InPower Episode #1: A Mass Action of Liability
InPower Movement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtIYFCjUTSo
Most people who still have some cognitive function understand that microwave radiation exposure is not good if you are hoping for a bright, healthy future. However, the powers-that-be have decided that we need to have a microwave emitter (also called a “smart meter”) on every house and building in the world. There are a number of strategies floating around out there about how to stop power companies from putting a meter on your house. This video explains one of the more intriguing strategies.
The most important thing to understand is how the system really works. If you have tried to argue with your power company about your concerns about smart-meter-associated health issues, there is a good chance you have already found out that they really don’t care. If you argue that smart meters violate your privacy, they don’t care. Why not?
The video goes into some detail explaining the different levels of regulations and laws we operate under. The average person has no understanding of this. Utilities are operating under contract law. The service you receive from a utility company is subject to contractual terms to which you have agreed. The original contract included a meter to monitor electrical use to determine what your bill is each month.
Now, the power company wants to change the contract. They want to change older analog meters (or older digital meters) to digital “smart” meters. The first thing they must do is put that change in writing to the customer, who then has a set period of time to respond. They cannot change the contract until they do that. Here is where it starts to get interesting. If the customer does not respond, the company can take that as agreement and proceed with the change. For them, it is not about property rights, privacy or health concerns. It is about a contractual agreement and, of course, money.
So if you respond with concerns about privacy or health you may stumble onto some individuals who actually care, but the company as a corporate entity absolutely does not care. If you really want to get their attention, speak their language. What this video recommends is a response like this: OK, I will allow you to put a meter on my house, but due to liability concerns, I will have to charge you ten thousand dollars per day, starting the day that meter shows up on my house.
Now you are playing their game, and they can’t ignore that. They may not like it. They may try to say you can’t do that (oh yes you can). They certainly won’t agree to those terms, so don’t get any ideas that you are going to make a lot of money. I’m no legal expert, but in most cases, I would bet they will just opt you out and hope not too many people try this. But if they try to ignore you and install the meter anyway without coming to a contractual agreement, they will legally owe you a lot of money.
One of the things I find most interesting is that this strategy could be used in a broad range of dealings with big corporations. It is my personal opinion that large corporations are one of the greatest enemies of the individual. This could level the field a bit. Thumbs UP.
This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Winter 2018
🖨️ Print post
Thank you so very much Tim!
This is about the best news that I’ve heard in regards to the issue of the “smart meter”!
What you have presented here is absolutely true that:
“Utilities are operating under contract law” and
“the company as a corporate entity absolutely does not care.”
Corporations are not able to care as they are soul-less entities.
Also true that the company “cannot change the contract ” without proper notification to “put that (proposed) change in writing to the customer, who then has a set period of time to respond.” The non-response is known as “silent acquiescence”. So very glad to hear the suggested example of how a customer can respond to a proposed change in a contract!
Re: “playing their game.” I accept the idea and for many “average person” Americans this may possibly be the best strategy. However, it needs to be sad that simply adding a monetary consideration to a proposed contract change will not touch the deep root of the problem with “large corporations” – that you mention – that they are “one of the greatest enemies of the individual” and that I most certainly agree with you on!
The strategy for “root” eradication may be beyond the scope of this Foundation and if so I would love to see another forum created where addressing these concerns are most welcomed.
The “Wise Traditions” Journal speaks of “Education” along with “Research” and “Activism”. My personal passion is for both education and the necessary research in support of that. IMO – education about our natural Unalienable Rights for “Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness” is absolutely essential for our good health and total well-being via and in addition to: “Food, Farming and The Healing Arts”. Whether the Foundation chooses to host the forum I’m suggesting or possibly allow a sister organization do the hosting is naturally up to the Foundation. Yet as long as this forum is not hosted there is a tremendous gap here regarding the vital need for an “education” that has everything to do with the fullest and most lawful acknowledgement of the Individual’s “property rights, privacy (and) health concerns” and equally important: Individual and societal Sovereignty over every incorporated entity on the planet!