Friday, March 17, 2006
This post is a response to an article written by Manorbier Sam in his blogg Anonymity 2.
I have been following with interest recently the Manorbier bloggs and the comments on them. On anonymity 2.
I am mentioned by name and therefore feel I have a right to reply.
I am using my true name as I am speaking the truth and therefore have nothing whatsoever to fear from County Councillor Calver. If he wants to sue me, (this apparently seems to be his new tactic to try and frighten people if they tell the truth about him,) I believe he is suing 4 members of the community at the last count (allegedly)), fine, see you in court Malcolm add me to this hall of infamous names!!!, I have nothing to hide, unlike our County Councillor who not for the first time has had my post about the Manorbier Missile campaign removed, because he is frightened of the truth about him being made public. The first time was because I reported on my post to the BBC action network site regarding the Manorbier missile campaign that “he (County Councillor Calver) abstained from the vote at the Manorbier Community council because he had made his views known the actual wording was:- “that it was his own personal view he felt he had to support the MOD” This was all that was in the post and was the truth, this quote was taken from a copy of the letter the County Councillor published on his own website Manorbier.com and he sent to the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority.
In a later letter to PCNPA on Pembrokeshire (County Council Headed notepaper), this copy obtained directly from the planning file re the MOD application. He reiterated his view. As I couldn’t be bothered to argue the case as I felt it far more important to get the post back on the website I moderated it to “the County Councillor abstained”. I did not give any reason. Now the illustrious member of our County Council has complained yet again and had it removed “again” stating:- I had not given his reasons for the abstention. So which reason is County Councillor Calver referring to? It is obviously not the letter he wrote to PCNPA as he complained about this. Is it, the later letter County Councillor Calver wrote to PCNPA which he told Manorbier Community Council he had been invited to write in his role as County Councillor? A fact which again is not true, as he received the letter that all members of the public received who had shown an interest in the application. So I can only assume the said Councillor must be referring to his undeclared pecuniary interest in that he has let his family owned properties to MOD Range related personnel. He was invited to declare this interest by the Chairman of the Manorbier Community Council meeting and was challenged to do so by myself! The County Councillor declined, adding, “He did not feel it was necessary to declare an interest in his holiday properties”, (as shown in the Manorbier Community Council minutes of that meeting). At the time in question the Councillor had not even declared these property interest’s in the member's interest list at County Hall, but raising this matter spooked him into doing so and the properties are now included, so at least that has now been rectified.
So I ask County Councillor Calver, which reason does he want me to show on BBC ACTION NETWORK. The declared or undeclared interest he has used to abstain from voting. Or does he not wish the article to be published at all? which appears to be the case.
Below is a copy of the email I had from the BBC:
------------------------------------
Dear BBC Community member, Thank you for contributing to a BBC community site. Unfortunately we've had to remove yourGuide Entry below because it contravenes the House Rules. We contacted you last week as the County Councillor referred to in your campaign aims has requested that you clarify his declared interest. As we have not had any response, we are now taking down the campaign aims. If you wish to amend and repost your campaign aims, please contact us as we have kept a copy which we can forward to you. If you would like to re-write your contribution to remove the problem, thenwe'd be very happy for you to add it to the Guide again. If you have read the House Rules carefully and are still unsure why your message was removed, please reply to this email. Best wishes, The BBC Moderation Team URL of content (now removed):http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A8811803 Subject:NO! TO THE MANORBIER MISSILE! CAMPAIGN. Guide Entry:Manorbier! A sleepy seaside village or a noisy war zone in The heart of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park? Thanks to the MOD Air Defence Range! Manorbier, Nr Tenby is now one of the noisiest places in Wales. The villagers are hit by shockwaves and earth shattering thuds when the MOD start firing their missiles which hit MACH 3 in milliseconds of launching. The noise levels on a good day reach an ear shattering 102 decibels with levels in excess of 122dbs being recorded by the Pembrokeshire County Council Environmental Health Department, when they did a snapshot monitoring exercise. This is over twice the level of 65 dB the threshold at which noise becomes a nuisance. To put these levels into perspective 120 dB is the level a military jet aircraft would reach on take off from an aircraft carrier at 50feet with afterburner on, but to the human ear this would appear 32 times as loud (source Outdoor Noise and the metropolitan Environment Publication, Department of City Planning, Los Angeles) The European Environment Agency state on the website, levels over 40db affect our well being. On the website www.huntsnap.dircon.co.uk it is stated noise intensities above 55db are high enough to cause annoyance, aggressive behaviour and sleep disturbance, YET THE MOD ARE INTENDING TO START NIGHT FIRING AND IF OPERATIONAL DUTIES DICTATE THIS COULD GO ON BEYOND MIDNIGHT.To inflict even more misery on the community The Air Defence Range is now a Centre of Excellence in anti missile tactical training for pilots. So now the local community and not so local inhabitants are subjected to the roar of low flying military jet fighters, large supply jet aircraft, helicopters and most things military that fly including those from foreign countries.The MOD state in their environment assesment 2005 there is very little impact on the local community and environment by the exercises and planned night firing. Absolute Rubbish!!!Action needs to be taken now to ensure:-A/ The night firing does not get the go ahead.B/ The intolerable noise levels suffered now are reduced to an acceptable level, below 60db.C/ The low flying exercises are stopped.All the above can and should be transferred to an alternative site the MOD now admit there are alternative less inhabited sites available where there is no restriction on night firing and which larger noisier and missiles are already using.This is an infringement on our human rights section 8. There has now been petitions of opposition handed in to the planners with almost 400 local residents signing.The community Council are opposed to the night firing voting 8-1 against the application and our county councilor abstained, declaring an interest. The YHA are opposed to the firing as it could seriously affect the 40/50 schoolchildren who attend the youth hostel up to a week at a time This is situated almost adjacent to the perimeter fence where noise levels of 129.4 have been recorded, some of these children are on their first trip from home, imagine how frightening that would be for kids from 6-8 upwards.In recent case law Dennis & Dennis V MOD the MOD lost the case on noise and human rights issues and residents have now taken legal advice and are going to challenge the plan along these lines as well as the environmental and health issues None of the village are opposed to training British troops, but the MOD are intensifying the use of the base and doing absolutely nothing to help reduce the noise or its impact on the local population. So Manorbier is now saying this is a missile to far and enough is enough.Take your training to the alternative sites.Help by writing to the Catherine Milner, Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority, Llanion Park, Pembroke Dock Pembrokeshire with your objection,Also letters to the local paper, The Tenby Observer Warren st Tenby Pembrokeshire stating why you feel it is wrong this firing and low flying aircraft training should take place in a conservation area and SSI in the middle of our only Coastal National Park.Join the campaign pressure group NO! TO THE MANORBIER MISSILE! CAMPAIGN.
I have been following with interest recently the Manorbier bloggs and the comments on them. On anonymity 2.
I am mentioned by name and therefore feel I have a right to reply.
I am using my true name as I am speaking the truth and therefore have nothing whatsoever to fear from County Councillor Calver. If he wants to sue me, (this apparently seems to be his new tactic to try and frighten people if they tell the truth about him,) I believe he is suing 4 members of the community at the last count (allegedly)), fine, see you in court Malcolm add me to this hall of infamous names!!!, I have nothing to hide, unlike our County Councillor who not for the first time has had my post about the Manorbier Missile campaign removed, because he is frightened of the truth about him being made public. The first time was because I reported on my post to the BBC action network site regarding the Manorbier missile campaign that “he (County Councillor Calver) abstained from the vote at the Manorbier Community council because he had made his views known the actual wording was:- “that it was his own personal view he felt he had to support the MOD” This was all that was in the post and was the truth, this quote was taken from a copy of the letter the County Councillor published on his own website Manorbier.com and he sent to the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority.
In a later letter to PCNPA on Pembrokeshire (County Council Headed notepaper), this copy obtained directly from the planning file re the MOD application. He reiterated his view. As I couldn’t be bothered to argue the case as I felt it far more important to get the post back on the website I moderated it to “the County Councillor abstained”. I did not give any reason. Now the illustrious member of our County Council has complained yet again and had it removed “again” stating:- I had not given his reasons for the abstention. So which reason is County Councillor Calver referring to? It is obviously not the letter he wrote to PCNPA as he complained about this. Is it, the later letter County Councillor Calver wrote to PCNPA which he told Manorbier Community Council he had been invited to write in his role as County Councillor? A fact which again is not true, as he received the letter that all members of the public received who had shown an interest in the application. So I can only assume the said Councillor must be referring to his undeclared pecuniary interest in that he has let his family owned properties to MOD Range related personnel. He was invited to declare this interest by the Chairman of the Manorbier Community Council meeting and was challenged to do so by myself! The County Councillor declined, adding, “He did not feel it was necessary to declare an interest in his holiday properties”, (as shown in the Manorbier Community Council minutes of that meeting). At the time in question the Councillor had not even declared these property interest’s in the member's interest list at County Hall, but raising this matter spooked him into doing so and the properties are now included, so at least that has now been rectified.
So I ask County Councillor Calver, which reason does he want me to show on BBC ACTION NETWORK. The declared or undeclared interest he has used to abstain from voting. Or does he not wish the article to be published at all? which appears to be the case.
Below is a copy of the email I had from the BBC:
------------------------------------
Dear BBC Community member, Thank you for contributing to a BBC community site. Unfortunately we've had to remove yourGuide Entry below because it contravenes the House Rules. We contacted you last week as the County Councillor referred to in your campaign aims has requested that you clarify his declared interest. As we have not had any response, we are now taking down the campaign aims. If you wish to amend and repost your campaign aims, please contact us as we have kept a copy which we can forward to you. If you would like to re-write your contribution to remove the problem, thenwe'd be very happy for you to add it to the Guide again. If you have read the House Rules carefully and are still unsure why your message was removed, please reply to this email. Best wishes, The BBC Moderation Team URL of content (now removed):http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A8811803 Subject:NO! TO THE MANORBIER MISSILE! CAMPAIGN. Guide Entry:
