizen pushback against wireless proliferation part of what the Center calls, the commons movement, which “consists of many people who are fighting the privatization and commodification of their shared wealth by the “free market.”
The wildfires that burned at least 245,000 acres across Sonoma, Napa, Mendocino and other Northern California counties in 2017 were caused by power line and equipment failures and the overloading of utility poles according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. That is a pattern that’s occurred over many years. (http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/20/local/la-me-ln-edison-admits-errors-in-malibu-fire-settles-now-top-60-million-20130520)
Cal Fire announced last June that at least a dozen wildfires in six counties were caused by the utility’s “electric power and distribution lines, conductors and the failure of power poles.”
The planned over-loading of utility and light poles with the placement of thousands of ‘small cell’ transmitters by multiple companies clearly constitutes a serious fire danger.
REALTOR® Magazine published a study showing that the presence of cell towers in a community causes a 20-30 percent drop in property values.
The study was only looking at large cell towers. The effect on property values of having ’small cell’ transmitters on poles outside homes and apartment buildings scattered throughout urban areas is predictable and is already occurring in Santa Rosa, CA. (see picture above)
The Case Against 5G
When you add up the ‘taking’ of public assets, the mountains of evidence regarding public health damage, the proven fire dangers and the destruction of property values, the case against 5G, as opposed to the case for municipal optic fiber networks, would seem crystal clear for responsible local authorities.
As a case in point, on October 3rd, the Northern California City of Fairfax Town Council voted unanimously to explore the installation of a fiber optic network, thus obviating the rationale for the local deployment of 5G.
Preemption can cut both ways.
Articles to check out: Small cell antenna opponents ask Marin supervisors to stiffen regulations – By Richard Halstead | Marin Independent Journal
The moral obligation to disobey unjust laws –
The following Letter by Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff was written to the Montgomery County Zoning Committee. Dr. Kostoff strongly admonishes the County to protect public rights even when these are in conflict with Federal law – in this case, with Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. The arguments presented in this letter are compelling and should be brought before every public official making decisions relating to the deployment of 4G/5G “small” cells.
Important Letter to Zoning Committee on Their Responsibility to Protect Public Rights and Not Hide Behind Federal Laws That Can Harm Us
Links to videos –
PUBLIC EXPOSURE: DNA, Democracy and the ‘Wireless Revolution’
Can microwaves alter our brains and DNA?
Released in 2000, the EON documentary, Public Exposure is the first – and still definitive – independently produced investigative report on this key issue: the human health dangers of Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) from cell phones & cell towers… and what we can do to protect ourselves. Broadcast nationally on LinkTV and in constant use by community groups and concerned citizens around the world, with many thousands of DVD copies sold.
Citizen Voices on 5G:
2018-0918 No “Small Cells” in Marin County Residential Areas — Part 1
2018-0918 No “Small Cells” in Marin County Residential Areas — Part 2
2018-0918 No “Small Cells” in Marin County Residential Areas — Part 3
2018-0918 No “Small Cells” in Marin County Residential Areas — Part 4
Above video excerpts thanks to Paul McGavin, MyStreetMyChoice
For the 5G technophile vision of the the future, here is a breathlessly enthusiastic promo video from Norway
6Genesis vision for 2030: Our future society is data-driven, enabled by near-instant and unlimited wireless connectivity. Developing products, services and vertical applications for the future digitised society requires a multidisciplinary approach and a re-imagining of how we create, deliver and consume data and services.
EON on Nukes and 5G Risks
Mary Beth Brangan and Jim Heddle in conversation with internationally popular progressive host and commentator Peter B Collins on their forthcoming docu-series SHUTDOWN (with preview clip); nuclear issues; and on the attempted power grab by Telecoms with dangerous 5G networks that threaten public safety, health, the environment and local control.
Links to handouts, PPTs and other resources:
Links to some movement sites:
Urge Congress on EMF Safety, FCC Must Change Exposure Guidelines for Microwave Radiation Exposure by ElectromagneticHealth.org
1. Update FCC antiquated “safety standards”
2. Repeal Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
3. Declare a moratorium on further wireless expansion
4. Establish wireless free zones