5G: Annie Logical Disputes Mark Steele

by the Editor

The Craven Freedom has covered 5G a great deal.

From my own experience and professional knowledge, I have been able to verify much of the concerns.

I can for example tell you that current 2G, 3G and 4G devices breach established safety levels when performing tasks such as sending text messages and making phone calls as I have measured it myself.

I can also tell you that the Internet of Things (IoT) is a threat to national security as it weaponises the infrastructure of the whole country and leaves us open to things such as cars being remotely controlled and devices in our homes being remotely controlled. It could eventually lead to people being remotely locked in their own homes (or locked out).

All the above I have been able to verify.

What I have taken on trust is Mark Steele's claims about the contents of street lights in the Gateshead area.

Annie Logical has a different view on this. She also raises interesting questions about Mark Steele's court cases and other items. Whilst I take her concerns onboard, I don't feel confident to stake a claim either way as to if this is disagreement between her and Mark or if one or both of them are what some would term "shills". The fact that Mark's court cases weren't directly about 5G is something that I think was already known. The point Mark Steele seemed to be trying to put across to me was that his court cases were as a result of comments he had made to people during his campaign against 5G. As such the court cases were 5G linked though not directly 5G court cases.

We know from the debacle with the EU that the court system in this country is corrupt so the lack of the correct audit trail for Mark's court case doesn't necessarily mean anything, but it is a point worth looking at in conjunction with the rest of what Annie presents Please watch the video below and visit the web page at the link too for in depth details of the claims against Mark Steele.

Mark Steele Exposed Article - Click to Read

Some people disagree with Annie Logical and one person has commented to me that in Mark Steele's recent video there were components in that street light that had no need to be in there. Whilst I work in technology, the contents of street lights and precisely what is what in them is not my specific area so I cannot confirm either way on this one. I know the smart agenda is deeply bad for us so I bring it to your attention, but the point should always be made to make this truth your own by doing your own research.

There are counter arguments against what Annie has said. Some of it is circumstantial. Mark Steele is definitely putting some correct information out, but having seen this information against him and running a website campaigning against 5G, I felt duty bound to post this information for readers to view and consider.

Given that we don't have 5G (to my knowledge) in this area (and I hope we never do), that leaves me in a position of not being able to use my own measuring tool on 5G. Consequently for that part of my articles, I am having to rely on other sources. I will say though that having proved to myself that 2G, 3G and 4G are not safe, it is not unreasonable to suspect that 5G is also harmful, especially in view of all the information coming out from those who have studied and measured it. There is no evidence to prove it safe and there are many studies saying it isn't. Before rolling this technology out you would expect a burden of proof that is is safe to be brought on the technology companies.

Also of note is that the street lights round here are marketed as "Smart City Ready". They will be putting out radiation if a transmitter/receiver module is fitted to them. The amount of radiation and whether it classes in the 5G bands or something else would require precise measurements, but it certainly represent a mass increase in the radiation soup that we walk through daily. The possibility for 5G to be mounted on these lamp posts is still there even if the initial module operates on non-5G frequencies and we should be against a vast increase in amounts of radiation what "G" the smart component of the street light classes as.

I will endeavour to keep readers up to date on this situation and when more becomes clear on the components of the street light's smart city components I will let you know.

I do also hope this article will not be seen as gossiping or rumour mongering. My intention with this article is to say I've presented Mark's point of view in the past, now someone is disagreeing. It's important that we work out the truth of the matter and make sure our presentations against 5G are wholly factual.

Infighting is also something we want to avoid. We need to be fighting 5G rather than each other. That means being peaceful and humble enough to present the evidence and to remove anything from our case that is doesn't stand up to proper scrutiny.

Please visit our 5G, IoT and the Surveillance State section for more information.

Stop 5G