Interview with City of Fort Collins Light and Power

After hearing how the City of Fort Collins was treating Virginia and Craig Farver, we paid a visit to the utility and had a pleasant little exchange with them.  Note the color of Dennis Sumner’s face as we expose their “rational utility upgrade project eliminating ‘obsolete’ technologies” as a fascist violation of human and constitutional rights.   You can almost see the wheels turning inside their heads as they realize- “Are we the bad guys?”

This entry was posted in Citizen rebellion, Colorado, Democracy, Installer Threats and Assaults, Police, radio-frequency radiation. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Interview with City of Fort Collins Light and Power

  1. God job Josh & Mrs Faver!

    I heard the whole thing and the utiity manager uses disclaimers:

    1. I am not a health expert.

    2. I am an engineer.

    3. The City gave us approval.

    This is another way of saying “I’am am just following orders” which when used as an excuse in the past has not held up in court.

  2. Miles Schwartz says:

    Josh:

    What is wrong with a digital meter that doesn’t emit RF signals? Yes, we know that wireless smart meters are lethal, but digital meters that don’t emit RF are NOT harmful the way you are suggesting in this video.

    Why are you giving the movement such an extremist reputation? We need power line meter reading that is up to smart grid standards and that’s it. It’s called TWACs by Aclara, and it works well all over the country.

    Please explain your position.

    • Hi Miles, We prefer the term “radical” to “extremist.” Radical actually means getting down to the root of something, which is what we try to do here at SSM! Digital meters may have transmitters inside or are capable of being retrofitted. All meters with electronic components have a switch mode power supply which can put significant dirty electricity onto the line- this is dangerous. See: http://stopsmartmeters.org/2013/12/03/dirty-electricity-from-smart-meters-answers-from-the-experts/ PLC or TWACS intentionally uses dirty electricity to transmit readings. There is intentional wireless (as from a AMI or AMR system) and there is unintentional wireless from dirty electricity EMF’s coming off the wiring from TWACS systems. Neither is safe and people should insist only on pure electromechanical meters. By “works well” do you mean making people sick? Maybe we need t-shirts made with that slogan? Electromechanical only please.

      • Miles Schwartz says:

        Josh:

        Instead of running around the country picking on people, how about fighting some real crime?

        Like the La Plata Electric Association in Durango, Colorado which is forcing all residents to have wireless smart meters at a cost of $40-50 million in customer money.

        The research has been done: The Tantalus wireless smart meters being installed in southwestern Colorado are just a front for a financial scheme to take federal loan money and pump it into the economy through local banks during the economic slowdown.

        You want corruption? Go to Durango and blow the whistle on these people: Greg Munroe and company are truly criminals who are stealing from the public and causing public health problems.

        “I’ll know my song well before I start singing.”
        – Bob Dylan

        Catch a real crook for a change, Josh, instead of hyping up in the faces of hard-working people who are trying to do the right thing.

        • Miles,
          Josh is correct so don’t give him agro. Josh is trying to help people who are now very sick from the Microwave poison from the these far from Smart Meters. Please do some solid research for a change as I have done on this FILTH. Are you Miles perhaps working for this verdampte or evil Microwave Industry. Oh by the way I have a copper cable linked Computer not wireless as you possibly have. I can’t use a microwave phone or mobile phone as they are also called. I used one for years and it made me so sick my doctor has confiscated it thank God for that. I have pretty well recovered now from the damage of this Mobile Phone and now I simply use my copper cable Land Line Phone. You should try it pal, it’s cheaper to run than a mobile phone as well.

    • Paul H says:

      Miles:

      Did you know that anything over 1.7 kHz is absorbed by vital organs? Creating chronic exposure to unnecessary fields of 20 kHz>, throughout a persons home, is an assault on their body. Placing a device such as this on the front end of power entering a home is criminal.

      You have labeled those TALKING about this assault as “EXTREMIST”.

      The power company using smart grid communications to ASSAULT us are guilty of TERRORISM.

      Ignoring our pleas would label them as MASTER CRIMINALS that are condemning us to a life of absolute hell.

      ACTIVE DENIAL is in full play here standing behind a test designed to see if 6 minutes of exposure creates a thermal effect. Total ignorance!

      • Deborah Wiseman says:

        Utilites and PUC commissions are ALL in colusion with criminal acts of FRAUD to “push” this “new technology to get out of the old analog system” and they “know better” like they are our parents. Really???? I am #29 of 152 plaintiffs for a Criminal Act of Fraud against the Texas PUC in colusion with the TDU’s and Utilites who forced, lied, and broke the state law on Consumer Protection Standard Act 17.004. We are now in the court docket of the Texas District State Court in Austin, TX awaiting our time to go to court and win against these CRIMINALS who by the way knew just how bad these meters were by their own “bank” of lawyers in their own companies a very long time ago when they were in talks with FERC to create this Smart Grid in 1995. I have a contract in which TXU/Oncor of Texas made with FERC which gave TXU/Oncor $3.4 million to get their “infratucture” going. So this is not just lying, but RICO and we’re going after them by that laws for the criminal acts for which they are culpable together to make a ‘grid’ that would give them control over everything anyone living in this nation would do in the privacy of their own home not knowing they were also trying to KILL them all in the name of Agenda21, a UN baby.

  3. K says:

    “They are obsolete”. WHO decided this? The people that want to make more money, the utilities, the entire marketing industry who now have access to everything you do in your home. They now know what you are doing INSIDE your home and can target their marketing via the TV, the internet to pitch items that you NEED based on the information received through the meter. A money making machine for the utilities and all those involved in this industry. Unfortunately these crony capitalists don’t care if people are dying. This man doesn’t get the big picture and is another bully that is closed minded to other human being’s pain. The industry pitches them as safe and he believes it. There is no harm to giving a true analog to those who want it, other than the utility going for a money grab.

    Verb “Obsolete”: “we’re trying to stimulate the business by obsoleting last year’s designs” (GOOGLE)

  4. Terri Keller says:

    I’m surprised at you, Josh (at the 16:08 mark). Didn’t you know that “safe” equals “obsolete”?

    Honestly, what these people were saying is the same thing that others who force “smart” meters upon us are saying: “We don’t care if this is dangerous in the extreme. We have an agenda, and that agenda involves YOU having a fire-starting, cancer-causing, bill-raising, totally hackable “Spy and Fry” meter on your home!”

    Can’t wait to see you tomorrow. Too bad there’s not a million of you. This problem would be dispatched immediately!

  5. John says:

    Having watched the first 6.5 minutes of this interview, it is clear to me that the interviewer does not grasp the difference between analog meters and the three options offered by FCU for digital meters:

    1.) Smart Meter, broadcasting every 15 minutes for electricity (or hourly for water);

    2.) Smart Meter, broadcasting once per day for electricity (twice per day for water); and

    3.) Digital Meter, no emr broadcasting whatsoever, requires meter to be read by a worker; an $11 per month surcharge applies.

    The interviewer cut off Mr. Sumner just as he finished explaining option 2. There is no doubt in my mind that the interviewer did not want to hear the rest of the answer; I would suggest that he was probably suffering from info overload and that he was unfamiliar with the three options going into the interview.

    I do not believe the interviewer was intentionally trying to suppress information about option 3; he was simply getting frustrated at his own inability to process, within his cerebral cortex, the information provided by Sumner. He is a young man, not particularly adept at planning ahead or thinking on his feet, and it showed.

    Mrs. Farver, unfortunately, seems to be unfamiliar with the differences as well. She referred to her neighbor’s “digital analog meter” (a contradiction in terms) being replaced with another meter.

    I would suggest the possibility that the solution for FCU is to undertake a PR effort to explain to the public the difference between options 1, 2, and 3. Not everyone, apparently, can easily grasp the difference, as we have seen in this video.

    I suspect that FCU would be adamantly opposed , however, to communicating more clearly to the public about the differences in their options. They prefer to keep it short and simple, without delving into the negative aspects of options 1 and 2. The reason, in my view, is that armed with more information, many more customers would switch to option 3. That goes against the plans of the utilities, as well as the big shots who rule the world and their Agenda 21.

    Those opposed to smart meters in Fort Collins need to firmly grasp the issues before engaging in any type of activism. While I do not believe the material on this blog is intentionally spreading disinformation through the use of strawman arguments, the net effect is that they are helping the opposition through their errors.

    The “next big thing” will be the elimination of “opting out.” The three options are a method of appeasement, and will only be offered over the short term. The elimination of option 3, and later option 2, is the plan. You will all find this out, sooner or later.

    I would suggest you focus your energies on that, rather than getting all tied up in your underwear from not understanding the issues and offering strawman arguments, no matter how innocently this was done.

  6. John says:

    I had a chance to view the entire video, and I am afraid I may have to change my opinion about the interviewer. His aggressive manner during the interview did not appear so much to be frustration over having to assimilate new information, but more like he was trying to box in Mr. Sumner with “Analog = good, Digital = bad.”

    I repeat: option 3, the digital meter, which IS NOT a smart meter, emits no electromagnetic radiation. The interviewer’s aggressive efforts to suppress this fact may sway the average Joe, but not anyone who has educated themselves on this subject and engages in the critical thinking process. I felt like I was watching Morley Safer trying to frame the argument HIS WAY, (i.e., with an agenda), rather than a reporter attempting to discover the truth.

    ~

    I neglected to point out another danger which smart meters present to the public, regardless of whether or not they selected option 3. If this has already been discussed somewhere in this blog, it will be nothing new for some…

    Say you live in a development where the houses are very close to each other, or even abut one another. You would prefer to have an analog meter, but lacking that option in Fort Collins, you have chosen option 3. No emr will enter your house from a smart meter, correct?

    Wrong. Electromagnetic radiation from your neighbors’ smart meters can and will enter your house, but at a lower intensity than a smart meter attached to your house would have.

    In addition, as the smart meters in your development uplink their data to FCU’s antenna, another stream of emr is created, and IF it passes through your house, en route to the antenna, you would be none too pleased with that, I’m sure.

    What this means is that option 3 only offers SOME protection to an urban or suburban dweller, since his clueless neighbors are ruining it for everyone.

    Would the world be safer with only analogue meters? Yes. Would the world be safer with only digital meters of the kind offered by option 3? Yes.

    We have to be very cautious with tactics used by disinformation agents, who infiltrate movements, or as Lenin counseled, TAKE OVER THE OPPOSITION, and subvert the cause through various tactics such as strawman arguments. EMR smog is a major weapon in the arsenal for depopulation, and we all must be cognizant of the possibility that those who are pushing this agenda also run the opposition. These people are very crafty. Do not take anything at face value, which is typical of the Amerikan mindset.

    This blog shall be monitored on an on-going basis by yours truly. While I am a kindly individual who will make allowances for occasional slip-ups and misinformation, I will take steps to correct disinformation whenever I encounter it.

    If my comments are not published in this blog, if they are suppressed, I will alert some heavy hitters (subject matter experts) who are opposed to emr smog and understand the Fabian socialist tactics being employed for mass depopulation and Agenda 21.

    P.S. I haven’t addressed the issue of exploding utilities costs associated with smart meters, nor have I addressed the privacy issues. Maybe on another day.

    P.P.S. Fabian depopulation tactics such as the roll-out of smart meters will soon be replaced by incredibly violent methods for depopulation which will be implemented by the Gramscian communists. That applies to 90% of us, regardless of whether or not you shop at Whole Foods and like to dress in black. See Solzhenitsyn for further information. I would suggest everyone begin to mentally prepare for this, at the very least.

    • Anna Log says:

      Hello John, I wish to inform you that option 3 (as you describe in your comments above) is not safe or even “safer.” Non-transmitting digital meters have injured people and continue to injure people. I have spoken with and personally know people severely injured by such meters, and this website also documents many similar stories. Any digital meter has a switch mode power supply (SMPS), whether it transmits RF or not, which loads dirty electricity into the wiring in the home. While AC electricity is already dirty to some degree, the levels go way up with digital meters of any kind, making life unbearable for some. Stetzerizer readings (a meter that detects dirty electricity) are well documented on youtube if you require proof. People are getting very sick wherever these meters go in. We should not be accepting compromises, but fighting for nothing less than a trusty spinning disc analog meter, at no charge for any home or any community. Any “opt out” offering anything less than that is a sham and should not be accepted or tolerated. Free analogs for everyone. Nothing less.

      P.S. Virginia Farver might have called it a digital analog because that’s what her utility might call it. Utilities are coming up with all sorts of misleading labels for their meters. In fact, my utility refuses to call their meters “smart” meters, when they so definitely are.

      • Anna Log says:

        P.P.S. Had to watch the video again. Josh Hart might have “interrupted” Dennis Sumner because he (Mr. Hart) knows more about these meters than the utility and he’s heard it all before, many, many times. Watch any one of these types of interviews with any number of different utilities and they are all the same. These utility talking heads are like zombies. There’s no critical thinking going on at all. Just industry spin.

        Favorite quotes:

        Dennis Sumner: “I’m not a health guy, I’m an engineer.”

        …and “We believe the analog meter is an obsolete technology, it has moving parts.” What’s next, the wheel?

        Dennis Sumner: “We have customers who have made threats of violence.”

        Josh Hart: “Isn’t it a threat of violence to force something that may cause cancer on a home?”

        Dennis Sumner: “We *only* exist to serve the community.”

        Well done Josh and Virginia. Virginia, you are brave and strong and inspiring. The officers that came to your home ought to be ashamed.

      • John says:

        Anna,

        An excellent reply. Would you kindly explain more about “dirty electricity”? I’ve come across the term before a few times, but I do not understand it.

        A few links to get to the bottom of this particular aspect would be very helpful. If option 3 is indeed dangerous to health, I would like to understand this better.

        What is this “dirty electricity” doing to the body? How does it do it? What are the effects of “dirty electricity” on people?

        Are there any scientific reports about the adverse effects of “dirty electricity” coming from option 3-style digital meters on people’s health? Links?

      • John says:

        Okay, I did about 30 minutes of research on dirty electricity.

        Based ipon the pronouncements by the World Health Organization, along with policies in Russia and the former republics of the USSR to reduce dirty electricity, I am convinced it is a problem to health if it exceeds a certain range for transient voltage (spikes).

        I have learned that dirty electricity may be the result of external sources, such as such as cellphone masts, or by internal sources, like your own electrical equipment. A bad wiring job in your house may also be to blame.

        The more electrical appliances you have in your home, the more your exposure, especially from these devices: flat screen TVs, dimmer switches, and CFLs.

        I have not seen any mention of option 3-style digital meters as being responsible for dirty electricity, according to the handful of sources I checked.

        Question: Has the option 3-style digital meter offered by FCU been tested for being a cause of voltage transients? If yes, please provide evidence of that.

        Secondly, it would be interesting to hear what Mr. Sumner has to say on this particular issue. Too bad he wasn’t allowed to speak without being interrupted so often.

        Too bad he wasn’t asked this exact question either.

  7. Pingback: Interview with City of Fort Collins Light and Power | TBYP

  8. Julie Ostoich says:

    As Josh says, this is not acceptable. People have a right to decide what goes on their homes. This technology is not safe. I’d much rather have the ‘obsolete’ meter and no RF, or DE. People should have the choice and not have a cancer risk forced onto their homes or into their lives.

  9. czehfus says:

    Josh, Virginia, great job.
    The same kind of run-around is occurring at high level regulatory bodies. If you haven’t yet seen the expose article by Susan Foster, “WHO Knew: The Elephant in the Room,” it shows how the cover-up of the truth about cancer from RF and MW starts from the “top”….excellent article at TBYP.
    “A shocking exposé on corruption within World Health Organization ranks, relating to scientific causality of harm from electromagnetic radiation (EMR)”

  10. JT says:

    I’m am just sick to find out about this smart meter stuff, as I just bought a house in Fort Communism (Collins). The City has gone to crap. They are now pondering a charge for plastic bags at grocery stores, require recycling of cardboard and have the most unfair tiered utility billing system that I’ve ever seen. Fort Collins is on par to take Boulder over as the most fruit loop town in Colorado. Agenda 21 has a strong foothold with this hard left leaning city council. It’s all about sustainability and climate change in their eyes. What a bunch of BS.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


4 + = thirteen

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>