EMF/RF/5G; Pittsfield Tower Update, If Only Amelia and Her Family Were French Cows!
While Americans were celebrating the July 4 holiday, a few neighborhoods were not, including the one that surrounds the monstrosity tower that was installed in Pittsfield, MA during the recent covid lockdowns.
Neighbors of a church antenna in Centerville, MA were not celebrating either. “Their symptoms include headaches, brain fog, heart palpitations and ear ringing.”
An update regarding the Pittsfield tower was reported by the Hill County Observer independent newspaper of eastern New York, southwestern Vermont and the Berkshires, “The cost of connectivity? Cell tower dispute puts Pittsfield at center of a national debate.”
The Hill County Observer article represents the urgency of protecting independent journalism. Many newspapers have board members and shareholders with substantial investments in the wireless industry, like the NY Times. Many carry advertisements from wireless carriers and are afraid of losing ad revenue. And many papers have gatekeepers who are very attached to their cell phones and will not entertain carrying articles about this emerging issue of health harm being caused to non-consenting, non-benefitting populations due to poorly sited infrastructure and inadequate regulation.
The Pittsfield story has also been covered earlier by Natural Blaze in the Mother’s Day series “5G EMF/RF Mother’s Day 2021; I Don’t Want Flowers And Chocolates For Mother’s Day. I Want Policy Change And Protections” and in the Earth Day series “5G Earth Day Countdown: Children — Amelia’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Cell Tower Days.”
Although the Pittsfield Board of Health was responsive to the concerns of the neighbors and seeking to take action, the City of Pittsfield was not willing to allocate funds to advocate for the neighborhood.
Nonetheless, there were two recent developments on the international front that demonstrate that the wall of denial concerning radio frequencies, health, and the environment is collapsing.
The Emergence of Justice, From France:
From Connexion France:
By Hannah Thompson
A court in France has found in favour of a farmer who claimed that a 4G antenna was damaging his cows’ health, and has ordered for the antenna to be switched off for two months.
The administrative court in Clermont-Ferrand (Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes) ordered the switch-off after Frédéric Salgues, a farmer in Haute-Loire, said he suspected that it was damaging his herd’s health.
The court said that “it is appropriate to order the temporary cessation of the operation of this antenna for a period of two months, taking into account its general impact, with monitoring, by the judicial expert, of the behaviour of the herd, and of the dairy cows in particular, during this period”. [ ]
Mr Salgues said that since the antenna’s installation in July 2021 – 200 metres away from his farm in Mazeyrat-d’Allier (Haute-Loire) – around 40 of his normally-200-strong herd had died, and milk production had decreased by 15-20% within days of the antenna being switched on.
He said: “There are no medical elements that could [otherwise] explain this brutal drop in milk production.”
Philippe Molhérat, the mayor of Mazeyrat-d’Allier, who had previously authorised the antenna’s installation, testified in favour of the farmer.
He said that he feared “a catastrophe on a human level” and that his “concerns” were growing for the 1,500 inhabitants of his village.
Yet, lawyers for the mobile operators affected by the ruling, which as well as Orange also included Free and Bouygues Telecom, said that there was “no scientific evidence” that there is a link between animal health and electromagnetic fields surrounding mobile phone antennas.
The French story was also reported in the U.S. by Activist Post.
From Emergence of Justice, from Germany
German court finds property owners can be liable for health impacts from base station antennas on their property
A German court has clarified in a lawsuit that property owners who rent space for base stations and mobile towers assume responsibility for health consequences of the activity. Although the radiation is lower than the relevant reference values from the authorities, this does not mean that the property owner is not responsible for negative health consequences. According to Björn Gillberg, the same responsibility principles also apply in Sweden.
The current case, which was decided in the District Court in Münster, Germany, concerned a municipality that wanted to terminate a rental agreement with a mobile phone operator regarding the location of base stations. The ruling, which rejected the municipality’s demand for termination of a lease for mobile base stations, clarifies that property owners who rent space for mobile masts or base stations are responsible together with the telecom operators for any damage that the business may cause. Attorney Krahn-Zembol, who represented the municipality, comments on the court’s decision as follows:
“As even official bodies such as the European Parliament’s Research Service (STOA) point out that the electromagnetic radiation limit values are too high by at least a factor of 10, the owner takes a liability when entering into an agreement with a mobile phone system operator in this regard.
In addition, to date, almost 1,000 scientific studies, out of a total of more than 1,600 scientific studies on mobile telephony, have shown that biological effects and harmful effects occur with weaker radiation than the long-obsolete limit values in the 26th BImSchV. (Regulation 26 on electromagnetic fields / Germany). The telecom operators have therefore for years in their annual reports warned their shareholders of further government regulation in the area. [ ]
Furthermore, the lawyer states that the mere fact that the limit values are complied with does not mean that the liability for damages is removed:
“Even if telecom operators repeatedly claim to comply with the limit values when operating their facilities, this does not in any way exclude liability on their part or on the part of the property owner. On the contrary, the Federal Court (in Germany) has repeatedly stated that producers or operators cannot liberate themselves by referring to the official limit values if they know or should have known of additional harmful effects, etc .. This is obvious even today, since even the majority of scientific studies show additional effects and harmful effects even though the radiation is lower than the limit values.
Since even the head of the Office of Technical Assessment at the German Bundestag, prof. A. Grunwald, has pointed out that it is irresponsible to introduce new technology with significantly higher frequencies without prior investigation of the consequences, this is also a sign of a not insignificant risk of liability. ” [ ]
[ ] both the telecom operator and the property owner are jointly and severally liable for damages as a result of the business in accordance with applicable tort law in the Environmental Code. This also applies to damages for reduced property values when it can be demonstrated that nearby residents have been affected by reduced property values due to the business. The same principle also applies to, for example, wind turbines.
Property owners are often unaware of the responsibility
According to the organization Diagnose-funk, property owners should be informed about the current responsibilities. The vast majority should be unaware of the liability they assume when they provide space for mobile base stations or mobile masts.
One footnoted reference notes: Ericsson’s annual report states the following about risks for Ericsson associated with new results on harmful health effects of the radiation from Ericsson’s equipment:
“5.3 Any health risks associated with electromagnetic fields within the radio frequency band may give rise to different product liability claims and lead to changes in the law.” The mobile telecommunications industry is affected by claims that mobile phones and other equipment that generates electromagnetic fields within the radio frequency band can expose individuals to health risks.
Robin Wall Kimmerer is a mother, scientist, professor, and enrolled member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation. She is the author of Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants. [ ] she is a SUNY Distinguished Teaching Professor of Environmental Biology and the founder and director of the Center for Native Peoples and the Environment. in her article in Emergence magazine,”Ancient Green, Moss, Climate, and Deep Time,” she notes,
“The architecture of a moss is designed to move water without expending any additional energy at all, rather by simply harnessing the forces of attraction between water and cellulose. Such economic elegance requires accepting natural forces and letting them shape your way of life. I like to imagine a human community designed the same way, embracing natural forces rather than obstructing them.”
Wireless frequencies are obstructing natural forces.
Coming soon to a neighborhood, city, country and planet near you: A necessary course correction regarding the commoditization of the electromagnetic spectrum that has now extended to the sky and the seas.
If only Amelia were a cow in France, the antenna would soon be turned off.
Pittsfield MA Expert Forum on Cell Tower Cease-and-Desist Order
Pittsfield MA Expert Forum 2, March 28, 2022: Verizon Cease and Desist
Top Image SOURCE