I am a resident of Warwick and a supporter of the CARE organisation. I write in connection with the controversy surrounding the erection by CellularOne/Bermuda Digital Communications (CellularOne) of a cellular telephone transmission tower at the Faraway complex in Warwick.

I am very disappointed that CellularOne has continued with the construction of the tower in such close proximity to a residential area. The company has ignored the concerns of Bermudians and residents and seems not to accept the irrefutable scientific fact that there is uncertainty as to whether these transmission towers are hazardous.

CellularOne was good enough to show me the scientific material it has accumulated on this issue. As you might expect, the majority of scientists quoted in CellularOne's literature say that probably there is no danger. This is comforting to some extent. It suggests to me that, possibly, and in time, it will be determined definitely that these antennae do not represent a significant hazard.

But even the material provided by CellularOne acknowledges that, at the moment, there is uncertainty. To give you an idea of the tenor of CellarOne's own literature, I note the following passages: In one article the author concludes that the research leaves one "uncertain and rather doubtful'' that any link exists between EMF exposure and carcinogenicity. This is not very comforting and implies doubt and uncertainty. The article does not adequately dismiss the studies which indicate a possible hazard.

A press release issued in Bermuda by CellularOne itself says that there is no "conclusive'' evidence to suggest that such towers may pose a threat to the health and safety of the Bermudian public. It is clear from this that there is some evidence that the towers do pose a threat, even though the evidence may not yet be conclusive.

The same release indicates that the studies over the past 15 years do not "consistently'' demonstrate that there are health risks. Until it is demonstrated consistently that there is no risk, I remain concerned. Surely the correct approach where there is uncertainly about safety is the conservative one. We must proceed on the premise that there is a hazard until it is demonstrated otherwise, rather than assuming we are safe until it is proven that there is a hazard.

After reading through CellularOne's material it became apparent to me that some of the views expressed were not at all objective. There was a detectable bias in favour of cellular transmission towers.

I have also taken the trouble to read materials collected by the CARE organisation. From it one gleans, for one example, that the US Environmental Protection Agency believes that emissions from cellular transmission towers are "probable human carcinogens''.

The difference between the views expressed in the literature provided by CellularOne and the views in literature provided by CARE is not that one set of authors say cell towers are perfectly safe and one set of authors say they are very dangerous. Rather, they all acknowledge a degree of uncertainty. The difference between their respective views is on the degree of uncertainty which they acknowledge.

In any view, the "bottom line'' is the same: the scientific community may not agree on the degree of uncertainty on the question of whether cellular transmission towers are hazardous but at this moment clearly there is uncertainty about the safety of cellular transmission towers. That there is uncertainty is also supported by the fact that there are governments in the world which are taking a much more conservative approach than is recommended by the US Federal Communications Commission. (This even includes state and/or local governments within the United States, the home jurisdiction of the FCC.) In addition, the World Health Organisation has commissioned a major study on this issue. Clearly the WHO believes that this is not a settled point.

The government's initial response to this is very discouraging.

Telecommunications Minister, Renee Webb, was quoted in this newspaper a couple of times as saying she knows for certain that Bermudians would not wish to be isolated from the rest of the world. As if that would be the consequence of taking a more conservative approach in relation to this particular tower (or even in relation to cellular towers in general)! A government study is underway but that is at best far too little and far too late to be of assistance in relation to the tower at Faraway, which is now nearly completed.

In any event, given the comments made to date by the Minister, especially those which appeared in The Royal Gazette on April 24, it is quite obvious that her mind is already made up. In order to succeed in this campaign, it is clear that CARE will have to rely on initiatives other than any which the present government may take.

I call on all Bermudians and residents to support CARE's boycott of CellularOne until CellularOne proves to be a more responsible corporate citizen of these islands by agreeing to relocate the tower proposed for Faraway.

NIGEL HOWCROFT Warwick Inciting racial hatred May 4, 1999 Dear Sir, How dare Mr. Perinchief project his own narrow sense of achievement onto Bermuda's future undergraduate population? He has no mandate and no right whatsoever to go before any public gathering -- even if it is of his own convening -- and suggest that the learning of French, Dutch or German (his examples) was not a worthwhile endeavour! Or was he suggesting that this was not within the scope of Bermudian ability? Firstly, Mr. Perinchief and the other forum organisers should remember that there is annually a good number of gifted students who go abroad to study languages, including the corresponding literature and history -- as a primary degree. What better place to pursue these undergraduate courses than in the appropriate country? Secondly, a surprising number of children, even in isolated little Bermuda, grow up exposed to another language, with a parent or grandparent hailing from the European mainland, not to mention Canada and the US, which respectively have French and Spanish as second languages.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, while on the subject of language, Mr.

Perinchief has conveniently forgotten Bermuda's very significant population of Europeans, namely the Portuguese.

Will he deny this community the opportunity -- if they wish -- to have unimpeded access to the excellent higher institutes of learning in Portugal, also of course part of the EU? Will he deny these Bermudians (or any others) the unrestricted right of abode, education and employment in Portugal just because his horizon does not extend that far? Now to the matter of Mr. Perinchief's attempt to incite racial disquiet by highlighting the recent isolated attacks on London's Bangladeshi communities by one crazy individual. How does this justify refusing full citizenship rights? Does he even know how rare such incidents are in the multicultural Britain of today? Has he turned to the Overseas section of the RG yet to discover that the British Police have already arrested the lone nutter who perpetrated these attacks? Is he aware that such individuals are motivated by the same monolithic prejudices which he seeks to disseminate under the guise of a "Forum''? It would be exactly like suggesting that those fiends who tortured Miss Middleton were exemplary for Bermudian society! What Mr. Perinchief is doing is referred to in most civilised countries as incitement to racial hatred. It is remarkable how silent the HRC is with respect to such utterances. It would almost seem as if one section of the community has been so demonised by current popular culture and repetitious propaganda--style historical excuses for indolence, that it is no longer considered human.

I should be grateful to you, as the Editor of The Royal Gazette , for allowing me enough space to spell out for Mr. Perinchief & Co. (which we all hope does not include any of the current MPs) how Bermudians can benefit from studying, living and working in the UK and Europe, because I was privileged enough to fall into that category: 1) To be able to bring home an internationally respected university degree, for which you do not have to mortgage your future.

2) Access to 100 per cent scholarships, if you are bright enough.

3) A wealth of experience (good and bad) and friendships within other and much larger societies.

4) Work experience, development of self discipline and a sound work ethic.

5) Deep rooted self confidence arising from the first four points, which allows you to return to Bermuda and be successful no matter who tries to "keep you down''! 6) Experience and contacts to pass on to other youngsters.

I should like to leave Mr. Perinchief and other "crabs in the basket'' with one quote from Goethe, who was of course much smarter than Mr. Perinchief! "If you learn another language, you gain another soul.'' PICCADILLY City of Hamilton P.S. As for Mr. P advocating that Bermudians, even if they were born here, currently holding full British Citizenship should be excluded from any referendum...What kind of fascist is he? This kind of thinking leads down the shady path to "ethnic cleansing''! Leave homosexuals alone! April 29, 1999 Dear Sir, You the adulterer, you the delinquent parent, you the woman beater, you the rapist, the child molester, the peeping Tom, you the physical abuser, the psychological abuser, the chauvinist, the sexist, you the addict, you the stalker, the liar, the thief, you who thinks your religion is the one and only true religion. You the haughty one. You who thinks you're right all the time about everything, you the judgmental, you the oppressor, the downpressor, you the selfish, the coward, you the one who stabs your friends and your family in the back, you who points the finger, you who cares about nobody but yourself, you the unforgiver, you all need to leave the homosexual alone.

Because God created all of your miserable souls! DR. CLARK GODWIN City of Hamilton