http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=First+They+Came+for+Lynne+Stewart&btnG=Suche&meta=

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

-Pastor Martin Niemöller, 1945

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021505A.shtml

Wir haben wieder einmal in einem Pressegesräch unsere Kreisverwaltung an den Pranger gestellt. Die Anlage ist die Tischvorlage zu diesem Gespräch:
http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/pressegespraech_am_14.02.05.doc

Gerrit Krause

[BIuM] Bürgerinitiative für umweltverträglichen Mobilfunk im Kreis Mettmann

http://mparent7777.blog-city.com/read/1078591.htm


Informant: Charles Bremer

http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2275/


Informant: jensenmk

From ufpj-news

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021605X.shtml



From: Greenpeace <usnewsletter@activism.greenpeace.org>
http://usactions.greenpeace.org/

It is with much regret that we tell you of the brutal murder of a woman we've worked with on many occasions. For the past 37 years, Sister Dorothy Stang worked tirelessly supporting the rights of rural workers and defending the Amazon from deforestation. Last week, the 74-year old American-born nun made the ultimate sacrifice for her cause as she was gunned down by two men in Anapu, Brazil.

A Senseless Death

The murder of Sister Dorothy is a tragedy, but it not unexpected. The Amazon Rainforest is not only beautiful, it is a highly volatile and dangerous area. In addition to rampant illegal logging - slavery, corruption and violence are regular occurrences. Death threats are not uncommon.

Activists risk their lives every day fighting against forest destruction and for the rights of local communities. As we mourn the death of Sister Dorothy Stang, we know that our fight continues. Please help us protect the forests so that her death will not be in vain. Read on to learn about three actions you can take right now.

1. Stop the Violence

Urge the Brazilian government to implement concrete measures to end the illegal logging and guarantee a sustainable future for the Amazon forest and its inhabitants. Since Sister Dorothy's murder, the Brazilian government has designated two million acres of forestland as reserves, now we must make sure that this protection is enforced. Take action!

Learn more about the life and death of Sister Dorothy.

2. Save "Muggle" Forests

The excitement is building as Harry Potter fans prepare for the long-awaited release of the sixth book in the Harry Potter series. While the incredible success of J.K. Rowling's tales are a boost for children's literature (and, let's be honest...adults' literature), the production of those books spell bad news for ancient forests. In 2003, Bloomsbury and Raincoast Books co-published the Canadian edition of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix on 100 percent recycled paper. Help us convince the U.S. publisher - Scholastic - to follow suit and print Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince on ancient forest friendly paper. Take action!

3. End "Kleercuts"

The manufacturer of Kleenex brand tissues, Kimberly-Clark, is destroying ancient forests like the magnificent Boreal forest of Canada, to create its products. Ancient forests are being flushed down the toilet or thrown away even though ecological alternatives exist. Please help us convince Kimberly-Clark to stop destroying ancient and endangered forests and to start using more recycled fiber in its products. Take action!

Forward this message to a friend. Help spread the word.

More on the Smokestack Six

We're pleased to report that five of the six smokestack activists have been released from jail. They are relieved to be home, but know that the sixth member, Josh, still has some long weeks ahead. If you haven't already, you can send a message of support to Josh and the others in our discussion center. The activists assured us that all the comments they received helped the days pass a little quicker.

Post your message.

702 H Street, NW
Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20001
(800) 326-0959

Help save virtual endangered species!
Play Eco Quest


Informant: Martin Greenhut


The Assassination of a True Forest Advocate
http://hopboyed.notlong.com

Studie: Pipeline-Bau an Rußlands Küste gefährdet Wale (16.02.05)

Die Ausbeutung der Öl- und Gasvorkommen im Ochotskischen Meer vor der russischen Insel Sachalin gefährdet die Existenz der letzten hundert Westpazifischen Grauwale. Zu diesem Schluss kommt eine am Mittwoch in der Schweiz veröffentliche Expertenstudie der Weltnaturschutzunion IUCN. Die Autoren, 14 führende Walforscher, kritisieren vor allem den geplanten Bau einer Ölpipeline durch die Nahrungsgründe der seltenen Wale. Die Studie war vom Betreiberkonsortium der umstrittenen Pipeline, der "Sakhalin Energy Investment Company" selbst in Auftrag gegeben worden. Die "Sakhalin Energy Investment Company" steht unter anderem unter Federführung der Shell AG.

Die ganze Nachricht im Internet:

http://www.ngo-online.de/ganze_nachricht.php4?Nr=10455

http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/commentary/digitaltv/digitaltv.html


Informant: ranger 116

The United States has been flying spy drones over Iran’s nuclear sites, Intelligence Minister Ali Yunesi said today, responding for the first time to reports of U.S. unmanned surveillance craft over Iran.

http://www.columbiatribune.com/2005/Feb/20050216News034.asp
http://tinyurl.com/3k2me


From Information Clearing House

A powerful blast occurred near Iran's Gulf port of Daylam, Iranian television reported, as witnesses said they saw a missile being fired from an unidentified plane.

http://www.turkishpress.com/world/news.asp?id=050216145242.3cky2kul.xml
http://tinyurl.com/5gpc3


From Information Clearing House

On the tape she said: "Everyone must withdraw from Iraq. No one should come to Iraq any longer because all foreigners, all Italians are considered enemies. Please do something for me.

http://tinyurl.com/6qkjm


From Information Clearing House

Video: Shocking and Awful:

What is life like for a U.S. Soldier In Occupied Iraq.

The American military in Iraq: Lambs led to slaughter or centurions for the Empire? Soldiers and their families speak out against the war and their lost loved ones.

http://207.44.245.159/article8074.htm

Video Report From Fallujah

This amateur video was shot on the first day of one of the biggest festivals in the Muslim year. But instead of buying new clothes for their children and visiting family and friends, the men of Falluja are digging graves.

Watch it online now!
http://207.44.245.159/article8076.htm

by Jack Lessenberry

“The United States needs to lose the war in Iraq as soon as possible. Even more urgently, the whole world needs the United States to lose the war in Iraq. What is at stake now is the way we run the world for the next generation or more, and really bad things will happen if we get it wrong.”

http://207.44.245.159/article8077.htm

Please take a moment to take action...After you're registered, it's even faster to participate for serious and important issues for our people.

"We The People" are on the move and our voice is getting louder by the moment...Please make your voice heard in this most urgent matter.

D o w n s i z e r - D i s p a t c h



PLEASE FORWARD TO INTERESTED FRIENDS

Dictators around the world throw people in jail for criticizing them. We in America are justly proud of the fact that we can say anything we want about our leaders without fear of legal punishment. It has even been said that we'll know Iraq is truly free when every Iraqi citizen can do the same.

Well, maybe they will reach that point in Iraq, but it's no longer true in America. The same elected leaders who are preaching, and taxing, and investing American lives to export freedom to the world, have also passed a law to make it illegal for American citizens to criticize their rulers.

Sadly, most American citizens remain blissfully ignorant of the fact that it is now illegal, on pain of imprisonment and large fines, to broadcast ads criticizing federal elected office holders by name within 60 days of an election without the equivalent of a government permit. This provision was one of the features of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, formerly known as McCain-Feingold.

This is a massive abuse of power. It is hypocritical. It is un-American. It must be overturned.

Fortunately, Representative Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), has provided us the means to do that. His "First Amendment Restoration Act" -- HR 46 - has been reintroduced in Congress. This bill would restore your right to criticize your elected leaders by any means you choose, at any time. It deserves your support.

Please go to
http://action.downsizedc.org/wyc.php?cid=17
and use our easy Electronic Lobbyist system to send a message to your Representative and your Senators asking them to co-sponsor HR 46. Then use our Tell-a-friend system to spread the word to others.

It's your right to free speech and your right to free press - use these rights or lose them.

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.


Informant: Marsha

by Jeremy Pelofsky

Tue Feb 15, 2005 05:07 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators are turning their sights on protecting children from indecency on mobile telephones after cracking down on television and radio stations for indecent antics.

The wireless industry should mount an education campaign so parents know how they can shield their children from adult content as more and more have mobile phones, John Muleta, head of the Federal Communications Commission's wireless bureau, said in a letter released on Tuesday.

"With adult content available from a myriad of sources, now more than ever it is important for carriers, content providers, and parents to know what is being done by industry to prevent access to adult content by minors," he said.

"Through responsible action on the part of wireless carriers and content providers this important social goal can be achieved without government intervention and without interference to the provision of content to adults," Muleta said.

He urged the wireless industry association, CTIA, to tell parents what services their children's mobile phones can access and that they can if they want to block pay-per-call voice services and Internet access.

Muleta also asked the industry to review whether it should change its code of conduct to address adult material.

About 21 million, or 33.8 percent, of 5- to 19-year-olds had cell phones by the end of 2004, according to technology research firm IDC.

A spokesman for CTIA said it has a team working on the issue and was "committed to staying ahead of it."

"The goal is to have a rating system in place and also provide additional tools in the form of filtering systems," said Joe Farren, director of public affairs at CTIA.

Unsolicited e-mail messages of any kind to mobile phones are barred by law. But there are no laws on the books that directly address indecency on wireless phones.

The FCC has been cracking down on television and radio broadcasters for violating limits on decency after a series of incidents, including pop singer Janet Jackson baring her breast during the 2004 Super Bowl football game halftime show.

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to consider legislation on Wednesday to increase fines to as much as $500,000 on broadcasters and entertainers who violate decency limits.

Broadcasters are barred from airing indecent material, typically of a sexual or profane nature, except during late- night hours when children are less likely to be in the audience. The limits do not apply to cable and satellite television and radio services.

© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?storyID=7639528


Informant: Gotemf

*February Marks Turning Point in Global Warming Struggle*

Global warming is the world's number one environmental problem.
But this month marks two big milestones in the fight to undo
global warming, in the United States and around the world.

First, Progress Around the World:

Starting today, the Kyoto Protocol goes into effect. More than
125 nations around the world are using the power of market-based
solutions to bring heat-trapping pollution under control.
Unfortunately, the United States, the world's largest greenhouse
gas polluter, is not on board. Much of the rest of the world is
already on track, cutting pollution with innovative technologies
and a carbon trading system.

Second, Progress In America:

The Climate Stewardship Act, just reintroduced in Congress, is
not the Kyoto Protocol. But it is a way for the country to do
its part in the fight to undo global warming. The bipartisan
bill would tackle global warming by making sensible and
affordable cuts in greenhouse gas pollution in the U.S. The
Climate Stewardship Act is the way for the U.S. to harness its
business acumen, ingenuity and technological prowess to deal
with the problem of global warming.

Climate Stewardship Act is Back - What You Can Do:

Momentum is growing to undo global warming. You and over 400,000
people have already signed the Emissions Petition, becoming
citizen co-sponsors of the Climate Stewardship Act. But we need
even more to convince Congress. Our goal is to get one million
citizen co-sponsors, and we need your help. Here's what you can
do:

1) Tell a friend. Send an email inviting friends, family, neighbors and others to sign the Emissions Petition:
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/globalwarming_petition/forward/i5sxe849j8b86b

2) Send a personal reminder. You've already signed our petition
in support of the Climate Stewardship Act. Now, follow up and
remind President Bush and Congress that the U.S. needs to get in
front on the issue of global warming:
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/csa_109/i5sxe849j8b86b

3) Help fund the campaign. Your donation will help pay for
petition canvassing, advertising, grassroots organizing and
old-fashioned Capitol Hill lobbying:
https://secure.environmentaldefense.org/donate/undoit/undoit_donate_1.cfm?pcd=2AX05AA001

4) Post a flyer. Post a global warming flyer on bulletin boards
in your community, explaining why this issue is so important and
what can be done about it:
http://actionnetwork.org/ct/d7aYwHs1TjCG/

* Global Warming Evidence Mounts *

- 2004 was the fourth warmest year on record. The 10 hottest
years on record have all occurred since 1990!

- Record heat waves responsible for some 26,000 deaths battered
Europe in the summer of 2003 -- the hottest on the continent
since Shakespeare's time at least. The scorching temperatures
caused over $16 billion in damages to agriculture and other
industries. Global warming has doubled the risk of events like
the 2003 heat wave, according to a recent paper published in the
prestigious scientific journal Nature.

- A massive ice shelf the size of Rhode Island broke off from
Antarctica in 2002. Rapidly warming temperatures on the
Antarctic Peninsula were blamed for the loss of the Larsen B Ice
Shelf.

- Alaska's worse fire year on record was 2004. A total of 703
fires consumed over 6.5 million acres of forest, an area the
size of Maryland. Global warming will increase the risk of more
intense, destructive wildfires.

* Global Warming: Undo It! *
The Climate Stewardship Act is before Congress again and
Environmental Defense is ramping up its Global Warming: Undo It!
campaign. Here's what we're doing:

- Renewing our push to secure one million signatures on our
Emissions Petition.
- Firing up grassroots efforts across the country and in swing
states
- Hitting the media with our message
- Releasing new scientific reports
- Boosting our lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill and in state
legislatures

Wednesday, February 16, 2005 2:36 PM

Laragh House,
Ardeevin Road,
Dalkey,
Co Dublin.

Dear Minister Cullen,

This email is an urgent request that you intervene immediately to stop CIE from progressing with their illegal plans to replace the communication tower/mast that presently exists at CIE property, Ardeevin Road, Dalkey, Co Dublin with a new mast which will be much larger and the expressed intention of which is to accommodate telephonic antennae for Vodafone, without planning permission or consultation with concerned and outraged residents.

The attached letters which I sent on the 3rd inst followed my shock and outrage at discovering on the 2nd inst from Mr Peter Cunningham, Property Section, CIE that it is the intention of CIE to replace the extant single purpose mast/'tower', which is a slim line, innocuous looking communications tower for the dart and is exempt from planning regulation under Class 23 of the 2001 Planning and Development Regulations, with a new much larger mast which is overtly to accommodate Vodafone and then to interpret the planning regulations in the erroneous manner that they have done is an outrageous abuse of planning by CIE and must be stopped forthwith. It has also come to my attention that it is their intention to do the same along the DART line and at no less than 41 locations nationwide.

Following expending much effort and energy in this regard between the 2nd inst and now I received written email confirmation from the Planning Department, Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Co Council on the 10th inst to the effect that 'The planning Authority consider that Vodafone would not be entitled to erect antenna to the CIE mast without the benefit of planning permission.' They also sent me a copy of a letter that they sent to Mr Peter Cunningham, CIE dated 9th inst. requiring them/CIE to provide details of the nature, scale and extent of the works being undertaken, the purpose of the works and the relevant planning regulations that they are claiming exemption under. The Planning Department also stated their intention to issue a letter to Vodafone stating that they Vodafone cannot erect any antennae to the proposed structure within the curtilage of Dalkey Dart Station 'as it requires planning permission'. They state that they will send this letter when they receive clarification from CIE as to what they are proposing for the site.

It is clear to me that a telephonic Vodafone mast, such as is proposed by CIE in conjunction with Vodafone for Ardeevin Road Dalkey is not exempt from planning permission. Mr Peter Cunningham, CIE in his erroneous communication to me on the 2nd inst. and in an email to my neighbour Mr Vernon on the 7th inst., claimed that the development is exempt. The Planning Dept have confirmed that it is their interpretation of the Regulations that Class 31 cannot be joined with Class 23 exemptions. For CIE to progress with the construction of this mast at this time claiming exemption under Class 23 and knowing that the true purpose of the change in mast is to accommodate Vodafone is an outrageous abuse of planning regulation by CIE. If this is not stopped I will not stop until this outrage is fully highlighted in every possible manner and media. It is blatantly obvious at this time that if they proceed with the new mast in a misleading manner claiming exemption under 23 and with every intention to replace the mast so that Vodafone antennae can be accommodated, and if it is the case that this will be repeated in many other locations, this scandal will have catastrophic ramifications.

I have grievous concerns for my health and safety from such masts. I anticipate that I would suffer so much stress from having to live and sleep under such a beam of emf radiation on a daily basis that I would become ill from that worry and stress. I would therefore be left with no option but to sell the home that I have happily lived in for 20 years. I am informed that the only way I could exclude this radiation from my home is to lead line the entire premises and this would be impossible. I also have evidence that the sale potential and by implication value of my home if such a mast succeeds would be dramatically decreased. Is it fair in a democratic society that a statutory authority for transport under your tutelage can so bend the regulations and abuse the rights of the ordinary law abiding citizen?

I expect my rights to protection of health and property to be upheld by the statutory bodies whose remit it is to do so. For a statutory body such as CIE to injure me or my family I cannot and will never accept. I expect and demand that the precautionary principle as outlined in 'Telecommunications Antennae and Support Structures Guidelines for Planning Authorities July 1996 and which states: 'Only as a last resort and if the alternatives suggested in the previous paragraph are either unavailable or unsuitable should free-standing masts be located in a residential area or beside schools.' be applied in this case. I also bring to your attention the precautionary approach recommended in the Stewart Report http://www.iegmp.org.uk/report/text.htm .

I do not choose or volunteer to become part of epidemiological research by having my body irradiated from a CIE/Vodafone mast as I sleep in my bed at night. If my plea is ignored, the mast is installed and there is injury or loss to me or my family I will hold you Minister personally responsible.

This is more that an economic consideration and profit or loss concern for CIE and Vodafone. It has serious health and safety, moral and ethical implications also and these in my humble opinion must far outweigh financial considerations for decision makers like yourself with the overall responsibility for such decisions. In view of the imminent erection of the mast and therefore the urgency of the matter, the serious concern that I have for my health from the biological effects occurring at exposure levels below the guidelines, I respectfully request that you intervene by taking the protective measures available to you in the 1996 Guidelines and stop this mast at Ardeevin Road, Dalkey.

Yours sincerely,

Rosalie Prendergast
Laragh House,
Ardeevin Road,
Dalkey,
Co. Dublin.


03/02/2005
Mr. Peter Cunningham,
CIE Property Section,
Oriel Street,
Dublin 1.

Re: Vodafone Mast on CIE property at Ardeevin Road, Dalkey, Co Dublin


Dear Mr Cunningham,

Your intention to position a Vodafone mast, approx 10 metres from the curtilage of our house is causing my family and I great distress.

When I discovered from talking to you yesterday that the intention is to replace the existing train communication tower with a dual use Vodafone and train communication tower, that the development is exempt under planning and development legislation and that it was your intention to inform nobody we were outraged.

This is a demand that this mast not be located opposite our house on Ardeevin Road, Dalkey, for the following reasons:

It is my firm belief that this mast will damage my health and that of my family and neighbours.

It is my constitutional right not to be harmed or injured by another and your mast will cause me and others harm by causing me and others stress, anxiety and bombardment by emf radiation.

The available scientific data on cancer risks and congenital abnormalities linked to humans being exposed to radio frequency electromagnetic radiation is inconclusive.

The scientific data is insufficient on:

1. The possible altered response of humans taking medicines. (My husband is taking medicine).

2. On possible combined effects of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation with chemical or other physical agents in the environment.

3. On the possible effects of modulated microwave fields on the central nervous system and the possible existence of ‘power’ and ‘frequency’ windows for such effects.

4. On the possible non-thermal effects.

I am proactive in protecting my health and that of my family and in my job in protecting the health of the community. My knowledge of the aforementioned facts and of your intention to nonetheless force me to accept a beam of this non-ionising radiation to penetrate the cells of my body as I inhabit my abode is already causing me stress. I have a right not to have to wait for reactive epidemiological studies to safeguard my health. I do not choose to wait for 20-30 years for epidemiological studies to prove cause effect of EMF exposure and cancer.

It is acknowledged now that children are particularly vulnerable because of their developing nervous systems. The size of their skulls allows them to absorb more radiation than adults. Some of my neighbours have small babies and soon they will lie in their beds and have this radiation foisted on their innocent care.

The location of Base station masts in the vicinity of schools is now frowned upon. Should the same precautions not apply to a child in their own home, where they will spend proportionately more of their time? I refer you to a planning decision that was made by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council as far back as 1997 and upheld by An Bord Pleanala (Planning Register Reference No. D 97A/0510). Permission was refused for the erection of a mast at an industrial site at Knapp and Peterson, Sallynoggin Industrial Estate in close proximity to a school and in a densely populated area because it would not comply fully with the Guidelines issued by the Department of the Environment to Local Authorities in 1996.

For the same reasons your mast will contravene the Department of the Environment Guidelines 1996. These guidelines clearly state in Section 4.3 that ‘only as a last resort or if the alternatives suggested in the provision paragraph are either unavailable or unsuitable should free standing masts be located in a residential area or beside schools’.

This is a residential area. There are human beings including babies living here.

You advise me that you are exempt from planning requirements under Article 4 of the Local Government Planning and Development Regulations 1997. What about the requirements under the 2001 Regulations? I refer to Class 31 (d) of those Regulations, where it is specified that equipment such as you plan to install (i.e. ‘equipment for transmitting or receiving signals from satellites in space’) shall not exceed 10 metres in height and such equipment shall be situated within 10 metres of the curtilage of any house save with the consent in writing of the owner or occupier there of, or within 10 metres of the window of a workroom of any other structure’. You advised me yesterday that this mast will be 20 metres high and how far do you think it will be from the curtilage of my home?

How do you plan to monitor the field strengths of the non-ionising radiation emissions from the radio station container and communicate the results of such monitoring to the concerned residents?

Finally it states that ‘The planning authority in whose functional area the …..shall be notified by the statutory undertaker in writing of the proposed location of any such structure at least four weeks before such attachement.’

Are you obliged to notify the Planning Department as per above or as per Section 5 declaration? When is it your intention to locate the mast and have you yet notified the Planning Department?

I regard the erection of a telephonic communications mast at the aforementioned location as a threat to my health, well being and peace of mind and a breach of my constitutional right to live in a healthy and safe environment and as such insist that it not be located at Ardeevin Road, Dalkey.


Yours sincerely,

Rosalie Prendergast



c.c. Vodafone Head Quarters; Planning Department, Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Co Council; Department of Communications Marine and Natural Resources; Comreg.; Minister Noel Dempsey; Mary Harney T D, Tanaiste and Minister for Health; other concerned citizens.



Laragh House,
Ardeevin Road.
04/02/2005

Re: Vodafone Mast at Ardeevin Road, Dalkey

To whom it may concern,

It is the intention of CIE in conjunction with Vodafone to locate a telephonic communication mast at Ardeevin Road, Dalkey. The foundation is already prepared.

CIE claim that they are exempt from planning regulation.

Planning Department are presently investigating this claim and are sending an inspector out to the area today.

I believe that this mast will send emf radiation in the direction of our homes, that this will damage our health and devalue our homes.

There was no consultation whatsoever with any residents in so far as I can ascertain in relation to this.

Yesterday I made my personal protest and demand that this mast not be installed in a letter to CIE and c.c. to Vodafone Head Quarters; Planning Department, Dun Laoghaire Rathdown Co Council; Department of Communications Marine and Natural Resources; Comreg.; Minister Noel Dempsey; Mary Harney T D, Tanaiste and Minister for Health; other concerned neighbours.

The person responsible in CIE is Mr Peter Cunningham, CIE Property, Oriel Street, Dublin 1. Tel 7032928. e mail peter.Cunningham@cie.ie The contact person in Vodafone is Mr Colin Feeley, Tel 2037777, e mail colin.feeley@vodafone.com

The Stewart Report (2000) on Mobile Phones and Health states that:
‘6.44 The anxieties that some people feel, when the uncertainties in scientific knowledge is ignored can in themselves affect their well-being.

6.39 We conclude, therefore, that it is not possible at present to say that exposure to RF radiation, even at levels below national guidelines, is totally without potential adverse health effects, and that the gaps in knowledge are sufficient to justify a precautionary approach.’

The Department of the Environment and Local Government July 1996 Guidelines for Planning Authorities states:
‘4.3 … Only as a last resort and if the alternatives suggested in the previous paragraph are either unavailable or unsuitable should free-standing masts be located in a residential area or beside schools.’

Rosalie Prendergast.


Informant: Colette O'Connell

http://www.nlg.org/news/statements/DayOfOutrageLynne.htm


Informant: Yoshie Furuhashi

From ufpj-news

http://www.rense.com/general63/ffol.htm


Informant: ranger 116

Sie sprechen nun auch mit den Hunden – und mit den Toten: Handys sind allgegenwärtig...

http://www.telepolis.de/tp/r4/artikel/19/19452/1.html

We need your help TODAY, to lobby for federal legislation requiring voter-verified paper ballots (VVPBs). While you are reading this, many states, counties, and towns are rushing to buy unreliable, unverifiable paperless touchscreen voting machines. They are poised to spend more than a billion dollars of taxpayer funds on machines that cannot provide a reliable recount or an accurate audit.

Unless you act now, tens of thousands of these paperless e-voting machines will be coming to precincts across the country within the next few months.
Ask Your Senators to Co-Sponsor S.330

Voter-verified paper ballots make it possible for voters to verify their votes are recorded as intended and for election officials to conduct meaningful recounts and audits. VVPBs also make it possible to recover from e-voting machine malfunctions, such as those experienced last year in California, Georgia, North Carolina, and elsewhere, without having to re-run a costly election from scratch.

ONLY a law requiring VVPBs will halt the ongoing purchase of paperless e-voting machines nationwide.

Take action:
Urge your senators to co-sponsor of Senator Ensign's "Voting Integrity and Verification Act" (VIVA, S.330).

Please ACT NOW to be heard on this important issue, visit our Action Center today at
http://democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/vevo/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=388

Thank you,
Will Doherty
Executive Director
VerifiedVoting.org

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=2&contentid=1921


Informant: ranger116

The Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) -- home to one of the largest and healthiest coral reef ecosystems, rare sea turtles, seals, sea birds, and other rare sea life -- need your help again. Send a message supporting the strongest possible protections for this culturally important and unique habitat.

Take action or find out more:
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/nwhi5/i5sxe84zj8bewt

Spread the word. Invite friends to take action:
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/nwhi5/forward/i5sxe84zj8bewt

A Few Days Left to Comment! Campaign Expires midnight, April 17,
2005.


** Protect Hawaii's Coral Reefs **

The Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) -- home to one of the largest and healthiest coral reef ecosystems, rare sea turtles, seals, sea birds, and other rare sea life -- need your help again.

While the public overwhelmingly supports strong protections for the islands, one powerful federally-funded council mandated with protecting them has been found instead misusing public funds to weaken these protections, according to award-winning journalist Paul Koberstein at the Cascadia Times. The Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council (Wespac) has proposed allowing coral harvesting, reef fishing, re-opening crashed lobster fisheries, and expanding bottom fishing in feeding grounds of the highly endangered Hawaiian monk seal, all violations of existing NWHI Reserve protections.

Take Action:
Let Wespac and Department of Commerce officials know that the public supports the strongest possible protections for this culturally important and unique habitat. Urge a full investigation into the use of public funds.


RESPOND VIA THE WEB:
http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/nwhi5/i5sxe84zj8bewt

Your letter will be addressed and sent to:
Ms. Kitty Simonds, Executive Director, Wespac

----THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT IN YOUR NAME----
Dear [decision maker name automatically inserted here],

I support the strongest possible protections for the NWHI Coral
Reef Ecosystem Reserve and proposed sanctuary. I oppose Wespac's
proposals to violate existing protections for the NWHI and to
promote coral harvesting, reef fishing, the re-opening of the
crashed lobster fishery and bottomfishing. These activities are
planned for the feeding grounds of the highly endangered
Hawaiian monk seal and are inconsistent with the goals and
objectives of the proposed NWHI sanctuary, which is mandated to
strengthen protections for the NWHI.

I am also deeply concerned about Wespac's inappropriate use of
tax-payer funds to defy public support for protecting this
public resource, to undermine existing law, misrepresent
scientific information, and make false claims to the public -
all to the detriment of this public trust. I urge the Department
of Commerce and Congress to investigate this use of public funds
and take firm disciplinary measures.

The NWHI are a rich marine ecosystem, serving as a nursery for
fisheries in the main Hawaiian Islands, where thousands fish for
a living. Protecting the NWHI as a public trust is key to
helping local fishers and the $800 million ocean recreation
industry in the main islands.

I support the call of Native Hawaiian elders and scientists who
state that commercial use of the remote and vulnerable islands
is not culturally appropriate, economically or ecologically
sustainable. The plans for the NWHI must be consistent with the
existing law, the NWHI executive order, and goals and objectives
of the proposed sanctuary. Please ensure implementation of
existing protections, including the Coral Reef Ecosystem
Reserve, and guarantee that additional protections for this
region -- mandated under the executive order be put in place,
should a sanctuary be established.

----END OF LETTER TO BE SENT----

Sincerely,

cc:
Mr. William Hogarth

Haaretz newspaper, 16.2.2005

Requests to erect antennas will be published in public order to make the public resist them. The local authorities have decided to sharpen their fight against antennas erection in a wild way or in places that can endanger public health like schools, kindergardens, hospitals. According to the national programme of cellular antennas, the mayors have no actual possibility to resist the decision to erect antenna.

In order to change this situation, the fighting staff of the local authorities decided to publish in public every request of the companies to erect antenna, to enable the people to deal publicly and legally with the wild erection of antennas. The staff explained that today the mayor can present his resistance to antennas erection but it is only one voice. When the district committee will receive dozens of resistant voices of residents, it can undermine antenna erection.

Herzelia mayor, Yael German, said that national programme of cellular antennas erection sterilize the local authorities from any possibility to influence the location of the antennas and made it a rubber signature. This situation enables the companies to behave irresponsibly and in opacity. The local authorities decided to recruit the public to their fight after they had an economic victory: lately the national committee of planning and construction has decided that the companies which request to erect antennas will have to deposit in the committee a commitment to compensate the authorities for future financial losses for reduction of land value, because of the cellular antennas.

*** The problem remains for the "tiny" antennas which don't need approvals according to the law.


Iris Atzmon

http://oldamericancentury.org/dalt1052.htm


Informant: Charles Bremer

It's payback time! After contributing tens of millions of dollars to Congressional candidates, last week the fat cat corporate lobbyists successfully pushed their self-serving agenda through the most corrupt Congress ever.

The very first bill passed by the U.S. Senate severely limits your right to sue a corporation that does you wrong. Remember Erin Brockovich -- the crusading mom who discovered that Pacific Gas & Electric contaminated the ground water in a small town? In the 1990s, she was able to organize the community, sue the corporation, and win $333 million for the victims. Today, thanks to the most corrupt Congress ever, corporate America can rest a little bit easier knowing that it's harder for innocent victims hold them accountable.

Now, this tort reform bill heads to the House of Representatives where it will be voted on before the end of the week. Send a message to your lawmaker now -- let them know that you're watching and expect them to vote to protect you not their big money lobbyist friends.

http://action.ourfuture.org/ctt.asp?u=1742757&l=78919

The second bill set to be passed by the Congress restricts your ability to seek relief from greedy creditors. Credit card companies have long pushed their deceptive credit schemes on unsuspecting families, and now this bill will pull the rug out from under these families. Who suffers? Ordinary Americans -- like Rose Shaffer -- a working class nurse from Chicago who suffered a heart attack, and then had to contend with sky-rocketing medical expenses.

A week after Rose was released from the hospital, she received a bill for $18,000. Under pressure from her hospital to pay the bill, she was forced to file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Now, the most corrupt Congress ever is siding with greedy creditors who want to make it more difficult for people like Rose Shaffer to get bankruptcy protections for the little money that they have left.

Write your Representatives and tell them that it's their job to protect you, not their big money lobbyist friends.

http://action.ourfuture.org/ctt.asp?u=1742757&l=78919

There will be more big money lobbyist payoffs to come. The National Association of Manufacturers -- the same group pushing to limit your right to sue -- is leading the fight to privatize Social Security. We must act now to send a clear message to Congress that -- regardless of the issue -- the rights of ordinary Americans cannot be defeated by the power of corporate contributions.

Before these bills are taken up by the House of Representatives, send a message to your members of Congress -- tell them that you're watching, and will hold them accountable.

http://action.ourfuture.org/ctt.asp?u=1742757&l=78919

Sincerely,

Ellen S. Miller, Deputy Director
Campaign for America's Future

by Jeff Krehely, TomPaine.com Exclusive

Under George W. Bush, evangelical groups are tapping public coffers and influencing policy decisions like never before.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/funding_the_culture_wars.php

by Bonnie Alba

Frontiers of Freedom

02/15/05

Our President, Congress, and Supreme Court Justices do so solemnly swear upon entering their offices. The oath of government officials has become one of mere formality, nothing more. The Constitution is just a document to most of them, holding no meaning or knowledge of the original intent of the founders. There was a time when a man's word was good as gold; a handshake meant a promise to be kept.

Remember what we as children swore by: 'Cross my heart and hope to die?' Did we believe we would die if we weren't telling the truth? Yet today's adults swear and make promises which they have no intention of keeping...

http://tinyurl.com/6sx5m


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

by Chris Paterson

AlterNet

02/16/05

CNN has a habit of devouring its own. Whenever the right-wing flak machine cranks up, CNN, like CBS last fall, dispenses with another top executive, producer, or correspondent, no matter how celebrated. The resignation last Friday of CNN's top news executive, Eason Jordan, should be seen in the context of CNN's previous abandonment of its top journalists, like April Oliver and Peter Arnett, and CBS' dismissal of top producer Mary Mapes; all of whom raised the ire of the right with the revelation of unflattering facts about the military. But the resignation is also being hailed as more evidence of the power of bloggers to fell their perceived enemies...

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/21262/


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp


PENTAGON THREATENED EARLIER TO KILL REPORTERS IN IRAQ
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=76203;show_parent=1

by Julian Sanchez

Reason

02/15/05

George W. Bush may cite Jesus as his favorite political philosopher, but his foreign policy vision bears a distinctly Kantian imprimatur. In his second inaugural address, Bush offered a clear and succinct articulation of a foreign policy vision that makes fostering democracy abroad the key to domestic security. 'The concerted effort of free nations to promote democracy,' he said, 'is a prelude to our enemies' defeat.' Many apparently viewed this as a radical new strategy -- perhaps understandably, given Bush's aggressive interpretation of what 'democracy promotion' entails -- but it is in many ways continuous with Bill Clinton's idea of 'engagement and enlargement...

http://reason.com/links/links021505.shtml


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

by James Leroy Wilson

Liberty For All

02/16/05

What if Bush's defenders were correct? What if everyone, from CIA agents on the ground, all the way up to the President himself, were doing their honest best in searching for the truth? What if no intelligence that reached the President's desk was undoctored, and that the President himself was never inclined to go to war, and only did so because he felt he had no other choice? Giving the President and his Administration the benefit of all that doubt, only one conclusion can be made: Government not only does not work, it is so completely and systematically incapable of performing even its supposed primary function, that nothing it attempts is worthy of our confidence and faith...

http://www.libertyforall.net/2005/feb27/Liar.html


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

LewRockwell.Com

If you have read the Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis, you know that the Devil is an expert in turning good impulses toward evil ends, and in leading people to misapply virtues in ways that serve the cause of evil. Well, so it is with the state. In every age, it takes the intellectual and political fashions alive in the culture, and turns them toward power for itself, money for itself, authority and affection for itself. The end is always and everywhere the same and as predictable as the tides. However, the means the state uses to achieve this end are forever changing in ways that surprise us.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/absorbed.html


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

The Times

02/13/05

A year ago this past week, Niederer buried her only boy after Dvorin, 24, was killed by a bomb on the battlefield in Iraq. Like any grieving parent, she spent a good part of the year pounding the walls, crying before bedtime and daydreaming about the grandchildren she will never have. But spurred by her son's spirit, Niederer also grieved by vehemently speaking out against the Iraq war and the Bush administration in hundreds of media interviews and at seemingly countless protests. The Hopewell Township mom lost more than one friend who objected to her campaign, and she was even arrested during one protest, but she said she doesn't have any regrets or plans to stop...

http://tinyurl.com/62vf7


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

MSNBC

02/15/05

There are new allegations that heavily armed private security contractors in Iraq are brutalizing Iraqi civilians. In an exclusive interview, four former security contractors told NBC News that they watched as innocent Iraqi civilians were fired upon, and one crushed by a truck. The contractors worked for an American company paid by U.S. taxpayers. The Army is looking into the allegations. The four men are all retired military veterans: Capt. Bill Craun, Army Rangers; Sgt. Jim Errante, military police; Cpl. Ernest Colling, U.S. Army; and Will Hough, U.S. Marines. All went to Iraq months ago as private security contractors...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6947745/


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

Montana: Anti-federal bills move forward in House

Bozeman Daily Chronicle

02/14/05

Lawmakers in the Montana House of Representatives collectively thumbed their noses at the federal government Monday by approving two bills exempting guns from federal regulations and driver's licenses from national standardization requirements. The bills by Reps. Diane Rice, R-Harrison, and Roger Koopman, R-Bozeman, do different things but are driven by the same concern: the erosion of personal liberties by the federal government...

http://tinyurl.com/5a329


Informant: Thomas L. Knapp

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/15/201217


Informant: Susan

Dear Ms Rendle,

Thank you for your ‘proforma’ reply to my email.

May I ask you to give full and proper answers to the following questions?

Why exactly was Roger Coghill invited to attend the Science Festival?

Why exactly was he then excluded?

Who exactly (names required) refused to share a platform with him?

On what grounds did they refuse?

Why were their demands obeyed? What influence did they bring to bear on the organisers and what powers (official or unofficial) do they have to decide and control who speaks?

Who was responsible for selecting and then deselecting Roger Coghill? Was it you? If not who? Name please.

Are any members of the Telecommunications Industry going to sell their wares, provide glossy brochures or in any way whatsoever, use this as a platform for their business aims and profits? If the answer to any of these is yes, they should be banned. This is, supposedly, a scientific festival, not a Trade Convention.

It is of course perfectly acceptable for NRPB members to argue for or against the science of mobile phone technology in a fair and impartial debate. It is not acceptable in this forum to have biased, Industry businessmen or women who are not scientists arguing the case, for the profits and benefit of their companies. The appropriate venue for this would of course be a Mobile Phone Trade Convention, to which the public would no doubt be invited. No-one would dream of arguing against this. However, as a point of interest, I wonder whether the Operators would allow an independent scientist like Roger Coghill to speak about the health risks at their Trade Convention?

I believe people are now contacting their local Cheltenham MP, and there will undoubtedly be a great deal of media interest on the actions of the Festival’s organising committee.

I would appreciate full and honest answers to the questions I raise. This is a very serious matter. It affects the lives, health and wellbeing of everyone in this country. So far people have not been given the truth, and their democratic and human rights have been consistently abused by the Government and the Operators. The people are no longer prepared to put up with this. Please be assured that your reply will be published to many thousands of people across the UK. We are confident that this will be of particular interest so close to the election.

Yours sincerely

Jennifer Godschall Johnson Executive Committee Mast Sanity

--------

Dear Ms Rendle,

Re Cheltenham Science Festival and Roger Coghill

I know you have already received many emails expressing concern about the exclusion of Roger Coghill from the Science Festival. Your decision is ethically and scientifically inexcusable. But I am sure you know that.

We are all aware of the reasons why he has been excluded. If this is a shameful action by the Mobile Phone Industry and the NRPB, then your cowardly decision to succomb to their blackmail (because that is exactly what it is) is equally reprehensible, and it sullies the reputation of the Festival and those who organise it.

You have deprived people of the right to know, in a forum which should be, above all else, open and free. I thought this only happened in a dictatorship. Try as you will, I do not believe you can justify or excuse your decision. You have chosen to present a biased and self serving agenda which will be no more than a showcase and PR event for the Telecommunication Industry. If the organisers of this Festival have so little integrity that they are willing to sacrifice both truth and debate, then in my opinion Roger Coghill is better off not attending. But if nothing else, honesty should dictate that you delete the word science from the name, as it is not worthy to include it.

Since you have received this from so many others, it is unnecessary for me to make further reference to the worldwide scientific evidence proving health risks from mobile phone technology. All that needs to be said, has been said. Though perhaps you might like to consider that in depriving people of this information, you may be as responsible for putting them at risk as the Operators themselves. In the end it is a matter of conscience.

The following lines may be of interest.

“A time comes when silence is betrayal.”

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

Martin Luther King


Yours sincerely,

Jennifer Godschall Johnson

--------

The Cheltenham Mobile Phone Festival

sorry hastily written but wanted to do it tonight.
cn


Dear Ms Rendle,

I understand that you are arranging the Science Festival in Cheltenham. A wonderful thing to do in this enlightened age. In darker times when science was as much to do with power, money and political influence as with the search for knowlege and understanding, it would have been expected that the business establishment would veto opinions other than their own.

I do hope that your festival will represent a more modern and enlightened approach. Specifically, I do hope that you will reconsider your view to let the multi billion pound mobile phone industry put their view of the relevant science unopposed by that of an independent Scientist Dr Roger Coghill.

If you really are prepared to stifle useful scientific debate because the multinationals are threatening to take their bats and balls home, then what you are proposing is a festival of business, not science and I suggest that you re name it appropriately.

I do hope that you will reconsider your decison on this occasion, presenting any view unopposed is simply unbalanced. If your festival is so dependent on the multinationals finances,it would be better to postpone it until such a time as you can present a balanced programme.

Yours sincerely
Chris Nunn
M.B. B.S M.A. (Cantab)

--------

Dear Ms Rendle,

I am aware of the recent e-mail exchange between yourself and Roger Coghill and your withdrawal of an invitation to him to take part in the Cheltenham Science Festival because, and I quote your own words, "other organisations and speakers, reflecting a variety of different views did not feel comfortable sharing a platform with you". This decision is clearly incompatible with your subsequent statement "we are endeavouring to make sure that all the information reaches a wider audience - giving them a chance to make a formed opinion". Your decision will ensure the opposite of your intent.

The stance of those who refuse to appear on the same platform as Mr Coghill because they disagree with his scientific opinions smacks of blackmail. If your organisation succumbs to this ploy, then you are conniving to a particularly insidious form censorship - and I have to say that I did not serve for 36 years in the HM Forces in the expectation of such an abject approach to freedom of expression.

The bottom line is that if those with different views cannot bring themselves to take part, then the correct course of action must be to either find others who are prepared to engage in honest debate or cancel the event outright.

I urge you to reconsider your decision.

David Baron
Group Captain, RAF (Retired)

--------

I am aware that you have been receiving many e-mails regarding the decision you have made to exclude Roger Coghill from giving a presentation on mobile phones and masts at the Cheltenham Festival of Science. I feel saddened that the might of the mobile phone giants, and also the NRPB/Government, are acting only to protect financial and commercial interests, rather than entering into open and frank discussion to ensure that the safety of the public is ensured.

The decision you have made would be more understandable if Roger Coghill were merely expressing a personal opinion. Instead, he is endeavouring to bring respected and thorough research findings to the public. I would have thought that a Festival of Science would strive to do exactly that.

Your only responsibility is to give all interested parties the opportunity of taking part and putting their views forward to the public. This you have done by inviting the Industry and NRPB/Government to attend the event. The public deserve to hear the facts which are emerging from around the world but are obviously being prevented from knowing the facts by the unscrupulous actions of these organisations.

Please reconsider your position. I am a Parish Councillor and take my duties to the public very seriously indeed. Anyone who is paid (or unpaid) to serve the public has a responsibility to protect the rights of those people over and above any other consideration.

Regards
Cllr Sylvia Wright

--------

For info.

David


Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 9:54 AM
Subject: FW: Festival of Science

Dear Madam,

I am a recipient of some E.Mails regarding the science festival you are organising, and I am so very sorry you feel unable to have Roger Coghill speaking about mobile phone masts and the medical aspects of them. If the mobile phone industry do not want to appear with him, that is their problem, not yours. Your problem now is that you are depriving the public of information. Let them decide what is credible and what is not. No other issue at the moment is such a burning one to the public, and they want information from a reliable source, and I am sure Doctor Coghill is reliable and well known in his field.

From my experience as a District Councillor, I can assure you that the mobile phone operators are less than frank and honest even at appeal level when I would have thought they would wish to be seen as whiter than white. Not so. Good luck with the festival.

I am responding as a private citizen but for your information I add the following.

Diana Pound (District Councillor for Sidlesham and Hunston) Chichester District Council.


Herewith the background to the Cheltenham Science Festival issue. Maximum effort please on Roger's behalf.

David Baron


Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 7:25 PM

Below my email you'll find an exchange between Roger Coghill and a lady organising the Cheltenham Science Festival - emails in reverse order, self-explanatory. Some of you may wish to write also - politely and without aggro, but with a clear view. This is with Roger's express approval - he suggested I pass it on to you.

Regards

Grahame

----- Original Message -----
From: Grahame Blackwell
To: Gillian.Rendle@cheltenham.gov.uk
Cc: Ann Silk ; Brenda Short ; Chris Busby ; Don Maisch ; Eileen O'Connor ; EMR Australia ; roger@cogreslab.co.uk ; Alasdair Philips

Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 7:18 PM

Subject: Re: Cheltenham Science Festival

Dear Ms Rendle

As I'm sure you must be aware, the word 'Science' (the key word in your upcoming event) is derived from the Latin 'sciens', meaning 'knowing'. It is a sad truth that there are those in the mobile telecommunications community - be it in the industry, or among their supporters - who are very keen that the British public should NOT know certain facts in relation to this technology. By taking the stand expressed in your emails to Roger Coghill, below, you appear to be (presumably unwittingly) colluding in that undermining of the claimed intention of your Festival.

It is a mystery to me how you can believe that the intentions of those refusing to share a platform with Roger are anything other than to prevent the audience knowing what he can tell them. Is he supposed to have some contagious disease? Be violent? Abusive? Nove of these is the Roger Coghill that I know.

For decades now Roger Coghill has been warning of the health risks from overhead power cables, risks that have until very recently been consistently denied by official Government scientists. Just last March, the NRPB officially acknowledged what Roger (and some others they refer to as 'maverick scientists') have been saying all those years - that the risk of childhood leukaemia is doubled by exposure to overhead power cables. (Needless to say, they didn't give any credit to those 'mavericks' for getting to the truth years earlier). It appears from the text of these emails below that these are just the people refusing to share a platform with one who is years ahead of them in scientific wisdom - not surprising, but hardly laudible. And hardly in line with the spirit of 'sciens' - knowing.

Late last year a major EU project, comprising many partners from several EU countries, released their Final Report - the REFLEX Report. That Report, which showed multiple unrepairable breaks in DNA (the classic precursor to cancer) from low-level electromagnetic radiation (below Government 'safety' guidelines) includes the following text:

"Since all these observations were made in in vitro studies, the results obtained neither preclude nor confirm a health risk due to EMF exposure, but they speak in favour of such a possibility."
I.e. It is more likely than not, on the basis of these findings, that such health risks exist.

That Report also states:

"Furthermore, there exists no justification anymore to claim, that we are not aware of any pathophysiological mechanisms which could be the basis for the development of functional disturbances and any kind of chronic diseases in animal and man."
I.e. The claim, so often peddled out by the NRPB and others, that there are no known mechanisms by which EM radiation could cause illness, is no longer tenable.

These are the sort of 'sciens' that those refusing to share a platform with Roger Coghill would rather were not known.

I'm very much aware of the '.gov.uk' in your email address. It's another sad fact that government bodies are strongly 'encouraged' to take the official line - even if that compromises their position in respect of their claimed objectives. I would very much hope that the Cheltenham Science Festival would not be allowed to fall prey to such political gerrymandering - I cannot believe that one in your position would wish for anything other than scientific integrity to take top priority in the organisation of this event.

I run a public information website informing many thousands of people every month about mobile technology health-related issues. I am also in contact with other similar organisations providing information to people all around the world. I shall certainly be putting an item on my website about your event. I very much hope to be able to relay confirmation from yourself that representation of this issue is truly balanced, and that if certain parties refuse to share a platform with a sincere and highly able scientist then this will not deprive the public at your event of the knowledge that he has to share. If others choose not to be there for whatever reason, fine, that's their priviledge - but please don't let their negative attitude spoil it for others, particularly the public who are there to learn.

Yours most sincerely

(Dr) Grahame Blackwell


----- Original Message -----

From: Roger Coghill
To: Alasdair Philips
Cc: Ann Silk ; Brenda Short ; Chris Busby ; Don Maisch ; Edward Goldsmith (Business Fax) ; Eileen O'Connor ; EMR Australia ; Gerard Hyland (Business Fax)

Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 2:39 PM
Subject: FW: Cheltenham Science Festival

Roger Coghill
MA (Cantab) C Biol MI Biol MA (Environ Mgt)
Sent: 15 February 2005 11:58

Subject: RE: Cheltenham Science Festival

Dear Roger,

We are going ahead with the debate, but unfortunately we can not do it with you involved. It is important for us to take a neutral position - that is our responsibility. Therefore we cannot just have you on stage, we need a variety of perspectives and since we cannot get confirmation from anyone else to speak with you then we will need to pursue other speakers who represent all the different views and who are willing to get on stage together. We agree with you that it is important that this debate happens, and is not abandoned.

With best regards,

Gillian


Sent: 15 February 2005 10:06
To: Gillian.Rendle@cheltenham.gov.uk
Subject: RE: Cheltenham Science Festival

Of course the establishment do not feel comfortable sharing a platform with an experienced, world respected, and knowledgeable scientist who can demolish the flimsy and untenable support they offer for the argument that only EM effects which actually burn tissue should be considered as regulatory guidelines. The whole weight of scientific opinion is now against that view.

By not going ahead with this important debate which is of consuming interest to the public, you are effectively aligning yourself with this conspiracy of silence and suppression, Gillian. What are you, as a responsible citizen, going to do about this?? If you kowtow to their aim of avoiding debate then you are simply helping put at risk the health of those in the public living near masts or excessively using cellphones in an increasingly radiative world. Your proper response would be to tell thenm that you plan to go ahead and let me give an exposition, and announce at the Cheltenham Science festival that the establishment refused to appear, because these facts are uncomfortable.

Roger Coghill
MA (Cantab) C Biol MI Biol MA (Environ Mgt)
Senior Visitor, Emmanuel College, Cambridge

Sent: 15 February 2005 09:36
To: roger@cogreslab.co.uk
Subject: RE: Cheltenham Science Festival

Dear Roger,

Thanks for the email and I'm sorry that you feel we are shying away from the discussion.

We do feel it is a relevant and topical issue that needs to be debated at the Science Festival. Unfortunately we could not programme a balanced dialogue because other organisations and speakers, reflecting a variety of different views, did not feel comfortable sharing a platform with you. I apologise for this, but feel it would be a disservice to our audience to only focus on one element of the debate.

I think because of the sensitivity of the topic we need representatives who can reflect the views of industry, government and the consumer. We are unfortunately not in a position to provide this at the moment, and so we are looking for other speakers who can cover all views. I'm sorry that we cannot offer you the opportunity to take part in the Festival this year but I hope you appreciate that we are endeavouring to make sure that all the information reaches a wider audience - giving them a chance to make an informed opinion.

With best wishes,

Gillian


Sent: 14 February 2005 19:11
To: Gillian.Rendle@cheltenham.gov.uk
Subject: RE: Cheltenham Science Festival

It seems to me that if the cellphone industry and the NRPB refuse to debate the issue of cellphone health hazards in an open scientific forum, then you are doing a disservice to the public by removing it from your agenda, Gillian: this is suppression of scientific truth, is it not, by default? Are you going to apply the same rule to other public issues?

Wolf and Wolf has just published a report (Intl J Cancer prevention, April 2004) showing that cancer is increased fourfold near cellphone masts within a year of their installation. Thank you for not helping that kind of information reaching a wider audience!

Roger Coghill
MA (Cantab) C Biol MI Biol MA (Environ Mgt)


Sent: 14 February 2005 18:16
To: roger@cogreslab.co.uk
Subject: RE: Cheltenham Science Festival

Dear Roger,

Many thanks for talking to me last week.

I'm afraid that I have not been able to confirm the other speakers for the debate on the dangers of mobile phones. It is important that the cafes at the Science Festival give a balanced view with different opinions on the various issues, and unfortunately I have not been able to ensure this. Due to this fact I'm afraid that I will have to withdraw the invitation to take part in the event.

I'm sorry for not being able to welcome you to Cheltenham. Please accept my sincere apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused, and I appreciate your time in speaking with me.

Yours sincerely,

Gillian

Gillian Rendle
Science Festival Coordinator
FameLab Coordinator

Cheltenham Science Festival
8 - 12 June 2005

http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-09-03.html


Informant: Foxhallgtown

16 feb 2005 BBC World News Outlook on EHS - "Electric Shock"

It sounds like a science fiction tale, but it seems that many people around the world are allergic to electricity. We speak to a man whose life changed when he realised he had a bad case of Twenty-first century poisoning.

Listen to Brian Stein (EHS/UK), Per Segerbäck (EHS/SE) and Olle Johansson, Karolinska Inst (SE)at Outlook Wednesday

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/outlook_peo.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/ram/outlook_wed.ram


Informant: FEB - The Swedish Association for the ElectroSensitive

High-Tech-Gemüse

"Die Niederlande gehören weltweit zu den wichtigsten Exporteuren von Treibhausgemüse und - blumen, die unabhängig von der Jahreszeit, auf Steinwolle und Nährstofflösung produziert. Im folgenden Beitrag steht die Thematik der illegalen Beschäftigung von Migranten im Westland - der wichtigsten Gewächshausregion des Landes - im Mittelpunkt. …"

Artikel von Marijke Bijl, Mitarbeiterin des Unterstützungskomitees für illegal Beschäftigte (OKIA), Den Haag

http://www.labournet.de/branchen/bergbau/gemuesenl.html

Dieser Beitrag ist erschienen in: "Bittere Ernte - Die moderne Sklaverei in der industriellen Landwirtschaft Europas" Verlag Europäisches Bürgerforum/ CEDRI, Basel 2004 128 Seiten, 12 Euro (inklusive Versandkosten: 14 Euro), Solidaritätspreis: 30 Euro. ISBN 3-9522125-2-0. Bestelladresse BRD: Europäisches BürgerInnenforum, Hof Ulenkrug, 17159 Stubbendorf bei Dargun, Tel.: 03 99 59/2 03 29, Fax: 03 99 59/203 99, E-Mail: ulenkrug@t-online.de

Zum Europäischen Bürgerforum siehe ihre Homepage
http://www.forumcivique.org/

In diesem empfehlenswerten Buch befinden sich auch Beiträge über die Arbeitsbedingungen in Spanien (El Ejido), USA, Frankreich, Schweiz, Österreich, Deutschland sowie Polen

Siehe dazu auch folgende Besprechung:

Eine agroindustrielle Einöde. Broschüre beleuchtet die Arbeitsbedingungen in Europas Landwirtschaftszentren. Besprechung von Kathi Hahn in junge Welt vom 17.01.2005

http://www.jungewelt.de/2005/01-17/013.php


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

"Der Abschluss im öffentlichen Dienst macht deutlich: mit dem gewerkschaftsschädigenden Kurs von Bsirske und Co muss scharf gebrochen werden. Eine schlagkräftigen ver.di-Opposition ist bitter nötig!..." Stellungnahme des Netzwerks für eine kämpferische und demokratische ver.di zum Tarif-Abschluss im öffentlichen Dienst vom 14.2.05

http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/gewerkschaft/tarif05/batnetz.html


"Verhandlungsergebnis" bringt keine Verbesserung

Offener Brief an die Mitglieder der Bundestarifkommission und den ver.di-Bundesvorstand von Gewerkschaftern aus Sachsen, dokumentiert in Auszügen in junge Welt vom 15.02.2005

http://www.jungewelt.de/2005/02-15/021.php


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

von Tacheles e.V.

http://www.my-sozialberatung.de/


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

Johannes Steffen hat auf seiner Seite Sozialpolitik bei der Arbeitnehmerkammer ca. 80 Stichworte zum Thema "Grundsicherung" näher erläutert. Zum Beispiel für den Buchstaben A die Stichworte: Allein Erziehende; Allein Stehende; Anspruchsberechtigte, Antrag; Arbeitsgelegenheiten; Arbeitslosengeld; Arbeitslosengeld II; Arbeitslosenhilfe; Arbeitsunfähigkeit; Aufrechnung; Ausländer; Auszubildende.

http://www.arbeitnehmerkammer.de/sozialpolitik/doku/05_soziales/sgb_ii/alg_ii_abisz.htm


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

Pressestatement vom Sozialverband Deutschland e.V. (SoVD) - Präsident Adolf Bauer bei der Pressekonferenz am 11. Februar 2005 (pdf).

Aus dem Text: "…Wir stellen fest: Die Einführung des Arbeitslosengeldes II führt zu erheblichen sozialen Härten. Hartz IV trifft diejenigen besonders hart, die auf dem Arbeitsmarkt derzeit kaum eine Chance haben - die Älteren, Menschen mit gesundheitlichen Beeinträchtigungen und behinderte Menschen.

Krankheit, Alter und Behinderung führen geradewegs in die Armut. Viele dieser Menschen erleben ihre Lage als ausweglos. Sie fühlen sich ohnmächtig gegenüber einer als undurchdringlich erlebten Bürokratie der Arbeitsagenturen und der Kommunen. Das zeigen auch die Zitate aus den Briefen, die wir in der Pressemappe für Sie zusammengestellt haben. Bei der Umsetzung von Hartz IV ist für viele bislang nur das "Fordern" zu spüren. Viele Arbeitsagenturen und Kommunen sind mit dem Bearbeiten der Bescheide vollauf beschäftigt. Das "Fördern" bleibt bislang auf der Strecke.

Die Arbeitsagenturen müssen jetzt dringend die Vermittlung der Arbeitslosen intensivieren. Ich möchte Ihnen nun einige zentrale Problemfelder nennen, in denen wir Nachbesserungsbedarf sehen…"
http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/arbeit/realpolitik/hilfe/sovd_bauer.pdf


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

Trotz "Ausbildungspakt" keine Verbesserung der Ausbildungssituation in Sicht. Weitere Verschlechterungen durch "Hartz IV". Ein Interview von Herbert Wulff mit Matthias Lindner vom ver.di-Bundesvorstand - Bereich Jugend in der jungen Welt vom 08.02.2005.

http://www.jungewelt.de/2005/02-08/020.php


Zu diesem Thema auch unser Zitat des Tages:

"Die letzte Meldung: Jugendarbeitslosigkeit

Berlin/Nürnberg: Kurz vor ihrem dreißigjährigen Dienstjubiläum wird die Jugendarbeitslosigkeit als Problem gelöst. Dies - so ein Sprecher der Bundesregierung - wird dadurch möglich, dass die Industrie - und Handelskammern einen neuen Ausbildungsberuf anerkannt haben. Es handelt sich hierbei um den Fachberuf "Qualifizierter Auszubildender als ALG II-Empfänger". Zum ersten Mal seit langer Zeit, so die Bundesagentur für Arbeit, wird damit eine über den Bedarf notwendige Anzahl an Lehrstellen zur Verfügung stehen. Keiner geht mehr leer aus. Unklar ist nur noch, ob als Ausbildungsqualifikation das fehlerfreie Ausfüllen des ALG II-Antrages reicht."


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

SoPo betont Handlungsspielräume für Personalvertretungen

"Betriebsräte und Mitarbeitervertretungen haben ein Wörtchen mitzureden, wenn freie Träger und öffentliche Betriebe 1-Euro-ZwangsdienstlerInnen beschäftigen wollen. Darauf hat das Personalamt der Freien und Hansestadt in einem Rundschreiben vom Dezember 2004 hingewiesen. Die so genannten 1-Euro-Jobs sind nach dem Personalvertretungsrecht auch dann mitbestimmungspflichtig, wenn sie im Rahmen eine Kooperationsvereinbarung mit einem Beschäftigungsträger eingesetzt werden. Das Personalamt weist in diesem Zusammenhang auf zwei aktuelle Urteile des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts hin. Danach dürfen Betriebsräte und Personalvertretungen etwa von Krankenhäusern auch über den Einsatz vorn Beschäftigten von Fremdfirmen mitbestimmen, wenn diese in das Weisungs- und Aufsichtrecht des Krankenhauses eingegliedert sind. Die Sozialpolitische Opposition Hamburg betont die Bedeutung dieser Richtersprüche für die aktuelle Diskussion um 1-Euro-Arbeitsgelegenheiten…"

Aus der Pressemitteilung der Sozialpolitischen Opposition zur Mitbestimmungspflichtigkeit von 1-Euro-Jobs vom 4. Februar 2004 (pdf).
http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/arbeit/realpolitik/hilfe/euromitb1.pdf

Siehe dazu auch das Urteil des Bundesverwaltungsgerichtes vom 13.
April 2004 (pdf)
http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/arbeit/realpolitik/hilfe/euromitb2.pdf

sowie Rundschreiben des Personalamtes der Stadt Hamburg zum Personalvertretungsrecht vom 15.12.2004 (pdf)
http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/arbeit/realpolitik/hilfe/euromitb3.pdf


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

Offener Brief von Arbeitslosen Hilfe Forum Deutschland an den Gesamtvorsitzenden des Arbeitslosenverbandes Deutschland (ALV e.V.), Mattias Dittmann, vom 10.02.2005.
http://www.arbeitslosen-hilfe-forum-deutschland.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=290

Siehe dazu auch den Artikel von Rainer Balcerowiak in der jungen Welt vom 15.02.2005: Alle lieben "Hartz IV". Selbst der Arbeitslosenverband Deutschland bietet jetzt "Ein-Euro-Jobs" an: Am Montag mußten Erwerbslose beim Ortsverband Luckau zwangsantreten...

http://www.jungewelt.de/2005/02-15/001.php


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

1-Euro-Jobs im Erziehungs- und Bildungsbereich - Empfehlungen zum Verhalten der Personalräte von der GEW-Landesrechtsstelle Hessen (pdf)

http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/arbeit/realpolitik/hilfe/geweuro.pdf


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

Offener Brief des Hauptpersonalrats des Landes Berlin vom 8. Februar 2005 an Bundesminister Clement zur Umsetzung von Hartz IV, dokumentiert bei BAG-SHI

http://www.bag-shi.de/sozialpolitik/arbeitslosengeld2/hpr-berlin/view

Aus dem Text: "Wenn von Ihrem Ministerium erklärt wird, dass das "Arbeitslosengeld II ohne Probleme gestartet" sei und nun die "Phase der Vermittlung beginnt", dann bitten wir darum, folgende Zustände in den neuen Jobcentern Berlins zur Kenntnis zu nehmen…"


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

Gewerkschaftliche Arbeitslosenkonferenz bekräftigt Kritik an "Ein-Euro-Jobs" Artikel von Hans Springstein in junge Welt vom 14.02.2005

http://www.jungewelt.de/2005/02-14/017.php


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

Impulspapier 2005 der Mitglieder am Runden Tisch der Erwerbslosen- und Sozialhilfeorganisationen, Hannover, Januar 2005

http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/arbeit/realpolitik/hilfe/impuls05.pdf


Aus: LabourNet Nachrichtensammlung, Band 22, Eintrag 11

http://www.mpip-mainz.mpg.de/~bluemler/extra/teaching/dioxine.pdf


Informant: Aart Bosman

February 16, 2005

MEDIA ALERT: FEARS FOR A FINITE PLANET

Rampant Corporate Globalisation And The Climate Crisis

"Our continuing uneconomic growth makes us complicit in a process that is triggering an ecological catastrophe for our children and generations beyond them. They will justifiably sit in judgment on our failure to have prevented its devastating consequences knowing that we chose to look the other way.” (Mayer Hillman, environmentalist and author)

A Fat Cat Laments

The audacity of corporate propaganda still has the capacity to make us gasp. Consider the astonishing attack on nongovernmental organisations launched at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, by Sir Digby Jones, director general of the Confederation of Business Industry. "The pendulum is swinging too far in favour of the NGOs”, Jones claimed. “The World Economic Forum is caving in to them. Davos has been hijacked by those who want business to apologise for itself."

According to Jones, business is the only route to cleaner water, better healthcare, better education and better roads. "Have I heard that in Davos? Have I hell. We have heard how we are greedy and how we pollute, and how we have got to help Africa. But a celebration of business? No."

Jones is “fed up with business being characterised as greedy”. He goes on: "Has anybody ever thought about the greed of the consumer? The consumer consistently wants more for less and business is expected to deliver it." (Larry Elliott ‘CBI chief claims Davos hijacked by NGOs’, The Guardian, January 31, 2005)

For the World Economic Forum to be “caving in” under the onslaught of grassroots groups really must feel like the end of the world to those who like to shape the planet’s affairs in their own narrow interests.

But Jones’s concern is misplaced. The legal obligation to shareholders to maximise profits in pursuit of endless economic growth, even as the finite planet groans, does face a real obstacle. Namely, that the wealth generated by global capitalism – shared ever more unequally in society - is rapidly being overtaken by the damage that the system itself is wreaking. If existing trends continue, the Global Commons Institute estimates that damages due to climate change will actually exceed global GDP by 2065. (http://www.gci.org.uk/papers/env_finance.pdf)

Global capitalism has an inbuilt death wish that will likely take most of us with it – if we let it.

We Live In A Capitalist Society!

Meanwhile, at the other end of the corporate spectrum, where cuddly CEOs ‘share your pain’ at the prospect of climate catastrophe, we find Shell’s Lord Ron Oxburgh. According to Oxburgh, the chairman of Shell’s UK arm, governments must take action now to avert “disaster”. "Whether you like it or not, we live in a capitalist society”, he said. “If we at Shell ceased to find and extract and market fossil fuel products while there was demand for them, we would fail as a company. Shell would disappear as any kind of economic force." (Saeed Shah, ‘Shell boss warns of global warming “disaster” ’, The Independent, 26 January, 2005)

As the above suggests, cracks do occasionally appear in the façade of what passes for reasoned debate in mainstream culture - uncomfortable truths can sometimes be glimpsed. Yes, we +do+ live in a capitalist society: that is the nub of the problem. The very nature of the global economic system is unsustainable. It demands limitless economic growth; ‘growth’ which results in terrible damage in terms of human and animal suffering, and environmental devastation.

Oxburgh’s argument is that it is up to government “to provide a new regulatory framework that would reduce the incentive to consume fossil fuels”. For Oxburgh, and many corporate chiefs, an attractive part of the climate ‘solution’ is to bury carbon underground. But: “The timescale might be impossible, in which case I'm really very worried for the planet because I don't see any other approach." ('Oil chief: my fears for planet. Shell boss's 'confession' shocks industry', David Adam, The Guardian, June 17, 2004)

Oxburgh's comments fit a long-standing pattern of 'greenwashing' propaganda: accept that there is a problem but move the debate away from genuinely sustainable solutions that threaten corporate power and profits. Thus he plumps for the techno-fix, business-oriented option of carbon sequestration "because I don't see any other approach."

Like all industry chiefs, Oxburgh has a blind spot that conveniently overlooks how state-corporate power is relentlessly feeding a suicidal system of globalisation. Businesses and governments, and their allies in the media and the public relations industry, are fiercely resisting "other approaches" that are, in fact, being debated and developed by citizens, communities and grassroots organisations around the world.

It might be an uncomfortable thought for the head of a giant oil company, but whether dangerous climate change can be averted is dependent on the extent to which today's corporate-shaped society can shift to one based on genuine democracy. Tragically, political parties across the world, particularly in the US and UK, are converging like never before under the pressure of big business. As US philosopher John Dewey once observed, “politics is the shadow cast on society by big business” - a reality that has reached epic heights today with the rise of the world's giant multinationals.

Robert Hinkley, who spent 23 years as a corporate securities attorney, explains that corporate law ensures that the people who run corporations "have a legal duty to shareholders, and that duty is to make money". Failing this duty, Hinkley writes, can leave directors and officers open to being sued by shareholders:

"Corporate law thus casts ethical and social concerns as irrelevant, or as stumbling blocks to the corporation's fundamental mandate. That's the effect the law has inside the corporation. Outside the corporation the effect is more devastating. It is the law that leads corporations to actively disregard harm to all interests other than those of shareholders. When toxic chemicals are spilled, forests destroyed, employees left in poverty, or communities devastated through plant shutdowns, corporations view these as unimportant side effects outside their area of concern. But when the company's stock price dips, that's a disaster." (Hinkley, 'How Corporate Law Inhibits Social Responsibility', January/February 2002 issue of Business Ethics, see articles section www.medialens.org)

Global society is in the grip of a system of economic and political power that views human suffering and impending environmental collapse as incidental to the core issues of revenues generated and costs incurred. But this is not up for discussion in the mainstream media.

Veteran environmentalist Mayer Hillman, author of ‘How we can save the planet’ (Penguin, 2004), notes that the mass media is “complicit in this frightening state of denial.” Hillman points out that the “blind ideological commitment to a burgeoning economy is fundamentally frustrating attempts to protect the global environment adequately.” (Hillman, ‘Clarion call on climate change’, BBC news online, 6 February 2005, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/4240697.stm)

With current targets on reductions of emissions clearly insufficient, only the policy of contraction and convergence proposed by the Global Commons Institute (www.gci.org.uk) has a reasonable prospect of success. This would entail a rapid convergence to equal per capita rationing of carbon emissions within an overall contraction of global emissions to an internationally agreed safe level. Hillman likens the present-day emergency to the second world war when Britain saw stringent rationing of resources.

In order to achieve zero net emissions in the timescale required, governments +have+ to take tough decisions on energy use and conservation. As environmental journalist Andrew Rowell has noted: “The only moral and rational reaction to global warming is disinvestment in the processing of all fossil fuels.” (Rowell, The Big Issue, 15-21 February, 1999)

Governments need to invest massively in energy conservation and renewable energy technologies and building design, by diverting tax breaks and subsidies from, in particular, the fossil fuel and nuclear energy industries. In addition, energy policy should not be in the hands of a few large corporations. There needs to be a rapid shift towards public ‘ownership’ of energy, just as is the case with water or schools in some countries and in some US states. As solar energy activists Daniel Berman and John O’Connor point out, “Democracy is a false promise if it does not include the power to steer the energy economy.” (Berman and O’Connor, Who Owns the Sun?, Chelsea Green, 1996, p.245)

Mumbling Without Irony

A conference titled ‘Avoiding dangerous climate change’ was held at the Meteorological Office in Exeter earlier this month. Off the agenda was any recognition that unsustainable economic growth on a finite planet might be at the root of the problem. Nor, as we saw above, is it a topic that crosses the minds of mainstream editors and reporters. Instead, the media faithfully relay the illusion that tough western leaders gathered at plush meetings of the G8, UN, World Bank, WTO or the EU are ‘tackling the climate problem’.

Sometimes the illusion is compounded by the myth that governments are listening attentively to the input from the Green movement. Thus: “Mr Blair - who will speak to an audience of business-men and environmentalists on Tuesday - last week held a rare meeting with the leaders of Friends of the Earth, the Green Alliance, Greenpeace, The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and WWF-UK to seek their ideas.” (Geoffrey Lean, 'You ain't seen nothing yet: after Hurricane Ivan, prepare for the return of El Nino, Independent on Sunday, 12 September, 2004)

Lean, a long-time environment correspondent much admired by green NGOs, tells his readers that Blair “is determined to use his forthcoming chairmanship of both the EU and the G8 group of the world's most powerful nations to revitalise international action and is considering pushing for agreement on a level of warming that the planet must not be exceed.” (Ibid.)

This is the standard media view: on climate change, Blair is ‘determined’, ‘committed’ and ‘listening’ to the major NGOs. Thus: “The Prime Minister is hosting a ‘power breakfast’ of business leaders, politicians and environmentalists at Downing Street on Wednesday, where he will unveil a new five-year strategy to combat global warming.” Mr Blair is calling for Britain to "pull together as a country".

However, this means little more than “a call for the public to be far more environmentally aware when they buy cars, homes and household goods”. (Severin Carrell, 'Blair's green summit' under fire ', Independent on Sunday, 5 December, 2004)

Previously determined challengers of this nonsense have fallen into line. Sir Jonathon Porritt, former leader of the Green Party and Friends of the Earth - now head of the government’s sustainable development commission - reproduces the worst habits of the “grey politics” he used to revile, mumbling without irony: “Labour's modernisation programme should be driven by the principles of sustainable development.”

Forever on hand to provide the media with important insights into the life and loves of his close friend, Prince Charles, Porritt claims: "Blair really does care about both Africa and the climate change and broader environmental issues.”

Of course he does. But then Blair “really did” care about Iraqi WMD and links to al-Qaeda, too. Quizzically scratching his head, Porritt tells us that Blair and Brown “talk up the seriousness” of climate change on the one hand, “and on the other they fail to bring in the raft of policies that are actually necessary to change corporate behaviour.” (Amanda Brown, Press Association, 'Modernisation "must include sustainable development"', 11 January, 2005)

It has somehow escaped Porritt’s attention that New Labour has always been beholden to corporate power. The consequences for any meaningful action on climate change are likely to be dire. Meanwhile, real options allowing us to reduce carbon emissions and reverse the global juggernaut of unsustainable economic ‘growth’ do exist.

But the likelihood of the media exploring these is minimal, unless sustained public pressure forces them onto the agenda.

SUGGESTED ACTION

The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and respect for others. In writing letters to journalists, we strongly urge readers to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone. Write to one or more of the journalists and editors below. It is more effective to write in your own words. You could ask questions along the following lines:

Why, in your reports on climate change, do you not address the unsustainable nature of endless economic growth on a finite planet? Why do you so rarely draw linkages between the likelihood of climate catastrophe and the core practices of global corporations and investors? Where are your in-depth reports highlighting the obstructive tactics of business to sustainable policies? Why do your climate reports fail to mention the billions spent by business and the PR industry in promoting unsustainable consumer consumption?

Write to Geoffrey Lean, environment editor of the Independent on Sunday:
Email: g.lean@independent.co.uk

Write to Michael McCarthy, environment editor of the Independent:
Email: m.mccarthy@independent.co.uk

Write to John Vidal, environment editor of the Guardian:
Email: john.vidal@guardian.co.uk

Write to Helen Boaden, head of BBC news:
Email: helen.boaden@bbc.co.uk

Write to Jim Gray, editor of Channel 4 New:
Email: jim.gray@itn.co.uk

Please also send all emails to us at Media Lens:
Email: editor@medialens.org

Good article today - Kate Figes who was Greenham common campaigner is now on a phone mast campaign. Sian


We protest

The last time Kate Figes was involved in activism was at Greenham Common. But when she heard that a mobile phone company planned to erect a mast near her children's school, she started dusting off her placards

Wednesday February 16, 2005

The Guardian

Its good to feel the energy and anger of activism once again. It's 20 years since I joined thousands of women to cut the fence at Greenham Common. Now, like thousands of other angry parents up and down this country, I am picking up my placard once again. Twenty years ago, it was about the threat of nuclear weapons; this time it's a 3G mobile phone mast that Orange seems determined to erect on top of the fire station in Stoke Newington, a densely residential area of north London with three primary schools nearby. It had made me very angry - so much so that my children and I spent last Saturday morning demonstrating outside the fire station with other local parents.

I realise there is something rather tragic about an old campaigner rediscovering her zeal only when her children are directly threatened by something - and a theoretical threat to boot. But it has happened, and the fact is that this is an issue that has stirred up an enormous nest of angry parents, all across the country, from all walks of life - many of whom have never protested against anything in their lives. Local newspapers from Cornwall to Scotland carry stories each week about local campaigns against masts going up in residential areas and near schools. And yet this national concern is largely being ignored by the national press.

I'm protesting about the mast because I feel there is no other way of stopping it, and I feel betrayed by government over this. How can I hope to keep my children healthy when the government does nothing to limit their exposure to electromagnetic fields? It enrages me.

And it enrages others - in some cases, to violence, if only against phone masts. In one Leicestershire town, residents grew so angry that two weeks ago they vandalised a 15m (50ft) mast near two schools. "We're told young people shouldn't use mobiles," says one local mother, "yet they put up these masts where children play."

When the government sold off five third-generation phone licences for £22.5bn in April 2000, it triggered a rush by the phone companies to grab as many sites as possible for potential conversion to 3G, the videophone service nobody appears to want. 3G requires many more base stations to operate effectively and transmits electromagnetic radiation at a higher frequency than 2G, with the highest concentrations within 400m of the mast. The phone companies appear to bulldoze through planning applications and do not need permission at all for masts lower than 15m.

In our case, planning permission was refused by Hackney Council, but Orange appealed to the Planning Inspectorate and managed to get the decision overturned last Christmas - to the complete surprise of the local community. The Mobile Operators Association say that local schools have to be consulted, but few are. Orange says it wrote to the headmistress of the primary school 200m away from our proposed site, but she says she never received the letter. Funny, that.

While that may be a genuine mistake, this is a sneaky old business. The phone companies install masts on top of buildings on Sunday mornings before anyone is awake. They have been known to change over the boxes on existing masts to 3G without telling anyone, while pretending to carry out maintenance. And with little regulation, a rash of masts has spread across London and the countryside, with businesses and local authorities cashing in. Masts are now everywhere - in church spires and on council flats, hospitals, offices, petrol stations and public buildings. A survey conducted by the Daily Mail at the end of January found that one-third of Britain's schools now have a mobile phone mast 200m away or less.

The government and phone companies hide behind the line that there is no conclusive evidence that these masts are bad for health. After all, they haven't been around long enough for research to prove anything much and all we have at the moment is anecdotal evidence from some people who live near masts and suffer insomnia and other ill effects. But a Dutch government study has found that some people exposed to 3G signals suffer from tingling, headaches and nausea. Sir William Stewart, head of the National Radiological Protection Board and the government's chief adviser on mobile phone safety, has said: "I believe on a precautionary basis it would be better if these masts were not placed near schools." Well, that's good enough for me. And if your kids end up in a school in the shadow of a mobile phone mast, you may end up wishing there was something you could do about it.

It's a hard fight, but it helps to know that some communities have triumphed against the might of the phone companies. In Notting Hill in London and Whitton in Yorkshire, residents recently managed to prevent masts being erected near nursery and primary schools. In Gloucester, the sheer weight of public protest has forced O2 to withdraw its plan for a mast 20m from a primary school. But these are rare successes.

This may be a national issue, but the only way to fight each mast is on local issues. In Stoke Newington, it is the London Fire Authority, run by elected councillors on the General London Assembly, which stands to earn tens of thousands of pounds a year from this mast. So we have pulled together as a community in the past few weeks. The lawyer next door has served papers for judicial review in the high court. The designer over the road has produced leaflets and posters. We have thrown up a campaign website with the help of shortal.com (DIY websites) and we walk from door to door asking people to write to the fire authority, urging them to withdraw.

I own a mobile phone and am the first to admit that life would be hard without one. But you can choose whether or not to use a mobile; you can turn it off and limit its use. Those forced to play within the shadows of these masts do not have any choice. And it is cheaper for the phone companies to erect masts in residential rather than industrial areas - that's why they do it. In my view we urgently need regulation forcing mobile companies to share mast sites and to place them in less densely populated areas and away from schools. In countries such as Australia there is a 400m exclusion zone between base stations and inhabited areas. Yet in Britain the mobile giants seemingly have carte blanche.

Until the government does something, I, like thousands of other parents, have no choice but to stand up and shout against something I believe to be wrong. So we hand out leaflets outside the fire station. My 11-year-old daughter carries a placard as I talk to people and collect signatures. And even though it feels at times like David fighting Goliath, there are bonuses in trying. I see more of my neighbours and have made new friends. We share tales of past demos to egg each other on. My daughters now understand that activism can be a positive force, and is their right in a democracy. And they're amused that I did not shirk from being a rebel before I was ground down by working motherhood. "What's Greenham Common?" my youngest asked. So I got the chance to tell her.

Stoke Newington Campaign: http://www.shortal.com/nomast

National campaigns for sensible siting of masts: http://www.mastsanity.org and www.mastaction.co.uk

Facts about electromagnetic radiation:

http://www.radiationresearch.org

Local support groups: http://www.planningsanity.co.uk

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1415331,00.html


From Mast Network

You don't support someone by displaying a magnet, a ribbon, or a flag. You support us by standing up for us and taking action with our sleeping politicians. You support us by finding out the truth and not buying into twisted propaganda making it look like we are supported.

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/?Page=Article&ID=2837

Ein Beitrag auf der Webseite des izgmf (Informationszentrum gegen Mobilfunk) informiert über die Proklamation eines zehn Punkte umfassenden Forderungskatalogs zum Entwurf des WHO-EMF-Programms über vorsorglichen Bevölkerungsschutz gegenüber Risikotechnologien, der im Rahmen des Weltsozialforums 2005 in Porto Alegre (Brasilien) formuliert wurde.

Die Seminarteilnehmer sind beunruhigt wegen des Risikos gesundheitsgefährdender Strahlung, die sowohl von Mobilfunk-Basisstationen als auch von Handys ausgehen soll. Deshalb haben die Seminarteilnehmer eine öffentliche Erklärung verabschiedet, in der sie der WHO ihre Empfehlungen vorschlagen.
http://www.izgmf.de/

Aus: FGF-Infoline vom 17.02.2005

--------

Weltsozialforum 2005: Wirkung nichtionisierender Strahlung auf die Gesundheit und die Bedeutung der gesellschaftlichen Kontrolle

Forderungskatalog vom Weltsozialforum 2005

Weltgesundheitsorganisation WHO, Internationales EMF-Projekt, Frau Dr. Emilie van Deventer, Genf, Schweiz

Betrifft: Framework to Develop Precautionary Measures in Areas of Scientific Uncertainty (Entwurf vom Oktober 2004) - Rahmenprogramm zur Entwicklung von Vorsorgemaßnahmen bei wissenschaftlich ungefestigtem Sachstand

Seminar-Brief “Mobilfunk: Wirkung nichtionisierender Strahlung auf die Gesundheit und die Bedeutung der gesellschaftlichen Kontrolle”, freigegeben auf dem 5. Weltsozialforum, abgehalten in Porto Alegre (Brasilien) vom 26. bis 31. Januar 2005

Allgemeiner Diskussionsbeitrag zum Entwurf des WHO-EMF-Programms über vorsorglichen Bevölkerungsschutz gegenüber Risikotechnologien

Die Seminarteilnehmer sind beunruhigt wegen des Risikos gesundheitsgefährdender Strahlung, die sowohl von Mobilfunk-Basisstationen als auch von Handys ausgeht. Deshalb haben die Seminarteilnehmer eine öffentliche Erklärung verabschiedet, in der sie der WHO folgende Empfehlungen vorschlagen:

1. In Anbetracht der großen Anzahl wissenschaftlich nachgewiesener intrazellulärer Auswirkungen bei schwacher nichtionisierender Langzeitbestrahlung müssen strengere Grenzwerte eingeführt werden, bezogen auf die ICNIRP-Werte. Anzustreben sind Werte, die dem Schweizer Anlagenwert (ONIR, 814.710 vom 23. Dezember 1999) gleich kommen oder diesen unterschreiten.

2. Im Hinblick auf die Vorsorge sind kurzfristig Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, die das Ziel haben, die Hochfrequenzemissionen von Basisstationen und Handys zu reduzieren. Beide sollten mit geringstmöglicher Strahlungsleistung auskommen, wobei sich die Forderung geringstmöglich daran orientiert, was technisch mit vernünftigem Aufwand machbar ist. Zu beachten sind dabei die maximal zugelassenen Absorptionswerte für Menschen aller Altersgruppen und unterschiedlicher Anfälligkeit, einschließlich der von Beschäftigten in der Mobilfunkbranche.

3. Im Zuge des Gesundheits- und Umweltschutzes muss überall dort, wo sich Menschen länger als vier Stunden aufhalten können, der Pegel der nichtionisierenden Strahlung ermittelt und ggf. auf das gleiche Maß gesenkt werden, wie bei den ständig bestrahlten Bevölkerungsgruppen.

4. Die SAR-Messung an Handys muss bei höchster abgestrahlter Leistung erfolgen und von unabhängigen glaubwürdigen Stellen gemäß international empfohlener Messvorschriften (beispielsweise die von CENELEC oder IEEE) vorgenommen werden. Die verwendete Messvorschrift muss den Messabstand zwischen Antenne und Kopf für jede SAR-Messung verbindlich vorgeben.

5. Handyhersteller müssen verpflichtet sein, den höchsten SAR-Wert eines Handymodells auf dem Handy, auf der Umverpackung, im Benutzerhandbuch und im Werbematerial zu nennen. Hierbei muss der Messabstand, mit dem die SAR-Messungen ausgeführt wurden, erkennbar sein.

6. Alle derzeit in Gebrauch befindliche Handymodelle mit einem SAR-Wert oberhalb der empfohlenen Höchstgrenze, müssen von den Herstellern mit einer Rückrufaktion aus dem Verkehr gezogen werden.

7. Den Handyherstellern ist eine Übergangsfrist mit Schlusstermin zu setzen, innerhalb der sie neue Techniken mit geringerem Gefährdungspotenzial für den Anwender entwickeln müssen.

8. Mit einer weltweiten Aufklärungskampagne sollte vor dem Gebrauch von Handys durch Kinder, Jugendliche, Schwangere und alte sowie anderweitig anfällige Menschen gewarnt werden.

9. Werbung für Handys und verwandte Produkte sollte direkt oder indirekt verboten werden, wenn sie auf Kinder und Jugendliche abzielt. Begründen lässt sich dies mit ethischen Grundsätzen des Anzeigenmarketings und mit Warnungen vor den gesundheitlichen Kurzzeit- und Langzeitrisiken bei Handynutzern.

10. Wie es schon im WHO-Entwurf der Vorsorgemaßnahmen vom Oktober 2004 heißt (PDF, Introduction - Objectives, Seite 6, letzter Absatz, sowie in den Anhängen A und B) müssen in den wissenschaftlichen Fallstudien zusätzliche Gefährdungskriterien berücksichtigt werden (physikalische, chemische oder biologische), deren Zusammenwirken für den menschlichen Organismus schädliche Folgen haben könnten.

Porto Alegre, 29. Januar 2005

http://elektrosmoghalle.twoday.net/stories/519945/

Fränkischer Tag, 11.02.05

Appell an Trittin und Künast

GAL sieht Gefahr durch DECT-Schnurlos-Telefone

Die Gefahr, die von DECT-Schnurlos-Telefonen ausgeht, wollen die Bamberger Grünen schnellstmöglich eingedämmt wissen. In einem Brief an die Bundestags-Fraktion von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen sowie an Umweltminister Jürgen Trittin und Verbraucherschutzministerin Renate Künast weist Grünen-Stadtrat Peter Gack eindringlich auf die Gefahr der DECT-Technik hin, die eine Strahlenbelastung bedeute, die mit der von Mobilfunk-Antennen vergleichbar sei. Er beruft sich in erster Linie auf eine Studie des Nova-Instituts, die von der grünen Bundestagsfraktion vor zwei Jahren in Auftrag gegeben worden war. "Die Untersuchung ergab, dass die Mobilfunkstrahlung, die von der Basisstation eines schnurlosen Telefons ausgeht, häufig weitaus höher ist als die einer Sendeanlage auf dem Nachbarhaus. Das heißt, die Menschen haben so etwas wie eine kleine Mobilfunkantenne mitten in ihrer Wohnung stehen, oft ganz nahe an Schlafräumen oder dem Kinderzimmer."

Wie bedenklich das ist, haben nach GAL-Angaben Messungen im Raum Bamberg belegt, die Mitglieder der Ärzte-Initiative "Bamberger Appell" in Wohnungen und an Arbeitsplätzen von Patienten durchführten." Dabei sind wir immer wieder auf eine hohe Belastungen durch DECT-Telefone gestoßen, von der die Menschen zuvor keine Ahnung hatten", zitiert die GAL eine Ärztin. Und weiter: "In ganz vielen Fällen verschwanden die Beschwerden bald, nachdem die Menschen ihr Telefon ausgetauscht hatten."

Für die Grün-Alternativen (GAL) ergibt sich aus diesen Beobachtungen eindeutiger Handlungsbedarf in Berlin. Die Verbraucher müssten sofort darüber aufgeklärt werden, dass ein DECT-Schnurlos-Telefon eine Strahlenbelastung und mögliche Gesundheitsschädigung bedeutet. Außerdem müsse die Industrie dazu gebracht werden, künftig nur noch Geräte zu produzieren, die keine derartige Strahlenbelastung verursachen.

Das Bayerische Landesamt für Umweltschutz rät nach Aussage der GAL bereits seit einiger Zeit zum Verzicht auf DECT-Telefone. Vor kurzem habe auch die Firma BMW auf die mögliche Gesundheitsgefährdung reagiert: Betriebsintern sei der Grenzwert für die Belastung am Arbeitsplatz auf einen Wert festgesetzt worden, der weit unter dem gesetzlich vorgeschrieben liege.

http://elektrosmoghalle.twoday.net/stories/523115/



DECT - Gesundheitsschäden durch DECT-Telefone
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/322063/

http://www.321energy.com/editorials/winston/winston020905.html


Informant: Shanti Renfrew

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php4?article_id=5885


Informant: Shanti Renfrew

http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2269/


Informant: jensenmk

From ufpj-news

http://mparent7777.blog-city.com/read/1076868.htm
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php4?article_id=5891


Informant: Shanti Renfrew

http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2268/


Informant: jensenmk

From ufpj-news

http://www.afghandufund.org/android2_001.htm


Informant: Carol Wolman

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0215-21.htm


Informant: Carol Wolman

http://www.rense.com/general62/aamr.htm


Informant: Smacko

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Feb05/Stanton0214.htm


Informant: Shanti Renfrew

FARMERS PUSH FOR SHIELD FROM BIOTECH CROP LIABILITY AS STATES TRY TO COPE WITH GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS

Billings, Mont. - Farmers in Vermont, Montana, and North Dakota are supporting legislation to make biotechnology companies, not farmers and grain elevators, liable for damages from genetically modified crops. These bills would also prevent the manufacturers from suing farmers whose fields are contaminated by genetically engineered crops and are unintentionally growing these crops.

Legislative committees in Vermont and Montana heard testimony today supporting Farmer Protection Acts. More hearings are scheduled in both states next week for further consideration of the legislation.

A hearing is scheduled next Thursday in North Dakota by the Senate Agriculture Committee on Senate Bill 2235.

Farm advocacy groups across the nation are working with farmers to ensure protection for farmers and by holding companies responsible for any damage caused by their products.

"We've done our homework for Vermont's farmers and our bill is strong and clean. We must make sure that farmers are not bearing the burden for the manufacturers who are marketing a product that is designed to contaminate," stated Amy Shollenberger, policy director of Rural Vermont. "I am encouraged by the strong support for S.18."

In Montana, wheat growers lined up to support Senate Bill 218 during a hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"If genetically engineered wheat is introduced, this bill will protect farmers from the liabilities associated with this crop resulting from contamination by making sure biotechnology companies are responsible for their product," said Dena Hoff, a farmer near Glendive, Mont., and representative of the Northern Plains Resource Council.

Hoff cited a recently released study, Monsanto vs. Farmers, by the Center for Food Safety that found that Monsanto has sued or is suing more than 100 farmers for patent infringement. Even farmers who have not planted the seeds are at risk of these lawsuits.

Currently, farmers who buy genetically engineered seeds must sign a Technology Use Agreements. These agreements shield the patent company from liability for contamination and place the full liability burden on farmers. Farmers contend these agreements essentially pit farmer against farmer when conflicts arise.

Farmers are equally concerned about the affects on grain elevators. "Losses to a country elevator for a 400,000 bushel train load of wheat to a west coast port could equal a half-million dollar loss of milling grade, transportation costs, and railroad charges for a train load of wheat sitting idle at the port," said Todd Leake, a wheat farmer from Grand Forks County, N.D., and member of the Dakota Resource Council. "These losses would bankrupt these country elevators."

Rural Vermont educates, activates, and advocates for living soils, thriving farms, and healthy communities.

Northern Plains is a grassroots conservation and family agriculture group that organizes Montana citizens to protect water quality, family farms and ranches, and a high quality of life.

The Dakota Resource Council is a grassroots citizens group in North Dakota working for family agriculture and responsible energy development since 1978.

Northern Plains and the Dakota Resource Council are members of WORC (Western Organization of Resource Councils), a grassroots organization of farmers, ranchers, and consumers in seven western states.

CONTACT: Amy Shollenberger, Policy Director, Rural Vermont, 802-793-1114; Kevin Dowling, WORC, 406-252-9672; Dena Hoff, 406-687-3645; ToddLeake, DRC, 701-594-4275


Pam Browning
Policy Coordinator
National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture
110 Maryland Avenue, NE, Suite 306
Washington, DC 20002
Phone and Fax: 202-544-5466
Email: pam@sustainableagriculture.net
http://www.sustainableagriculture.net/


Brian Caldwell
Farm Education Coordinator
Northeast Organic Farming Association of New York
180 Walding Lane
Spencer, NY 14883
607-564-1060
education@nofany.org


Informant: JHW369

http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2264/


Informant: jensenmk

From ufpj-news