World-News

Tamworth Herald

10:30 - 17 August 2006

Almost every month, controversial phone mast applications are submitted to the council.

These applications are ignoring Tamworth's 100m IPG policy. My own surveys indicate that over 97 per cent of Tamworth's residents support this policy and the signs/indications are that the applicants are seeking to undermine its importance.

The problem is not unique to Tamworth and in Telford there are now over 400 masts; 'the people do not want these close to their homes'.

Over on the east coast, residential groups have been set up who work with the applicants and the local authority to identify and assist in identifying appropriate locations that satisfy the applicants' views and also respect the views of the community. To date, the applicants are not showing respect for the local views.

I propose that the residents of Tamworth form a similar group. These will not go away and we need to accept that these phone masts are required. I have talked with a few councillors and a few residents and the idea has received support.

I therefore ask the residents of Tamworth to communicate with me if they are willing to consider working to set up such a group and to move forward constructively.

The intention is, once a group is set up, to register with the local authority as a non statutory consultee purely on this single issue.

To be successful, residents who are members of other groups all over Tamworth or are active in the community and know their area are required. The success of such a group will depend on its community input.

Anyone interested in helping to move this forward should contact me. All responses will be answered and an evening weekday meeting will be arranged. Please give in your response, evenings that suit you.

To date, I understand that the council has rejected all those that do not comply with the 100m policy and consequently, eight appeals have been registered. Time is short for local action.

Please do not leave this to others because we are all likely to be affected.

Any councillor who is not on the planning committee will also be welcomed/invited to respond.

Ken Forest


Although I am not a resident in Tamworth, I am pleased to see that more and more people are waking up to the human rights abuse of the insensitive placing of mobile phone masts. I am a Parish Councillor in a village where we are being placed "under siege" by mobile operators who are now installing and upgrading at will. I would urge anyone who feels that their rights are being abused to contact their MP - or the Government direct if your MP is unwilling to take up this cause - and demand that planning laws are tightened to restore democracy. OFCOM - who are supposed to be the Government Body who oversees this Industry are, I am afraid, very heavily committed to rolling out the networks and, therefore, would appear to be operating with a serious conflict of interest. I wish this new group every success.

Cllr Sylvia Wright,
Essington,
Staffordshire

Aug 18 2006

Stafford ic network

By Justine Halifax

FAMILIES are celebrating victory over a mobile phone giant after plans for a mast near homes and a primary school were thrown out.

Vodafone told Tamworth Borough Council it wanted to erect a 12m high mast, equipped with a microwave dish, on a grass verge in Pennine Way, Stonydelph.

It sparked fierce opposition from families over fears it would have been just ten metres from the nearest house and 150 metres from Stonydelph Infants and Junior School.

Angry residents joined forces to object to the plans and won when the council rejected Vodafone's application.

Independent councillor Chris Cooke, of Stonydelph, said: "This must have been one of the cheekiest applications yet.

"It was barely 150 metres from Stonydelph school and close to an old people's complex. There were literally dozens of homes within the 100 metre reach. This application was totally insensitive."

A council spokesman said: "The siting of the proposed mast within ten metres of a residential property is considered insensitive and ill thought out.

"Ten metres is not judged an acceptable distance from a residential property to site a telecommunications mast, nor appropriate given the residential density of the area.

"The proposed mast will appear visually intrusive and is likely to have a detrimental impact on the character of the area."

Vodafone defended its decision to site a mast so close to homes and a school.

A spokeswoman said: "Every reputable scientific body has said that providing we comply with guidelines, there is no risk to human health whether you are right next to it or a mile away."

It is the second bid by Vodafone to be thwarted following campaigns in Tam-worth this month.

Last week jubilant families blocked the company's plans for a 12m high mast in Overwoods Road, Hockley, Wilnecote.

We need a few more news items like this and they are around. With David's info sheets on planning and a little help with writing letters, we are making dents in the system.

Sandi


No go for mobile mast

Aug 22 2006 icSouthLondon

By Emily Twinch

PARENTS and residents are celebrating victory after plans for a mobile mast on a pub near a school were withdrawn.

Campaigners started fighting in September last year against the proposed mast on top of the Crystal Palace Tavern in East Dulwich.

Punch Tavern, owners of the pub in Crystal Palace Road, has now agreed with T-Mobile to withdraw the application.

Resident, lead campaigner and mum-of-two Lisa Precious,35, said: "Everybody is delighted - overjoyed. We were getting to the point where we thought it was going to be a victory for T-Mobile.

"We are not against technology. We see the need for it, and mobiles can save people's lives.

"But until research has been done, a cautious approach should be taken to sites near schools."

The mast would have stood 46ft from the ground and been about 260 yards from Heber Primary School, 56 yards from Gumboots Nursery, near Dulwich Medical School and near an after-school club.

Three petitions were raised with more than 500 signatures,and nearly 700 letters of objection were written to Southwark council.

Councillor Richard Thomas wrote to Punch Taverns in April and the application was withdrawn last month.

But the residents and parents of children at Gumboots Nursery and Heber School will not be resting on their laurels and are gearing up to fight again.

They want an existing mast on the Castle pub, also in Crystal Palace Road near Heber School, and another in Barry Road near St Anthony's School, taken down.

A Punch Taverns spokeswoman said: "We have decided this pub is no longer a suitable area for a mast installation and we have agreed with the telecoms operator to withdraw the application."

MOA stands for “Mobile Operators Association” (I am still thinking of a new interpitation, of “MOA”, contributions very welcome.

But se for your self, here is a link to MOA: http://www.mobilemastinfo.com/

What is says to us is: ”I am So powerful and have bought your Governments full support, so don’t Mess with us, as your Government likes the money they get “short term” for spending on all their expensive “abortive schemes” that only cost and add nothing to your society and if you as much as think about messing with us “We Will Crush You!”

But Sylvia is wrong.

The MOA know All about the harm they are doing to us, but they don’t want it publicized as they have a profitable business, and if they did admit the harm it would diminish profit, and they would probably be out of business altogether.

Government realizes this, so has to make up its mind on what is most important, citizen’s wellbeing, or cash flow while they are in office.

So, no we (citizens) are no contest, to quick, easy money, we are mortals anyway, and keep breeding, and as long as they (government) don’t acknowledge that we get harmed, we don’t. “It´s All In Your Mind” sort of thing!

Ever heard that one before?

I bet you have, like the rest of us.

But think, they also said this about smoking (sorry I do smoke, and have done for very many years, it was quite a healthy vice when I was a teenager, but I am over 60 now and things have changed. Today it is the worst thing you can do to your self and your surroundings.

So console yourself, whether you are a smoker or a non-smoker.

Passive smoking will be illegal from 2007, but passive Microwave Radiation will be Compulsory!!

Let me know, when you have looked at the MOA web-site, that actually lists all the things they do to: US OUT THERE, WHERE WE LIVE

If you cant find it I will show you where to look.

Best regards.

Agnes

(via artjar) - Sept. 2006 edition of 'RadCom' magazine - Israel's 'tighten-up' on amateur installations.

http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/tough_rules_for_israeli_hams(1).jpg
(reduced jpg)

Note UK radio amateurs still being encouraged by their organisation The Radio Society of Great Britain to believe the microwave 'no evidence' line.

--------

As radio amateurs often support phone anti-mast camapigns with measurement equipment and know-how, this is a clever way to try to alienate the two groups of people!

Interesting that they are still allowing VHF and UHF equipment up to 20 W. (Tx power or EIRP???) Most of the low-height and building mounted base stations that most highly irradiate people fall into this category.

So they cause aggravation to the radio amateur community but still allow the sorts of UHF signals that mast protestors are most worried about.

I think most amateur equipment is probably OK, but I have found some terrible examples of moon-bounce kit in small residential gardens very close to other houses and putting out very high ERPs with lots of side-lobe splatter nearby. I do think that that needs better regulation. Luckily, few amateurs actually experiment with it, especially in new housing estates.

http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/pdf/78518.pdf

I believe that up to 1500 watts can legally be used into a high-gain aerial array of at least 20dB, making an EIRP of 150 kW!

Ofcom acknowledge the UK amateurs have achieved moon-bounce comms on frequencies up to 24 GHz.

I hope this is of interest

Alasdair
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk

Police were called in after the protest turned angry

POLICE are currently at the scene of an anti-mast protest which is threatening to turn nasty.

Officers have been called in after protesters attempted to tear down barricades at the site of the controversial building work.

Speaking from the scene, News Shopper reporter Robert Fisk says about 15 campaigners are claiming mobile phone giant T-Mobile has broken its word.

They say a meeting was due to be held tonight between them, T-Mobile and police before any work began.

He said: "The mood here has changed and the protestors are very angry, saying work was only suppose to start after tonight's meeting."

Workmen have erected the barricades around themselves to stop the protestors getting anywhere near the work.

St Paul Cray residents have fought a six-month battle to stop mobile phone giant T-Mobile erecting the mast on the corner of St Paul's Wood Hill and Bedington Road.

This morning, workmen arrived at the scene to attempt to erect the mast for a third time.

Campaigners, who say they are worried about the health effects of the mast, gathered and were being kept away from the workmen by barricades.

Last month, an attempt to erect the mast turned nasty when campaigners argued with security guards brought in to keep them away.

© Copyright 2001-2006 Newsquest Media Group

http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.880074.0.protest_as_phone_mast_work_begins.php

--------

This story is related to this one:
http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/bromnews/display.var.879386.0.mast_campaigners_want_mass_march.php which regards a mass demonstration and march on Downing Street. I for one think we should all support this and be there if we can. I will be...

Simon

--------

Simon,

The story on News Shopper's home page quotes Sam Anderson who I know is very keen to help organise a mass protest in London. She does not use e-mail but I can let you have a contact telephone number if you so wish.

David Baron
Mast Sanity

--------

Thanks David

I note there is a contact number for her in the article (020 8302 4043).
If this is not correct then please let me know the correct one. I will
try to call her this evening. I think the tide of public opinion is
beginning to turn in favour of the (real) evidence and I think we should
use all our resources to seriously capitalise on this. A large well
coordinated march would certainly help!

Cheers

Simon

I have today lodged a complaint with the BBC regarding today's airing of the "Click" feature. It was trailered as continuing information regarding a new website for family research. When the programme actually went out, this information took up only a few seconds of the slot - most of the air time devoted to a new mobile phone about to be launched and the WIFI services and free texting it will allow.

I have complained that this section of BBC News is now nothing more than a marketing exercise for the mobile phone industry and even when the down-side of the technology is featured it is riddled with inaccuracies and "balanced" views, although these balanced views are never evident when "pushing" the technology.

Sylvia

PS - I also noticed that, during the initial coverage of the terrorism threat at Heathrow - a table showing all types of drinks bottles were shown with a mobile phone in the foreground. All later coverage had removed the phone. And has anyone noticed that phones are rarely mentioned in the "electronic devices" which cannot be taken in hand luggage. We have heard that key fobs, electronic cameras, laptops, etc. must be put into the hold, but nothing about mobiles (although I know they are also prohibited). And, despite the fact that the people arrested in the US had been purchasing a huge amount of phones (reported in our local newspaper yesterday) nothing has been said on the national news.

--------

Phones on planes

I do not think phones are being allowed on planes Sylvia and I wonder how this terrrorist alert will affect plans for masts on planes so the poor business men can use their phones on the planes.

Personally I think business people are so stressed nowadays and under such pressure from companies to perform that it would do them the world of good not to have laptops and phones on planes.

As the government is so keen to promote the mobile industry I wonder how they will get around this problem of terroists and phones on planes particularly as some airlines were due to have masts from next year.

The airports themselves are only interested in retail, not airlines, passengers etc. They are only interested in making money in retail so I am sure corperate pressure will win again. People can buy in the departure lounge airside and collect it when they come home although I don t know what is currently happening as I gave up working at stansted a few weeks ago.

Regards

sue g

--------

My son and his girlfriend went back to Copenhagen Friday from B.ham airport, after a weeks holiday with us.

All the info we got before going to B.ham told about mobiles as no one forbidden in the plane cabins.

All they were allowed to take with them was: ticket, passport, necessary medicine and keys without a fob, in a clear plastic bags.

This was also made clear in Fridays B.Ham Post and Daily Mail.

There were still a lot of people in the airport having to repack their cases to put electronic gadgets into them.

A lot of people were sitting on the floor putting away mobiles, laptops ipods etc.

But the instructions were quite clear, and everything got checked.

Regards.

Agnes

Good news, of a sort...

http://www.theregister.com/2006/08/07/3g_woes/

But at what point does PPG8 para 6 collapse?... Authorities should not question the need for the telecommunications system which the proposed development is to support.

Ben

Truly shocking. Please forward.

Gary


In October of 2001, my sister started getting very sick. She had stomach spasms and she was having a hard time getting around. Walking was a major chore. It took everything she had just to get out of bed; she was in so much pain.

By March 2002, she had undergone several tissue and muscle biopsies and was on 24 various prescription medications. The doctors could not determine what was wrong with her. She was in so much pain, and so sick...she just knew she was dying.

She put her house, bank accounts, life insurance, etc., in her oldest daughters name, and made sure that her younger children were to be taken care of.. She also wanted her last hooray, so she planned a trip to FL (basically in a wheelchair) for March 22nd.

On March 19th I called her to ask how her most recent tests went, and she said they didn't find anything on the test, but they believe she had MS. (Multiple Sclerosis)

I recalled an article a friend of mine E-mailed to me and I asked my sister if she drank diet soda? She told me that she did. As a matter of fact, she was getting ready to crack one open that moment... I told her not to open it, and to stop drinking the diet soda !!! I E-mailed her the article my friend, a lawyer, had sent.

My sister called me within 32 hours after our phone conversation and told me she had stopped drinking the diet soda AND she could walk!!!! The muscle spasms went away. She said she didn't feel 100% but she sure felt a lot better. She told me she was going to her doctor with this article and would call me when she got home.

Well, she called me, and said her doctor was amazed! He is going to call all of his MS patients to find out if they consumed artificial sweeteners of any kind... In a nutshell, she was being poisoned by the Aspartame in the diet soda... and literally dying a slow and miserable death.

When she got to FL March 22nd, all she had to take was one pill, and that was a pill for the Aspartame poisoning! She is well on her way to a complete recovery and she is walking!!! No wheelchair!!!

This article saved her life. If it says "SUGAR FREE" on the label, DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!!!

I have spent several days lecturing at the WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE on "ASPARTAME," marketed as 'NutraSweet,' 'Equal,' and 'Spoonful.' In the keynote address by the EPA, it was announced that in the United States in 2001 there is an epidemic of multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus. It was difficult to determine exactly what toxin was causing this to be rampant.

I stood up and said that I was there to lecture on exactly that subject. I will explain why Aspartame is so dangerous: When the temperature of this sweetener exceeds 86 degrees F, the wood alcohol in ASPARTAME converts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis. Formic acid is the poison found in the sting of fire ants. The methanol toxicity mimics, among other conditions, multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus. Many people were being diagnosed in error. Although MS is not a death sentence..., methanol toxicity is! Systemic lupus has become almost as rampant as multiple sclerosis, especially with Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi drinkers. The victim usually does not know that the Aspartame is the culprit. He or she continues its use; irritating the lupus to such a degree that it may become a life-threatening condition.. We have seen patients with systemic lupus become asymptotic, once taken off diet sodas.

In cases of those diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, (when in reality, the disease is methanol toxicity), most of the symptoms disappear. We've seen many cases where vision loss returned and hearing loss improved markedly.

This also applies to cases of tinnitus and fibromyalgia.

During a lecture, I said, "If you are using ASPARTAME (NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, etc.) and you suffer from fibromyalgia symptoms, spasms, shooting, pains, numbness in your legs, cramps, vertigo, dizziness, headaches, tinnitus, joint pain, unexplainable depression, anxiety attacks, slurred speech, blurred vision, or memory loss..., you probably have ASPARTAME poisoning!"

People were jumping up during the lecture saying, "I have some of these symptoms." Is it reversible?" Yes! Yes! Yes! STOP drinking diet sodas and be alert for Aspartame on food labels! Many products are fortified with it!!!

This is a serious problem. Dr. Espart (one of my speakers) remarked that so many people seem to be symptomatic for MS and during his recent visit to a hospice; a nurse stated that six of her friends, who were heavy Diet Coke addicts, had all been diagnosed with MS. This is beyond coincidence! Diet soda is NOT a diet product! It is a chemically altered, multiple SODIUM (salt) and ASPARTAME containing product that actually makes you crave carbohydrates. It is far more likely to make you GAIN weight!

These products also contain formaldehyde, which stores in the fat cells, particularly in the hips and thighs. Formaldehyde is an absolute toxin and is used primarily to preserve "tissue specimens."

Many products we use every day contain this chemical but we SHOULD NOT store it IN our body!!!

Dr. H. J. Roberts stated in his lectures that once free of the "diet products" and with no significant increase in exercise; his patients lost an average of 19 pounds over a trial period.

Aspartame is especially dangerous for diabetics. We found that some physicians, who believed that they had a patient with retinopathy, in fact, had symptoms caused by Aspartame. The Aspartame drives the blood sugar out of control. Thus diabetics may suffer acute memory loss due to the fact that aspartic acid and phenylalanine are NEUROTOXIC when taken without the other amino acids necessary for a good balance. Treating diabetes is all about BALANCE. Especially with diabetics, the Aspartame passes the blood/brain barrier and it then deteriorates the neurons of the brain; causing various levels of brain damage, seizures, depression, manic depression, panic attacks, uncontrollable anger and rage.

Consumption of Aspartame causes these same symptoms in non-diabetics, as well.

Documentation and observation also reveal that thousands of children diagnosed with ADD and AHD have had complete turnarounds in their behavior when these chemicals have been removed from their diet. So called "behavior modification prescription drugs" (Ritalin and others) are no longer needed. Truth be told, they were never NEEDED in the first place!

Most of these children were being "poisoned" on a daily basis with the very foods that were "better for them than sugar." It is also suspected that the Aspartame in thousands of pallets of diet Coke and diet Pepsi consumed by men and women fighting in the Gulf War, may be partially to blame for the well-known Gulf War Syndrome.

Dr. Roberts warns that it can cause birth defects, i.e., mental retardation, if taken at the time of conception and during early pregnancy. Children are especially at risk for neurological disorders and should NEVER be given artificial sweeteners. There are many different case histories to relate of children suffering grand mal seizures and other neurological disturbances due to the use of NutraSweet.

Unfortunately, it is not always easy to convince people that Aspartame is to blame for their child's illness. Stevia, which, which is a sweet herb, NOT A MANUFACTURED ADDITIVE, helps in the metabolism of sugar, which would be ideal for diabetics. It has now been approved as a dietary supplement by the FDA. It is known that for many years the FDA outlawed this true sweet food," due to their loyalty to MONSANTO Chemical Company."

Books on this subject are available: EXCITOTOXINS: THE TASTE THAT KILLS written by Dr. Russell Blayblock (Health Press 1-800-643-2665) AND: DEFENSE AGAINST ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE-written by DR H. J. Roberts, also a diabetic specialist.

These two doctors will soon be posting a position paper with case histories on the deadly effects of Aspartame on the Internet. According to the Conference of the American College of Physicians, "We are talking about a plague of neurological diseases directly caused by the use of this deadly poison."

Herein lies the problem: There were Congressional Hearings when Aspartame was included 100 different products and strong objection was made concerning it's use. Since this initial hearing, there have been two subsequent hearings and still, nothing has been done. The drug and chemical lobbies have very deep pockets. Sadly, MONSANTO'S patent on Aspartame has EXPIRED!!

There are now over 5,000 products on the market that contain this deadly chemical and there will be thousands more introduced.

Everybody wants a "piece of the Aspartame pie." I assure you that MONSANTO, the creator of Aspartame, knows how deadly it is. And isn't it ironic that MONSANTO funds, among others, the American Diabetes Association, the American Dietetic Association and the Conference of the American College of Physicians? This has been recently exposed in the New York Times. These cannot criticize any additives or convey their link to MONSANTO because they take money from the food industry and are required to endorse their products.

Senator Howard Metzenbaum wrote and presented a bill that would require label warnings on products containing Aspartame, especially regarding pregnant women, children and infants. The bill would also institute independent studies on the known dangers and the problems existing in the general population regarding seizures, changes in brain chemistry, neurological changes and behavioral symptoms. The bill was killed.

It is known that the powerful drug and chemical lobbies are responsible for this, letting loose the hounds of disease and death on an unsuspecting and uninformed public.

Well, you're informed now!!!! YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW!!!! Please print this out and/or e-mail to your family and friends. They have a right to know too.

Mike Nash
Author: Aggressive Health
Managing Director: Raw Perfection Ltd
Tel: 01908 316853
Fax: 07092861318



http://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Aspartame

PPG8 is a problem, yes, as it does not insist that public exposure from base stations is kept as low as practicable as Stewart (IEGMP) requested. The Annex to PPG8 states that there was no need to require this as the Operators already do it in order to run an efficient system - haha, what a joke!

However, mobile phone users are by far the main problem.

A 100 metre ban would not work because too many people are using their mobile phones from home. Most masts are now much nearer than 100 metres from homes in residential areas. There are places where they are only about 5 metres from bedroom windows on lamp-posts - that is far too close, in my opinion.

However, to get adequate call capacity it is necessary to have multiple masts in residential areas to cope with all the mobile calls people make and receive from their homes. One multi-channel base-station can only handle about 127 simultaneous calls - and many only have 4 channels and handle 63 or 64 calls. That is the way the cellular system works.

The vast numbers of calls made by people from home when they could use their land-lines drives me mad with frustration.

That is by far the main reason for all the masts close to houses. Each base-station / mast costs at least £30,000 and up to £90,000 to put up. They certainly don't do it for fun or charity. Mobile phone call taxes and Operator taxes now provide over £10,000,000,000 (£10bn) per year of UK Government income.

That comes directly from mobile phone users. Period. That is why we have so many masts near to houses. The users (unthinkingly) pay for the masts to be put there.

Think about it the next time you use your mobile phone. There are currently over 60 million active registered mobile phones operating in the UK. A 100 metre ring around masts is just not possible in many residential areas now until and unless people stop using their mobiles at home.

Alasdair

--------

Well, there actaully is another reason not to use a cellphone. The exposure of the body even exceeds the limits for thermal effects (limits are from 2 to 10 W/m2 (2 to 10 million microWatt/m2), mobile phone exposure goes up to 13,5 Watt/m2, scientifically proven thermal effects start from 100 Watt/m2). All known non-thermal effects may happen (while in the vicinity of a mast few non-thermal effects may happen). These are the increased risks:

Consistent indications: cell stress, DNA-damage, central nerve system disorders, cancer. DNA-damage in cell phone users 40%, while in non-users 10%.

Strong indications: hormone system disorders.

Indications: infertility, immune system disorders, cell process disturbance, blood brain barrier permeability.

Weak indications: 'electrosensitivity'.

Source: Risiken durch elektromagnetische Felder, die Grenzwertfrage im NF- und HF-Bereich, Mainz, 22 april 2006. Dr. H.-Peter Neitzke, Ecologi Institut, Hannover, Germany. Page 16.

This is the most urgent argument against cellphones.

Tell them, go on using your cellphone! As much as you can, x times a day! And put it next to your head when you go to sleep .... the mast is just a
24-hour 7-days a week extra exposure ...

Even people who know this still use a cellphone (e.g. with a bluetooth headset, adding insult to injury) and a wireless laptop, etcetera.

Frans