Information and Opinion by Warren Woodward
Sedona, Arizona ~ January 27, 2016
Yesterday, the corrupt Maine Supreme Court confirmed a decision by the corrupt Maine Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that “smart” meters were safe enough.
How do I know these outfits are corrupt? Because they use corrupt language!
Check this out and see if you can make sense of it, especially given that, under Maine statutes, it is up to the Maine PUC to “ensure safe, reasonable and adequate service.” In other words, the burden of proof of safety is upon the PUC. Note the simple, black & white language of the statute: “ensure safe, reasonable and adequate service.” Now, read how that got corrupted into:
“It’s one thing to make a finding that evidence is credible regarding potential harm and quite another to find there is a legally credible threat of harm — that a credible threat of harm is in fact credible: likely and probable to result in harm.”
Here’s another instance of corrupt language being used in the ruling:
“The Commission appropriately applied the credible threat standard such that it evaluated “what threat or hazard constitutes an acceptably safe level of exposure,” balancing the potential for harm against the usefulness and pervasiveness of the technology at issue.”
Several things wrong there. The Statute requires safety, not a ‘balancing of potential harm’ against anything, but, just the same, look what they balanced it against. “The usefulness of the technology?” Useful to whom? The “technology at issue” has never been proved useful. It has only been assumed useful and endlessly promoted as useful.
The only thing useful about it is that it’s been useful to the utilities that have been able to pad their bottom lines as result. Rates have gone up to pay for this utility boondoggle everywhere the “smart” grid has been implemented. Due to the massive overheads, expensive complexities and endless “upgrades” of the “smart” grid, those increases will never stop either.
And I can’t believe they used “pervasiveness of the technology” as an excuse or as something to ‘balance” health against. What they are saying essentially is, So much has been spent on this boondoggle already that we can’t turn back now no matter what.
By the way, that is the line of corrupted reasoning that Arizona Corporation Commission commissioner Doug Little used during his campaign. When asked about recalling “smart” meters, he said there were simply too many of them installed, and that replacement would be too costly. Never mind that they are bio-toxic surveillance devices. Never mind that APS has already proved him wrong by hiring subcontractors to replace all of theirs that are already falling apart and obsolete after just seven years or less. Hey, the utilities spent a lot of cash on this junk and they are entitled to enhance their revenue stream forever. APS CEO Don Brandt needs $10,403,293 to live on each year, dammit!
As the Maine Coalition Against “Smart” Meters pointed out in their press release, the Court turned a statute that required safety into “a risk assessment evaluation of acceptable harm.”
Coalition spokesman and Plaintiff Ed Friedman had this to say:
“While the decision acknowledges over one hundred peer-reviewed scientific studies were reviewed by the Commission, what the Court doesn’t admit is over 1,000 peer-reviewed study citations and verbatim abstracts of supporting studies submitted into evidence by anti-smart meter activists were rejected by the PUC because ‘somehow we need to whittle down the amount of evidence.’ The Court has miserably failed the people of Maine, instead relying on CMP supplied evidence from the FCC [FCC exposure standards admitted by even the PUC to be obsolete and irrelevant],Trilliant [vendor for the smart meter project], Exponent [a well-known product defense firm], and the Maine CDC finding from 2010 [a 2-week rush job about which the CDC admittedly knew nothing and that predated both this investigation and the WHO classification of RF as a possible humancarcinogen].”
“The Court ignored when they needn’t have, independent testimony from international experts on the credible threat of harm RF exposures at smart meter levels pose and instead chose to believe the “Marlboro Man” that smoking is good for us. The Law Court has despite ample evidence we were not legally required to submit [with the burden of proof on CMP] rejected Maine’s judicial maxim-the health of the people is the supreme law.”