AT&T, Verizon, and our very own national street shitter is against government built 5g infrastructure...

AT&T, Verizon, and our very own national street shitter is against government built 5g infrastructure. To me this would make wireless very similar to how land line residential telephone service was, but I'm too young to remember if that was good, or bad?
Well would a government built wireless infrastructure be good, or bad for me Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

recode.net/2018/1/29/16945452/donald-trump-5g-wireless-network-national-security-council-memo
youtube.com/watch?v=P5AYRWvjiVg
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

The silence on this topic is hilarious.
Shiet who do we back guise le anti nn poo, or le republican president?

Its good for people, national security, industry, and one could even say world peace/stability.

taxes already pay for the construction and maintenance of "private" telecom infrastructure almost 100%

the anti-net neutrality meme is kike shilling, telecom giants are dinosaurs and aren't innovating, rely on their oligopolies

the sooner these rentseekers are out the better

military grade telecom security is a requirement for national defense

bool trusthim(antinn poo)
{return true;}

>The Trump administration labored to clarify on Monday that it currently has no plans to build its own ultra-fast 5G wireless network, despite publication of a memo that suggested the idea was under consideration.

>At issue is a proposal put forth by an unnamed official at the National Security Council, a White House-based body that advises the president on critical U.S. and foreign policy matters. The document, first reported by Axios last night, called for the U.S. government to effectively nationalize a portion of the telecom sector — a radical departure from current policy — in a bid to combat Chinese influence.

>As multiple White House officials confirmed to Recode on Sunday, the document as published is dated. They also stressed it had merely been floated by a staff member, not a reflection of some imminent, major policy announcement — and probably might never be.

recode.net/2018/1/29/16945452/donald-trump-5g-wireless-network-national-security-council-memo

Leftists will just ignore it because:
-Siding with Trump admin is something they refuse to do.
-Siding against Trump admin means they are against government building and maintaining a network which they just got through backing via "net neutrality"

It was a single anonymously sourced article about a random guy at the NSA who proposed it. The headline (falsely) said that Trump was considering it. Ajit Pai, when asked, said he would oppose it. Then Trump announced he opposed it, too.

So what's the story here? Moron NSA deep stater leaks dumb plan, reporter writes fake news saying Trump supports it.

The punch line was that allegedly the socialized wireless system would be cheaper and be completed faster if it's done by our nation's government apparatchiks. When has this EVER turned out to be the case? Even if you believe that this time will be different, who seriously believes that Trump thought that?

Fake news story. The only news is the leak, almost certainly from the NSA itself, which probably made the proposal purely so they could leak the fake story and make Trump look bad.

Thats quite a spin there.

Do you really want the NSA to run your soviet socialist 5g network?

>(((state))) are building something
>is it good?
You have to ho back.

So is the axios article not anonymously sourced? Did even it claim that Trump supported the proposal? Is it even likely that Trump wants to nationalized anything? The whole complaint is that he's a businessman who want to deregulate and privatize.

I'm curious to hear what part of my post you see as spin. And what factual support you have for any of this.

Pro tip: when the left has to make shit up to bitch about, it means what president Trump is actually really doing is a good job.

>military grade telecom security
translation: you can only have one Big Brother

>To me this would make wireless very similar to how land line residential telephone service was
The government didn't own the lines. The lines were built with USF fees. I think they should do the same with Internet service and get the ISPs off the teat.

When does banking (((cartels))), (((government))), (((corporations))) became a nation, Juden shit?

There are no nations without a government. Government is the key to a nation.

Please use code tags when writing code on Sup Forums

>Government is key to nation
OK, Shlomo.

Yeah, and war is peace, racemixing and degeneracy is progress, totalitarianism is freedom and communism is good.

Name one nation that didn't have a government.

>The Trump administration labored to clarify on Monday that it currently has no plans to build its own ultra-fast 5G wireless network
> They also stressed it had merely been floated by a staff member, not a reflection of some imminent, major policy announcement — and probably might never be.
Sad!

Friendly reminder this is completely untested technology from a health perspective. Also requires a ""mini tower"" every 2 to 10 houses on residential streets.

We'll all be taking a nice bath in 50Ghz electromagnetic radiation 24/7 with no safety testing what-so-ever. Nationalism prevents YOU from fighting this at a the local level as federal law overrides state/local laws.

This is a serious threat to our freedom and health, bringing botnet to a tree lawn near you.

youtube.com/watch?v=P5AYRWvjiVg

Iceland

the 5g thing was about a glow-in-the-dark cia "national security" cucknet, not whatever you think it was
see
i never voted for trump, but ajit pai is /ourpoo/