MK

Boris Johnson taken decision about 5G Huawei ban by delay (fait accompli method)

Recommended Posts

(edited)

Boris Johnson, at first sight does not look like very smart and cunning politician.

He is friends with Donald Trump, cares a lot about special US-UK relations, but actually cares more about UK.

In April 2019 Theresa May, allowed Huawei limited access to help build parts of the network such as antennas and other “noncore” infrastructure.

Meanwhile, fast, very fast building of 5G infrastructure (by Huawei) started in Britain.

The decision whether to ban Huawei or not was left for Theresa May successor.

Boris Johnson became PM in July 2019, but was so preoccupied with Brexit, that till today 21 January 2020. he had no time to take the final decision.

But decision was already taken by facts on the ground, by Boris Johson delay, in  the form of billions of pounds spent on the deployment of Huawei infrastructure.

Assume that tomorrow (very unlikely) decision will be to ban Huawei from British 5G network. It would take months to rip off the Huawei infrastructure and billions of pounds in damages paid to telecoms, which were in line with all regulations. In total 5G deployment in Britain could be postponed by 2-3 years.

And Trump will not make Huawei great again and will not reimburse Britain for lost money.

But now it is January 2020 and Germany is waiting for British decision.

If UK, part of 5 Eyes decided to allow Huawei, Germany can safely go ahead too.

And the question that seems tricky but is not.

What is the name of the only G-7 country that would not have 5G till at least 2025 and second part of the question is why ?

 

 

Edited by Marcin2
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“If UK, part of 5 Eyes decided to allow Huawei, Germany can safely go ahead too...”

This is an incorrect statement. If the UK decides to allow Huawei to get involved in any way, shape or form with the Five Eyes project. The other members will cease to share intelligence with the UK, and Germany as well if they get into bed with Huawei.

There is absolutely no chance that members will allow even the slightest chance for China to breach Five Eyes.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

“If UK, part of 5 Eyes decided to allow Huawei, Germany can safely go ahead too...”

This is an incorrect statement. If the UK decides to allow Huawei to get involved in any way, shape or form with the Five Eyes project. The other members will cease to share intelligence with the UK, and Germany as well if they get into bed with Huawei.

There is absolutely no chance that members will allow even the slightest chance for China to breach Five Eyes.

 

We will see soon,

Have you considered the question ?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

We will see soon,

Have you considered the question ?

No...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

What is the name of the only G-7 country that would not have 5G till at least 2025 and second part of the question is why ?

This what you referring to?

Spy claims New Zealand could be kicked out of Five Eyes intelligence network due to China's influence in the country

A top secret spy claims New Zealand is 'compromised' due to Chinese influence and they could lose their membership with intelligence agency Five Eyes.

The unnamed senior intelligence official alleges New Zealand's membership is 'on the edge of viability' as they have a weak attitude towards the communist country, the Financial Times reported. 

The Financial Times claims New Zealand is 'attractive to Beijing as the soft underbelly' of Five Eyes.

But Andrew Little, the minister who overlooks spy agencies in New Zealand, slammed the allegations by the unnamed source as 'incorrect'.

'Our relationships with our Five Eyes partners remain strong and enduring,' he told Newshub.  

In 2018, a US analyst said 'the CCP [Chinese Communist party] has gotten very close to or inside the political core' of New Zealand and Australia.   ...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Tom, the answer is the United States, because of lack of frequencies.

Mid-band frequencies ( around 3.5 GHz ) the backbone of 5G are all used at the moment by incumbent users:

3.1-3.7 by military for radar infrastructure 

3.7-4.2 by civilian ground satelite infrastructure 

Only around 2020-2021 at earliest FCC will organize auction for frequencies relieved by satellite companies.

Per historical pace of action in this area ( the problem is widely known  since 2015) the frequencies will be ready for 5 G not earlier than 2022-2023.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

No Tom, the answer is the United States, because of lack of frequencies.

Mid-band frequencies ( around 3.5 GHz ) the backbone of 5G are all used at the moment by incumbent users:

Interesting.

3.5 Ghz is (or at least was) pretty much open band.

The proprietary ValveWatch monitoring systems I installed on offshore oil platforms used 3.5 Ghz for wireless communication, because 3.5 Ghz band is freely available, generally not subject to licensing, in most parts of the world.

Granted, that was a decade ago, and the open frequency availability of 3.5 Ghz band may have changed since then.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lack of media frenzy about this (public) information is an indicator that actually conflict US-allies about Huawei ban has not reached hot zone.

European politicians were not using this information in public discussions as it is politically very inconvenient for Trump administration.

Huawei is a leader of mid- band solutions, there is no true alternative cause Nokia and Ericsson do not have comparable equipment and also scale of manufacturing.

Huawei deployed 600,000 base stations in 2019 and plans 1,500,000 in 2020.

Huawei ban for US is no problem in 3 years perspective as it is not going to deploy 5G. Who knows in 2022-2023 maybe also Nokia or Ericsson would have competitive and scaled up solutions.

German telecoms need 98% coverage till end of 2022. ( coverage in 3.5 GHz band). Technically achievable only with Huawei equipment.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Interesting.

3.5 Ghz is (or at least was) pretty much open band.

The proprietary ValveWatch monitoring systems I installed on offshore oil platforms used 3.5 Ghz for wireless communication, because 3.5 Ghz band is freely available, generally not subject to licensing, in most parts of the world.

Granted, that was a decade ago, and the open frequency availability of 3.5 Ghz band may have changed since then.

Your usage was geographically restricted and it was as you said before 5G. At present around the world frequencies were reserved or already auctioned off for 5G usage.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar was with 700 MHz wireless microphones that were banned from 700 frequency in 2010 bexause of mobile telecom usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's all review Why everyone is worried about Huawei. It isn't speculation that China govt  placed microchips on server motherboards, it's fact. 

CCP has fully funded and fully controlled Huawei from the beginning with ridiculously cheap loans and eminent domain to place factories wherever they pleased. They've had agents working there since the beginning. They're also notorious for industrial espionage. 

Marcin you know I've always suspected you of being a wumaodang and you've reinforced that belief multiple times. By all means keep pretending you've never been to China and don't know the language or culture, while continuing to carry water for the CCP. Carry on

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

Assume that tomorrow (very unlikely) decision will be to ban Huawei from British 5G network. It would take months to rip off the Huawei infrastructure and billions of pounds in damages paid to telecoms, which were in line with all regulations. In total 5G deployment in Britain could be postponed by 2-3 years.

Britan wouldn't have to pay telecoms damages - if there's pending legislation against a product, choosing to purchase and use that product carries inherent risk. The company decided the benefits of a cheaper product were worth the risks that they would have to replace them if it were banned...

4 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

No Tom, the answer is the United States, because of lack of frequencies.

Mid-band frequencies ( around 3.5 GHz ) the backbone of 5G are all used at the moment by incumbent users:

3.1-3.7 by military for radar infrastructure 

3.7-4.2 by civilian ground satelite infrastructure 

Only around 2020-2021 at earliest FCC will organize auction for frequencies relieved by satellite companies.

Per historical pace of action in this area ( the problem is widely known  since 2015) the frequencies will be ready for 5 G not earlier than 2022-2023.

 

The US already has 5G in some markets, so this is false. (Some deployments in major cities were made in 2019)

Also 5G is a communication standard and is technically frequency independent. That said, it does work better on some frequencies than others (just like all communications signals). There's 3 bands - millimeter (24-72 GHz - best speed, but only short distances), mid-band (2.4 GHz-4.2 GHz - lower speed, but better distance), and low band (600-900 MHz - good distance, but speed is only marginally faster than a good 4G signal. Though you blanket more area in a 'good' signal than 4G).

Now, you are correct in that the US is limited by spectrum, but part of that is also that the carriers have used a bunch of this for 4G, and if they switched that spectrum to 5G, their 4G customers (who's phones can't use 5G) would lose bandwidth and therefore experience poor speeds even though they have good signal strength. So until a critical customer mass has 5G capable phones, they're in a catch 22.

All this to say the US likely won't have widespread 5G until 2022 or 2023 (when consumers have upgraded phones), but we do 'have' it now in limited markets. Also note that all of Verizon's towers from 2019 on are '5G capable' which means it's a software update to turn them to 5G. They can't do this yet as it would negatively impact their 4G customers, but when they decide to, it's a matter of a remote software push.

  • Great Response! 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Otis11 said:

Britan wouldn't have to pay telecoms damages - if there's pending legislation against a product, choosing to purchase and use that product carries inherent risk. The company decided the benefits of a cheaper product were worth the risks that they would have to replace them if it were banned...

The US already has 5G in some markets, so this is false. (Some deployments in major cities were made in 2019)

Also 5G is a communication standard and is technically frequency independent. That said, it does work better on some frequencies than others (just like all communications signals). There's 3 bands - millimeter (24-72 GHz - best speed, but only short distances), mid-band (2.4 GHz-4.2 GHz - lower speed, but better distance), and low band (600-900 MHz - good distance, but speed is only marginally faster than a good 4G signal. Though you blanket more area in a 'good' signal than 4G).

Now, you are correct in that the US is limited by spectrum, but part of that is also that the carriers have used a bunch of this for 4G, and if they switched that spectrum to 5G, their 4G customers (who's phones can't use 5G) would lose bandwidth and therefore experience poor speeds even though they have good signal strength. So until a critical customer mass has 5G capable phones, they're in a catch 22.

All this to say the US likely won't have widespread 5G until 2022 or 2023 (when consumers have upgraded phones), but we do 'have' it now in limited markets. Also note that all of Verizon's towers from 2019 on are '5G capable' which means it's a software update to turn them to 5G. They can't do this yet as it would negatively impact their 4G customers, but when they decide to, it's a matter of a remote software push.

This should be a real sales benefit for Verizon. I was waiting for 5G but you explained how I could buy sooner without it. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Let's all review Why everyone is worried about Huawei. It isn't speculation that China govt  placed microchips on server motherboards, it's fact. 

CCP has fully funded and fully controlled Huawei from the beginning with ridiculously cheap loans and eminent domain to place factories wherever they pleased. They've had agents working there since the beginning. They're also notorious for industrial espionage. 

Marcin you know I've always suspected you of being a wumaodang and you've reinforced that belief multiple times. By all means keep pretending you've never been to China and don't know the language or culture, while continuing to carry water for the CCP. Carry on

 

https://qz.com/690650/chinas-internet-propaganda-is-more-subtle-and-sophisticated-than-it-ever-has-been/ I had to look that one up. I wish I was paid for my propaganda. I would have been making money the last eight years. 

Edited by ronwagn
addition
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

This should be a real sales benefit for Verizon. I was waiting for 5G but you explained how I could buy sooner without it. Thanks.

Please note Ron - Verizon probably isn't the only one doing this, they're simply the one I'm aware of.

If the T-Mobile/Sprint merger were to go through, that could also set them up for success because the spectrum it would open up for them (assuming they get to keep it all - haven't followed lately the status of this potential merger)
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

https://qz.com/690650/chinas-internet-propaganda-is-more-subtle-and-sophisticated-than-it-ever-has-been/ I had to look that one up. I wish I was paid for my propaganda. I would have been making money the last eight years. 

5G means DDOS can get faster and even more overwhelming.  8kun has been under sustained attack for the last 2 days, just before the Virginia 2A assembly.  I'm really not looking forward to 5G, far too pervasive and invasive as far as the insanity of "internet of things" meaning everything gets tracked.  Google-type data mining on steroids.  Of course China wants Huawei for global 5G.   < sigh >

1419015972_500kddos.thumb.png.d0432c3d25ca319f25587806f5f5575e.png

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

5G means DDOS can get faster and even more overwhelming.  8kun has been under sustained attack for the last 2 days, just before the Virginia 2A assembly.  I'm really not looking forward to 5G, far too pervasive and invasive as far as the insanity of "internet of things" meaning everything gets tracked.  Google-type data mining on steroids.  Of course China wants Huawei for global 5G.   < sigh >

1419015972_500kddos.thumb.png.d0432c3d25ca319f25587806f5f5575e.png

 

China wants Huawei for China first. Think Big Brother on steroids. They'll know who's even thinking about standing up to the government. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Otis11 said:

Britan wouldn't have to pay telecoms damages - if there's pending legislation against a product, choosing to purchase and use that product carries inherent risk. The company decided the benefits of a cheaper product were worth the risks that they would have to replace them if it were banned...

The US already has 5G in some markets, so this is false. (Some deployments in major cities were made in 2019)

Also 5G is a communication standard and is technically frequency independent. That said, it does work better on some frequencies than others (just like all communications signals). There's 3 bands - millimeter (24-72 GHz - best speed, but only short distances), mid-band (2.4 GHz-4.2 GHz - lower speed, but better distance), and low band (600-900 MHz - good distance, but speed is only marginally faster than a good 4G signal. Though you blanket more area in a 'good' signal than 4G).

Now, you are correct in that the US is limited by spectrum, but part of that is also that the carriers have used a bunch of this for 4G, and if they switched that spectrum to 5G, their 4G customers (who's phones can't use 5G) would lose bandwidth and therefore experience poor speeds even though they have good signal strength. So until a critical customer mass has 5G capable phones, they're in a catch 22.

All this to say the US likely won't have widespread 5G until 2022 or 2023 (when consumers have upgraded phones), but we do 'have' it now in limited markets. Also note that all of Verizon's towers from 2019 on are '5G capable' which means it's a software update to turn them to 5G. They can't do this yet as it would negatively impact their 4G customers, but when they decide to, it's a matter of a remote software push.

US cannot deploy 5G because of lack of mid-band frequencies where 95% of 5G experience will happen.

600-700 MHz low-band as per recent T Mobile deployment is only marginally faster than 4G.

28 GHz mmWave band is for special applications only like for stadiums, factories, airport terminals. This frequency is not suitable for area deployment due to physical barriers: signal fading, being muted by physical obstacles, interference of base stations at LOS. Last but not least recent studies show that for good coverage in Urban area you need 300-500 base stations per km2.

So at the end of the day 5G is about mid-band 3.5 GHz frequencies.

Incumbents from satellite sector would relieve 300 MHz and it will be auctioned around 2021.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Guys some of you are politically charged, and discuss only in Well known comvention: us vs them, Huawei Communist etc.

I do not blame Ward, he has his own crusade, I like him the way he  is, but at the same time has sharp mind, only sometimes it is more convenient for him to just scream Communists! Than to use his brain and consider cold facts that I provide for discussion.

I mean for most Americans in this forum if sb provides facts about lack of spectrum for 5 G in US that is preventing 5G deployment he must be communist.

It is information, you did not know about it, is it not strange that I know hell more about your country than you do ?

What is more Trump administration did some serious actions to relieve frequencies around 3.5 GHz for 5G.

What is really sad is how slowly FCC is working, they brag now that are super efficient because will organize auction in 18 months, they are heros. In the past it was 3 years. There was no sarcasm when FCC spokesman was presenting this data.

Edited by Marcin2
Typo
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

Guys some of you are politically charged, and discuss only in Well known comvention: us vs them, Huawei Communist etc.

I do not blame Ward, he has his own crusade, I like him the way he  is, but at the same time has sharp mind, only sometimes it is more convenient for him to just scream Communists! Than to use his brain and consider cold facts that I provide for discussion.

I mean for most Americans in this forum if sb provides facts about lack of spectrum for 5 G in US that is preventing 5G deployment he must be communist.

It is information, you did not know about it, is it not strange that I know hell more about your country than you do ?

What is more Trump administration did some serious actions to relieve frequencies around 3.5 GHz for 5G.

What is really sad is how slowly FCC is working, they brag now that are super efficient because will organize auction in 18 months, they are heros. In the past it was 3 years. There was no sarcasm when FCC spokesman was presenting this data.

Fair enough points, although I will note that I tend to agree with Ward on numerous issues, as we seem to read similar off-mainstream stuff.

As a moderator I can indeed confirm you are in Poland, and not China.  Yes, I get curious about stuff and did quite a bit of digging over the weekend, while trying to clean up this forum from sock puppets and their artificial bickering which was corrosive here.

Anyway, I am trying here to bolster your opinions (although I frequently don't agree with them.)   Near as I can determine, you are indeed in Poland, and I have no issue with your Poland-centric and EU-centric views.  Clearly I disagree with your views on China, but we can agree to disagree.  I prefer a strong sense of nationalism over the depressingly grey socialist slant of globalism.

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Fair enough points, although I will note that I tend to agree with Ward on numerous issues, as we seem to read similar off-mainstream stuff.

As a moderator I can indeed confirm you are in Poland, and not China.  Yes, I get curious about stuff and did quite a bit of digging over the weekend, while trying to clean up this forum from sock puppets and their artificial bickering which was corrosive here.

Anyway, I am trying here to bolster your opinions (although I frequently don't agree with them.)   Near as I can determine, you are indeed in Poland, and I have no issue with your Poland-centric and EU-centric views.  Clearly I disagree with your views on China, but we can agree to disagree.  I prefer a strong sense of nationalism over the depressingly grey socialist slant of globalism.

 

Thank you Tom. My opinion is I am really pro American and anti-Chinese by general political affiliation, but with bias of the person living in small country, surrounded by strong neighbours with no geographical boundaries.

What I really do not like in Americans is how you live in the distant past, in 1990s at best, it is already 2020 btw.

I will give you 1 really good example how most of recent US foreign policies is all talk no walk and frequent sabre rattling.

Trump policies of China high tech containment, mainly in 5G area/Huawei.

April 2018: ZTE was embargoed. Nuclear option used against one of the largest global tech sector companies.

US has shown that it can destroy any Chinese company by US export controls.

THE PROJECT: China since the day 1 of the ZTE embargo gathered all the political and later economical and scientific resources of the country to prevent success of US policies. All Chinese technology gaps were mapped, especially US technology gaps and vulnerabilities and action plans were made to solve these problems and close these gaps.

This project will not stop till is succesfully finished, no matter what would be external situation.

It was Day 1 of their Sputnik moment, they doubled down on China 2025, R&D spending etc, technology war started.

And US actions ?

There was some solution to the ZTE conundrum. But later in 2018 focus of US politics was moved to trade war and tariffs, objectives of second importance.

But China knew that technology war has started and still worked with all the might of the country and its businesses to not allow the success of technology containment policies.

May 2019: After 13 months of Chinese preparations, United States finally decided to hit Huawei. Because Huawei was preparing for this move for 13 months it was not crippled, to the astonishment of US authorities. All other Chinese companies were also preparing so were also not astonished when further embargos were administered by US.

January 2020:  We are now 1 year and 9 months (23 months) into Chinese The Project.

US actions: 

Diplomatic offensive to ban Huawei with subtle blackmail of possible US sanctions. Only recently 1.2 billion dollars were allocated for 5G R&D by Congress.

Facts: 3 companies are able to provide 5G gear: Ericsson, Nokia and Huawei. Ericcson and Nokia were in deep financial troubles in the last 5 years, so did not have funds to scale up production and invest in R&D. They are behind Huawei and this technology gap is rising cause Huawei spends 15 billion USD on R&D and Nokia and Ericsson about 4-5 billion USD each. They also cannot scale up 5G manufacturing cause are generally much smaller companies still in the survival mode.

What US should do ?

- Technology embargos cannot be announced 13 months in advance. Their success depends on element of surprise and accross the board application to whole technology sector. Now Chinese are acting in line with worst case scenario, no element of surprise.

- US should from Day 1 support both Nokia and Ericcson with substantial R&D grants, lets say 30 billion dollars for each company to be spent in 10 years time. Furthermore companies should be awarded substantial grants to expand manufacturing base in US. Additionally subsidies and tax exemptions should be provided for companies that want to use Nordic telecom equipment. In short: US should be prepared to spend in total 200 billion dollars starting from 2018 to compete with Huawei.

With the prospects of reliable supply of 5G equipment by Ericcson/Nokia at competitive prices it would be much easier to convince all allies to not use Huawei equipment.

And last but not least: US should create conditions for fast domestic 5G deployment: these frequencies around 3.5 GHz should be made available in 2018, 2019 the latest and not in 2022

This was very pro-American comment in my opinion.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Otis11 said:

Please note Ron - Verizon probably isn't the only one doing this, they're simply the one I'm aware of.

If the T-Mobile/Sprint merger were to go through, that could also set them up for success because the spectrum it would open up for them (assuming they get to keep it all - haven't followed lately the status of this potential merger)
 

Actually I still love my Galaxy 7 and it takes great pics. I just worry that it might stop working but they are inexpensive to replace and wait for what you really want with 5G compatibility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a question for you (keep in mind that I am NOT a computer/IT guy at all!).

Does your average consumer actually need, or require, this 5G stuff? What does it actually provide your regular citizens that 4G does not?

Is it like saying that you could opt for a Ferrari over a Ford....even though you will NEVER utilize the 700 horsepower available?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Here’s a question for you (keep in mind that I am NOT a computer/IT guy at all!).

Does your average consumer actually need, or require, this 5G stuff? What does it actually provide your regular citizens that 4G does not?

Is it like saying that you could opt for a Ferrari over a Ford....even though you will NEVER utilize the 700 horsepower available?

Douglas there appear to be 3 main benefits of 5G detailed below

5G is projected to bring three main benefits:

  • Faster speed: Data transfer speeds are projected to be about 10 times higher with 5G than is possible with 4G. That means significantly faster transmission of images and videos. With 4G/LTE, downloading a high-definition movie might take about 10 minutes. With 5G, it should take less than a second.
  • Shorter delays: Though it’s not always noticeable, there is often a brief lag in time from when data is sent to when it’s received. 5G should reduce this so-called latency, making it possible, for example, to watch high-speed virtual reality video with no delays or glitches.
  • Increased connectivity: Cell towers equipped with 5G technology would have greatly increased capacity over 4G/LTE. That means more people — and more devices — should be able to communicate at the same time.

 

Your Ford v Ferrari metaphor is a bad example as you will always be benefitting from the speed and connectivity of 5G, not just that it has the potential to be faster (like your car scenario) it just is, every time you use the network.

Hope this helps explain.

 

Edited by Rob Plant
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Rob!

I guess I am just at that advanced age where 5G just doesn’t seem like something that I couldn’t live without in my personal life. Unlike many I see around me, usually younger, I do not live my life on my phone and I am in no danger of walking into an open manhole while texting. That said, the commercial and military applications of 5G are obvious. It also becomes obvious why Western countries should be very wary of utilizing any Huawei hard or software...common sense actually.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.