General Information

London, 21 February: A new report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) shows that both the science and policy of the climate debate are shaped and driven by an almost flawless example of classical Groupthink. Written by one of Britain’s leading newspaper columnist Christopher Booker, the report is based on research by Professor Irving Janis, the American psychologist who is famous for his theory of “Groupthink”. But as Booker explains, Janis never looked at the application of his theory outside the policy areas he was interested in: “Janis’s focus was on decision-making in the foreign policy arena. However, as soon as you look, you see that his ideas apply elsewhere. The climate debate is a case in point – all of the characteristic ‘rules’ of groupthink are there: warmist ideas can’t be tested against reality, and so to ensure they are upheld as the truth, they have to be elevated into a ‘consensus’ and anyone who challenges them must be crushed. These are precisely the features that Janis used to define Groupthink.” So just as Groupthink led to the policy disasters of Pearl Harbour, the Bay of Pigs fiasco and Johnson’s escalation of the Vietnam war, attempts to suppress serious debate of climate science and the policies that are being promoted as solutions are leading to irrational behaviour, costly policy blunders and corruption on an unprecedented scale. This will only end when groupthink eventually bumps up against reality. As Booker puts it in his conclusions: “Every South Sea Bubble ends in a crash. Every form of Groupthink eventually has its day. This is invariably what happens when human beings get carried along by the crowd, simply because they have lost the urge or ability to think for themselves.” Download the report from https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploa.

https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2018/02/Groupthink.pdf

It is important to know which areas have already gone live with 5G, which areas are planning to go live and which have no plans as yet.

This article in July 2019, outlines all the areas involved as well as the networks involved.

BT Mobile and Sky Mobile have also confirmed that they’ll be launching a 5G service in 2019. BT Mobile piggybacks on coverage from EE, so their 5G service will be available in the same places as EE. Similarly, Sky Mobile uses O2 as their network coverage provider so you can expect them to offer 5G in the same towns and cities as O2.

5G Coverage In Major Towns & Cities

Unsurprising, it’s the UK’s largest towns and cities that are getting 5G coverage before the rest of the country.

All 15 of the UK’s largest towns and cities will receive a 5G service before the end of the year. However, due to the staggered roll-out of 5G, different 5G mobile networks will be available in each city. This is summarised in the table below:

Read on for further information about the 5G roll out in different regions of the UK.

5G Coverage: By Region

Eastern England

At the moment, 5G coverage isn’t available in the East of England. So far, EE is the only mobile network to announce a launch date for 5G in Eastern England (they’re due to launch their 5GEE service in Cambridge and Peterborough in 2020):

East Midlands

5G coverage should be available in the Eastern Midlands before the end of 2019. Both EE and Three have announced their 5G rollout plan for Derby, Leicester and Nottingham:

London

Unsurprisingly, London has been the epicentre of the UK’s 5G coverage roll out.

At the time of writing, both EE and Vodafone offer 5G coverage in London. Three will launch their 5G service in August 2019, with O2 also launching a 5G service before the end of the year.

North East England

5G coverage has currently been announced for three cities in the North East of England:

North West England

At the time of writing, 5G coverage is live in both Liverpool and Manchester.

For residents of Liverpool, 5G coverage is currently available only from Vodafone. However, both EE and Three have announced their plans to launch a 5G service in the city before the end of the year.

In Manchester, both EE and Vodafone have live 5G mobile networks, with Three aiming to launch a 5G service in the city before the end of the year.

Northern Ireland

In Northern Ireland, 5G coverage is currently available in Belfast on EE’s mobile network. O2 have also announced the roll-out of 5G coverage which should arrive in Belfast before the end of the year.

Scotland

5G coverage is currently available in Edinburgh and Glasgow (EE has coverage in Edinburgh whilst Vodafone has coverage in Glasgow). 5G coverage should also launch in Aberdeen sometime in 2020:

South East England

The following towns and cities in South East England currently have 5G coverage in the works:

South West England

In the South West of England, 5G coverage is currently live on Vodafone’s 5G network in Bristol. It should also arrive in Bournemouth and Plymouth by the end of 2019:

Wales

Both EE and Vodafone currently have a 5G mobile network live in Cardiff. By the end of the year, all four mobile networks should have a 5G network in Wales, with O2 and Three aiming to launch their 5G service in Cardiff before the end of the year.

West Midlands

At present, 5G mobile coverage is available in Birmingham on both the EE and Vodafone networks. It’s also confirmed that we’ll see a 5G service in Coventry, Stoke-on-Trent and Wolverhampton before the end of the year.

Yorkshire and the Humber

5G coverage has so far been announced for five towns and cities around Yorkshire and the Humber:

https://kenstechtips.com/index.php/5g-network-coverage

BT launched its 5G service on Friday 11th October, 2019. It launched in 20 towns and cities on day one, and – unsurprisingly since it owns EE – it  offers 5G coverage in the same places as EE.

However, it’s worth noting that these locations don’t initially have comprehensive 5G coverage. Rather, 5G will be found primarily in places with high population density.

BT has confirmed that it will be switching on 5G in 25 more towns and cities throughout the rest of 2019. Link to article: https://5g.co.uk/bt/

Moratoriums

The latest news is that a campaigner in Totnes  have persuaded local officials to declare a moratorium on installing the high-frequency network.

Is this a step forward? Well it might be If Totnes were due to have 5G coverage anytime soon! And it might be if council holding moratoriums had any force in planning law, they do not! But when you throw into the mix, the fact that the government is holding a public consultation to allow the telecom infrastructure to by pass any need for planning applications and that that consultation will end in just a few weeks, then you have to wonder why these campaigners are not advertising that fact.

We can see that 5G has already been rolled out in 25 towns and cities live, we can see that it is also planned to be rolled out in a further 89 towns and cities across the UK 2019/2020.

Yet, a council with no plans in the pipeline to roll out 5G have agreed to a moratorium which according to reports:

THE DECISION HAS NO FORCE IN PLANNING LAW?

Another report in a main stream media states:

Which begs the question: Why claim that it bans the installation of new technology at the same time reporting that a moratorium has no force in planning laws? Why claim to ban installation in an area that has no plans as yet to install the network?

When has main stream media ran stories that go against the agenda? 

Even the BBC are reporting this, the very agency that is funded by the Dept of Digital, Culture, Media and Sports, the same agency tasked with the Smart/5G roll out.

Recent Government proclamations claim they intend to remove planning restrictions for telecoms operators which will  conclude following a government consultation that is set for November 2019.

On top of that the Government is also seeking to make it easier for operators to build taller masts and related mobile infrastructure via a new consultation (here).

Mobile Planning Consultation (Permitted Development Rights)

* changing the permitted height of new masts to deliver better mobile coverage, promote mast sharing and minimise the need to build more infrastructure;

* allowing existing ground-based masts to be strengthened without prior approval to enable sites to be upgraded for 5G and for mast sharing;

* deploying radio equipment cabinets on protected and unprotected land without prior approval, excluding sites of special scientific interest; and

* allowing building-based masts nearer to roads to support 5G and increase mobile coverage.

 So, if a moratorium has no force in planning law and planning laws are set to give telecom operators ever greater powers next month, what exactly does a council with no plans in place  for 5G roll out,holding a moratorium achieve? According to the report, the campaigner claims that it sends out a  warning to ministers that they cannot bring in 5G without further research into its effects on health.

But they already have! Just not in his area? And the govt plan to give telecom even more rights next month!

The article also went on to  quote the  this campaigner who states:

 Adjunct Professor Curtis Bennett is  a radiation consultant and Chief  of Integrative Health Forum (IHFGlobal). Bennett,s core work is stopping the radiation that will kill the planet and all on it.

The Integrative Health Forum evolved in 2003 and serves professionals and associations that promote health, well-being, and EMF awareness. They host the only CME/CE-approved educational programs offering scientific knowledge about the impact of EMF on the human body.

He states:

You can NOT impose EMFs on  natural frequencies and vibrations.There is ZERO acceptable exposure.

Causation and biological plausibility linking RF EMFs to adverse health effects was found, reported and qualified for lecture for Continuing Medical Education credits required for ongoing medical licensing’

There is no making it safe.There is no acceptable absorption or dosage of electromagnetic radiation.

The   Government is  seeking to make it easier for operators to build taller masts. The claim is that there are advantages of taller masts because they’re perceived to be safer (the equipment is further away from people on the ground), can cover a much wider area and you don’t need as many smaller masts when you have one big one.

Is this not exactly what this campaigner has been given main stream media coverage to request, Safer 5G? 

Why would a local council who know that there are NO plans to roll out 5G,in their own area, agree to moratorium to which it claims to be halting the roll out? There are no plans to roll out  as yet in that area!

At the same time it is reported that the decision will have  have no force in planning law.

So if there are NO plans to roll out 5G in Totnes and a moratorium approved by Totnes council has no force in planning law, what exactly is this really all about?

And what is the actual point of councils holding moratoriums if they have no force in planning law? 

I suspect this may be a tactic for other campaigners  to follow meanwhile the govt give even more rights to telecom providers next month AND there is NO halt to 5G, it is already in  many areas.

Apart from Gateshead– which is also an area in which another so called campaigner, claims to have 5G lampposts that are targeting the Jewish population and is a co-partner in campaigning with the man from Totnes claiming to want safer 5G.

I have already exposed this fake campaigner here. https://www.vigiliae.org/mark-steele-is-controlled-opposition/

Gateshead have never had 5G nor are there any plans for it, the council even had a moan about being overlooked for funding to test it.

If anyone wants to find out if their area is using 5G, there is a simple app that you can use via your postcode. Link here. https://www.signalchecker.co.uk/?fbclid=IwAR0aPGAXJuByv3SIax1XflZK9kv8uXS_O0wyFuuQNfSHo3WSS-RZEBx1YE4

In the meantime. 

Campaigners needs to ask some questions about moratoriums and what they can actually achieve because it seems that they are being used to claim they can stop the 5G roll out when they clearly cannot! The fact that BT announced that it was rolling out 5G  on Friday 11th October, 2019. It launched in 20 towns and cities on day one, this is AFTER this campaigner claimed that the call for a moratorium sends out a message that ministers cannot roll out 5G without testing it for safety first: No, what is does is create a false sense that this action is stopping the roll out when it clearly is NOT.

Link to newspaper article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7544239/5G-campaigners-force-Devon-council-pause-installation-new-high-speed-network.html

The Government has launched a consultation on proposals to simplify planning rules for mobile infrastructure to support the roll-out of 5G across the country. Make your opinion count!

Ways to respond

While the Govt consultation states”This consultation seeks views on the principle of amending or creating new
permitted development rights to grant planning permission for the following four
proposals, and in particular, the circumstances in which it would be appropriate to:
a. enable deployment of radio housing equipment on land without requiring
prior approval, excluding on sites of special scientific interest, to support
5G deployment;

To enable deployment of 5G and to improve mobile coverage, mobile network
operators need to deploy radio equipment housing (‘equipment housing’). This can
range in size from a small cabinet to a purpose built cabin serving several
operators. It can be placed within a building, underground, on the ground or on a rooftop. The equipment is connected to antennas via feeder cables and provides
the power source. An example would be an equipment cabinet located near to a
monopole mast.

Can you see what is going on here? 

Whilst these campaigners are getting moratoriums for the local council to affect the planning applications of the 5G roll out, doing so in areas with no planned roll out, the govt is just weeks away from changing legislature to allow the roll out to proceed without the need of any planning applications at all.

Yet why are these campaigners NOT giving the links to the govt consultation on their websites or even mentioning it publicly?

Should the chair of the supposedly ‘independent’ body setting the guidelines of microwave radiation protection and also his wife – really be holding shares in the very same companies he is supposed to be regulating?  How is this not an extreme conflict of interests?

Full Article : https://communityoperatingsystem.wordpress.com/2019/09/12/how-icnirp-agnir-phe-and-a-30-year-old-political-decision-created-and-then-covered-up-a-global-public-health-scandal/?fbclid=IwAR0pjLTBUcStFXOc-FM5f6m2j