Editor, Montague Reporter
February 28, 2004
NETRAD IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD:
ILLUMINATING THE CELLTOWER AGENDA
keith harmon snow
Perhaps
the most intriguing aspects of the cell tower siting debate in Wendell have
been the absence of discussion about some of the most disturbing details. The
U.S. government in 1996 passed the Telecommunications Act (recall that a democrat occupied the White House at the
time), limiting state and local zoning authoritiesÕ jurisdiction over the
construction, modification and placement of wireless communications towers. And
while some people have made valiant efforts to illuminate the very real health
risks of cell technologies (e.g. resident Robbie Lepzer), the extent of the
suppression of legitimate studies showing health concerns remains obscured.
Still more ominous on the cell tower landscape however might be the coming
ÒHomeland SecurityÓ cell towers agenda to be implemented in the not-so-distant
future.
To begin
with, AT&T has consistently shown up at cell tower hearings—in other
Mass towns, at least—wielding ÒirrefutableÓ science. At a public hearing
in Conway (2002) on the proposed cell tower abutting the Conway Elementary
School, AT&T sent in a team of experts to Òset the record straight.Ó The
meeting was poorly advertised, and it happened very quickly (and the rushed
hearing tactic is used quite successfully to bulldoze public interests in favor
of corporations; the nuclear industry providing the best example).
One of the
ÒexpertsÓ who presented in favor of AT&TÕs wireless technologies was Joshua
Cohen, a Ph.D. from the Harvard Center of Risk Analysis (HCRA). However,
AT&T never disclosed their business relationships with this Harvard
affiliated institution. The Conway select board allowed AT&T to deceive the
public without guaranteeing a balanced discussion by also providing independent
or public presenters.
The Harvard
Center for Risk Analysis (HCRA) is an industry front funded by over 100 of the
worldÕs largest corporations (including American Tower?). Mr. Cohen -- in his
PhD capacity -- failed to disclose that AT&T and the Wireless Technology
Research Foundation (and others) fund HCRA. (Local newspapers never disclose
such conflicts of interest, because they deny that any conflict exists -- since
that might affect advertising revenues.)
Mr. Cohen
forgot to tell Conway residents that the HCRA advisers and executives have
numerous interlocking business relationships with major cell tower interests
like Radian Corporation, a subsidiary of ONEX Corporation Òa leading
manufacturer of communication towers and the only independent manufacturer of
tall broadcast towers in North America.Ó
Mr. Cohen
failed to disclose the fees he has received from AT&T -- and other telecoms
interests -- to join their executive entourage and -- through his credentials
and the power of the association with Harvard University – to deceive the
public about the objectivity and honesty of the science he speaks for.
Indeed, in
a letter to Harvard President Dr. Barry Bloom expressing professional and
ethical objections to the substantial commercial ties of the HCRA, Michael
Jacobson, Ph.D, executive director of the Washington D.C. Center for Science in
the Public Interest, wrote that Òthe CenterÕs ties to industry are so
substantial as to undermine its credibility as a bonafide educational institution committed
to the search for unbiased truth.Ó
Dr. Jacobson urged Harvard to sever it ties to the HCRA.
David
Ropeik, HCRAÕs Director of Communications – and a leading member of the
Society of Environmental Journalists – is a regular contributor to
National Public Radio. An entire chapter in his book discounts the problems of
wireless technologies and cell towers without introducing or discussing the
huge volume of evidence indicating the negative health effects. It is a ruse,
and it is funded and advertised by the media, and carried by NPR, precisely
because it serves corporate interests.
Unlike
others concerned about the potential health risks of wireless technology -- but
cowed by the science -- I am unwilling to tow the corporate line by taking the
position that the Òscience is uncertain.Ó Take asbestos, DDT and PCBs –
and ignore the most blatant examples of tobacco and radioactivity – and
you will find that the use of these substances continues in some parts of the
world on the basis that Òthere is no scientific consensusÓ on the health
effects. Is it surprising, given that objective studies are not funded? Or that
researchers are predominantly funded by military and corporate entities?
GE
continues to fund studies that set out a priori to prove that PCBs are not
carcinogenic. Ditto for the companies and consequences of wireless
technologies. But cell phones cause brain tumors. Electromagnetic radiation
disrupts living tissues at the most basic level: the cell. Children (and the
fetus) are highest risk. Microwave technologies and electromagnetic energy are
used by the military as integral components of weapons systems precisely
because they are detrimental to life.
Evidence of
the health risks abounds. It is buried, suppressed, hidden, unreported. It is
more insidious, in fact, in that these corporations already know the answers,
but need to recoup huge capital and R&D investments, and the profits of a
burgeoning, new, exiting, technology. IsnÕt the industry resistance to research alone reason for
serious concern?
Cell
towers, cell phones, and the 1996 Telecoms Act are just the beginning. At least
15 universities in teaming partnerships with government agencies and private
corporations are currently battling for highly competitive National Science
Foundation research dollars ($17 million NSF dollars over 5 years, with $17
million matching funds from industry partners) focused on Òclimate and weather
sensorsÓ to be mounted on the lowest rungs of cell towers. The program is
called NETRAD (Network? Electronic? Telecommunications? Radiation?).
The Office
of Homeland Security is helping to peddle the NETRAD program, with the objective
of implementing a national Òweather and atmospheric surveillanceÓ grid that
enables detection, for example, of biological agents. (There are all kinds of
other imaginative uses however, like monitoring radiation releases from nuclear
plants, for various insidious possible purposes.) Advanced miniaturized sensors
will be coupled to rapid signal processing and computing technologies, and to
some centralized national control and monitoring center. Further, cell towers
will most likely be outfitted with miniature video monitors for high-resolution
area (earth & sky) surveillance and monitoring. (What kinds of surveillance
are we really talking about? And against who? Or what? Ask U.S. Attorney
General John Ashcroft...)
One of
leading teams is comprised of the universities of Massachusetts, Oklahoma,
Puerto Rico and Colorado State, with industry partners Raytheon, M/A-Com and
Vaisala. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA) and the National
Severe Storms Laboratories are two of the leading federal agencies involved.
Indeed, the UMASS Microwave Infrared Remote Sensing Labs (MIRSL) are involved
in all kinds of military programs dealing with surveillance, sensors, and
weather-as-a-weapon technologies, but these are euphemistically described as Òweather
monitoring and characterizationÓ technologies in reportage by local newspapers;
when a grant is awarded to MIRSL it is always and unquestioningly billed as
Ògood for the local economy.Ó
The cell
tower industry, more broadly, is seeking any and all viable ÒtenantsÓ to occupy
the real estate they now control, consisting of over 100,000 cell towers
installed in the US already, with thousands more planned. Cell phone
technologies infrastructure currently occupies the apex -- illuminating people
and earth below with long wavelength/ tissues penetrating radiation -- and the
NETRAD censors will occupy the base – illuminating the sky –
leaving (typically) hundreds of vertical feet of cell tower infrastructure for
other military or ÒcivilianÓ technologies: all kinds of communications,
surveillance, RADAR and tracking technologies are being considered for national
Òsurveillance and securityÓ deployment.
Who is American Tower? American
Tower claims they are Òthe largest independent owner, operator and developer of
broadcast and wireless communications sites in North America.Ó American TowerÕs
Chairman, Steve Dodge, is also on the board of Directors of companies called
Nextel – a major digital communications technologies provider – and
Sensitech – a corporation that produces state-of-the-art sensors and
monitors. Mr. Dodge is also on the board of directors of the Dana Farber Cancer
Institute, another of the sponsors of the Harvard Center for Risk Analyses.
In their 2002 Annual Report, Mr.
Dodge noted rather matter-of-factly: Òwe do not believe that the landscape of
wireless will be limited to todayÕs companies. We would not rule out potential
government sponsored applications for wireless technology related to homeland
securityÉÓ In October 2001, American Tower paid $150,000 in civil penalties
related to certain alleged environmental permitting and filing violations in
the County of Santa Clara in California. In 2002, American Tower collected $
548,923,000 in rental and management revenues.
The bottom
line is that cell tower technologies are lethal to living systems, especially
children, and that research into the negative health and environmental effects
has been suppressed or intentionally sidelined. The cell technology irradiates everything below it and the energy is fairly
high power. That means that energy transmitted on waves at the cell phone
transmit frequencies is bouncing around being deflected and/or absorbed, but
dissipated in any case, but whatever is on the ground, or in its path, below
it. For that reason alone, cell technologies should be prohibited. And too
there are the millions of birds dying annually due to flying into cell tower
structures. On top of these concerns, considering issues of health, democracy
and civil liberties, the implications of the plans described above are
staggering.
Cell phones users and non-users might also be interested to know that the raw material that enables cell phones to operate comes primarily out of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Some 80% of world supply of Columbo-tantalite – essential for cell phones, computers and interactive technologies like Sony Playstations – comes out of the Congo, where U.S. special forces have operated with impunity, sowing terror, and where over 4 million people have died in the past 4 years. From start to finish, the cellular technologies are hostile to democracy, the environment and public health and safety.
End.
keith harmon snow is an independent investigative journalist living in Leverett. With B.S.E.E and M.S.E.E. degrees from the University of Massachusetts, Microwaves and Antennas specialty, he was formerly employed as Engineer, Microwaves and Antennas, and then Manger, Communications Business Development, with GE Aerospace Electronics Laboratory, Syracuse, NY.
Tel:
413 549 5318 / www.allthingspass.com