by Derek Bruce
In a landmark decision, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled that the FCC failed to consider evidence of negative health effects of wireless technology, including 5G.
On August 13, Circuit judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Rule In favor of environmental health groups and petitioners, it found that the FCC ignored thousands of public comments and evidence of the harmful harm caused by wireless technology.
The ruling comes as a result of lawsuits known as A petition for review Presented by Advocacy for Children’s Health. The CHD lawsuit was merged with a similarly filed case from the Environmental Health Trust. The two organizations alleged that the FCC violated the Administrative Procedures Act by not responding to public comments about environmental damage from radiofrequency radiation.
The groups argued that the FCC’s December 2019 decision to maintain safety limits for human exposure to radio radiation was ‘Arbitrary, capricious, not based on evidence, miscalculation’ who violated the APA. The FCC originally adopted guidelines for radio radiation in 1996. Critics of the guidelines point to and ignore the fact that the FCC’s guidelines deal only with the thermal (heating) effects of radiation. Evidence of damage from RFR at non-refractory levels. Although there is a growing body of evidence detailing the harm wireless technology causes, the FCC has not revised its guidelines or new evidence since 1996.
In 2013, the FCC requested public comment on whether the guidelines should be revised. In response, thousands of comments were submitted containing scientific evidence from researchers, clinicians and scientists, as well as citizens affected by wireless technology. Despite these comments, the FCC reaffirmed its guidelines in December 2019. Following the 2019 FCC decision, the FCC, EHT, and other organizations filed the suit. The petitioners submitted 11,000 pages of evidence of the damage caused by 5G and wireless technology being ignored by the FCC.
The Capital Circuit Court of Appeals found that the FCC failed to provide evidence to support its decision not to update the guidelines and also failed to respond to evidence submitted to the FCC. Court wrote:
“The FCC has completely failed to acknowledge, let alone respond to, comments regarding the impact of radio frequency radiation on the environment…The record contains substantial evidence of potential environmental damage.”
The court stated that the FCC’s decision not to review the evidence undermined the commission’s conclusions about the adequacy of the testing process. the The court ruled “Return the case to the Committee to provide a rationale for its decision that its guidelines adequately protect against the harmful effects of exposure to radiofrequency radiation.”
Overall, the court found that the FCC ignored many organizations, scientists, and clinicians who asked the agency to study the long-term impact of radio exposure, specifically the effects on children, wildlife, the environment, and testimonies of people injured by radio. radiation.
Scott McCullough, a communications and administrative law attorney representing CHD and EHT, described the win as “historic.”
“The FCC will have to reopen the procedure for the first time in a meaningful and responsible manner.” Huge amount of scientific and medical evidence It turns out that current guidelines do not adequately protect health and the environment,” McCullough said after the session.
Dr. stated. Devra Davis, president of the Environmental Health Fund, said the organization was “pleased” to court “It upheld the rule of law and found that the FCC should provide a reasonable record for review of the thousands of pages of scientific evidence presented by the Environmental Health Fund and many other specialized authorities in a previous identification case. No agency is above the law.”
One of the organizations that Evidence provided To the FCC in 2013 was the American Academy of Pediatrics. The AAP has called for a review of safety limits to protect children and pregnant women. Dr. Jerome Paulson, chair of the Environmental Health Council of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said he was pleased with the court’s decision that the FCC “This material should be adequately reviewed before a decision is made on new regulations for mobile phones.”
Privacy and security risks
While the lawsuits from CHD and EHT focused on health risks, there are also privacy and security risks posed by The growth of 5G wireless networks. A growing number of professionals, government agencies, civil rights attorneys, and activists are asking important questions about the safety of the future of the 5G smart city.
In April 2018, the American Civil Liberties Union released a guide detailing important questions that city officials seeking to join in the “smart city development” must ask. The directory is calledHow to prevent smart cities from turning into surveillance citiesIn January 2019, ACLU attorney Matt Cagle told me that the ACLU recommends that cities considering “smart city” technology determine whether the technology is smart or actually good for the city. .
“Why do we ask… Why do we say that? Well, that’s because you know that smart city technology can be a wolf in sheep’s clothing” Kagel male. “It could be another way for the government to collect information that they might not want to collect for law enforcement purposes but might be vulnerable to this type of use later or might not want to collect it for immigration purposes but that could potentially be vulnerable to that later.”
There are already some examples of what a smart city might look like in the coming years. In places like San Diego, there are already activists Fighting invasions of privacy Via smart, eco-friendly street lights that are always listening. As I mentioned earlier, these so-called cities, which are supported by 5G and 6G networks, have Possibility to be digital prisons from The Great Reset.
Only this week Intercept mentioned That the Biden administration’s $1.2 trillion “infrastructure bill” includes an initiative to “Advance Mobility and Revolutionize Transportation,” whereby “City and city planners will test how new data-collecting devices and vehicles can improve ‘transport efficiency and safety.’” Sponsors of the bill are particularly interested in reducing traffic, enhancing access to jobs and health care, lowering pollution, and stimulating private sector investment by working with service providers Telecommunications “.
As is often the case, smart cities are being promoted as the green wave of the future, a necessary step in the fight against climate change. Intercept Reports:
The idea of the grant program is inspired by the futuristic ‘smart city’ concept adopted by local governments at the state level and around the world – including in South Bend, Indiana, headed by Transportation Minister Pete Buttigieg – with the hope of revitalizing business, health and safety in poor, overcrowded communities. Often encouraged by big tech companies seeking lucrative contracts, the concept envisions the use of high-speed networks of shared sensor data, known as the Internet of Things, to help manage the flow of people, commerce and energy at low costs.”
Adam Schwartz, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation Intercept That measures in the invoice amount to a “A form of surveillance, often involving police, that violates privacy, deters protest in public, and often burdens people of color disproportionately.” Schwartz said that “regrettable” That bipartisan efforts will be invested “Half a billion federal dollars in these pesky surveillance technologies, without adequate privacy safeguards.”
Even with these concerns, the bill has the support of powerful politicians such as Representative Yvette Clark of New York, the second most powerful Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Clark, Intercept Notes, from proponents of smart city technology have argued that the infrastructure bill actually does not go far enough. Clark told The Intercept in an email, “We need a coordinated effort by the entire federal agency apparatus to support the adoption of smart community infrastructure and technologies that will take our societies into the 21st century.”
the Infrastructure Bill A debate is currently underway in the House of Representatives ahead of a vote expected next week.
The push for 5G-Smart City technology is clearly not going anywhere. The truth is that 5G networks, smart cities, and wireless technology in general pose a serious threat to the health and privacy of the public. With the recent victory from the Environmental Health Fund and Children’s Health Advocacy, we may see the tide begin to turn in favor of science, turning away from the corruption of regulatory agencies that Big Wireless has taken over.
Watch press conferences to win from Defending children’s health and the Environmental Health Trust Fund:
Source: The last American hobo
Derek Prouse, writer for The Last American Vagabond, is a journalist, author, public speaker, and activist. He is a co-presenter of Free Thinker Radio on 90.1 Houston, as well as the founder of The Conscious Resistance Network and The Houston Free Thinkers.