"Kevin Weaver" <kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:ZVtZi.20123$lD6.4085@newssvr27.news.prodigy.n et...
> "DTC" <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in message
> news:7atZi.4654$RR6.2808@newssvr22.news.prodigy.ne t...
>> The same troll spewing bullshit on his "Cell Phone Usage and Radiation
>> Its Affects on Users" post.
>>
>> mizadorian wrote:
>>> Ever notice how you will get great reception in the most
>>> industrialized areas or in poorer neighborhoods?
>>
>> Riiiiiight.......
>>
>> > I'm sure it takes permits, approval by the residents of
>> > the city, neighborhood and so on. Its not about just living in a great
>> > area up in the hills, its about the leverage that people in those
>> > neighborhoods have over the affairs of their city.
>>
>> Totally incorrect. Residents have NO say in the matter, period. As long
>> as local zoning is met, a tower can be placed. The only exception is
>> truly valid claims of historic preservation.
>
> In my town they do have a say. Verizon wanted to put up a tower
> and so many people said no. The city agreed. After about a year passed and
> now there is one but It's hidden into a chuch cross on a hill.
>
> Soon after, The police now all has cell phones for there officers.
> Which company ? Verizon. I'm sure they gave them free phone's and service.

That is actually pretty common, particularly in small towns. They will throw
up a tower on top of the police station, fire station, or town water tower
and toss in cellular service for the city. Good deal all around.

>
>>
>>> Cellular towers are
>>> believed to be a heatlh risk to the residents living nearby one.
>>
>> Believed by who? People like you that wear tin foil hats? The FCC has
>> made this very clear objections due to health concerns are not acceptable
>> claims.
>>
>> Dude...you need to get off that sedating medication and get your facts
>> straight. Google can be your friend.
>
>