By Patricia Burke
Insightful students of history readily note parallels between the Manhattan-Rochester coalition’s covert research on radiation weaponry in the 1950s, and the smart meter narrative in the U.S. today.
Unethical human experimentation took place on vulnerable populations in Missouri in the decades following WWII. The public narrative was that scientists were researching whether they could shield American cities from Russian warplanes using harmless smokescreen cloud dispersals.
In truth, college students were not privy to the true nature of the tests which were to spray low-income predominantly black neighborhoods in St. Louis with radioactive materials, for scientists studying offensive weaponry.
In her PhD dissertation in 2011, Lisa Martino-Taylor researched the details of the partnership between the various players who comprised the Manhattan-Rochester Coalition, including
- The US government, including the Army and the Lawrence Livermore National Library;
- Colleges and universities providing legitimacy, stature, facilities, and personnel;
- Industry, including Monsanto
- And local politicians.
Her research examines how covert projects can be layered with secrecy, while tactics are applied to create ethical lapses inside an organization. She explored how organizations also control public dissent by stifling debate, distorting the reality of harmful actions, and manufacturing false security claims.
While a tight-knit group knew the true nature of the St. Louis study, thousands who implemented the project and who participated did not.
A similar elite group of insiders is participating in the smart meter narrative, including Lawrence Berkley Labs, except that the cast of players has been expanded to include the telecom industry, utilities, regulators, the tech sector, and state and federal elected officials.
And, most alarmingly, misinformed environmentalists promoting vague concepts of energy efficiency are among the most outspoken smart meter advocates.
While the utility industry and its regulators continue to claim that smart meters only collect data about when electricity is used, and not how, U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper let the cat out of bag in January, stating:
In the future, intelligence services might use the [internet of things] for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials.
The Guardian reported on Feb 9th that:
Security experts examining the internet of things take as a given that the US and other surveillance services will intercept the signals the newly networked devices emit, much as they do with those from cellphones.
Devices include micro-chipped appliances communicating with wireless utility meters.
Furthermore, The Guardian revealed, “Domestically ‘homegrown extremists’ are the greatest terrorist threat.” 
The statement marked a major shift in the continuum of boundary violations as the nation turns on its own people. While imperialism dominates foreign policy, the adoption of “dual-use technologies” implements militaristic control of essential services (electricity, gas, water) and comprehensive surveillance of a deceived populace.
Dr. Martino-Taylor described the Trojan horse strategy used against St. Louis. Like smart meters,
Dual use may have been a tactic to mask defense-related activity under a blanket of industrial research, production, and add additional layers of secrecy through intellectual property laws.
The Manhattan-Rochester coalition instilled fear and bolstered the urgent need for funding and mobilization of resources based on security threats from the Soviets. The smart meter narrative instills fear and bolsters the need for mandated investment based on threats from climate change, global warming, the need to divest from fossil fuels and nuclear energy, and the threat of terrorism. The inherent danger contains elements of reality, but the sustainability guise manipulates the core values of an unsuspecting public to justify immoral, reckless actions.
The U.S. Army denied any public health risk associated with the St. Louis cloud study. The pro-industry FCC has granted the same immunity to collaboration between the wireless industry and telecoms. FCC guidelines were established for acute short-term exposures of adult military personal for heating/thermal impacts only, and are inapplicable for current exposures and for non-thermal impacts,  especially for infants, pregnant women, and the medically vulnerable.
The U.S. denied the existence of previous reports of harm while spraying unsuspecting St Louis residents with radioactive materials. The FCC denies the existence of thousands of studies indicative of harm due to exposure to non-ionizing radiation, especially from research conducted by Soviet bloc nations. 
The U.S. Army denied the need to obtain informed consent for the St. Louis studies. At least 15,000 Worcester, MA residents were auto-enrolled in the National Grid pilot. Over 180,000 residents did not provide informed consent regarding experimental WiMax towers blanketing the city with a class 2B possible human carcinogen.
The official smart meter rollout in the U.S. began in 2009, financed by taxpayers’ economic stimulus funds, while wireless AMR meters were already covertly modified to transmit continuously in many communities.
In the 7th year of deployment that started in 2009, there are 7 reasons to be greatly concerned about the purposeful layering of deception beneath the public narrative of the smart grid:
- The industry claim that utility customers are driving the demand for smart meters and wireless remote control over appliances is a form of delusional insider propaganda. The demand for “more information” is necessitated by undisclosed changes in pricing structures.
- In a predatory model, pilot programs do not resemble future pricing plans to price electricity hourly via the commodities market to benefit investors, and the move towards pre-pay meters,, rather than society providing an essential service safely and reliably to its citizens.
- Smart meters do not help to integrate renewables into the grid. Regulators in sunshine states including FL, NV, and AZ have altered the compensation formula for solar to the detriment of producers, restricted the amount of solar tied to the grid, surcharged solar operators to distribute electricity, and/or favored the installation of industry-owned community solar farms, while focusing on large-scale storage rather than smaller scalable applications. Ignoring the issue of dirty electricity introduced into the grid due to solar inverters, denying adverse health impacts associated with utility-scale wind turbines, and ignoring ground current issues further endangers both human health and the environment. The idea that the smart meters will enable expansion of renewable energy is a cover story to gain the support of environmentalists.
- In discussing the threats of terrorism towards the grid, the military quaintly morphed its identity from the Dept. of War, to the Dept. of Defense, to the current day post-9/11 euphemistic ‘Homeland Security’ while building a grid that is more vulnerable to hacking, as well as physical threats, rather than focusing on a decentralized more efficient model that does not necessitate wasteful transport over long distances.
- The claim that smart meters will save customers money while financing the over-engineered, exorbitantly expensive infrastructure in untrue. Meters have also been found to depreciate faster that claimed by industry.
- Promising bill savings without divulging punitive pricing is predatory.
- Various groups claim that smart meter deployment is sourced from a desire to address the health and environmental consequences of the fossil fuel model. If there were any validity to the health focus, smart meter rollout would have been halted as soon as the first reports of adverse health impacts surfaced in California.
The crippling onset of electromagnetic hypersensitivity associated with smart meter installation, also known as microwave illness, has been socially engineered to correlate with conspiracy theory and tin foil hats, while shifting scrutiny towards evidence of harm rather than proof of safety.
When Cold War scientists concocted their chilling plan to spray radioactive aerosols on American civilians, they initially chose Minneapolis. When they encountered public and political resistance, they instead targeted a St. Louis slum “where residents were less likely to be educated, inquisitive, or to question authority.”
Question authority, now. There is nothing smart, sustainable, informed, or ethical, about smart meters.
TLB Recommends other great articles from Activist Posts
About the author: Patricia Burke works with activists across the country and internationally calling for new biologically-based microwave radio frequency exposure limits. She is based in Massachusetts and can be reached at stopsmartmetersMASS@gmail.com.
 https://www.emfscientist.org/ Scientists in 40 nations has signed The International EMF Scientist Appeal, stating, “Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”
 http://magrid.raabassociates.org/Articles/MA%20Grid%20Mod%20Working%20Group%20Report%2007-02-2013.pdf page 30
The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions.
TLB has other above the fold articles, videos and stories available by clicking on “HOME” at the top of this post. Never miss a new post, sign up for E-Mail alerts at the bottom of the Home page and get a link dropped right to your in-box.
TheLibertyBeacon.com contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.