BBC News online

Councillors ignored their officials on Wednesday to vote against a proposed mobile phone mast.

South Ribble Planning Committee rejected plans for the 14.7m 3G mast on farmland near a school and housing estate in Hoghton, Lancashire.

Planning officials had recommended the T-Mobile mast should be accepted.

However councillors decided against the phone mast on the grounds of siting and appearance. Residents and local MP Nigel Evans had opposed the plan.

'Unbelievable result'

Campaigner Chris Nelson said: "We're delighted, it's unbelievable."

He added that he hoped T-Mobile would not appeal against the decision.

The company was applying for determination, a process which allows masts under 15m to be built without planning permission as long as the local planning authority agrees.

No-one at T-Mobile was available for comment.

Michael Meacher told a public conference on Science, Medicine and the Law in the strongest terms that we need independent science and scientists who take the precautionary principle seriously and sweeping changes are needed in science funding and scientific advice to the government that ensures the protection of independent science

Which scientists?

Nobody disagrees that debate over whether we should go ahead with new technologies should be conducted on the basis of science, but which science? Independent science or industrial science? Let me test out a few examples on you.

Fifteen years ago a lorry driver accidentally tipped 20 tonnes of aluminium sulphate into the public drinking supply in north Cornwall – nearby residents and local doctors are convinced they were poisoned; but two Government enquiries found no evidence. Whom do you believe?

There are childhood leukaemia clusters in villages down the Cumbrian coast – local residents and independent scientists think it is the consequence of chronic exposure to low-level radiation from nearby Sellafield; but the Department of Industry (DTI) and British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) think it is nothing to do with local nuclear power stations – their best explanation is that it is caused by high levels of inward and outward migration. Whom do you believe?

Mark Purdey, a Somerset farmer turned epidemiologist, has produced detailed evidence to show that BSE was caused by farmers spreading Phosmetz, an organohosphate (OP), over the backs of cattle as a prophylaxis, but the Government's MRC Toxicology Unit - funded by the pharmaceutical company Zeneca - apparently refuted this theory. Which company held all rights over the production of Phosmetz? Zeneca. Whom do you believe?

Gulf War Syndrome has been a persistent disabling, and sometimes lethal, condition since the first war in Kuwait in 1991. Both UK and US soldiers and their independent scientific advisers are convinced that the soldiers were poisoned by the OP insecticides that they were liberally sprayed with. But the MOD and chemical companies insist there is no evidence for this. Whom do you believe?

Well, if you have any doubts, look at what has actually happened in the past when Government, in the teeth of overwhelming evidence, have often finally been forced to back track from entrenched positions that they always said were supported scientifically.

Science can quite often get things wrong.

Which science?

Government biologists initially refused to accept that power stations in Britain or Germany could kill fish or trees hundreds of miles away in Scandinavia ; later the idea of acidification caused by SO2 was universally accepted.

Government scientists originally did not agree that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were destroying the ozone layer; but during the 1987 negotiations on the Montreal Protocol the industry – ICI and Du Pont – abruptly changed sides, and ministers and scientists soon fell into line alongside them.

The Lawther working party of Government scientists roundly rejected any idea that health-damaging high levels of lead in the blood came overwhelmingly from vehicle exhausts, only to find that after lead-free petrol was introduced, blood-lead levels fell 70%.

The Southwood committee of BSE scientists insisted in 1990 that scrapie in cattle could not cross the species barrier, only to find by 1996 that it did just that. And there are many more examples.

Scientific uncertainty and the precautionary principle

The only way to deal with these problems is by applying the precautionary principle. Perhaps the classic formulation of the precautionary principle was at the Rio Summit in 1992 principle 15: “in order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”

That principle survived renegotiation attempts during the Johannesburg Summit in September 2002, and was reaffirmed in the Plan of Implementation that resulted from the Summit .

Why has this not been adopted by scientists and policy-makers? There can be only one reason: cynicism of not disturbing powerful political and economic interests.

It is highly disturbing to realise how long it takes for poisonous chemicals to be banned after scientific evidence emerged that they were harmful.

* Benzene was demonstrated as powerful bone marrow poison in 1897

* Acute respiratory effects of asbestos was identified 1898

* The ability of PCB to induce chloracne was documented in 1898

But it was not until 1960-70s that significant progress was made in restricting damages caused by these agents.

Independent scientists vilified

Efforts were made to discredit independent critics, as in the case of Richard Lacey and Mark Purdey in BSE, & Arpad Pusztai in GM food, and too many other examples.

Data and reports have been regularly suppressed or publishers intimidated, as in the Great Lakes chemical case.

The Southwood Committee on BSE believed a ban on the use of all cattle brains in human food chain might be justified, but considered that politically unfeasible.

There was also incompetence: the Department of Health was not informed by MAFF (the then Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, now disbanded) about the emergence of new disease (BSE) until 17 months after MAFF was first alerted.

Pervasive mistrust of science and scientists

No wonder that there is a pervasive mistrust of science and scientists. But the roots for this go deep.

First, the Rothschild revolution under Thatcher made the funding of science much more subservient to business interests. Over the past two decades, getting finance for scientific inquiry inimical to the commercial and political establishments has become increasingly difficult. The science is owned by a tiny number of very large companies and they only commission research which they believe will further their own commercial interests. And when that turns out not to be the case, as when research turns up results which may be embarrassing to the company, they are most often dubbed “commercially confidential” and never published.

In addition, companies have learned that small investments in endowing chairs, sponsoring research programmes or hiring professors for out-of-hours projects can produce disproportionate payoffs in generating reports, articles, reviews and books, which may not be in the public interest, but certainly benefit corporate bottom lines. The effects of corporate generosity - donating millions for this research laboratory or that scientific programme – can be subtly corrosive. Other universities regard the donor as a pote ntial source of funds and try to ensure nothing is said which might jeopardise big new cash possibilities. And academics raising embarrassing questions (as they should) - such as who is paying for the lab; how independent is the peer review; who profits from the research; is the university's integrity compromised? – would soon learn that keeping their heads down is the best way not to risk their career, let alone future research funding. The message is clear: making money is good, and dissent is stifled. Commerce and the truth don't readily mix.

A second reason why there is such pervasive mistrust of science and scientists is that the scientists staffing the official advisory committees and Government regulatory bodies in a significant number of cases have financial links with the industry they are supposed to be independently advising on and regulating. A recent study found that of the five scientific committees advising ministers on food and safety, 40% of committee members had links with the biotechnology industry, and at least 20% were linked to one of the Big Three – Monsanto, AstraZeneca, or Novartis. Nor is that an accident. The civil servants who select scientists for those bodies tend to look for a preponderant part of the membership, and particularly the chairperson, to be ‘sound', i.e., can be safely relied on not to cause embarrassment to the Government or industry if difficulties arise.

Third, the culture of spin and intimidation is far more pervasive than should ever be allowed. The shocking sacking and vilification of Dr Arpad Pusztai, when he produced GM research results inconvenient to the Government, bio-tech industry and the Americans, was no doubt, deliberately intended as a warning to others if they stepped out of line. And the threats and insinuations made clear to the only two independent scientists on the UK Government's GM Science Panel, Dr Carlo Leifert and Andrew Sterling, demonstrates all too clearly how viciously the Establishment will fight to safeguard its own interests.

And on spin, how many times have we heard the false argument that is still regularly deployed by ACRE , the Government's main GM advisory committee, when it announces that, “there is no evidence that this GM product is any greater risk to human health than its non-GM counterpart”. In fact they have not sought such evidence directly, merely relied on the biotech companies telling them that their GM product was ‘substantially equivalent' to its alleged non-GM analogue.

Fourth, science is not, and never has been, a value-free search for the truth. It is a social construct influenced by a variety of rules, peer group pressures, and personal and cultural expectations. It is developed, like all human thought, from preconceived built-in judgements, assumptions and dogmas, the more powerful because they are often unconsciously held.

So what is to be done?

What all this means is that science can only be fully trusted if it is pursued with the most rigorous procedures that guarantee total independence and freedom from commercial and political bias. That is far too often not the case today. The implications for policy are clear.

One, if the Government truly wants independent research, it has to be prepared to pay for it, not lay down, as it has, that 25% of finance for publicly funded research should come from private sources, thus forcing the universities into the hands of corporate sponsors.

Two, the Government should also require that no member of its advisory committee or regulatory bodies should have any current or recently past financial or commercial link with the industry concerned.

Three, contributors to scientific journals should be required to make full disclosure of current and prior funding sources, so that any conflicts of interest can be exposed and taken into account.

Four, we need above all a Government with the political gumption to stand up to the United States and those demanding calls from the White House, to stand up to the biotech companies, and to stand up to big business, and make clear that there will be no succumbing to dominant political /economic interests, e.g. no growing of GM crops in this country until proper, systematic, independent, peer-reviewed research, which is totally absent at present, has been carried through and made public which demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt whether GM foods are safe or not.

We should never forget the words of Winston Churchill, who said “Science should be on tap, not on top”.

This is an edited version of Michael Meacher's keynote address to the Green Network Conference, Science, Medicine and the Law, 31 January to 2 February 2005 , Royal Institute of British Architecture, London , UK , which will be published in issue 26 of Science in Society http://www.i-sis.org.uk

EDM 666

21.07.2005

Rosindell, Andrew

That this House expresses deep concern at the decision by Orange to site a new telecommunications mast in Gidea Park, Romford; notes that the mast has been erected despite continued protests from local residents as well as parents, pupils and staff associated with the Gidea Park College close by; further notes that the Stewart Report suggests that there could be a danger from these masts; understands also that the report recommends that no masts should be sited near schools or nurseries; further notes with concern that the Planning Inspectorate has ignored this advice when allowing Orange to use the site; urges Orange to dismantle the mast; and believes that no further telecommunications mast should be sited near to any building regularly used by young children.

Signatures( 1)

Standard Order Party Groups Alphabetical Order Party Totals

Status

Open signatures All signatures

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMByMember.aspx?MID=455

Rosindell, Andrew

Amanda Wesley

--------

I have forwarded EDM 666 to Sir George Young requesting him to sign it. I have also asked him if he would be prepared to go forward with a Private Members Bill on telecoms similar to the Richard Spring / Andrew Stunnell bills. Will forward his reply.

Jenny

--------

Dear All, FYI

Sir George Young has declined to sign EDM 666, as he is 'reluctant to intervene in a planning matter in another constituency.' Also he is of the opinion that EDM's achieve very little if anything. He said he would 'look carefully' at any PMB's on Telecoms, but did not comment on putting one forward himself.

Just to remind people - I have kept GY informed so he is well aware of all the arguments - therefore I haven't gone into any detail in this shortish email to him. Thanks to Amanda I believe most MP's will have this info, but it may be as well to check if you want to request an MP to present a Private Members Bill on telecoms.

Here is my reply.


Dear Sir George,

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly, I do appreciate it, though of course I was disappointed that you will not be signing Andrew Rosindell’s EDM. But it is your decision and we must all do what we feel to be right.

I’m very grateful that you have undertaken to look at any new Private Member’s Bills on Telecoms. Obviously I had hoped that you might present a bill on this issue yourself, but as you declined to comment, I assume this would not be the case. Do please let me know if I am mistaken. It is entirely a matter of luck as to who gets drawn, so the more MP’s who choose Telecoms, the greater the chance of success.

More and more MP’s are crossing over to our side of the debate. They have come to realise how flawed the Government / Industry science is, and how much harm local communities across the UK suffer because of the disgraceful planning laws. As a result a PMB is almost certain to be presented again in this parliament.

MP Lynne Featherstone is, I believe considering such action.
Another MP, David Evennett (Bexleyheath and Crayford) recently stated that, “Masts in residential areas are a blot on the landscape, and an eyesore, inappropriate and out of character. There are also the health issues to consider. The law must be changed and I will endeavour to support a law change in Parliament.”

MP Dr Ian Gibson is one of the best known and high profile opponents of masts close to schools and in residential areas. There are many others, too numerous to list here, most of whom are deeply concerned about the long term risk to public health. The Richard Spring and Andrew Stunnell bills failed through lack of signatures. We believe this is about to change.

Thank you as always, for your kind support – I hope you will go further and consider presenting a Telecom Bill yourself – a publicly ethical stand against this Government’s unethical policies.


Kindest regards as ever,

Jennifer (Godschall Johnson)


FYI - MP’s responses to Private Members Bills and EDM’s are posted on the Mast Forum nationwide.

http://members.aol.com/gotemf/emf/schools.htm

--------

I am trying to persuade the govenors at my son's school to wire in the WLAN computer network and shield the school from radiation from the masts outside by screening the windows. The WLAN has been in one year and the worst mast by far, up one year so there is not much sickness yet. However a TETRA mast has just gone up nearby and there are at least 4 other masts around and a radar signal we are picking up. The radiation from the Orange mast (the strongest one nearby) is from their report about 0.7 v/m

The govenors are asking me which schools have had cases of cancer in children near masts.

Does anyone know of any cases in the UK or abroad that I could get details from to prove my case?

Thanks

-------

Dear ...,

There was a lot of ill health including cancers I believe, amongst children since a mast went up close to a school in Spain. There was great public outrage especially amongst the parents, because the sickness rate was so high. The local authority decided or attempted to remove the masts. However, please don't quote me on this as I can't remember the exact details, it was a year or two ago. There was also the school near an Orange mast in Paris. There was a lot of illness amongst the children and Orange were forced to make a tactical retreat and remove the mast. They did so because of parental intervention and, if I'm not mistaken, with the support of the French authorities. I wonder if this had some influence on the ground breaking court case that has just concluded (or perhaps it's still going on?) in France to have the precautionary principle enshrined in legislation. I was unable to download the latest information on this on Omega twoday, as my computer and printer don't seem to be functioning properly, so I don't know the outcome. I'd appreciate the info if anyone has details. Am I right in thinking there are also a number of other school illnesses in Israel and Japan? Sorry not to be more helpful but hopefully there is someone out there with a better memory than mine, who can be more specific.

Jenny

--------

I was led to believe that Manor High School in Crosby L23, Merseyside has a high number of cases of childhood leukaemia. They have a large number of mobile phone masts sited upon their roof. Eileen O'Connor of SCRAM may hold factual information on this school.

Stephen

--------

As well as St Edwards at Coleshill, there is an issue in Haverfordwest, where all of their schools are within 350 mtrs (or a figure in that region) of a TETRA mast which was recently placed on the Police station. One of those schools is a special school, and one of the pupils attending is an epileptic whose family had to move house in Milford Haven because an Orange mast was switched on and she developed epilepsy. The case was so evident that the council moved the family, but the little girl then had to attend a special school because although her seizures were reduced considerably, she still had the epilepsy in a manageable form. Now that the TETRA mast has been switched on, the child has been having so many fits that her mother has taken her out of the special school. This case is well documented, and is being presented in court soon. I think it is important to focus on conditions like epilepsy as well as cancers etc. As Andy said recently, those with EHS (and epilepsy) are the canaries, ie, effects show up immediately, whereas the rest of us are miners, left to show the signs when it's too late to do anything about them!

Amanda

--------

Hi all

Have been a little busy of late, here's a couple of links for you.

Phil Watts

http://www.rkpartnership.co.uk/

Schools & Cellular Antennas
http://members.aol.com/gotemf/emf/schools.htm

----------

I am in touch with the campaign coordinater of a local(ish) campaign who has conducted a survey of five schools now in Warwickshire (Coleshill) with startling results. She began with one school, who had noticed a high incidence of illness in staff and children.

She has taken on 02 and is pressuring them to remove the mast from the school and is hopeful of success.

She has the backing of Warwickshire LEA, I believe.

Cheers Sylvia

--------

Dear Sylvia - thanks I have spoken to Jacqui but understand her mother is ill at the moment. Do you know if any of the children or teachers had cancer at the schools? And are the details available

Thanks very much

--------

I believe some 8 members of staff have cancer (2 deaths) - but I don't think any of the children have (thankfully).

The stats have shown that most of the children suffer headaches/nosebleeds/nausea, etc. - in fact, Jackie told me that some children are walking to school with nosebleeds.

I will see if I can get any actual stats.

Cheers

Sylvia

--------

Somewhere, I have details of a school in France where very young children were developing cancers. The mayor had the mast removed, but he was overridden and the town/city was fined thousands of pounds for their trouble.

It's not on my disks, so it must be amongst the astronomic amount of printed evidence I have accumulated. I'll try to find it.

Gill Lyden

--------

Glynn Hughes is to be interviewed on Monday on ITV North about a mast on his daughters old school. She was sick and he removed her from the school. There are 2 other people appearing as well as a rep from Orange. Its for a programme called 'Not in my backyard' to be broadcast on Oct 26th

Can he have some suggestions for sharp salient points to get across.

I always hear the phrases

'There's no evidence' and 'diseases always appear in clusters so you would expect to see clusters of cancer"

What would be the best answers to these questions?

Can someone suggest the best examples of peer reviewed and published research to quote?

Thanks very much.

--------

'There's no evidence' - There are hundreds of studies and I invite anyone to contact me to receive them / or simply say- that's a lie, because IT IS simply a lie, it can be refuted easily. Come with papers, show them to the camera and say - there are hundreds of studies - THESE ARE THE STUDIES ! THEY ARE RIGHT HERE. Telling that something does not exist doesn't make it right- and here they exist.

'Diseases always appear in clusters so you would expect to see clusters of cancer". There is consistency of clusters around antennas - more cancer the more close you are. Dr. Horst found cancer increase and Dr. Wolf found cancer increase near antennas. John Walker found and you can show the map he did - where there are antennas there is cancer. I ask something else - why doesn't anyone do research on the tens of clusters around the antennas in England? Eileen counted many in England. Say how much.

Can someone suggest the best examples of peer reviewed and published research to quote? The above mentioned. Take also the summary of Dr. John Walker that Eileen sent.

--------

Is there any effect of mobile telephone base station?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/958423/

SCIENTIFIC evidence of harm to human health from EMR
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/970429/

Cancer Clusters in Vicinity to Cell-Phone Transmitter Stations
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/580224/

"MOBILE TELEPHONE CAN CAUSE CANCER"
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/586356/

SERIOUS CONGLOMERATES OF CANCER AND OTHER PATHOLOGIES THAT HAVE BEEN TIE BY THE POPULATION NEXT TO ANTENNAS OF TELEPHONY - Cluster in Spain 2000-2004
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/466717/
https://twoday.net/static/omega/files/cancer_cluster_in_spain2000_2004.htm

Cancer Clusters in Vicinity to Cell-Phone Transmitter Stations
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/580224/

--------

Dear ....

Because the operators and the government do NOT accept the independent research and evidence, but only industry and government sponsored research does NOT mean it does NOT exist. It only means IT DOES NOT FIT THEIR PLANS. and, just think about it, where would they be if they did. They would have disappeared from the face of the earth, because of all the compensation they would have had to pay to people whose health and lives they had ruined. It will come to that eventually, and then you will see them scramble away as rats from a sinking ship so fast, they wont even stop to turn the bloody things off.

The cancer clusters do exist. Ask Eileen O´Connor [eileen@smokestack.ltd.uk] and or S-R-A-M, Contact: S-C-R-A-M PO Box 11329 Sutton Coldfield B76 9ZS T: 0121 313 3718 F: 0121 313 3718 info@s-c-r-a-m.co.uk Wishaw in Sutton Coldfield had a terrible dose of it. And clusters exist in London streets with old masts, and elsewhere where masts have been for a number of years.

There is lots of pier-reviewed and published research, and it has been there since the 1940s, (since the military invented the radar) but I am not the right person to answer about that. Ask Andy Davidson (watch@tertrawatch.net) Roger Coghill (roger@cogreslab.co.uk) or Graham Blackwell (grahame@starweave.com) I am sure they can give you something good to quote.

Best of luck. Agnes

--------

There is also sauvonsleon a town in France [ infos@sauvonsleon.fr ] where If I remember right 378 people have taken Orange to court, over a mast that caused cancer in a whole neighborhood

A lot of the people have died, and just the other day, while the case is on-going another 3 people died.

I will find it and send you a link to look the start of it up.

--------

You may want to point out the inadequacies of the government scientists in the past as mentioned in the document I've attached below. Their track record leaves much to be desired and at times they have had to do an about face in the light of independent research.


Best regards

Nancy


Which Science or Scientists Can You Trust?
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/980447/

--------

Re the incidence of cancer, I am challenging our Cancer Intelligence Unit at the moment because they stated at a meeting that "one in three will get cancer, anyway". My question is: How long has it been one in three? Why do we have to accept that this is happening "anyway". The Director of the Unit said that she didn't know for sure but thought it was about 30 years. I think that's rubbish - I think the escalation in cancer will have co-incided with the development of mobile phone technology.

They are looking closer at the science now that Lloyd Morgan's report has been forwarded on to them.

Cheers

--------

NNOOOOO !!!! It wasn't 1 in 3 30 years ago. You can ask the cancer registry and confirm (there should be a website with the data of the registry).

From Sylvia

Sorry, I forgot to sign. I know it wasn't 1 in 3 - and she knows it wasn't. That is why she is now openly supporting our calls for more investigation on the high incidence of cancers in our village.

--------

Dear Agnes and All of you,

I think this letter from Dr, John Walker is very valuable for our cause (do you know what are his qualifications etc)?. I have gone through it, and understand most of it but the part in blue is not clear. Would it be better if the ICNRP guidelines were inserted in brackets?

I have 'edited' the letter (apologies to Dr. Walker) to try and make it clearer and easier to read, but would like an opinion as to whether I have altered it in any way that changes its meaning. I have only corrected spelling mistakes; tried to work out a couple of ambiguities e.g. where it says 'Question 1' I put in a question mark and erased the 'r' before 'rNewspaper', which seems to make it clearer. This apparent anomaly made me hesitate for a while and could put off someone who did not want to be persuaded of the actual proven effects - they might not read the rest of it at all.

Does anyone know the price of the gadgets mentioned at the end?

Sincerely,

Gill Lyden


From

Dr. John Walkers letter.

Question 1) Is there any effect of mobile telephone base station? Newpaper questions and answers.

Abstract

There is now very self sustaining and well agreeing information over several countries:- To answer question 1 Is there any effect of mobile telephone base station radiation on living beings e.g. human and animal health? There are results of ill people in houses in beam patches (7 patches) so far tested (120 ill people by 2005) There is about 3 times the average rate of Cancer. in the beam patches. Ill people in flats in mast beams in Midlands (600 ill people) Ill people in a school near mast (75 ill pupils and teachers) To answer question 2 How is the incidence of ill health related to the strength of the radiation? In Spain Navarro & Oldfield 0.13 volts/metre for an Odds ratio of 39 for increased depressive tendency. In UK Beam patches about 1,5 volts/metre outside correspond to about 0.5 volts/metre inside buildings In Germany Bamberger <0.06 volts/metre give 30% illness, 0.06 -0.2 volts/metre gives 60% illness. These values are relatively close compared to ICNRP 41 volts/metre!

“An Unofficial View” of Health v Mobile phone Mast Non Ionizing Radiation September 2005.

Introduction Newspaper cuttings were collected a few years ago, of illness near mobile telephone base station masts around this country and some from Europe. The worst case was 4 cancers in 5 adjacent houses by an old mast; this seemed to be too much of a coincidence.[Evening Standard 20 February 2002] Most of the articles were followed up by a visit, to find the extent of the illnesses at each location. A more scientific approach was needed. It was found that three pole mast beams, 120 degrees apart, often hit the ground at a distance away from the mast equal to 10 times the height of the mast and it is here, at the area of highest field intensity, that the illness patches occur. Question 1. Is there any effect of mobile telephone base station radiation on living beings e.g. human and animal health? Human Data available A) HOUSES
(1) 7 patches of illness were found in the highest signal level of the radiation (non ionizing) near masts around the country. Approximate simulated average fields were used,. this is of the order of 1.5 Volts/metre.outdoors and corresponds to 0.5 Volts/metre indoors

1a) The number of ill people:-

1a1) in a single beam patch is proportional to the cumulative integrated dose of radiation received over the years e.g. 8 ill after 8 years, 21 ill after 13 years and:-

1a2) in a two beam crossing patch, 31 ill.after 11 years.

1b) The radius away from the mast of both beam patch and illness patch agrees well.

1c) The angular phase of the illness patch relates to the angular position of the poles of the mast e.g. 120 degrees or 240 degrees (maximum error so far only 12 degrees). B) FLATS
600 people were found to be ill in flats which were at high field levels. Note: - in multi- storey flats, each person’s rooms are all on the same side of the building, so the inhabitants cannot escape the radiation unless they sleep in the corridor! C SCHOOLS Surveys in schools A survey in a Warwickshire school, close to a multi array mast 11 years old, showed the teachers to be twice as ill as the pupils (The teachers have more years at the school and therefore get a larger integrated cumulative dose of radiation) and the pupils to be twice as ill as the population in a West Midlands town with a merely 2 year old mast. If the data answers Question 1 in the affirmative, then the next question is: Question 2. How is the incidence of ill health related to the strength of the radiation?

Don't quite understand this paragraph- can anyone explain it please? Andy?

The latest Bamberger study from Germany shows well (at 4 levels of radiation) the relation between the ICNIRP (International Commission on Non Ionizing Radiation Protection) Guidelines, the local Salzburg Guidelines and the levels for:-

60% illness at 0.06 – 0.2 volts/metre and :-

94% illness at 0.21 – 0.6 volts/metre in the 356 people studied.

Note - the level in the beam patches in Question 1 is 1.5 volts per metre externally which is of the order of 0.5 volts/metre internally in houses. This agrees fairly well with the more detailed Bamberger study. This also agrees well with the Oldfield Navarro results of:-
0.13 volts/metre for an Odds ratio of 39 for increased depressive tendency. The remaining question is:- Question 3 What are the mechanisms by which illness are caused? If over time, radiation suppresses our nightly melatonin cycle, evolved by all vertebrae (humans and animals) etc over many millennia, then our immune system protection against cosmic rays is seriously compromised.

I have not yet found an old mast that has not got an illness patch. If you have any data which disagrees with the above, if there is any, I would be glad to receive it.

“An Unofficial View” of Official Views.

About 1997, ICNIRP (International Commission for Non Ionizing Radiation Protection) took a very narrow view of the reasons for susceptibility of the bodies of living beings to Non Ionizing Radiation. They merely considered the heating effect and ignored the most important effects. They persuaded most governments and institutions with plausible arguments to their view. They did not know then what we know now. They had no feel that on this earth “we see through glass as but darkly”. It is easy to think that, although some of us can stand a few years of radiation without any obvious effects, that there is no effect. However this is really living in myth land and ignoring what is going on.

1) An Establishment statement "The balance of evidence to date suggests that exposures to RF radiation below NRPB and ICNRP guidelines do not cause adverse health effects to the general population. This is a non quantitative statement that has been static for several years. It is more political than scientific. It is a chameleon, depending on the population which is being considered.

A) If this is applied to the general population of UK then it is apparently True. But highly diluted results are being obtained due to averaging many people outside beam patches with a few people inside beam patches.

B) But if this is applied to the general population of a Beam Patch, then it is False. The illness applies to up to 50% of the people, with an illness density of about 3 times that of the surrounding area which is at a much lower radiated field level.

2) An Establishment view. There are so many masts about that there are sure to be some coincidences with random cancer clusters. The data on the previous page shows that mast induced illness is very far from being random and is in fact extremely determinate. Note - if mast induced illness is random, then it is out of control of the establishment and from an economic viewpoint, then maximum wealth should be generated by the expansion of the mobile telephone industry.


3) A Consensus view. People feel they are safer if their views agree with the “general consensus” however it is possible on odd occasions that this view may be erroneous particularly when:-

A) A new situation occurs - much higher frequency, digital, squarer waves, as compared to the old lower frequency sinusoidal waves of broadcasting. The establishment will pretend it is not a new situation.

B) And from my work so far, I feel that ICNIRP’s decision was extremely misleading, because they had not got the data then that we have now. The establishment will attempt to defend the old consensus by calling new scientific data merely anecdotal and by destructively fastening on unimportant points and neglecting important points. Defence of an old consensus can be very unfair scientifically.


4) Paralysis of advancement of knowledge by cutting funding Several scientists have said that there was no funding for key work.

1) At Universities students who wanted to do worthwhile work were dissuaded because it would be controversial (Universities depend on Government for their funding.).

2) This means that any real work must be done voluntarily by a retired scientist within the cost limits of the volunteer.

3) The Suppression of anti policy statements has maintained the myth for several years.


4) Generalisations and logicality not rooted in actuality do not help health.


Dr John Walker

Instrumentation The Acousticom makes one aware of radiation, but it does to a certain extent indicate the source. However a digital frequency analyser is much more versatile and about one tenth of the cost of the old analogue versions TheSpectran HF 6080 has a directional aerial and can detect amongst other things GSM 900, GSM1800, UMTS, Dect etc It can be hand held and gives an Acousticom sound of the wave modulation and % of ICNIRP level as well as the spectra etc and two channel storage of signals.etc.

--------

I think it is disgusting when govertnments know full well about carcinegenic substances, chemicals, plastics pesticides never mind the masts. For those of us that use face creams and I was recently told suntan creams we are putting poisons on our faces in the form of parabems [ have i got that right]. Where there is corporate power, money and greed and the chance of votes for a government the public always seem to loose. I have virtually stopped giving to cancer research because I believe we know so many things that cause cancer and it seems to me that we are just giving money for more drugs to be invented to the pharmeceutical companies to get more rich.

sue g

--------

My son attended E Bergholt High School, Essex where there was an Orange mast next door to the school playing school. My friend and I met with the H&S school governor and he arranged for Orange to come to the school to plot the beam. However the report was so technical I could not understand it although I did work out the beam fell in the school grounds. Meanwhile my father died and I had to help look after my mother who lived long distance. My son left school and no one else seemed interested so I had to drop it but I do know of at least 2 children having unexplained fits. The mast has now beeen up several years so who knows how many are sick . Incidentally the local doctors built a state of the art surgery just across the road from the mast in spite of the fact that my friend and I had written to them and sent a paper of doctor highland's.

sue g

--------

Hi Sandi

I couldn't find the school study I mentioned the other day from my thousands of emails on file but here's my own synopsis. I've no idea if it's still on the Powerwatch site though - this was current in June 2002.

BW Gary.


A recent independant study:
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/schools1.asp
compared two primary schools in the U.K, West Park Primary school in Hartlepool (330 pupils) which has had a mobile phone mast on its' property for three years, and Grange Park Primary school in Sunderland (300 pupils) which has no mast. In each case, over 100 parents responded to a questionnaire sent out which showed the following percentage comparisons in pupil symptoms:

SYMPTOMS Grange P'k West P'k

• Headaches 30% 66%
  Nausea 12% 25%
  Extreme tiredness 8.5% 39%
  at school
  Short-term memory loss 1% 15%
  Unusual change in 6% 20%
  behaviour over last 3 yrs.
  Teachers expressed 1% 20%
  concern over childs be'viour.
  Skin irritations 14% 33%
  Anxiety probs 5% 12%
  Poor concentration 15% 41%

EFFECTS OF TRANSMITTERS

Symptoms include: eye problems, problems with concentration, dizziness & loss of memory, headaches, nausea, digestive probs, muscle & joint pains, palpitations, skin disorders, anxiety/depression, tiredness, sleep probs, menstrual problems etc

Check out http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/schools1.asp

--------

June 2002 issue of the Ecologist quotes a report in The Lancet, which says a 2 minute mobile call can alter a child's brain activity for an hour, so classroom behaviour could be affected if calls were made at breaktime. Doctors fear this could lead to psychiatric problems, aggressive behaviour, lack of concentration, memory loss and inability to learn. The report's author is worried that delicate balances such as immunity to infection could be affected by interference with chemical balances in the brain.

On the basis of this, all schools should ban mobiles, including lunch and breaktime. This must apply on the way to school as well, so any pupils with mobiles for emergency use,or use on the way home should have to hand them in as they enter the school.

David Oakley-Hill

--------

Spain investigates four cancer cases diagnosed in children in one school http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1004264/

The Star Sheffield 14 .09 05

RESIDENTS are up in arms over plans for a mobile phone mast in one of Sheffield's greenest areas.

Members of the Friends of Porter Valley claim T-Mobile's application for a 72ft telecommunication antenna in a field close to Ivy Cottage Lane would spoil the picturesque landscape.

The phone company, which has submitted an application to Sheffield Council, says the mast is needed as part of its "third generation" technology but local people are urging the council to reject proposals.

Friends' chairwoman Ann Le Sage said: "We are objecting to this plan and we urge everybody to write individually. There is very little time and we must act fast if we are to stop this monstrosity being erected." She described the area as "one of Sheffield's greenest corridors" and added: "This would be highly visible and obtrusive. If the council allows this mast, how many others will follow?"

Friends' members claim the council failed to properly notify residents of the plans - by putting a notice on a lamppost.

But a council spokeswoman said: "We are only required to let the adjacent landowners know about the plans, which we have done. But we increased this to include a further 18 neighbouring dwellings."

Already 229 letters of objection have been lodged with the council along with a 668-name petition.

A T-Mobile spokesman said: "When a new mast is needed we try to reduce the impact on the environment with sensitive siting, innovative design and, where appropriate, landscaping. We are always conscious of local wildlife and conservation."

14 September 2005

Sep 13 2005

By Paul Rhys, South London Press

A BILL for almost £17,000 has been slapped on planners who failed to consult properly over the installation of a phone mast.

Scores of people complained when the T-Mobile mast was set up on Camberwell College of Arts in Peckham Road last year.

Their case went to the Local Government Ombudsman - a watchdog on councils - which has ruled that Southwark council's incomplete consultation constituted an injustice.

It has asked the council to pay 83 residents £200 each - a total of £16,600.

Objector Nathan Morris, 70, a retired accounts assistant of Brunswick Park, said: "It's not just that we weren't consulted - there's documented evidence these things could be a health risk.

"The money just seems like a payoff."

Another objector, NHS consultant Giuseppe Spoto, 59, of Camberwell Grove, said: "It's not enough to say it would have been built even if we did have chance to object. If the procedure was wrong it should be pulled down."

An application to install the mast was originally lodged in July 2003.

The council dismissed it as incompatible with the local conservation area, but a revised application was lodged that October.

Southwark put up a notice and advertised in the press - but didn't write to 83 residents whose objections had previously been collected by Brunswick Park Labour councillor Ian Wingfield.

No objections were therefore considered and the application was approved by officers without going to a planning committee.

In a report the ombudsman said there were "no grounds to refuse the application because of perceived local health risks".

He added the mast was well-concealed and had little visual impact on nearby houses.

But Cllr Wingfield remains unhappy with the outcome.

He said: "Whether residents get £200 or £2million, it's not good enough.

"The council made an illegal decision and didn't follow its own procedures.

"What confidence can the public have if they don't put right the damage?"

A council spokeswoman said they'd received the recommendation and were considering the findings.

By Ben Hoyle
Times online

September 14, 2005

A COUPLE who spent their life savings on a doomed two-year battle over a telephone mast now face financial ruin after being presented with a claim for £400,000 in legal costs.

Agnes Ingvarsdottir, 61 and her husband, Ericur Petursson, 63, began proceedings to have Hutchison 3G’s mast removed after the telecommunications company installed it on the roof of a restaurant opposite their home.

Soon after the mast became operational in August 2003 the couple and their son, Neils Erickson, 42, said that they began to suffer nausea, headaches and other health problems. But their attempt to prove that the mast caused the symptoms was thrown out by the High Court and they were instructed to pay Hutchison 3G’s legal costs.

The company has now presented the couple’s solicitor with a statement of its costs, which amount to £407,398. The company said that it had offered the family numerous opportunities to settle out of court.

Mrs Ingvarsdottir said yesterday that her family cannot pay. “We face financial ruin. We have no way of ever getting anywhere near paying this,” she said. “It is just unbelievable. We have no money. Even if the figure they eventually are awarded is less I doubt we could pay. The case was dragged out and it drained us of our savings.”

The family moved into their three-bedroom, Grade II-listed Georgian house in London Road, Worcester, in 1999, after coming to Britain from Denmark. Their son ran the family business, designing and making air filtering systems, from the property.

All three of them claim that they began to get ill when the mast became operational. Mrs Ingvarsdottir said: “Our lives just changed, it became very hard. We suffered headaches, nausea and vomiting, tinnitus and cardiovascular disease. I developed a blood clot in my leg, which I believe was caused by the mast.

“We have always been healthy people but suddenly we got everything going. I got chest infections. My guts were infected and my teeth started to fall out. It was like there was no immunity any more.” She added: “The doctor said there was no guidance on treatment of illness supposedly caused by phone masts. We had to move.”

They sold their house for £220,000 in August 2005, £50,000 less than it had been valued in 2003. Their new home, in Upper Colwall, Worcestershire, is surrounded by a conservation area.

--------

A family face financial ruin over a battle against a telephone mast
http://openpr.com/news/132.html

--------

Dirty dealings by Hutchison
http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=210

More on Hutchison 3G dirty dealings
http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=242

And still more on Hutchinson’s dirty dealings
http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=244
http://www.mast-victims.org/index.php?content=journal&action=view&type=journal&id=11

--------

Hutchison 3G use intimidation tactics to keep people at bay
From http://www.powerwatch.org.uk

I understand that corporations have a principle motivation to make as much money as possible, but is it really ethical to drag out a court case with highly expensive corporate lawyers and then dump the 400,000 pound bill on normal home owners with bad health.

Click here for the full news story:
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20050914_hutchison.asp

--------

Dear Agnes,

I've just read the newspaper article about you. What can I say? This is absolutely monstrous - and I'm quite sure that H3G will be shown up for the brutes they are. I hope you are getting this into the big daily papers - it's a human interest story that they should be falling over themselves to 'scoop'. A simple family with little money being trampled on by a global giant, for nearly half a million pounds! It's fantastic stuff, and it will make H3G into the phone firm from hell! Try and get it on to national TV and radio if you can. You & Yours Radio 4 would be good. My email address is les.johnson2@ntlworld.com - if you need to talk about it, or if I can help in any way to get this maximum publicity for you, please just email me. Maybe Karen with all her media contacts could also give you some advice, and perhaps offer to link you up with some of the national journos? What about it Karen - could you help Agnes in this?

Good luck - you're not alone, we're with you all the way.

Jenny

--------

Thank you Jenny.

I am in quite a shock over, that if it is just about big money, the press is there and ready.

By now it has been on BBC Midlands today, all three on Monday, + Local BBC Radio Hereford and Worcester.

Yesterday with a press agency from Birmingham, who got it into the Times today:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1779393,00.html

Which is not a quite accurate article, but nothing big wrong with it.

So, that was today, (now yesterday) and also in the Daily Express.

Central news has contacted me, but I do not know if they will come through.

The press agency will also send it to Europe, so it might appear abroad.

And you bet I will make the most of it, while someone is still interested.

There are many of us, as you best know, and there are only going to be loads more within a couple of years.

And yes please, if you have any contacts, I sure can use them.

Eileen O,Connor got me into the BBC central news with her contacts and that started all this.

We have been trying since 2003 to get the press interested, to no avail, but big sums can do wonders.

I honestly think I took H3G unaware, in the start they did not seem to understand what had hit them, but now I can recognize their solicitors jargon now on the answers to the press, and they are trying to unwrap the intimidation method and lies again, to get the press to believe we are the bad guys.

But no matter what, we will never negotiate with H3G, we do not negotiate with yobs, thugs and Mafia.

I do know principles are expensive, but this is our opinion. Come what may.

I am going to write to Danish and Icelandc newspapers, and I have sent the times article to Omega news and stopumts in the Nederlands.

And to a Swedish site that brings mast news and happenings, in the hope that they will print it, and maybe a French site as well.

So, I am still sitting here at 4 o´clock in the morning and writing.

But I thank you for your concern, I can use all the help I can get, and I have had a lot of support from people.

Many of my neighbors have come by today to wish me luck and sympathy.

I feel like an angry Terrier dog, and I will do them all the harm I can, and try and show them off for what they are.

And yes, I do know I am not alone.

Thank you for your support,

Best regards.

Agnes

--------

From Karen Barratt

Mast Sanity press office is pushed at the moment. Sian is on holiday and as many of you know, my brother is in a coma after a stroke. I am still handling all enquiries (Lisa will back up if I'm called away). I did the press release on the blood test as Sian had been working round the clock and hadn't had time to do it. It was a priority as it's the first time a test showing the link between masts and health effects has been available. It will be difficult for the establishment to "rubbish." As a number of people are off line at the moment the press office is also dealing with all blood test enquiries.

I have great deal of sympathy with Agnes. It's a terrible situation to be in. I've seen both the reports in the nationals. I regret to say that I think the publicity on this occasion is a double edged sword. Unfortunately the main message that comes over is "challenge the operators and lose your house" which is precisely what H3G wants. They may shed crocodlie tears over the "bad" press but won't lose any sleep over it. Protestors will be too scared to take legal action when they read this. Most people would not put their houses on the line. I certainly wouldn't. H3G may be seen as a bully but their phones will still sell. I know only too well from the Winchester experience with Orange that the telecoms do not care about bad publicity. We've had nearly five years of negative stories about Orange but it has proved impossible to get a boycott going. People still buy their phones because the advertising campaigns are enormous and nobody can quite face up to the fact that their phones require masts. We also have pursued the legal route as you know but as far as possible protected individuals against personal liability but it's a risky business unless you can get public funding. However, the costs award which Orange got against Winchester City Council has resulted in other councils being afraid to upset the companies. This has resulted in our recent failure to get Hants County Council to support us on the highways issue.

--------

I do understand Karen, and being in a similar situation myself with regard to desperately ill relatives, you have all my sympathy. Your comments regarding the failure we all encounter when up against the Ops are absolutely correct and do nothing but strengthen and confirm my view that mass direct action is the only way forward. As you so rightly point out, all our careful and well reasoned arguments have failed to date. It is increasingly clear that we are doomed to being permanently oppressed by rogue Operators and a shameful government, and they will triumph unless they are faced by the united force of the people. It could be done, there are enough of us out there to make a real difference. Whether this is possible under the new Mast Sanity remit, is a question we must ask ourselves. But that's obviously for another time and place. For reasons which I think you are aware of, I am happily outside this now, and that in itself gives me a great sense of freedom.

Jenny

--------

Agnes.. obviously very sorry to hear about your situation. Personally I think you should challenge the amount. AS far as Im aware operators often quote ridiculous figures and often judges will tell them to stuff it when the people who have to pay have little funds and the ones wanting the money have vast reserves. Im fairly sure they have to justify the amount especially if your own personal legal bill was a lot lower.

The other thing to look at is what advice your solicitor gave you and if they gave you false hope of winning. Mast sanity have always advised people never to go to court unless they have legal aid. Its not fair but the way the courts are set up it has to be a unique case to win and the solicitors have to be specialists in planning and in mast cases as well as far as Im concerned. On top of that you’ve got the fact that even very very strong cases such as the bardsey case are lost – things are stacked very heavily against us so risking costs is something we advise against. I believe the solicitor has to make it quite clear what potential costs could be landed on you if you lost. I m not sure which solicitor you used was it one on our recommended list? I think I sent that to you with our info pack when you rang and its also on the website.

Check with Chris Maile about what solicitors have to do as he will know. ( however ive just rung him and found out hes closed again due to lack of support )

AS to media … Actually Agnes after you called me on the advice line I gave your number to absolutely every media contact about 18 months(?) ago national and many more local media wanted to contact you however none of them managed to contact you and did come back to tell me they couldn’t get hold of you. I rang you myself and emailed you many times as well to try and find out your situation but didn’t get a reply so sorry I stopped giving your number out. There was a time when we got many many press inquiries wanting “sick” people (!!) we obviously have a long list of them and you were on it however from what I can see press inquiries are looking at different things in our campaign at the moment.. not sure why.. maybe the terror climate? There will be a time however when they do come back to the health aspect and no doubt we can give your number and email out again.

Life as a Mast sanity volunteer is very difficult at the moment. Lots an lots of people are very frustrated by the lack of movement and expect an awful lot of our volunteers. I often read emails on this list saying mast sanity should be doing this mast sanity should be doing that. Im afraid there is only so many hours in the day and in order to keep sane volunteers do have to have a break sometimes.. what we could do with is more volunteers.. there is so much we could do and could be doing but without people prepared to represent mast sanity and prepared to put the hours in then we have to limit what we do. Our priority as always is helping those people starting out who need to fight NOW. However we are doing things that might not be very obvious eg are you all aware Amanda is talking to all MPS on a regular basis educating them on the new research etc. Theres been a def upturn in political interest and I feel Amanda is partly responsible for that.

Media is slow at the moment as our press office people are under a lot of strain... – it shows when I have to provide cover!! I “broke” a long time ago and if it wasn’t for the current volunteers mast sanity and this list would have disappeared totally last November. As a result of working too hard for too long Im just not able to work much for mast sanity now.

Its very difficult to get any meaty stories in with all the iraq stuff and terrorist stuff…the mobile industry and scientific “authorities” are making the most of this time by slipping in news etc that in quieter times would be big news but now slips easily past the media.

Again Agnes I really do feel for your situation and I would reiterate that you should look at getting legal advice on how to reduce the amount.

Regards

Lisa Oldham

--------

Actually I and mast sanity fully support direct action.

Direct action is not necessarily unlawful action.. I presume Jen you arnt suggesting we all break the law in this fairly open list and that that is the sort of direct action you are thinking of? I ALL for it and always have been.. so is mast sanity.. not sure why you think we arnt? Charity status doesn’t prevent us doing anything but officially (!!) organizing a protest (think we might be able to get round that as well don’t you!) we have to educate politicians rather than lobby them but its not affecting what we do at all.. wish wed done it years ago as it gives us lots more credibility with officious arsy types. Of course there was no one like Sian to do all the form filling for me then though which is why I never got round to it

We cant and never have either as an org or a charity supported unlawful activity. Apart from it being against the law and an org of any sort could be help responsible in the end if they endorsed it, its the ordinary people who are driven to do the unlawful stuff that end up paying for it - not the operators… I only want operators to pay.

If you look at our info pack it continues - as always - to advise groups to carry out direct action, that loud noisy very public campaigns are the most successful - but understandably many are reluctant.. many people who are faced with masts have never marched or chanted or waved placards at anything – it’s a big change….

Over the years we and other groups have tried to organize mass activities.. ie school pull outs etc.. there are lots of us but we are spread out .. there may be an activist at every school but we don’t have 500 at every school and we need the majority to pull out.. its not a success if one parent pulls children out of school because of a mast close by. Take my old school the school lost 4 families of children as a result of the mast…. But the rest stayed and sit underneath one of the loudest base stations I have ever heard. They all know its there.. many of them have seen my demonstration of the acousticom… many are close friends of mine - none of them care/KNOW – enough!

And look at how many have NOT carried out the health survey… an independent scientific national survey .. 50 at the last count and they were 50 individuals NOT 50 groups of surveys!!

And then remember the protest in London !!! We almost had more police than campaigners… I appreciate many of you think this is a newish campaign but there are people out there who have been fighting nationally for over 10 years now… at the time of the protest we contacted over 2000 groups that both Planning and Mast sanity had helped… some more than once.. in theory if they all came and brought a couple of mates we reckoned 10 thou campaigners would have gone to London .. the media certainly believed it possible and so did the police… they knew the extent of local uproar.. however we actually got under 300….considering the hard work that went into organizing it and the cost of the event it was pitiful and both chris and I felt very let down.. it was soul destroying.

Im not saying Im against mass protest again its just you have to be realistic of what you can expect of people … thousands of people fighting masts only 300 ish who thought it worth going to London to protest. Any direct action now HAS to be successful.. the media and industry will keep a very close eye on what goes on..we cant afford to fail again

What Id like to see first is more unity of local groups… more local people meeting together – maybe as branches of mast sanity…. I d love to see people getting more people on this list or At least using our forum.

People working together… people acting as one.. people using their personal talents to forward this very difficult national campaign. Coordinated direct action is impossible unless people are already working together and communicating effectively… organizing and attending big events is daunting for people unused to protesting unless they have local support and are part of the community.


Cheers

LisaO

--------

Lisa.

I have never received the list of numbers to the media you talk about.

18 months ago we were desperately trying to flee our radiated home, after having spent a fortune bying and installing netal netting, led curtains, ferrets to put on every single electricity outlet and so on. And having to acknowledge that this did not help enough to block out the pollution.

We finally found an empty house to move into (and moved in there 18 months ago.) And we were in a pretty bad state, practically not having slept, and having been continuously sick since 7th of August 2003.

And please Lisa, I am not blaming you, mast sanity or anyone in the mast resistance movement.

You helped me to find Dr. Hyland for Expert witness, we had scored the country to try and find one, but no-one was willing. The only one willing was Dr. Santini in France, but our solicitor rejected him.

You sent me information about a solicitor in Birmingham, my husband spoke to him, but felt he seemed very dis-interested,

We could not get legal aid as we had “2 houses” it did not count that we were unable to stay in the contaminated house.

And of course we are challenging the amount.

H3G had already demanded to see our financial status, before they submitted their demand so they knew all about what we had and what we did not have, and where it had gone. They went far past the deadline that had been put to them to deliver the cost demand, and asked for 6 weeks extension and she gave them 3 weeks, but when they delivered the cost demand they gave a 3 week deadline for our new solicitor to deliver the assessment, it she wanted more time we would have to pay them £. 40000.- on account. So much for “Settlement offers”.

They had earlier estimated their legal cost to be £. 233000.- and told the judge they could not see it exceeding that amount, but in reality they almost doubled that amount.

Now they come back and say they would accept less (no numbers), but it is too late for that, if they can accept less they should have asked for less. It makes no difference to us.

I know very well that following principles can be very costly, but we are going to follow that up, no matter what.

They lied in court, repeatedly, and were allowed to get away with it, and the judge was totally biased FOR H3G.

So I am going to do everything I possibly can to hurt them, and highlight what kind of POND-LIFE they really are.

I have nothing more to loose. They stole my health, they stole my home, they stole my life, and changed it for ever. I am really pissed-off, but we will not go down without a stink.

So, if you want to give me a hand, encourage people to write letters to the press and support us.

Mast-sanity has done that on more than one occasion, and I, and everybody else in similar situation could do with that now, to show them lots of people care.

And remember, this is not just about H3G it is about all the operators.

Best regards.

Agnes

--------

If I am not mistaken there have been one or two significant cases this year in which European Courts have ruled that cases have not been dealt with lawfully because large multinationals ettc have been favoured by tvirtue of their limitless resources. The MacDonalds two are the most recent, although in their case they were the defendants, but there is also the case of the Cornerhouse Group, who were granted legal funding to take the Government to court for failing in their statutory obligation. Perhaps there is some possibility of pursuing a similar line to recover costs from the Government, as they have failed repeatedly on this issue. I realise that this is a legal minefield, but it's worth investigating. You have my sympathy for the plight that H3G's treachery and the government's ludicrous laws have left you in, but most of all you have my admiration for standing up to them whatever the consequences. I truly hope that there is some way you can recover your costs, as if ever there was a case of someone suffering financial loss because of the Government's failure in their statutory obligations it is yours. I know that there is an area that we can identify in your case inasmuch as the Secretary of State and Ofcom have not complied with one of their statutory obligations to date. I have discussed this briefly with Chris Maile who is going to provide me with some more information on this. Once I have any information that may be of use to you I shall let you know in case you can use it.

Amanda

--------

Dear Amanda.

Thank you for your support, it is truly appreciated.

Support is the most important thing when people are doing such an absolutely stupid thing like we have been and are doing.

But the thing is, you only get one chance of standing up for your self and if you don’t use it, you have wasted it, and it won’t come again.

As I said principles can be costly, but they have harmed us enough, we were not allowed to proof our case in court,

We were not allowed to say anything, unless asked, we were not allowed to point out their lies, (some of which we have written proof for were lies) or put the proof forward.

We have nothing more to loose, so we can just as well give it all we got, and hope to make a real stink, so EVEN the elected members of the British society will notice, and maybe start thinking about doing something about it. Like my MP for one.

If enough people support us with voicing their opinion in form of letters and so on it will be a huge help, and will get noticed.

The more that write in to BBC Midlands today, The Times and the Daily Express the better.

When we saw the draft judgment we drew up a list of corrections, which very well might have changed the verdict, but we were not allowed to deliver it to the judge, although we can now see from the cost demand that H3G are charging us for the time spent making corrections to the draft judgment.

I am already getting huge help from my friends and other people round Europe are working on doing the same.

I have had support from Powerwatch and much more. It is awfully nice and you see you do friends in need.

Hutchison ran a test-case on us to be able to stop everyone else, so lets show the operators that we can unite and turn against them, so that they will see that they had made a BIG MISTAKE.

I have sent the times article to national newspapers in Iceland and Denmark, and am going to send it to all the big newspapers here and in The Nordic countries and Europe that I can find, in the hope that they will take up the issue, as well as all the mast resistance groups that I can find.

Here and elsewhere.

And thank you Amanda for the offer of information, I am sure we can use it and learn from it.


Best regards.

Agnes

--------

Lisa, I completely understand and support the fact that Mast Sanity cannot advocate illegal action of any kind. That is a given. What individuals choose to do when up against the illegal bullying tactics of the Ops is of course up to them. You quite rightly state that legal direct action is very effective, especially when carried out en masse.

Should Mast Sanity be advising parents in all its affiliated campaign groups to withdraw their children from schools near masts? Well, that's up to MS. Personally I would say that that would be one of the most powerfully effective actions concerned parents could take. Does MS need to suggest this publicly as a direct action policy? I doubt that it could so even if it wanted to, as it would be considered too contentious, and furthermore, as a 'politically motivated agenda' it would be outside the remit of MS charity status. But it is certainly clear in my mind that such action would bring forward the results we so desperately need. Nothing I can think of would galvanise this Government into action more than seeing thousands of children across the UK removed from their schools because of their proximity to masts. It would be political dynamite, quite possibly resulting in the change in planning policy that they promised and refused to implement.

It was interesting that Ofcom decided to ban the 'Make Poverty History' advert on TV, because it was seen to have a political agenda.

I do of course remember the Mast Sanity march in London - I was there - holding the MS banner up front and throughout the whole of the march! Yes, it was a real shame that so few people turned up. However, that was three years ago, and clearly a great deal has happened in that 3 years. Thanks in great part to Mast Sanity, people are far better informed and active than ever before. We have also been able to convince a lot more politicians, thanks to Amanda. So, although I understand what you're saying, I do believe that we have reached a time when, given direction and support, far more people than you think would be willing to take national direct action. However, it's really not for me to comment, it's just a personal opinion.

You are right that hard pressed and totally committed MS volunteers have far more to do than they can possibly cope with, therefore it is vital that they are kept on board. Speaking personally, I think you must be aware, as I know one or two others are, that my input on any level, has been totally curtailed, and not by me. I am happy to say though, that my newfound freedom 'outside the loop' is not something I would ever want to change!

Jenny

--------

Caroline.

Yes, that is what we are going to do, if and when we get funds.

We fired our solicitor and are waiting for legal aid to find out if we can proof professional negligence against the firm.

At the moment our new solicitor is going through H3Gs cost demand, and I believe by having read and compared different posts, that it might qualify for The title “Fiction of the Century”, but we will see, what our solicitor comes up with.

We will of course also work for getting the right to appeal, and are hoping that the proof for that will come to light when we scrutinize the negligence case.

So, as you see, we are fighting on all fronts.

We are also working hard on trying to keep the press interested.

So, like they say on the news “Keep an eye on this spot”


Best regards.

Agnes

--------

Dear Agnes,

Glad to hear this. I hadn't realised it was your case (backlog of emails to read because of the holidays). My husband, a barrister, was also shocked that the fees were so high. Presumably the fees quoted do not include your own legal costs. He was asking if you had had solicitors advising you; what advice you were given as to the prospects of success; whether you were advised as to the risk of having to pay the other side's costs and what they could be, and whether any consideration was given to contingency fees (no win-no fee). Until I saw that you have new solicitors I was going to say that my husband, formerly a solicitor and now a barrister of 35 years' experience, had offered to look at your file on an informal basis to see if you had a case for negligence. He would then have recommended competent solicitors to help you. He did mention that your previous solicitors should have warned you clearly that you may well be liable for the whole of Hutchison's costs and that if they had real doubt that you would win then they should have advised you to stop. Of course we do not know what advice was or was not given and they may of course be saying that you were fully advised.

We in Winchester used very good lawyers with much experience in mast matters and the relevant law, and this experience and knowledge is vital as it is a very specialist field. Over a period of 4 1/2 years covering legal action up to the House of Lords we were able to use a mixture of full and partial legal aid, no win-no fee, and full fees mostly paid by the community. I think this is the only way to avoid excessive legal bills. It is interesting to note that for no win-no fee generally there has to be a 70% chance of winning and insurance can be taken out to cover the other side's costs if the case is lost. If your solicitors didn't work on a no win-no fee basis because it was thought your chances of success were not high enough, then I would have thought that they should have advised you not to go ahead. Anyway, none of this is advice but concerned comment! I do hope that your new solicitors will be able to retrieve something for you from this mess.

Kind regards

Caroline

--------

Dear Panayis Zambellis Luton,

We do not live there anymore.

In the end we had to abandon our home (and place of work, means we were there 24 hours a day/7 days/week, 365 days/year )

The house is still standing empty 1½ years later. Why I wonder.

I still miss my house awfully.

But we did get lots of measurements on the Com monitor.

With the mast only 28 meters away, our Com monitor lit up like a Xmas tree. (see attached photo, all lights are lit to the top of the scale). http://www.omega-news.info/P1010002.JPG

But the thing is that UMTS is a sinister thing.

It is not the deadly silent radiation of GSM.

It is very noisy indeed. And probably even more deadly than GSM.

I first found out about the noise when they shut the mast down for repairs on the 180804 and then again on the 010904.

It was like coming into the “EYE” of a Tornado, suddenly it was totally quiet after the raging storm.

Erik measured and there was no radiation.

And then suddenly it all started again, and I felt physically that they had turned it on again, Erik measured and it was on again.

But the worst thing is, that we made a lot of effort to shield for the radiation, and managed to shield it away.

But still, sitting in the spots where the beams came into the house we fainted and lost consciousness.

There is still a big mark in the carpet of our TV room where my hot iron fell on the floor and melted the carpet fibre.

We were very lucky that the carpet did not ignite and burn the house down, because we only came to quite a while later, and the room was full of fumes from the melted carpet.

I have never been so scared in my whole life.

Dr. Gerald Hyland went into the house just before our case came to court and measured with his Acousticom, and he said that he had never heard the Acousticom screech like this before.

It was the highest reading he had ever had.

Best regards.

Agnes.


P.S. I have now moved us to a place almost at the top of the “Mountain” Malvern Hills, where there is 1.5 km to the nearest mast. (But even here, surrounded by conservation area of “Outstanding Beauty” where no progress is allowed, there is still a small private area where a greedy private person plays a host to a mast, but as I say 1.5 km away).

--------

Dear Sandy.

Agnes story it only about greedy Telecoms and greedy lawyers wanting money, so why should that have that effect.

It even does not do that to me, and I am Agnes. Money is only money. Money can never replace integrity, principe and ethics.

H3G, and their solicitors, they lied, and they cheated, they even lied in court, where we were not allowed to object.

And I can proof all of it, in their writing.

Some of the lying is coming to light now, very clearly at that, as we are going through their cost claims.

I do not think this will be the last word in this case, which they meant to be a warning to us all.

So, perk up your spirits.

Keep them up. Keep fighting.

Best regards.

Agnes

--------

Dear Sweet Agnes,

I was concerned for your illness, your family, and losing your home, so that should have affected me emotionally, and the operator greed should have aroused my anger. You were, and are, a just cause. I was just a little bottled up with so much told to me on the advice line and elsewhere.

I should perhaps explain that I am part Sioux Indian and seem to have inherited the temperament and ways. I am deeply emotional and compassionate, usually calm and peaceful, but can also be fiery, determined, and without fear when I am angry. My spirits are rarely down, I just get on overload sometimes and close down till something stirs my emotions and anger again - then I am back on the warpath.

Sandi

--------

It's great to read these messages. I get despondent occasionally and reading these emails really helps reignite the fighting spirit. Keep up the good work. You are much appreciated.

John Elliott

--------

Sandi

I too get very upset by peoples apathy and mocking attitudes - mainly angry - but also very upset at all the millions of people being made ill by untramelled spread of this most harmful technology.

It's so good to hear the voice of someone who truly cares.

I'm not sure whether the woman I spoke to (about a year ago now) was the Head or a high ranking teacher, so if you contact the Head bear in mind it could be man or woman.

The address is: Carlton Hill Primary School, Sussex Street, Brighton. Tel 01273 604966.

You may tell her that a local researcher (me) has measured the microwaves around the school perimeter on several occasions over the last two years and the readings (at between 3 - 6 volts per metre every time) exceed the Swiss, Italian and Austrian safety limits and are known by scientists worldwide to be at levels causing worrying adverse biological effects.

You can tell her that I am certain these emissions are coming from the masts on top of the police station opposite and that the school, given the signal strength and its position in relation to the masts, could well be smack in the midst of the beam of maximum intensity.

Remind her what Bill Stewart says - under 16s should never use mobiles and masts shouild not be sited near schools etc. Also that study in the North of England which has already in the early stages shown kids going to school with nosebleeds etc

There was another study conducted several years ago now comparing a primary school with a mast on its premises to one without. A questionnaire was completed by about a hundred parents from each school and showed much higher incidences of behavioural and learning problems, regular infections, nausea, headaches, nosebleeds etc etc at the school with the transmitter. If you don't have the details I can look for it for you.

She might want to get an Argus (local paper) reporter on the case. she could try emailing Rachel Pegg, Siobhan Ryan or Jenny Legg at the Argus - email formula is rachel.pegg@theargus.co.uk

Many thanks Sandi,

Gary

--------

Dear Panays.

I live on the Hereford side side of the Malvern Hills. The large mast is on the Worcestershire side very low down on the hill, just above Great Malvern town on the other side of the hill, and we are facing North West I think.

The big transmitter is the main transmitter in the area, but judging from the quality of our TV and radio signals it does not reach us, but the mast in Ledbury does.

Droitwhich (where we lived 30 years ago) is a lot further away than 16 miles. I would think it is nearer 20 miles.

We did measurements in the area here, and could not measure any radiation. There is a small GSM mast here about 1½ miles away on the top of the hill, at a lot higher level and there is one in Chances Pitch, but our new house is shielded by 5 or 6 other houses, and we get no readings.

So far, so lucky, because it is becoming impossible to find a place in Britain where there are no masts, of some kind or the other in the immediate vicinity.

I guess the thing is, we have lived with radio masts since before I was born, and then came GSM, but these have never had any direct impact on us that we could feel, but UMTS is an altogether different cup of tea.

And there is something very sinister about the screaming noise from these masts.

Having one so near as we had feels like being in a raging storm. The noise is unbelieavable.

But thank you for the maps, I will put a cross on the big one to show you where we are now, we are out of the picture on the multi-map townmap.

Best regards.

Agnes

--------

Hi Sandy.

I can easily identify with what you say of your temperament. I come from the very far, frozen and volcanic North Atlantic Ocean, (Iceland) and believe I am normally a very peaceful person, cool and collected, but when abused or looking upon abuse of others my temper turns volcanic, and I have no fear either.

I feel, we have been abused and raped by H3G and I will fight them until I drop, and I am not talking about money, money comes and money goes, but our good health, good harmonic and peaceful life in our home has been robbed from us, and that is irretrievable.

And that I cannot forgive.

And having to look upon it being excused by lies in a court of law, which is supposed to look after the rights of the individual against abuse.

And that I can not forgive.

So like my Viking for-fathers, I am now in a state of “Eye for an Eye, tooth for a tooth” frame of mind and will do everything in my power to hurt these people and their organization.

Only, I am not prepared to LIE and CHEAT like they do, but then there is more than enough sleaze, dishonesty and crimes on their CV´s ready to be used, without having to use their dishonest methods.


Best regards.

Agnes

--------

FYI from Jenny.

Below is the letter I'm sending to George Young, Blair and the ODPM. I have included Don's excellent article 'Has British Labour forgotten the lesson from BSE? http://omega.twoday.net/stories/990190/


Dear Sir George,

Forgive me for contacting you again so soon, but I felt the enclosed Mast Sanity PR and other information, might be of interest to you. Don Maisch (EMfacts Consultancy) is a Trustee of Mast Sanity. He is based in Australia.

I am in touch with Agnes Ingvarsdottir and this is a truly shocking case. She and her husband were forced to leave their much loved home because of the severe illness which they both began to suffer after a 3G mast was erected opposite their house. They became so ill with radiation sickness that they finally gave up the struggle and put the house on the market. Because of the mast it was devalued by £50,000! In short, their lives have been torn apart. Sadly they are not alone – this is happening all over the country.

Mr & Mrs Ingvarsdottir bravely decided to ‘take on’ H3G, with the all too predictable consequences. Some time ago a telecom operator came under fire when they tried to prevent a court case by means of ‘corporate blackmail’ ie a blatant attempt to terrify the complainants into submission by threats of huge legal costs. It is a well known tactic of the Mobile Phone Industry, to scare off anyone who might contemplate similar action.

The couple, victims of the company’s ‘dirty tricks’, are facing nearly half a million in legal costs – costs which soared as H3G deliberately strung out the process, their lawyers conducting the equivalent of political filibustering. Under no circumstances can such intimidation by a global giant be condoned. We might as well be living in a third world dictatorship, where the poor have no justice and the law is hijacked by the rich and powerful.

Logic dictates that if the telecoms had nothing to fear regarding the safety of the technology, they would not have to resort to such extreme and ruthless measures - the science would uphold their argument. But it doesn’t, and this is the whole point. No wonder then, that they have to inflict Mafia-like intimidation to prevent due process, and the truth from being heard. Technology can be wonderful, and Big Business is undoubtedly vital to any economy, but it profits no-one when it destroys local democracy, trust in politicians, and puts the whole country at risk by jeopardising public health and safety.

Now that the HPA has established that masts cause biological damage to health far below ICNIRP guidelines, it is clear that the Government must urgently change planning regulations to fully protect citizens against long term, biological damage from mast emissions.

ICNIRP IS NO PROTECTION AND SHOULD NO LONGER BE USED AS THE SOLE ARBITER OF SAFETY BY GOVERNMENT OR INDUSTRY.

There is one final comment I would like to make Sir George, and it’s this. Almost every community and LPA in the land is struggling with the telecom dilemma. Our government has abandoned its principles, polluted the environment and sacrificed the present and future health of the nation – all for profit and greed.

I genuinely believe that any party that wants to win the next election, could do no better than to face this issue head on – publicly and with moral resolve. The telecom industry has unfettered power, but it cannot elect governments. Only people can do that.

I intend to send this letter to others, so please feel free to show it to your parliamentary colleagues. I’m sure you’ll agree that the public deserves transparency and clarity on the views of their MP’s, on this subject.


Kind regards,
Jennifer (Godschall Johnson)

by Kate Morrison
The Argus

People power has defeated controversial plans for a mobile phone mast in an exclusive road.

Worthing councillors voted against installing the 12-metre pole at the junction of Grand Avenue and Hythe Road after receiving hundreds of objections from residents, including actor Hugh Lloyd.

Planning officials had provoked anger by recommending that the mast is approved.

Campaigners who have spent months fighting the Vodafone mast proposal were jubilant after Worthing Council's Development Control Committee threw out the application yesterday.

Liz Simpson, of Grand Avenue, Worthing, who lives next to the proposed site for the mast, said: "It was all worth it. Vodafone must have done this so many times they're just used to riding roughshod over people."

The company said the mast was needed to improve reception in West Worthing as demand for mobile phones grows. It would be disguised as a telegraph pole.

But the scheme proposed in April sparked more than 240 objections, including opposition from actor Hugh Lloyd and his journalist wife, Sian, who live in Dolphin Lodge, Grand Avenue.

Ms Simpson was so angered by the proposals that just four weeks after a double hip replacement she spent hours delivering 400 leaflets to residents.

Councillor Tom Wye said people in his ward were especially worried about the health impact on disabled residents in Grand Avenue flats.

Some suffer from spina bifida and hydrocephalus - water on the brain.

There were also concerns about the visual impact on the expensive and carefully maintained street and possible sight restrictions on drivers turning the corner from Hythe Road.

The company said it had considered 24 other sites in the area but none were suitable.

Planning officers told councillors that if they chose to reject the mast they should do so based on its location and visual impact rather than on health grounds The Government has advised local authorities that public fears about health should not be a factor when considering phone mast applications.

Paul Yallop, 41, representing the residents of Grand Avenue, said: "We are absolutely delighted with this decision and we're ready for a fight if Vodafone appeal against it."

AN OUTSIDER'S VIEW - JENNY.

I read the latest Mast Sanity PR announcement with despair. How tragic that we are being forced to live a life cocooned in protective devices and kept functioning by taking expensive remedies. As I said earlier (and please forgive me for repeating myself) the many thousands of victims of this technology in the UK must surely make this a human rights issue on a grand scale. We need some decisive action.

I mention this again because I sense a subtle change in strategy occurring, whereby people will accept and / or be expected to protect themselves against the technology, rather than requiring the technology to change to protect people (see the article on the HPA Report).

Is Mast Sanity as a charity, able to seek advise from Human Rights lawyers on this? Being forced to sleep under Faraday cages, lining walls and curtains with metal, carrying protective boxes etc etc, is frankly outrageous, and surely amounts to the subjugation of a vast number of British citizens. Sadly, for many there is no choice if they are to survive and function with any degree of normality. Perhaps they could send the bills for these protective measures to their local councils and demand that they pay them! However, that's an action that could have a sinister backlash. What would happen if the Government suddenly saw this as a way of getting round their difficulties?

I can almost hear their devious minds clicking away.

'How can we deal with this - it's just not going away, is it? Do you think we ought to throw them a sop? How about looking at ICNIRP - I mean it's just not convincing anyone anymore is it, and it's not making us look good.' What??!! You must be joking. Lose all that revenue, all those kick backs and jollies. Not on your life. Besides, the Ops would hang us out to dry. No, there must be another way .... I know ...

The Swedish method looks promising. We could save billions by not having to make the technology safe - all we have to do is put the people into protective custody instead! Clever eh?' 'You mean make them all walk around with masks and those big puffy white suits that astronauts wear?' 'Are you taking the piss? No, we fund protective materials for ES sufferers, and that way we would be seen to be caring, compassionate, and actually doing something!' 'Great, but won't it be pricey?' 'No, it'll look good on paper but in practice we won't need to spend anything. They'll have to be nearly dead to qualify and even if they do, we could pass a law to say that if only one member of a household is ill, there'll be no entitelement.'

'Great! The Ops'll love it. They'll get free reign across the country and we get lots of lovely dosh!' Pause 'But what about the ... er ... backlash? (said in an embarrassed whisper) 'Won't the people suspect ...?' Laughter. 'Of course they will, but so what? They'll put up with it, they always do. Actually I quite enjoy seeing them frustrated at every turn. It's become quite a spectator sport, especially for us at the ODPM. Just thank your lucky stars that most of them are too nice or too law abiding to do anything radical. If they started that kind of caper we'd really be in the sh ....! '

With huge apologies to Yes Minister, and of course sincere apologies to those who hate people who gum up the system with time wasting trivialities, even if they are trying to make a serious point. I keep trying to find a box to fit into but can't. Jenny

--------

Jenny.

You are a gem.

Can you remember a few years ago when the government said it was going to give a computer to every poor child so they could have one at home.

They can't understand why the funds are all still in the safe.

And there was this about doing something about a deprived area of a city, it was a name given area. But 3-4 years later when a reporter went to take a look, it looked the same, only more deprived.

Words are cheap, especially hot air. Always have been.

You just promise the same just before the next election, and get voted in again.

So, now you have another 4 years where you can rally around telling everyone how great you are,

You have promised to make radical changes to this and that, knowing that no one investigates it for another

4 years, and then the same old, same old.

And if someone reminds you of the misery at home that you promised to do something about, you are busy to go somewhere else to look at other peoples misery, and have a nice time away from the homemade one. And when you come back you talk about having to do something about the Global misery and the homemade stays the same and forgotten, because you have such big ideals.

The same old Merry-go-round.

Agnes

--------

Thanks Agnes - and I couldn't agree more. The terrible truth is we have been manipulated from first to last. Being patient, reasonable and acquiescent is just what they want - always has been. We've been playing into their hands for years. We can't afford to for much longer. As long as we continue to play by their rules, we'll always lose! We need to start making our own rules - people power is a far greater force than governments and big business - we should start using it. Jenny

--------

Wonderful stuff, Jenny and Agnes, and I wholeheartedly agree with you. I have faith in people power, but will the people have faith that they can do it? That is the question. In Poland many people are behind a person who is helping to get masts down. In other countries people are backing those who are trying to make changes. Will the UK achieve this? This rests with the people. It seems in the UK that every bit of research or evidence that is brought forward is overlooked, watered down, or dismissed! Will this continue to be so? If it does, then the people will need to speak out or nothing can be achieved.

Agnes, I understand your feelings so well. Not only do I talk to sick people on the advice line, but some of my family and friends suffer, and so do I. When I first realised how callous and evil some are, I was totally gutted and shocked. When I got over this, my hate and anger were tremendous - warpath variety with no let up! But having reasoned with this, in view of my deep belief and faith in Our Creator, I came out the other side and feel I now work more productively, when I am not zapped too much!

Sandi

--------

Jenny.

You are a gem.

Can you remember a few years ago when the government said it was going to give a computer to every poor child.

So they could have one at home.

The cant understand why the funds are all still in the safe.

And there was this about doing something about a deprived area of a city, it was a name given area

But 3-4 years later when a reporter went to take a look, it looked the same, only more deprived.

Words are cheap, especially hot air. Always have been.

You just promise the same just before the next election, and get voted in again.

So, now you have another 4 years where you can rally around telling everyone how great you are,

You have promised to make radical changes to this and that, knowing that no one investigates it for another 4 years, and then the same old, same old.

And if someone reminds you of the misery at home that you promised to do something about, you are busy to go somewhere else to look at other peoples misery, and have a nice time away from the homemade one. And when you come back you talk about having to do something about the Global misery and the homemade stays the same and forgotten, because you have such big ideals.

The same old Merry-go-round.

Agnes

--------

I could not agree more.

I am trying to do my bit now, and showing the telecoms as what they are, a greedy, sinister lot whose only care is the cash they can rake in, in a short time, not the tragedy the inflict on those standing in their way.

With the big help of Eileen O´Connor we have finally got through to the press, and the sum: £. 407,398,06 seems to have been enough to make them sit up straight.

And, by now they have put on investigative reporters, so maybe there is hope after all. Please cross your fingers for me.

Judging by the way they have reacted to the press, they are not used to be challenged (and do not like it) at the moment they are trying on the LIE bit again to turn things their way.

But I have nothing to loose anymore, so I will not give up.

I will use everything I can to show them for what they are.

Wish me luck. I am scared shitless, but I will not give up.

I have stopped being patient, reasonable and nice, all that is left is hate.

I went to Worcester yesterday, with the GGC Midlands Today and stood outside my old home

After 1½ years it is still vacant, and I can see it is crumbling, it is 200 years old, it needs TLC

On a steady basis, and it is not getting any.

Sorry, I still love that house, and my happy times there Pre-H3G mast.

So, I guess I am like you really are describing, a rabid dog, full of disgust for the people who have no regard for others lives and health as long as they can cash in.

And, that goes for the telecoms and the people who call them selves the rulers of this land.

Who ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR WELLBEING, BY LAW, but only act on fads that they think can make them look good, and whatever gives cash there is to be scraped up.

So, lets hope all of us shake of the apathy, and join the unions. And get active.

Sorry for the raving, but my feelings are very, very strong.

Best regards.

Agnes

BY NICOLA HODGSON

Derbyshire Evening Telegraph

09:30 - 12 September 2005

Residents believe that their human rights would be abused if a 25-metre mobile phone mast is approved by councillors.

Seventy people have signed a petition objecting to the mast, which would be built at New House Farm, in Etwall Road, Mickleover.

The Human Rights Act means people have the right to respect for private and family life, home and possessions.

Exemptions include when something is in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country.

A report to the council said: "The objectors to the mast have raised the human rights issue. They assert that it is not a matter of overriding national security or public interest."

However, the report said that there was a public interest because the Government has stated that it wishes the public to have access to the latest mobile phone technology.

It is also considered that the distance between the mast and homes means there would not be any "material impact" on the human rights of people living there.

The location of the mast has already been changed twice by a matter of metres since the application by T-Mobile (UK) Ltd was first submitted to South Derbyshire District Council.

It was moved once at the request of the council to ensure that the bulk of the equipment was screened by trees and the second time by the company after the landowner asked that the mast be moved further away from houses in Ladybank Road. The nearest houses to the site are 300 metres away, in Paxton Close.

Pamela McCahey, of Howden Close, Mickleover, has signed the petition. She lives about 400 metres away from the site of the proposed mast.

She said: "We are not concerned about seeing the wretched thing, we are objecting on human rights and health issues.

"The people who want to put it up can't give us any accurate figures for radiation levels."

A letter signed by 63 people also raises objections including health concerns and the visual impact the mast would have.

The proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions including that work on the mast should start within three years of permission being granted, and within three months of the equipment becoming surplus to requirements it should be removed.

A spokesman for T-Mobile said: "Based on more than 40 years of research, T-Mobile is confident that its base stations, operating within strict national and international guidelines recognised by the World Health Organisation, do not present a health risk to any member of the public."

Omega this is not true. See under:
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/Wissenschaft+zu+Mobilfunk/
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Cancer+Cluster
http://www.buergerwelle.de/body_science.html

Base Stations, operating within strict national and international Guidelines, do not present a Health Risk http://omega.twoday.net/stories/771911/

The development control committee meeting takes place tomorrow, at 6pm in the Council Chamber at the Civic Offices, Civic Way, Swadlincote.