1) Cybersecurity experts have been warning that Chinese telecom equipment could jeopardize our infrastructures and security. Huawei, as far as I know, is still a partner with Telus and has not been removed from its non-5G equipment. Telus did commit to removing Huawei from its 5G equipment.
(click on photos to enlarge)
https://www.theepochtimes.com/telus-to-remove-huawei-from-its-5g-network-development_3590805.html
FCC PUBLISHES LIST OF COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES THAT POSE A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY
Names Five Chinese Manufacturers of Telecom Equipment and Services
“The list includes five Chinese companies that produce telecommunications equipment and services that have been found to pose an unacceptable risk to U.S. national security or the security and safety of U.S. persons. They include Huawei Technologies Co., ZTE Corp., Hytera Communications Corp., Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Co., and Dahua Technology Co.”
Click to access DOC-370755A1.pdf
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-370755A1.pdf
And personal devices made by Huawei are readily available and being broadly advertised. This ad is by Visions.
Spring into these Hot Huawei Deals
https://mailchi.mp/visions/03102021-huawei-sale?e=671970e6a0
2) A couple of excellent suggestions from a member in Toronto that we should try to follow to make sure our intentions are perfectly clear.
“It’s extremely important that everyone develops a habit of being more specific when mentioning the words “fiber optic” or “fiber optic cable.” Indeed, the telecom industry and its proponents do urge and support fiber optic cable and request more support for fiber optic cable because they want it to feed wireless infrastructure equipment.
I recently sent a note (see below) to a few colleagues. Please, this is important for all of us! (You’ll see that my note happened because the phrase “fibre to the premises” was used, but the reasoning is the same: saying only “fiber optic cable” is not enough, and could actually be very dangerous if, for example, a government would support more fiber optic cable that is destined to fuel wireless infrastructure equipment. It has to be clear that our requests are to install/use cables instead of installing/using wireless; (and hopefully that includes replacing wireless with cables).
– – – – – – –
Hi Everyone,
Please can all us of develop a habit of completing the thought of “fibre to the premises” — a habit even when talking amongst ourselves — so that we never neglect saying it outside ourselves? Something like: fibre to the premises without anything wireless attached to it.
Another good wording example is in the “Suspend 5G Appeal”:
“Require all telecommunications providers to provide fibre to the premises (FTTP) that can connect to wireline equipment in the premises, and to not replace existing wired telephone and Internet services with wireless;”
Which reminds me. It might be best to have a habit of saying “the Suspend 5G Appeal” because… people who would advocate for 5G, their appeal would be “the 5G Appeal.”
3) Several groups have joined in filing with the FCC for a moratorium on 5G satellites, saying that fiber optic networks (and we would want these to go to the premises and not just to a cell tower or microcell) are far preferable in many ways. Other groups predict that SpaceX will be unable to fulfill its commitments.
Critics take aim at SpaceX’s Starlink, Amazon’s Project Kuiper and other satellite constellations
“These critics cite the risk of catastrophic satellite collisions, concerns about cybersecurity and worries about environmental and health impacts — including impacts on astronomical observations and the beauties of the night sky.
Such concerns are likely to intensify as SpaceX and OneWeb add to their current fleets of satellites in low Earth orbit, and as Amazon gets set to deploy more than 3,200 satellites for its Project Kuiper broadband network. If all the plans laid out for those ventures come to pass, tens of thousands of satellites could be put into orbit over the next decade….
The latest challenge to the mega-constellations was filed today with the Federal Communications Commission. A coalition of policy groups is calling on the FCC to put a 180-day hold on further approvals for broadband data satellite deployments, in order to conduct a more thoroughgoing assessment of the risks….
In today’s filing with the FCC, the petitioners highlight optical fiber networks as their preferred route to broader broadband access. They’re not alone in expressing a fondness for fiber over satellites: Last month, the Fiber Broadband Association and NTCA – The Rural Broadband Association sent the FCC an analysis claiming that SpaceX wouldn’t be able to follow through on its commitments for $885.5 million in federal broadband subsidies.”
Letters:
From: Cecile Petra (name given with permission)
To: crdboard@crd.bc.ca, crdreception@crd.bc.ca, legserv@crd.bc.ca, ssidirector@crd.bc.ca, “colin plant” <colin.plant@saanich.ca>, “rebecca mersereau” <rebecca.mersereau@saanich.ca>, dblackwell@langford.ca, lhelps@victoria.ca, mayorscreech@viewroyal.ca, “susan brice” <susan.brice@saanich.ca>, “barb desjardins” <barb.desjardins@esquimalt.ca>, mayor@saanich.ca, directorjdf@crd.bc.ca, directorsgi@crd.bc.ca, bisitt@victoria.ca, jloveday@victoria.ca, mayor@colwood.ca, mayor@sidney.ca, mayor@oakbay.ca, gorr@northsaanich.ca, “jranns” <jranns@metchosin.ca>, sandrews@langford.ca, mtait@sooke.ca, “ned taylor” <ned.taylor@saanich.ca>, kwilliams@highlands.ca, “ryan windsor” <ryan.windsor@csaanich.ca>, gyoung@victoria.ca, “emay” <emay@magma.ca>, pluckham@islandstrust.bc.ca, lpatrick@islandstrust.bc.ca, pgrove@islandstrust.bc.ca, connectedcoast@srd.ca, info@connectedcoast.ca
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 12:11:21 PM
Subject: TELUS letter of support from the CRD – competition with Connected Coast
Dear CRD Directors,
Thanks so much to those of you who voted against the motion to write a letter of support for Telus at the March 10 CRD Director’s meeting.
The attached article (https://www.cowichanvalleycitizen.com/news/telus-looking-to-increase-wireless-service-in-north-cowichan/) demonstrates that Telus is applying to the Universal broadband Fund to access funds for providing wireless Internet to under-served communities in our region. The intention of the Connected Coast is to provide high-speed, safe and secure Internet through fiber optics to these same coastal communities.
The motion that was passed states:
“The Electoral Areas Committee recommends to the Capital Regional District Board: That the Board approve a letter of support for the TELUS application to the Universal Broadband Fund to improve cellular service in the Southern Gulf Island and Salt Spring Island Electoral Areas on condition that there is no competition with the Connected Coast grant application“.
Clearly the Telus project is in direct competition with Connected Coast for funding, and for purpose (Internet vs. Cellular service). You cannot in good conscience write Telus a letter of support.
Further – other than parts of Musgrave Landing, Salt Spring does not qualify for any funding from the Universal Broadband Fund, and funding for improved mobile (cellular) communication is available only to Indigenous communities through this grant.
I hereby request that you immediately cancel/retract the motion to support the TELUS application.
Sincerely,
Cecile Petra
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.” Mark Twain