Radio host Clyde Lewis provides an excellent overview of the grave threat 5G wireless technology poses to public health and social well being. Despite serious health concerns this all-encompassing human health experiment is being rolled out to every nook and cranny of the nation and is a colossal exercise of collective uninformed consent and continued abandonment of the “precautionary principle” that should arguably govern decisions where human health in particular is concerned.
As we noted here at MHB in 2012:
The 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment & Development adopted the precautionary principle as a rule to follow in the situations utilities and school districts find themselves in today. “Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.” In exercising the precautionary principle, public governance and regulatory bodies should “take preventive action in the face of scientific uncertainty to prevent harm. The focus is no longer on measuring or managing harm, but preventing harm.”
As Lewis explains, the 5G grid being rolled out today poses a much greater threat than its present 3 and 4G incarnations. Moreover, the technology at present alongside implementation of biometric devices and the “internet of things” will greatly accelerate corporate/government control over everyday existence, particularly for already powerful entities like Google, Amazon, and the local and regional authorities they partner with to “service” your community.
Ground Zero Media
(November 16, 2018)
A few weeks ago at The Hague in the Netherlands, many birds died spontaneously, unexplainably falling dead in a park. I guess the story may not mean anything to most people because nowadays there are reports all the time of birds dropping dead – or even whales that beach themselves. But this case was different.
It is just business as usual in the apocalypse.
At first, a few birds were dropping dead which prompted the authorities to not rule out that someone was actually poisoning them. However there were reports of 150 more dying, then 200 and then 200 plus.
In the aftermath, it was proposed that perhaps the culprit was a new 5G Mast that was hanging from the roof of a nearby train station.
Later there were also reports that some of the area geese had dropped dead. Some were not eating while others were acting erratically.
Some of them were actually putting their heads in the water until they drowned.
Now, mind you the authorities had no real proof that the new 5G mast was responsible; there was only speculation as the effects on the birds just spontaneously happened after the test of the 5G mast.
Some believe that the birds were acting differently because of the microwave pulse activity. RF radiation was tested with a peak frequency of 7.40 GHz and at the point of the test Starlings that were roosting in the trees fell dead. In total there were 297 deaths of starlings Ducks and geese.
The “test “was in connection with the Dutch railway station, to see how large the range was and whether no harmful effects would occur on and around the station.
It ought to be noted that one GHz Gigahertz is one billion oscillations of energy per second; now multiply that by 7 — it is believed that most of the birds died of heart failure.
The fact there was a 5G test going on of course is circumstantial and there are plenty of websites like Snopes that are out to debunk the story, however, it emphasizes another dynamic regarding millimeter wave safety. This indeed raises concerns about the absolute need for real scientific testing and reports about possible dangers not consensus science testing.
The Hague incident and what is called circumstantial bird death during a 5G experiment actually shows that perhaps we need more environmental impact studies, regarding 5G before it is rolled out anywhere in the world
190 scientists from 38 nations have submitted the International EMF Scientist Appeal to the United Nations, UN member states and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of risk from this rapidly increasing environmental pollutant.
The scientists who have signed the Appeal have collectively published over 2,000 peer-reviewed papers on the biological or health effects of non-ionizing radiation.
Just as any new technology claims to offer the most advanced development; that their definition of progress will cure society’s ills or make life easier by eliminating the drudgery of antiquated appliances, the WiFi Alliance was organized as a worldwide wireless network to connect ‘everyone and everything, everywhere” as it promised “improvements to nearly every aspect of daily life.”
The Alliance, which makes no pretense of potential health or environmental concerns, further proclaimed that there are “more WiFi devices than people on Earth”. It is that inescapable exposure to ubiquitous wireless technologies wherein lies the problem.
The medical and scientific data is overwhelming and irrefutable as the wireless industry, the MSM and government agencies, frequently the last to acknowledge a pervasive health problem, continue to protect the industry from widespread public awareness of the insidious effects of the latest generation of digital by-products.
Even prior to the 1997 introduction of commercially available WiFi devices which has saturated every industrialized country, EMF WiFi hotspots were everywhere. Today with the addition of cell and cordless phones and towers, broadcast antennas, smart meters, and the pervasive computer WiFi, both adults and especially vulnerable children are surrounded 24-7 by an inescapable presence with little recognition that all radiation exposure is cumulative.
Without the expansion of 5G and all its invasive algorithmic tentacles into our personal lives, intelligence gathering would be severely curtailed, without which Big Brother would be relegated to knocking on doors and handwritten notes.
Right now their reach is at the palm of your hands as we gaze aimlessly at our screens—but Big Brother wants full spectrum dominance where every human and will be connected through a microchip or electronic tattoo—and those connections would also be linked to your appliances and even the sod you have in your yard.
Thousands of tech enthusiasts all across Europe have already had microchips implanted, and now a Swedish company is working with very large global employers to implement this on the corporate level. In fact, Biohax recently told one of the biggest newspapers in the UK that they have been talking with a “major financial services firm” that has “hundreds of thousands of employees.”
Of course, once this technology starts to be implemented, there will be some workers that will object. But if it comes down to a choice between getting the implant or losing their jobs, how many workers do you think will choose to become unemployed?
We truly do live in apocalyptic times, and many of us can see where all of this is leading. Unfortunately, the agenda just keeps moving forward. I think that people don’t believe it is happening or since it doesn’t affect them directly they won’t have to worry about it.
Not too long ago, a Wisconsin-based company called Three Square Market began implanting microchips in their employees “on a voluntary basis”. In the aftermath of that decision, USA Today published an article entitled “You will get chipped — eventually”.
It appears that we will be chipped and we will be living in a “smart” neighborhood with 5G rollouts and everyone being connected to the Internet of Things.
The world’s most ambitious “smart city,” known as Quayside, in Toronto, has faced fierce public criticism since last Fall when the plans to build a neighborhood “from the internet up” were first revealed. Quayside represents a joint effort by the Canadian government agency Waterfront Toronto and Sidewalk Labs, which is owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet Inc., to develop 12 acres of the valuable waterfront just southeast of downtown Toronto.
In keeping with the utopian rhetoric that fuels the development of so much digital infrastructure, Sidewalk Labs has pitched Quayside as the solution to everything from traffic congestion and rising housing prices to environmental pollution. The proposal for Quayside includes a centralized identity management system, through which “each chipped resident accesses public services” such as library cards and health care.
An applicant for a position at Sidewalk Labs in Toronto was shocked when he was asked in an interview to imagine how, in a smart city, “voting might be different in the future.”
Other, comparatively quaint plans include driverless cars, “mixed-use” spaces that change according to the market’s demands, heated streets, and “sensor-enabled waste separation.” The eventual aim of Sidewalk Labs’ estimated billion-dollar investment is to bring these innovations to scale — first to more than 800 acres on the city’s eastern waterfront and then to the world at large.
From the start, activists, technology researchers, and some government officials have been skeptical about the idea of putting Google, or one of its sister companies, in charge of a city.
Their suspicions about turning part of Toronto into a corporate test bed were triggered, at first, by the company’s history of unethical corporate practices and surreptitious data collection.
They have since been born out by Quayside’s secret and undemocratic development process, which has been plagued by a lack of public input — what one critic has called “a colonizing experiment in surveillance capitalism attempting to bulldoze important urban, civic and political issues.” In recent months, a series of prominent resignations from advisory board members, along with organized resistance from concerned residents, have added to the growing public backlash against the project.
Now, in an effort to get ahead of Quayside’s development before it’s too late, a coalition of experts and residents have launched a Toronto Open Smart Cities Forum. The group represents the latest and largest effort by residents to start having the kinds of public conversations, teach-ins, and debates that should have taken place last year when this project was first announced.
In the United States, efforts are underway to develop smart cities and 5G grids without public input. In fact, back in September, the FCC announced that local governments are no longer allowed to restrict the deployment of small-cell wireless infrastructure sites in ways that the Federal Communications Commission considers unreasonable.
In the United States, it seems there is no public outcry over the government attempts to make smart cities mandatory.
On Sept. 26, the Federal Communications Commission placed limits on restrictions that localities can place on cell infrastructure, as well as strict and unreasonable deadlines for consideration of applications for small cells.
This move was critical for the deployment of 5G wireless communications since wireless signals for 24- and 28-gigahertz bands are very short and a significant number of new, although small, cell sites will thus need to be built.
The order also limits the fees that localities can charge for approving these small cell sites to amounts that are related to their actual costs.
This means that in some cases if not all cases the next generation of high-speed, wireless internet is a giveaway to telecommunication companies that will eventually strip government of local control.
I was more than sure that lawsuits would be filed here in the United States but so far there has not been any reports in the mainstream or anywhere else about this and the potential it has for putting people in danger and taking away their right to privacy and health safety.
The outcome of Toronto’s ability to rein in the Google affiliate has ramifications not just for Canadians, but also for the future of who controls our civic life here in America and all over the world.
Google is prepared for the onslaught of bad press if the press cares to report about it. In anticipation of the negative press, Sidewalk Labs has allocated $11 million of its initial $50 million budget to “communications, engagement, and public relations.”
Meanwhile with the smart internet of things that are coming our way it may be important to point out that with the embracing of 5G big brother comes the arrival of smart intelligence bots that will soon be able to know your mental state just by listening to your voice and sensing body movement.
Last month, Amazon was quietly issued a patent that would allow its virtual assistant, Alexa to decipher a user’s physical characteristics and emotional state based on their voice.
Characteristics, or “voice features,” like language accent, ethnic origin, emotion, gender, age, and background noise would be immediately extracted and tagged to the user’s data file to help deliver more targeted advertising.
The algorithm would also consider a customer’s physical location — based on their IP address, primary shipping address, and browser settings — to help determine their accent.
Should Amazon’s patent become a reality, or if accent detection is already possible, it would introduce questions of surveillance and privacy violations, as well as possible discriminatory advertising.
Yes, Artificial Intelligence may have racial bias in the brave new world.
The civil rights issues raised by the patent are similar to those around facial recognition, another technology Amazon has used as an anchor of its Artificial Intelligence strategy, and one that it controversially marketed to law enforcement.
Like facial recognition, voice analysis underlines how existing laws and privacy safeguards simply aren’t capable of protecting users from new categories of data collection or government spying, for that matter. Unlike facial recognition, voice analysis relies not on cameras in public spaces, but microphones inside smart speakers in our homes. It also raises its own thorny issues around advertising that targets or excludes certain groups of people based on derived characteristics like nationality, native language, and so on.
If voice-based accent detection can determine a person’s ethnic background, it opens up a new category of information that is incredibly interesting to the government—it will also spark interest for law enforcement to enact upon profiling and pre-crime analysis.
The National Security Agency had developed technology not just to record and transcribe private conversations, but also to automatically identify speakers. An individual’s “voiceprint” was created, which could be cross-referenced with millions of intercepted and recorded telephone, video, and internet calls.
To create an American citizen’s “voiceprint,” which government documents don’t explicitly indicate has been done, experts said the NSA would need only to tap into Amazon or Google’s existing voice data.
Over the past year, Amazon’s relationship with the government has become increasingly cozy. BuzzFeed recently revealed details about how the Orlando Police Department was piloting Rekognition, Amazon’s facial recognition technology, to identify “persons of interest.” A few months earlier, Amazon was outed by the ACLU for “marketing Rekognition for government surveillance.” Meanwhile, in June, the company was busy pitching Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials on its technology.
So now we know that if you have an Arabic accent you can be profiled as a potential terrorist, if you have a Spanish accent I am sure ICE would have interest in what you say and I am sure the FBI, the CIA, and NSA certainly can detect any buzzwords that would indicate that you are conservative white American that is just begging to be profiled as a white supremacist.
This is how full spectrum dominance will be implemented against you.
Weak privacy laws in the U.S. are one reason consumers are vulnerable when tech companies start gathering new types of data about them. There is nothing in the law that protects data collected about a person’s mood or accent.
This is yet a threat to your cognitive liberty – this is the way tech companies can punish you for a hate crime that you might commit or a terrorist attack that you are responsible for because of association with people who have the right accent or even tick in their voice.
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, or ECPA, first passed in 1986, was a major step forward in privacy protection at the time. But now, over 30 years later, it has yet to catch up with the pace of technological innovation. Generally, under ECPA, government agencies need a subpoena, court order, or search warrant to compel companies to disclose protected user information. Unlike court orders and search warrants, subpoenas don’t necessarily require judicial review.
All of this will take a whole lot of power and it will come with the arrival of 5G.
Now, either we will have to fight against it, or, we can envy the birds that died unexpectedly in an experiment where big propaganda budgets are being used to cover it up.