1) So much money is being spent in the US on wireless internet access when a superior use of money would be to build a fiber optic cable network right to the homes. And now satellites, too. No doubt by the time the 5G grid is built, upgrades will be needed due to security and cybersecurity problems and, hopefully, due to classification of EMR as a carcinogen.
(click on photos to enlarge)
Satellites eligible for FCC’s $9 billion 5G Fund for Rural America
“The Federal Communications Commission approved the creation Oct. 27 of a 5G Fund for Rural America to distribute as much as $9 billion over the next decade to extend 5G wireless broadband connectivity to rural communities.
The FCC plans to distribute the funds through a series of reverse auctions. During the first phase, the FCC will award as much as $8 billion to extend coverage to areas without unsubsidized 4G LTE or 5G mobile broadband service. Providers serving tribal lands will be eligible to receive $680 million of the $8 billion fund, according to the FCC Report and Order approved Oct. 27.
During the second phase of the program, the FCC plans to award an additional $1 billion, along with any money not awarded during the first phase, to encourage “deployment of technologically innovative 5G networks that facilitate precision agriculture,” according to the Report and Order.
Satellite service providers who can delivery broadband service with a latency of 100 milliseconds or less will be eligible to receive funding….”
2) Dr. Devra Davis has been involved with various environmental issues her entire career, and EMR is an environmental issue about which she is deeply concerned.
BREAST CANCER IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ISSUE
“A substantial body of scientific evidence indicates that exposures to common chemicals and radiation, alone and in combination, are an important cause of breast cancer. The challenge in understanding breast cancer is considerable as the disease can arise decades after critical exposures take place. The disease may well arise from either hormonally active materials or those that directly damage DNA.”
3) We must pressure MPs regarding ISED which is allowing/encouraging more cell towers to be erected in our communities, even when the telecom ignores ISED protocol. There are so few requirements re. notification and consultation, yet when they are violated, there is no ramification. Please see another letter re. the Qualicum Beach application.
To: Ries, Bernie (IC) <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Good afternoon Mr. Ries,
I am writing to ask you to please delay your approval of the proposed Telus Tower in Qualicum Beach. I would also ask you to seriously consider cancelling the Telus application.
There are many reasons for my request, including those given by Dr. and Mrs. Dowe and Mr. Marcus Schluschen.
Firstly, in my experience and observation, Mr. Brian Gregg has continuously misled the public, and has refused to provide information about the proposed tower. Mr. Gregg misled me by presenting himself as a non-biased, independent consultant. When I asked him for information that he should have had, he refused to give it to me, although it involved me. He denied knowing things about cell towers that he should have known. He has evaded questions in many ways, most of the time, pleading ignorance. From his manipulative behaviours, I realized he was neither independent nor a consultant. He was working for Telus, and not for the people of Qualicum Beach. His unwillingness to collaborate, or consult with the people of Qualicum Beach, who will be affected by the tower, is reason to deny the tower, I believe.
Mr. Gregg, when he approached certain residents of Eaglecrest, only presented Telus’ position. As he is funded by industry, and is trained to be able to manipulate the public for Telus’ benefit, he had unfair influence.
Mr. Gregg also presented the tower, not as an option, but as a “given” when it was not, on several occasions, including asking the public which of 2 sites did they prefer.
To this day, the reason given for the tower is that some Telus customers in Eaglecrest cannot get Telus Emergency services. FEAR is a powerful motivator. These Eaglecrest residents were not informed that there were better options to Telus’s proposal, and that they could get Emergency services on their Telus phones, with 3 other providers (as determined by volunteers concerned about the tower). They could also get boosters. Most importantly, fully wired landlines are what is recommended for emergencies, by experts in this field, including the Red Cross, not cell phones.
Very importantly, I have learned that the Tower’s frequencies (signals) will be strong enough to blanket Lasqueti Island, and probably reach the Sunshine Coast. When I told a knowledgeable friend about this, he said that this tower will likely be a major tower to service other towers. The vast majority of people do not know this critical information, and its implications. THIS INFORMATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE PUBLIC. IT NEVER HAS BEEN. This kind of tower has no place close to residential areas, near places children and elderly congregate (including 4 Daycares, 2 elementary schools, a Church, senior homes), Milner Gardens, the QB Airport, major roads, farms, etc.
From interacting with Council I have observed that most of them have little knowledge about cell towers, other than what industry provides to them. Most need more information, but refused opportunities to learn more about cell towers, etc.. Two very kind and caring medical doctors, with expertise in this area, were very generously willing to meet with Council, as they have done in other localities, but they were refused by the majority on Council, probably 3-2. Most recently, Council is meeting in-camera, further obstructing democratic processes, including the processes of collaboration and consultation.
Council, to the best of my knowledge, has not considered legal liability for the tower. Have they asked their insurance company about the tower? Most insurers will not cover damages resulting from cell towers. Who is providing the insurance coverage, or will Qualicum Beach homeowners be held responsible?
The “Precautionary Principle” should be followed. People must have the information needed to give “informed consent.” There is no proof that the tower is safe. Until proven safe, it should not be constructed.
Also, the tower will likely be fitted for 5G. 5G requires significantly more energy, and emits more microwave radiation into the environment. Evidence is mounting that some of the recent serious fires could been associated with effects of this radiation on trees. To have this kind of tower in a treed residential area, is a huge risk, especially as we do not have adequate fire suppression to deal with fires of the possible magnitude.
From my observation, there has been no informed consent in order to make an informed decision about the tower. The required consultation or collaboration with the public, has neither been appropriate nor adequate.
There are many more reasons why this application should be delayed, and even cancelled.
Thank you, in advance, for your thoughtful consideration.
With best regards,
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Don’t judge each day by the harvest you reap but by the seeds that you plant.” Robert Louis Stevenson