editorial@islingtonexpress.co.uk

13 January 2006

Matt Eley's article (Orange mobile mast bid leaves a bitter taste, H&H January 6) was aptly named, as there is not yet any real evidence to confirm that these masts are safe. There is only a mountain of conflicting research which suggests the possibility that they may not be.

Sir William Stewart in his two reports on mobile phone masts, and TETRA have repeatedly recommended a precautionary approach and further research, but in over five years nothing has changed.

What is 'precautionary' about this proposed Orange mast to be sited in a densely populated area only 10 metres away from bedrooms?

The same can be said for masts near schools, on roofs, in church towers, and anywhere within communities and places of work. Yet still the mobile phone operators insist upon putting in applications in these places, or adding to other mast sites to cause clusters of masts.

The range of 3G masts is far less than the range for 2G, so the operators use this to justify the need to place masts within communities. Of course they may perhaps be able to develop 3G masts with a far greater range, but perhaps that would eat into their very significant profits.

If the 3G masts are truly safe, why are there clusters of ill health around phone masts all over the UK which are conveniently labelled 'anecdotal evidence'?

Why did 40 doctors in Crosby sign a petition to object to a phone mast, saying: "On the basis of currently available information, the long-term biological effects of mast emissions are unknown" while referring to the presence in the vicinity of "biologically vulnerable young children in nearby houses and schools".

Why did German doctors write an open letter to their Prime Minister, Dr Edmund Stoiber, in July 2005 to put forward their observations on adverse health risks from pulsed high-frequency EMFs (to include mobile phone masts, DECT (cordless) phones, mobile phones, or anything using microwave radiation)?

Can we take the word of government and mobile phone operators whose only incentive is for profit when the health of our children and their future is at stake?

You can research further on http://www.mastsanity.org, and also http://www.tetrawatch.net and
http://www.electrosensitivity.org.uk

Compare the findings here, and on other websites, to what is now being said in the public domain, and reach your own conclusions.

Sandi Lawrence

Mast Sanity - advising and supporting communities across the UK

Copyright © 2006 Archant Regional. All rights reserved.

http://tinyurl.com/dmqh5

Report on the International Conference: ‘Mobile Communications and Health: Medical, Biological and Social Problems’, Sept 20-22, 2004, Moscow, Russia

From: Eileen O'Connor
eileen@smokestackltd.co.uk
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:53:48 -0000
Subject: Russian conference reported by Don Maisch

I am forwarding this interesting report by Don Maisch (may be some of your readers would be interested) about the conference in Russia 2004, concerning EMF and children. It is interesting how the main focus of the discussion which was about EMF and children was not reported in the final statement (even though the Russians insisted).

http://tinyurl.com/b2etr

Sincerely

Dr Stelios A Zinelis
12 Jan 2006

--------

EU draft on EMF on Human Health
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/2863822/

Hot on the heels of the reminders about coltan mining upon which both war in the DR Congo and mobile phones depend, and the arms involvements of most mobile phone manufacturers (inevitable with leading edge communications technology?), and the charade over the Church of England's contract with the MoD's research arm Qinetiq, we are now reminded that those QS4 (Qinetiq) antennae in church towers and steeples are part of the US Carlyle Group global empire. Today's scandal is that Carlyle bought into Qinetiq at such undervalued prices. BBC today:

"However, the move is expected to be controversial because of the huge profits that Carlyle Group stand to make through the sale.

"The private equity group bought its 31% stake from the Ministry of Defence in 2002 for £42.2m, but it is now worth £341m."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4604568.stm

Carlyle already has 51% voting shares in Qinetiq, which firmly stitches UK top military technology and secrets with the US political regime in this relationship since 2003:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/decisions/m2993_en.pdf

Conspiracists amongst you will be familiar with how Carlyle is mired in global conflict and oil interests, and much more. Go Google if you will! Look at the people involved, and remind your friends who depend on 3G in churches, how it is being achieved and where the bucks and quite possibly the surveillance tracking is going.

Andy
http://www.tetrawatch.net

--------

Memory serves you well.

Try Google on "Bush Carlyle Cheney Saudi" for starters.

http://tinyurl.com/dqfys

And yes, John Major is there, with Blair tipped to join shortly as a second career.

US politics, NSA, UK defence, all the listening stations, all our domestic and military communications, including TETRA Airwave "homeland security" with its encryption keys held by NSA. Nothing goes on over here that's hidden from them over there. It's a complete stitch-up of global interests.

Andy

--------

http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=coltan
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Carlyle

Bath Chronicle

11:00 - 09 January 2006

Bathwick: anti-mobile phone mast campaigners have secured a leading expert in electromagnetic radiation to help them get their message across. The group, which opposes the erection of a flagpole mast on top of St Mary's Church, is holding a public meeting on Wednesday.

The mast has already been granted planning permission but the protesters are still determined to keep up their opposition because they fear the mast could damage the health of people living nearby.

Professor Alan Preece, from Bristol University, who has carried out research in electromagnetic radiation and cancer, and John O'Brien, a national anti-mast campaigner, will be speaking at the meeting, which is being held at St John's Primary School, Pulteney Road, at 7pm.

"We feel it is important to expose as much information as possible to people so they can make their minds up," said Mark Macdonald, who has organised the meeting.

"The meeting is for people who want to know more about the potential health issues of the masts.

"We are hoping that we will change the church's opinion, even though they have already got permission."

Under plans outlined by Vodafone, the mast would be disguised as a six-inch wide flagpole, projecting more than 30ft above the tower of the Grade II listed church.

But rector the Rev David Prothero said that it was unlikely there would be any church representatives at the gathering because they have to attend a pre-arranged meeting.

"We did tell them there was something already arranged that evening but apparently the speaker could only attend that day," he said.

"Whether the masts are unhealthy is a matter for national regulation. The national guidelines are straightforward and are being adhered to. There are many masts in Bath already."

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

10/1/2006

Fleet News and Mail

CAMPAIGNERS are hoping a vital mobile phone mast bill will finally get to be debated in parliament.

They are welcoming the proposed new Telecommunications Bill 2006 as it will put greater emphasis on health concerns when mobile mast applications are discussed.

Supporters are now hoping it will be third time lucky when the Bill is due to be debated in the House of Commons next month.

They include residents of Trefoil Close in Hartley Wintney, who for years have been fighting a series of plans to put masts on the redundant water tower overlooking their homes.

Trefoil Close campaigner Marre Dafforn said if the Bill became law it would mean a fundamental shift in the way telecom developments are looked at in the planning system, putting greater emphasis on health concerns.

She added: “This Bill first and foremost removes permitted development rights from telecom developments, meaning that all such installations will require full planning permission, to bring it into line with Scotland.

“Next it requires greater consideration of the health issue, requiring a statement setting out the precautionary measures to be undertaken to protect the public and wildlife.

“It then strengthens the public’s rights under the Electronic Communication Code, making it easier to get compensation for loss in property value. It also allows easier challenges to both existing and proposed installations that are close to schools and hospitals and other sensitive locations.”

Mrs Dafforn said Hartley Wintney ward councillor Sara Kinnell had organised a meeting with local MP James Arbuthnot on January 27, when residents can ask him to support the Telecommunications Bill on their behalf and be present to vote.

Meanwhile councillors are preparing a motion of support for the Bill to be lodged at this month’s full meeting of Hart District Council.

Chris Maile of pressure group Planning Sanity said: “We need pressure on MPs to be in the Commons on February 24 as well as pressure on local authorities to pass motions/resolutions of support.

“This is intended as a make or break approach — it is the third attempt at the same Bill so let’s see that it is third time lucky.

“Irrespective of the local campaign it is in everyone’s interests to change the law.”

Planning Sanity was first approached by Conservative MP Richard Spring to help with the drafting of a proposed Telecommunications Bill in 2003.

The Bill received some debate in its second reading and resulted in a technical win of ten votes in support and two votes against, one of which was the relevant government Minister.

However the Bill was lost due to the fact that for a quorum there has to be a minimum of 40 MPs in the House.

A revised Bill was then reintroduced by Liberal Democrat MP Andrew Stunnell, but was not put to a vote due to the calling of the general election.

A new version of the Bill is now being taken forward by David Curry, Conservative MP for Skipton and Ripon, and is due for a second reading in the Commons on February 24.

Mr Maile said: “This is important because we now know with certainty that the Bill does have a place in the parliamentary agenda.

“However, because of the system what is unsure is whether the Bill will get any debating time, or indeed be put to a vote.”

From: KAHLIN, Mette
kahlinm@parliament.uk
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:12:43 -0000

Subject: FW: Hard-hitting report suppressed by Government?

Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green, LDem)

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when he plans to publish Professor Phil Allmendiger's report with Arup on codes of best practice for mobile phone companies.

Yvette Cooper (Minister of State (Housing and Planning), Office of the Deputy Prime Minister).

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister commissioned the University of Reading and Arup to undertake an independent study to assess the impact that the Code of Best Practice on Mobile Phone Network Development has had since its introduction, how local authorities have implemented the code and how the public perceives its operation. Plans are to publish this report in the new year.

From Mast Sanity

For info. As sent to every Local Planning Authority in the country.


For Chief Planning Officer

10th January 2006

Please find attached a self-explanatory letter from our sister organisation, Planning Sanity.

http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/letter_to_lpas_amended.doc

We fully endorse the provisions contained in the Bill being presented by David Curry MP and would invite your Authority to issue a supporting resolution.

Kind regards.

David Baron
Trustee
Mast Sanity

"Blog"ish item on http://www.tetrawatch.net/main/news.php to keep this reminder going. It may have been 2001/2 but I can't see the situation has changed. So there's another ethical consideration for the C of E (see other news item below the above). No offence intended, but "We have faith, we believe, we don't need proof" doesn't sit easily with "There's no risk from our entertainment antennae, feeding into the brains of the young, because there's no definitive scientific proof".

Just a reminder, because it grows literally daily: health links at http://www.tetrawatch.net/links/links.php?id=health

Andy

Runcorn and Widnes Weekly News
05.01.06

A GROUP of Farnworth residents are determined to kick up a stink after claiming contractors installed three dishes on a mobile phone mast while nobody was looking.

The residents, whose houses back on to Moon Meadow, claim the work went ahead without prior notice.

They say they were told the mast could not be expanded once it was built in 2001 and are angry the Government is allowing the mobile phone companies to bypass the normal planning procedures and fear the three new dishes, bringing the total to four, on a 70ft-plus monopole is just the start.

Don Lyons, of Derby Road, said: 'We're upset and angry that the companies have the authority to add dishes without consulting anyone. It's not morally right.

'The jury's still out on whether these things are safe and there are a lot of families with children here.

'Is the council now going to allow unlimited expansion?'

Dennis and Wendy Malone, who live next to the mast, are up in arms. Mr Malone said: 'It's really slimy the way this has slid through. It is the way it has been done that caused the most upset. You at least expect a letter through the door to be given time to object.

'We woke up at 7.30am and saw a fella up the mast, welding. One neighbour says they've been at it a fortnight. If we don't make a fuss it will escalate.'

Mrs Malone said: 'Because it is camouflaged to an extent by trees, unless you were in the immediate vicinity you probably wouldn't see it.

'We can't even get a normal TV signal in our house and have to use digital. One house along the road had to drop the price. And their safety is simply not proven beyond doubt.'