A Critique of ‘In Power’ Episode One

Based on the YouTube presentation by
Josh del Sol
and Cal Washington
by Warren Woodward
October 14th, 2017

Please be aware that what I have to say is nothing personal against Josh del Sol or anyone else featured in the youtube. I have no personal grudges or axes to grind. But I do have a working BS detector.

Josh is a good filmmaker. Take Back Your Power was a great, fact-based tool for awakening people. But this one — and I will back this up with specifics — is propaganda. I would love for the theory it espouses to work, but I don’t think it will or has.

I am going to go through the YouTube InPower presentation now in the order that various things were presented.

The video gets off to a bad start when Cal Washington makes the point that one of the basic InPower premises is that, by switching to smart meters (SMs), the utility has changed the contract they have with you. That’s both right and wrong. Technically he is right because what they have installed is not a meter. It’s a transceiver and computer. I have made that point repeatedly here in AZ for years. I have proved it with an exploded conceptual rendering of a SM from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory that shows metering to be 1/5 of what a SM is. I have proved it by providing documentation that the IRS classifies smart meters as computers. I have proved it by providing the Congressional testimony of utility exec. Bennett Gaines saying SMs are computers. But guess what? In the “real” world, to the utility and PUC type people, it’s a meter. They won’t budge off that. If you accept service from the utility, you accept their equipment. Period.

Cal says that Kevin Lynch resigned on the day he got a Notice of Liability. This is supposed to be huge because Kevin holds the most senior non-political office in the gov. of Canada, Clerk of the Privy Council. Now this is something we will see throughout the YouTube: A news article is put on screen (11:17) and most of it is greyed out, with what Josh wants to emphasize lightened up and highlighted. But if you read the grey it says that “there has been much speculation in the civil service that he wanted out.” From my perspective, that’s a lot different than Cal’s exclamation at the end of the sequence that “He ran!” And again, this is something we will see a lot of in the YouTube: Drawing a false cause and effect relationship between Notices sent and people resigning or not seeking re-election. What we should be looking at is if policy changes, not if someone resigns or does not seek re-election.

Carol Taylor — Another person who resigned, supposedly because she received a Notice. But if you read the greyed out part the reason given is “So she can focus on her new job of chairing a federal economic advisory panel.” She has not been knocked out of the game. People like her make those kind of career moves all the time.

Cal talked about a judge he had running out of the courtroom. The bailiff (or sheriff or whoever was running the court) then says “All rise. I guess we’re having a break.” The problem is, Cal just leaves it at that. What happened after the break is not divulged. Outcome of the case not divulged. Maybe the Judge had a bathroom emergency. Who knows? One upshot was that Cal got arrested a year later, that he made sound as though it was some kind of revenge (and may well have been) for driving without insurance, and he spent 60 days in jail. Cal then talked about what happened after he got out and went to court again. Long story short, we are titillated with a $300M demand he put on the judge but the outcome of that is not divulged. It is left open ended. We don’t know what happened. And I don’t know about you, but I have better things to do than spend 60 days in jail. I’ve been there a couple times overnight. That was enough.

Kevin Falcon, is given as another example of someone who stepped down. What really happened in the greyed out bit is that he announced he was not going to seek re-election. As part of that announcement he did “step down” from some posts he held. But he did not quit altogether. The last line you can see on the screen is that his reason for not seeking re-election is “he and his wife are expecting.” Since the next line is not seen, I can only assume they are expecting a baby. What else would they be expecting together? A new car? Cancer? A Notice of Demand? I don’t think so. People resign all the time for family changes.

Next, examples of results of specific “seed groups” utilizing the Notice theory are presented.

Kelowna, BC action — The SM installer company CEO resigned on the day he got a Notice of Default, and Chair of the BC Utilities Commission who also got the same notices resigned. That sounds impressive but did SM policy change? No. Did the installation company fold up shop and stop installing SMs? No.

Seattle — same thing. People did not seek reelection and a couple of people resigned but did policy change? No. And BTW, people resign and don’t seek reelection all the time. Since I have been on the ACC’s case here in AZ (6 years), the ACC Executive Director resigned. 2 Utilities Division Directors have resigned. The so-called “Ethics Officer” resigned. Other various people there have resigned. Was that because they got Notice letters? No. Was that because I was such a relentless PITA? No. They resigned for a number of different reasons. A couple of them went to work for APS. Oh, and the Exec. Director of the AZ Dept. of Health Services, the guy who was in charge when the fraudulent SM health study they did came out, also resigned. Was that because I savaged his stupid SM study? No. Was it because he got a Notice? No. He moved on to a university teaching gig in Tucson. People do get sick of Phoenix. People do make career changes.

MI — AG Bill Shuette calls for free right of SM refusal after being sent the Notices. Total nonsense. Schuette has been hip to the SM scam since at least 2012! At the bottom of this email I reproduced the statement he issued in 2012.

About 4 people at the MI PUC are no longer listed at the website. Big deal! See my point above about the ACC resignations here. Happens all the time.

If you read the greyed out part, you can see that the Warren city attorney statement was taken out of context. Josh made it sound like he resigned and in so doing blew the whistle on DTE’s campaign donations. Campaign donations are a matter of public record. I look up APS’s all the time. It’s not major whistleblower stuff. The point the Warren city attorney was making (again, in grey) is that, for people who want to change SM policy there are steps that must be taken, and that some venues are appropriate and others aren’t. In his opinion for example, the Council can’t do it. Also, DTE is the beneficiary of a certain law which he cited and then, saying that the law could be changed, he mentions that would be hard because of DTE’s campaign donations. That’s not whistle blowing. It’s a statement of political reality. In short, the city attorney was being frank.

13 people have saved their analogs. That’s great, but for how long will that last? Were they given any guarantees? If they wrote Notices, where are the responses? Also, there’s a lot of people in MI who held on to their analog meters — until they didn’t. In other words, they were defiant and that worked for quite a while but eventually DTE came around to either cut them off or install a SM. If the 13 Josh mentioned still have their analogs a year or 2 from now, then I might be convinced.

NY — The speaker says he sent a $300M liability letter to not have a “smart” water meter and got a letter back saying “We’re sorry; you don’t have to have one.” But would he have gotten that letter anyway had he written something less shrill? The details of how to refuse a SM in his location are not provided. Were the meters mandatory? We don’t know.

Maui — This is another false cause and effect. The electric company switched from wanting to blanket the islands with “smart” meters to an “opt in” proposal. That was actually the result of the PUC rejecting the company’s huge proposed budget. The company had to make cuts. Blanket “smart” meter installation was one of them, but it remains a long term company goal. Also, that decision was made well before any Notice letters were sent out.

Lastly we get the voice of a “utility insider” who says that his utility has a “war room” dedicated to keeping track of SM resistance. Big deal. Of course they do! Josh is flattering himself if he thinks that’s the result of Notice letters being sent out. I am sure just about all the utilities have war rooms or at least have someone whose job it is to keep track of resistance. I know for a fact for example that APS has pictures of my meter cage. Does anyone think these companies just sit on their thumbs in the face of a threat like SM resistance of any kind? PG&E had VP “Ralph” infiltrate some anti-SM chat group years ago. In response to her request not to have a transmitting gas meter, someone I know actually got an email from UNS gas here telling her she’d been “brainwashed by Warren Woodward.” So of course these companies are keeping track of us, Notices or no Notices.

****************************

Comments are welcome as always. Please also visit our home page:
michiganstopsmartmeters.com

Footnote: Opt-Out Provisions From MI A.G. Bill Schuette in 2012:

Given the questionable benefit of smart meter program to customers, as well as the extensive public concern about the effect and potential intrusiveness of smart meter infrastructure acknowledged in the Commission’s January 12, 2012 Order in this matter, the Commission appropriately directed Michigan’s electrical utilities deploying or proposing to deploy smart meters to provide information about their plans for allowing customers to opt out of having a smart meter, and how they intend to recover the cost of such an opt-out program.

The Attorney General respectfully submits that utility customers should be given a meaningful choice of whether to have smart meters installed and operated on their property. An “opt-out” program that requires those customers who opt out to pay an unwarranted economic penalty for doing so does not afford customers such a meaningful choice.

The information provided by Detroit Edison, and Consumers [Consumers Energy Company] in response to the Commission’s Order does not sufficiently establish that they intend to offer customers a fair choice of whether to accept smart meters on their property. Detroit Edison’s response on this subject is based upon the assertion that “Edison’s AMI [Advanced Meter Infrastructure] program is beneficial for all customers.” (Document No. 0148, p. 7). Proceeding from the unsubstantiated assertion, Detroit Edison apparently proposes to impose what it broadly describes as “all incremental costs” solely upon customers who choose not to accept installation of smart meters. (Document 0148, pp. 8-9). Consumers’ submission similarly states that while it proposes to provide customers with the option to retain their existing meter equipment, it apparently intends to subject customers making such a choice to additional charges, including charges for “maintaining ready testing and billing traditional meters”. (Document No. 0146, pp.16-17). While neither Detroit Edison nor Consumers provide details regarding their opt-out proposals and associated charges, both of their comments suggest that they intend to effectively penalize customers who choose to opt-out of smart meters. Presumably, under the utilities proposals, customers who opt-out of smart meters would be required to pay rates covering both the costs of the smart meter program, and expansively defined incremental costs “of retaining traditional meters. These proposals raise substantial questions as to whether their respective customers would, in fact, be afforded a fair and meaningful choice to “opt-out”.

Another argument which may be important for the Commission to consider is whether a financial incentive to homeowners who allow smart meters to be installed in their home might be an alternative approach to a rate increase if a homeowner refuses to permit a smart meter to be installed.

Respectively submitted, Bill Schuette
Attorney General

[From: ATTORNEY GENERAL’S COMMENTS PURSUANT TO THE MPSC ORDER DATED JANUARY 12, 2012 – http://efile.mpsc.state.mi.us/efile/docs/17000/0408.pdf]

30 thoughts on “A Critique of ‘In Power’ Episode One

  1. To start with, this “critique” was not rebutted, or commented on, with consideration. It was not because I couldn’t rebut it. It was decided that rebutting would accomplish nothing. Since this is the second time that this was sent to me, and ‘someone(s)’ is ‘calling us out’ as if we cannot respond to this, you will now get ‘your rebuttal’ that you so desperately ‘need’. At the end of ‘your rebuttal’, you can decide what it actually accomplishes, and maybe (or not) see why there was no response to this “critique”.
    More

    • I have read the “Critique” on the In Power Movement by Warren Woodward and the post comments. The bottom line discussion in all of this should be the legal basis for the strategies the In Power Movement proposes. Lack of success cannot be used at this early stage as a reason not to endorse Cal and the In Power Movement as a follow up with enforcement has not been attempted by anyone other than me so far as I am awaiting a decision in my court case which part of it uses the NOL’s principles . Just as no strong success yet have been achieved over smart meters with any other legal method yet several of us are still pursuing that goal in the courts including Warren Woodward, in spite of the Summary Judgement decision he received initially but successfully overturned. Mark has attempted to debunk the NOL legal principles in his article he has a provided a link for in his subsequent comment on this thread. Evidently Mark is not aware of the tacit agreements that can happen by one party’s silence.

      Here in New York the collusion by the PSC and the Utility (Central Hudson/Fortis) use that Acquiescence by Silence principle all the time to go forward with what’s called the Tariff (agreement between the Utility and consumers) and Smart Meter deployments. Contrary to Warren’s statement :” If you accept service from the utility, you accept their equipment. Period” is not accurate. There is a process in NY with the Public Service Commission (PSC) and power consumers where additions or changes in service must go through a deliberation period. The public is notified for 30 days of a comment period in the online State bulletin board called the New York Register which not one person out of the hundreds I have asked ever heard of including our Woodstock Town Board. The comment/deliberation period lasts 30 days. T If no one comments then the addition or change becomes approved by the the PSC and opposition comments to the decision is given 30 days. After the 30 days the public then has 4 months statute of limitations to fight the decision in NYS Supreme Court Article 78 special proceeding which is very difficult.

      In our area when the Tariff and deployment of smart meters were decided there were 0 comments in either case because no one knew about the New York Register so no one knew about the comment /deliberation period. No one knew about smart meters till they were put on the homes and discovered by power consumers usually after the four month statute of limitations. The change to Smart Meters could have been stopped had the public been educated and involved and they did not have to accept the new equipment because they accepted service as Warren incorrectly states.

      One can see that the tacit agreement where one party has remained silent can result in a contract binding to that party without their consent as long as they are notified of the pending contract, details of it’s terms and conditions and notice that silence by that party will be taken as agreement with terms and conditions. There is a maxim in law that , that states in so many words , if they can do it to you , you can do it to them (If anybody knows the exact words of that maxim and the Latin please let me know.).

      Backing up that legal principle of Acquiescence by Silence is the classic American Law Institute multi-volume reference Restatement of Law(Contracts volume) 2nd edition used in all of American Jurisprudence and located in the NYS Supreme Court Library which elucidates the legal principles I have just elaborated on. A tacit agreement can be achieved under “special circumstances” which chapter 69 details. As long as agreement of a contract by silence has been previously used and the party is notified that silence in replying will be taken agreement to the contract, then that contract is valid. That is what the Utilities are doing and so I did right back at them and am waiting on the NYS Supreme Court to decide. You can view in more detail the legal prerequisites in Item 16 of my Motion to Reargue (https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSCPLL7X_KdWkRMRy8JoVegtbu1hMnQJbdlxgqNt9nmKYD2WAN1dhZamve4tEddBQzG55u2pQ57j3N1/pub)
      The In Power Movement is doing the same thing only no one at this point, as far as I know, has undertaken to enforce their NOL’s and subsequent liens hoping that the mere serving of the NOL’s will be enough to get their demands met. In my humble opinion It will take enforcement of at least one NOL and lien to make the process work with just the serving of NOL’s.
      I support the NOL process as I do the In Power Movement and it’s goals which which is not antithetical to all of our goals in fighting the imposition of smart meters on our homes and in our living environment without our physical consent. The In Power Movement is just a different approach and we should be supporting them at least in spirit. We are all on the same side and Warren, Josh and Cal are all doing good work in their unique ways. Thanks to all of you for all you do who lead the way in defending human and yes all biological life.

      Steve Romine Stop Smart Meters Woodstock NY

      • I forgot to add a very important point in my reply and that is the title of chapter 69 of the classic multi-volume law reference Restatement of Law 2nd edition volume on Contracts is “Acceptance by Silence”. Also With Truth , Perseverance and Unity we will overcome !

        peace,Steve Romine Stop Smart Meters Woodstock NY

      • Steve, I’d been trying for a long time to reach Michele (as i did earlier this year) – firstly because I think the red/green/blue smart-meter chart by Dr.Powell needs to be updated to reflect the WIRED (emphasis on wired) “antenna effect”, as proven by Michele’s consultant, and as seen on her video featuring the upstate NY home wherein a woman had contracted skin cancer.

        Secondly:
        I was recently in touch with a woman in another part of my county (where they already installed smart meters) – and she stated she’s satisfied with her smart meter because her bills actually went down.

        Well, I was knocked for a loop, with no clue as to how to respond to her. It’s a big problem that average people don’t know what to say to all the people who are quite “happy” with their new meters.

        I’ve been campaigning, and gathered over 100 signatures in a petition sent to local officials, but getting practically nowhere, without knowing how to make connections with any other concerned parties in my county. During my campaign (which was not just pro-analog, but also anti-5G) i had this guy laughing at me and saying he =wants= 5G so he’ll get better reception.

        So how does one respond to all these types of comments? As i said before, this not knowing how to respond, is a problem.

      • I saw your legal doc. (you didn’t state the date you served notice) – but it was way over my head. Did you compose it, or did you hire a lawyer? Your decision to fight “fire with fire” (or in this case fighting with the same “tacit agreement” argument they’ve used against the citizenry) is interesting.

  2. Please post your evidence for your statement under Maui:
    “Also, that decision was made well before any Notice letters were sent out.”
    Thanks

  3. The general consensus on this thread seems to disfavor the Cal Washington-founded Mass Action of Liability (MAOL), and my original comment fell into agreement by and large with the critique–it IS true that many of the assertions (of public officials leaving office as a consequence of receiving NoLs) made during the course of the presentation were not directly substantiated. However, I have continued to turn over in my mind the InPower-sponsored Notice of Liability methodology and read one of Cal’s eminently reasonable responses here (https://michiganstopsmartmeters.com/exchange-of-comments-on-inpower-website/). And also watched the InPower series from start to finish once again.

    As a consequence of which I’m changing my mind once again–not to the unbridled enthusiasm I did have upon initial viewing of the InPower episodes (http://bit.ly/2pjFXPS_Episode_1)–to see MAOL as a potentially quite useful tool in recovering our freedom from harm from this Fry&Spy (F&S) technology. Indeed, the advantage lies in personal empowerment: one is effectively ‘calling out’ specific individuals by contractual offer for the illegal harm they have wreaked.

    I view MAOL as a strong tool that can readily be tailored to spread to the redress of other mass harms such as GMOs, compulsory vaccines, geoengineering assaults, and so on. It is my impression that what we, the anti F&S movement, are doing now is less than optimal. Because we are not holding public officials and their corporate accomplices responsible for gross misconduct and flagrant constitutional violations in office. That can only be done by restoring people’s independent grand juries (PIGJs) en masse, then indicting the miscreants one by one.

    Please read my template starter column for restoring PIGJs in Michigan: http://bit.ly/2prcGCE_Simple_Grand_Juries. It is virtually impossible to go after a corrupt official with a criminal complaint: the existing legal system does appear to be a corporate bailiwick entirely, where the people’s rights are subordinate to the system’s profits, so they stymie you with overwhelming obstacles.

    Until we have PIGJs, which will take two to five years under the best of circumstances, I feel MAOL stands as the most invigorating strategy with the potential of HUGE success–envision the end of Phase II of the process where millions of Americans hold grossly corrupt public officials PERSONALLY responsible and subject to large damages. So think of MAOL as an interim justice technique that (admittedly arguably) depopulates the top-down aggressor minions until the PIGJ cavalry arrives.

    Both institutional approaches, MAOL and PIGJs, have one advantage that few of us have enjoyed since the beginning of our struggle: We get to play offense. We’re not consigned to ‘their’ system like an amateur tennis player with a catgut racket facing Pete Sampras–WHERE ONLY SAMPRAS HAS THE RIGHT TO SERVE. Think about it, I say. David Lonier agrees with me. It’s not like we drop all the other legislative and educational approaches we’re already doing. Nobody is in favor of that, especially Josh and Cal.

    • Unfortunately, i’m not so sure that “quiet” action works well in our current upheavled world anymore. We’re in a world where mob scene’s seem to get the most attention. So unless justice-seekers work up major mob-like demo’s throughout the country i don’t think conservative actions will make the grade anymore.

      • Miriam, I totally agree. The new movie by Michael Moore ‘Fahrenheit 11/9″ documents the success the West Virginia Teachers had with mass demonstrations. We are living in corrupt times and it takes mass demonstrations to effect changer and let them know we are serious about these issues. All else will fall on deaf ears . Look what happened in Flint Michigan. Those politicians didn’t care if they were poisoning anyone including 10,000 children who now have irreversible damage. It took mass demonstrations to get their attention. We need to do the same thing opposing smart meter deployment and 5G.

        Steve – Stop Smart Meters Woodstock NY

  4. Thanks for your work, Warren. I got way too excited because of wishful thinking, and the need to have some means for we the people to go on the offensive against these corrupt and criminal public officials. But it does appear there are no shortcuts, the evidence of success is indeed murky for Mass Action of Liability. I will mend my fences by retracting my initial enthusiasm and statements of interest in the movement.

    The only way to truly recover the people’s power is via their rightful independent grand juries, and I’ve been working on that here in Michigan: http://bit.ly/2pjFXPS_Episode_1. If anyone does come up with an interim legal method where we can go on the offensive and be successful, rather than continue to react to corrupt power where they always are on the offense and we are always on defense, please submit and popularize through these channels.

    • I’m glad you asked if there is any way to go on the offensive and be successful bwisok. That is the $64 million question. The more you look into this stuff, the deeper down the rabbit hole you end up, and the less options become practically available. Those behind this and everything else aren’t stupid, having set the world up in such a way to ensure almost anything we do plays in their favour.

      Ultimately, the only sure solution to our problem is through virtue. Considered holistically, we are kept demoralized and divided through our human weaknesses, which can be summarized as the 7 Deadly Sins. Greed, Gluttony, Envy, Wrath, Sloth, Lust, and Pride, which seem to be the tools used to keep us locked into our physical world, and focused on the sensual aspects of life. Through the utilization of our weaknesses against us, they are exposing themselves as classical scholars who know “The Art of War”, according to Sun Tzu.

      In his book, he states that the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. How that can be achieved is through a slow physical and intellectual degradation and demoralization process, achieved over decades, if not centuries. The evidence shows that we are becoming powerless to resist, having had the fabric of society degraded over our lifetime, beginning with the Feminist movement that sought to destroy the authority of real men – those whose role is to provide and protect their family. Once that connection is broken, women and kids lose any sense of dependence on their fathers and husbands, permitting them to do as they wish without fear of being disciplined. Domestic Violence is an extension of this operation.

      In order to answer your question, the extent of the problem should be understood, otherwise we’d end up acting unconsciously, thereby making our situation worse. There is much more to know, but rather than go into further detail, I’ll simply cut to the chase. The only solution available to us is two-fold. First, we must repair the fabric of society that has been shredded through the use of clever divide and conquer tactics, and second, we must stop feeding the beast that intends to destroy us.

      The first part requires us to focus on repairing social bonds, and resolving disputes, and differences. This process will test our patience, commitment, and humility, as we do our best to mend fences with others. This does not mean we simply accept whatever rubbish they heap on us. In fact, it means quite the opposite, since allowing friends and relatives to do us harm is not in their best interests, or ours. That demands courage and character, not to mention discipline, otherwise we’re likely to fly off the handle and make matters worse.

      The second part requires us to first become conscious of how the money, time, and energy we spend is surreptitiously feeding the beast. This is not as easy as we’d think, since just about everything we like or feel we need is associated with supporting the enemy. For example, the food we eat, the products we like, our favourite indulgences, forms of entertainment, recreation, sports, etc. are all part of the matrix that keeps us enslaved.

      In simple terms, to conquer this enemy, we must conquer ourselves first, because they are simply doing what they’re required to do – provide opportunities for us to grow spiritually. Then, once all this is comprehended, the goal is to learn to love our enemy for making all this possible. As they say, it’s a dirty job, but somebody’s got to do it…..

  5. Warren,
    Excellent analysis of Episode 1 by the InPower Movement. The details always matter. Especially when talking about the law and courts.
    Recently I wrote an analysis of the “Notice of Liability”.

    http://www.sacsmartmeters.org/inpower-movement-and-the-notice-of-liability/

    Anyone who reads my message about the “Notice of Liability” and then Cal Washington’s or Josh’s response will have all the information they need to decide who to believe and what to do with the NOL.

    Take Back Your Power was an excellent movie for several reasons. But this is a big step in the wrong direction. I believe the InPower Movement is misleading people and giving them a false sense of hope. There really is no legal basis for the NOL. The NOL does not create a contract.
    Keep up the good work Warren!
    Mark

    • Thanks Mark! In your SMUD article, I assume SM is “smart meter”, but what is “UD”? I sent out emails long ago to my local reps. requesting they act on my behalf so that I can opt-out without a fee (if/when they’ll roll them out in my area of NY). But nothing much came of my pre-emptive efforts, which was frustrating to say the least.

      Mark, do you have a clue as to why thrivemovement links to Del Sol’s site? The reason I ask, is because thrivemovement seems legit., which is how i =would= have got roped in =if= it weren’t for the fact that I didn’t have witnesses, and all the prep./plus/notaries it entailed loomed like a ton of bricks…

      • Miriam, SMUD stands for Sacramento Municipal District.
        Also Stop Smart Meters Woodstock NY was instrumental in getting the monthly opt-out fee withdrawn for your area in NY.
        Josh Del Sols site links to the Thrive Movement site because Foster Gamble and Josh Del Sol have similar mindsets and are both uniquely visionary. I personally know Josh and respect his bravery and use of his time to help humanity at great cost to himself. He’s a shaker and a mover and I am glad he is on the scene as I am glad we have others who tread where others would not dare to go.
        We all need to support each other . Miriam please email me stopsmartmeterswoodstockny.com (contact page) Steve

      • Steve, when I tried the Contact link at upper right side of your Truthsayer site, it displayed “Password Protected” and requested a password – so i was unable to contact you.

  6. Warren Woodward is 100% on the money with this story. InPower has misrepresented things, just as its parent group, Take Back Your Power has.

  7. Thanks for sharing your research Warren. I’ve been in contact with the group lately and was beginning to smell a rat, so I started searching and found this. Here is my best guess as to what’s going on, as strange as it may seem.

    First clue was a long email exchange with a Michigan advocate of InPower, who told me he’s a volunteer who was a contracts admin for the Department of Defense. His manner was terse, and abrupt, which was another subtle hint that this guy’s heart wasn’t really in the “mission” he was doing for free, because he loved it so much.

    Then, I started watching the videos and paid particular attention to the body language of the two principal spokesmen. Both looked casually dressed, but their look and manner was very much like military officers out of uniform.

    So, the question now is why would they go to the trouble and expense to run a scam? Putting all the pieces together, let’s hypothesize they are in the military, and are running this op under orders from the top brass. Why would the military have an interest in promoting InPower you may ask? To achieve dominance, they will be integrating wifi, 5G Wireless Internet, HAARP, Geo-engineering aka Chemtrails, and possibly more, to enable total control of planet earth. Therefore, the last thing they want is for us to unite and become conscious of their plan before the trap is closed. The one great advantage they have over us is our ignorance, and division, which they have consciously cultivated over decades, or centuries.

    As I said at the start, this is strange, but I can assure you that everything I’ve written can be verified through research and deduction. I haven’t actually made any of it up, just put all the pieces together to form a picture – the only picture that could represent the various fragments faithfully, without fear or favour.

  8. The Take Back Your Power video was excellent. Unfortunately, the In Power Movement videos and documents have given many false hope, and are as my lawyer tells me just a “pile of pseudolegal rubbish” promoted by those with evidently no understanding of actual law. That is no doubt why the “Terms” at the InPowermovement.com website clearly state that “The material presented on this Website is not to be considered legal advice”. What is the point of wasting your time filling out and mailing useless forms that have no legal effect whatsoever?

    • I see, Finlay. Perhaps you can invite Mr. Cal Washington (via his contact form) to respond to the comments on this blog, and then report back here as to whether your invite was accepted? Thanks.

      • Hi Miriam,
        Many months ago I contacted the InPowerMovement.com website and left 2 comments, the oldest 4 and a half months ago which Cal replied to. These comments are still posted on their website. I have screenshots of these comments which i can forward to you if you email me at fjm@xplornet.ca
        Best wishes, Finlay

    • Hi, I know its the end of March, but just wondering whether you had received my Feb.8th responses to your email. (Also got no response from Mark – up above in mid-March.)

      I’m actually preoccupied now with my water company who keeps on phoning me via automated calls, about wanting to install their meter in my basement.

      This, after having sent emails expressing my wish to opt-out-at-no-fee – to my state senator & assemblywoman, as well as sending a hard copy via certified mail to the water company.

      I’m wondering if i should cave in to the water company, given that Jerry Day said their’s don’t cause fires the way the electric company’s do?

  9. Warren, you are in agreement that all of us are against meters of all stripes, correct? So why can’t we be united against meters? Isn’t it enough that the anti-meter crowd are a small minority? Bottom line, is that I would love to see some nitty-gritty dialogue between you, Josh and Cal on this blog (even if much of it is over my head). Would that be possible? Thanks.

  10. FPL charges me $13 to opt out. I had a huge fight with them about no notice trespassing and replacing equipment without notice. The installed then removed the smart meter but the original mechanical meter was replaced with a non transmitting digital meter that I cannot trend monitor.

    Florida PSC is appointed and the entire rate system and oversight is 100% corrupt with total schools in the PSC. LOL

    The 5G rollout will make smart meters a distant memory as microwave emitters go onto every utility pole.

    • I feel your frustration John. We have the same situation here in Northern Michigan. We contacted Consumers Energy about opting out, for an analog meter, NOT a digital meter. We made it perfectly clear over and over again we were not going to pay the $129 opt out fee for a digital meter, we wanted our analog back. I explained why, told them the digital meters still produce the dirty electricity, told them about health issues we’ve had since the smart meter was installed a year ago. Could not have been clearer about refusing a digital meter, made sure they understood we were only interested in opting out for an analog meter.

      They showed up here when we weren’t home (as they have now done 3 times, once to install the smart meter, once to replace the smart meter with another because I complained about the interference with our internet service and then again to remove the smart meter, replacing it with a digital meter.)

      I’m self employed, my husband is retired, so we’re here 90% of the time, yet they showed up three different times when we weren’t home? Suspicious.

      Trying to communicate with their customer service reps is useless. They simply don’t care. There is no protection for any of us. They have a monopoly and there is nothing we can do about this right now, short of paying for a system to move off grid.

      • Let’s all pray to God that thrivemovement succeeds with their multi-pronged actions, to get us all freed from the grid, and the nefarious schemes of the power-hungry sector.

  11. The InPower “seed” group in Kelowna is a farce. Quite a few people fall for the InPower story, as people who are angry and feel helpless are prone to do. They followed all the “instructions”, made multiple copies printing their names in caps only, paying to notarize, sending each copy separately via registered mail, and even paying to have help completing the convoluted “documents”, only to get a smart meter. Not one person escaped and not one person had a smart meter removed because of any of these pseudo legal approaches.

  12. Readers contemplating following the “lawful process” advocated by the InPower Movement promoters may be interested in these comments and responses from Cal and Josh as posted on their website. With respect to Cal’s response, the lawyer I had review this matter also noted that Judges are Lawyers.

    finlay macpherson

  13. A terrific article which should convince people to do the research for themselves. Being in BC, I am familiar with the initial “seed” group that Josh uses as evidence that his bewildering method works. I am not part of that group, but I still have my analog, 6 years after the program was initiated here. Why do I have it? Because my analog has not expired yet. When it needs to be re-certified, BC Hydro will require me, just like all of the others in BC who have been fighting with every means possible, to take a smart meter if I wish to have electricity. If some of Josh’s “seed” group still have their analogs, it is just a matter of time for them, too. It is the law here in BC.
    Many of Josh’s group did everything he and his colleagues asked, made threats, copied numerous documents many times, sent them registered, paid for help to complete them, to get them notarized, etc. and still they were forced to take the smart meter. Why? Because it’s the law.
    Despite Josh’s desire to ignore the law, to believe that there is some law higher than the laws in our current system, the reality is, if we wish to keep our analogs, we must work to change the law.

  14. Good article. I agree with you on the points about the InPower movement. I think the InPower Movement is a great idea, but after watching both episodes, I was totally confused as to what they were telling us to do. While I,too, want a choice and want an analog meter put back on our home, the suggestions made in these video’s left me not understanding what in the world they thought was going to happen if one was to follow their advise. How can you fight with a company like Consumers Energy with information that makes no sense to you in the first place. Bravo to them for wanting to fight this, I just don’t think the average person will ever understand the legality of what they propose needs to be done. I did, however, find a lot of their information very interesting. I just hope something more user friendly comes to light soon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s