{"id":17471,"date":"2020-03-27T11:24:00","date_gmt":"2020-03-27T18:24:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/?p=17471"},"modified":"2020-03-27T12:23:21","modified_gmt":"2020-03-27T19:23:21","slug":"trump-signs-secure-5g-and-beyond-act-of-2020-despite-security-health-and-environmental-warnings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/?p=17471","title":{"rendered":"Trump Signs \u201cSecure 5G and Beyond Act of 2020\u201d Despite Security, Health, and Environmental Warnings"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\u00a0MARCH 25, 2020<\/span><\/h1>\n<\/header>\n
\n

\"\"<\/a>By B.N. Frank<\/a><\/p>\n

So this happened<\/a> on Monday:<\/p>\n

Statement by the President<\/strong><\/p>\n

Today, I have signed into law S. 893, the \u201cSecure 5G and Beyond Act of 2020\u201d<\/strong> (the \u201cAct\u201d)<\/a>.\u00a0 The Act requires the President to develop and implement a strategy for the adoption of secure wireless communications technology in the United States and abroad.\u00a0 The strategy will protect the American people from security threats to telecommunications networks and 5G technology.<\/p>\n

As part of the strategy, section 4 of the Act purports to require the President to engage in international diplomacy in order to share information and pursue policy goals specified by the Congress.\u00a0 Consistent with longstanding constitutional practice, my Administration will treat the relevant provisions of this section in a manner that does not interfere with the President\u2019s exclusive constitutional authorities with respect to foreign relations, including the President\u2019s role as the sole representative of the Nation in foreign affairs.<\/p>\n

Section 5 of the Act further purports to condition the President\u2019s authority to implement parts of the strategy upon the approval of the Federal Communications Commission.\u00a0 My understanding is that this provision does not preclude me or future Presidents from exercising our constitutional authorities as the \u201csole organ\u201d of the Nation in foreign relations and as the head of the unitary Executive Branch to ensure proper implementation of the entire strategy.<\/p>\n

DONALD J. TRUMP<\/p>\n

THE WHITE HOUSE,
\nMarch 23, 2020.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

OMG and Holy Crap!\u00a0 Warnings about 5G have come from a variety of credible sources including Department of Defense Secretary, Mark Esper.<\/p>\n

From Newsmax<\/em>, November 22, 2019:<\/a><\/p>\n

Defense Secretary Mark Esper has asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to deny a Virginia wireless company\u2019s license to provide 5G mobile broadband service out of \u201cnational security, civil service, and the economic benefit of the nation\u201d concerns.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere are too many unknowns and the risks are far too great to federal operations to allow Ligado\u2019s proposed system to proceed,\u201d Esper said in a letter Monday to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, Bloomberg News reports<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis could have a significant negative impact on military operations, both in peacetime and war.<\/p>\n

\u201cI, therefore, strongly oppose,\u201d Esper said, adding that the proposed service had \u201cthe potential for widespread disruption and degradation of GPS services\u201d that rely on signals from space.<\/p>\n

\n

Esper\u2019s letter was released Wednesday by the Pentagon, Bloomberg reports, and the FCC is not bound by the recommendation. In April 2019, Brig. Gen. Robert S. Spalding III was interviewed by The New Yorker<\/em> for an article titled, \u201cThe Terrifying Potential of 5G\u201d <\/a>and again in November by Patrick Bet-David about cybersecurity risks and increased surveillance<\/a> drastically affecting the American way-of-life:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

 <\/p>\n

Esper and Spalding are two of many security experts who have warned about cybersecurity risks from 5G (see 1<\/a>, 2<\/a>) and Internet of Things (IoT)<\/a> technology. \u00a0Other highly respected individuals and organizations<\/a> (including the U.S. Navy, NOAA and NASA) have also issued opposition for other safety issues (see 1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>).<\/p>\n

American opposition to 5G has been ongoing.\u00a0 <\/strong>Since 2018 people and animals have been getting sick where 5G has been turned on (see 1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>, 4)<\/a>. In February 2019 the telecom industry gave U.S. congressional testimony that they have NO scientific evidence<\/a> that it\u2019s safe.\u00a0 Last December \u2013 doctors, engineers, scientists, and public advocates asked President Trump for a moratorium<\/a> due to biological, environmental and safety risks.Lawsuits have been filed (see 1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>, 4<\/a>).\u00a0 A growing number of Congress members<\/a> have also expressed grave concerns and objections.<\/p>\n

Other countries have taken action though including banning 5G<\/a> and issuing moratoriums (see 1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>).\u00a0 Unfortunately, it seems Americans will continue to be guinea pigs.\u00a0 So much for \u201cmaking America great again<\/em>\u201d and \u201cgiving the country back to the people<\/em>\u201d\u2026<\/p>\n

Activist Post<\/em> reports regularly about 5G and other unsafe technology.\u00a0 For more information, visit our archives<\/a> and the following websites:<\/p>\n