Sunday, January 13, 2008

CALIFORNIA SCHEMIN' - Big Brother to control thermostats in homes?

Proposed mandate would grant utility companies unlimited remote access to regulate temperatures

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com

Add thermostats to the list of private property the government would like to regulate as the state of California looks to require that residents install remotely monitored temperature controls in their homes next year.

The government is seeking to limit rolling blackouts and free up electric and natural gas resources by mandating that every new heating and cooling system include a "non-removable" FM receiver. The thermostat is also capable of controlling other appliances in the house, such as electric water heaters, refrigerators, pool pumps, computers and lights in response to signals from utility companies. If contractors and residents refuse to comply with the mandate, their building permits will be denied.

The proposal, set to be considered by the commission Jan. 30, requires each thermostat to be equipped with a radio communication device to send "price signals" and automatically adjust temperature up or down 4 degrees for cooling and heating, as California's public and private utility organizations deem necessary.

Claudia Chandler, assistant executive director for the California Energy Commission, told WND the new systems would be highly beneficial to residents.

"From the Energy Commission's perspective, all we're doing is ensuring that this new technology is included in new homes instead of the older programmable technology," she said.

The Programmable Communication Thermostat, or PCT, will allow power authorities to control home temperatures while denying consumers ability to override settings during "emergency events." Nowhere in the proposal does it clarify what type of situation would qualify as an "emergency," but Chandler offered her own explanation: "An emergency is when the utilities need to implement rolling blackouts and drop load in order to be able to meet their supplies because the integrity of the grid is being jeopardized."


She claims residents will be able to manually override controls in all cases, but the 2008 Building Efficiency Standards (Page 64), known as Title 24, specifically states: "The PCT shall not allow customer changes to thermostat settings during emergency events."

Michael Shames, executive director of California's Utility Consumers' Action Network, told WND he believes the idea of a chip consumers are unable to override is not feasible. While he considers the technology to be a positive development, he said denying consumers control over their own appliances is a highly problematic concept.

"The implications of this language are far-reaching and Orwellian," he said. "For the government and utility company to say, 'We're going to control the devices in your house, and you have no choice in that matter,' that's where the line is drawn. That sentence must be removed."

Additionally, no provisional exceptions for people with health conditions worsened by excessive temperatures are mentioned in the current proposal; however, the Energy Commission spokeswoman said existing supply problems are more worrisome to Californians with health issues than the projected solution.

"I actually was more concerned in the 2001 electricity crisis that folks on critical medical devices like respirators, kidney dialysis machines and things like that were going through rolling blackouts," Chandler said. "That's a very challenging thing to face. Moving somebody's temperature up by a few degrees really seems mild by comparison."

Jim Gunshinan, managing editor of Home Energy, based in Berkley, Calif., told WND the changes would also provide consumers with an option to control thermostats via the Internet.

"That means someone can turn on the air conditioning before they leave work for home and have the house comfortable when they walk in the door. Or if they forgot before leaving home for a ski trip, they can remotely lower the thermostat at home and save money."

Gunshinan claims the new system is needed because it will be more beneficial to the environment than building new energy facilities for the state.

"Since utilities have old, inefficient and dirty power plants on reserve to use during peak demand hours, dropping demand will mean less use of these dirty power plants and less pollution."

Some critics say California authorities will be incapable of enforcing compliance if homeowners and renters bootleg heating and cooling systems from other states, block radio reception with inexpensive FM transmitters or simply install window air conditioning units and space heaters, a bypass method that could use more energy than traditional units.

Concerned California residents expressed outrage with the proposal in several online postings:

"I hate this state. Why don't we just fly a communist flag while we are at it? We are planning a move out of state. I'm done."

"This is insane. Please, everyone reading this, take action. Write your representatives, call the RINO governor, call your local radio programs and, lastly, write letters to the editors of your local papers. Dear God, just when I thought California couldn't get much worse!"

Other opponents of the state proposal expressed concern that its mandatory nature is a sign of increasing "Big Brother" government control.

The California Energy Commission invites public comment until the proposed adoption date, Jan. 30. Written responses must indicate "Docket No. 07-BTSD-1." Members of the California Energy Commission are appointed by the governor. Concerned individuals can also contact California state legislators.


If you would like to sound off on this issue, participate in today's WND Poll.


Related special offers:

"Global Warming or Global Governance?" DVD

"The Sky's Not Falling!"

"HYSTERIA: Exposing the secret agenda behind today's obsession with global warming"

Previous stories:

Warning: Vacate room when CFL bulb breaks

Congress bans incandescent bulbs

Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can't decide

Light-bulb ban craze exceeds disposal plans

Gore home's energy use: 20 times average


Chelsea Schilling is assistant commentary editor of WorldNetDaily.

LISTEN TO MY BIBLE STUDY
Steve McHenry's Bible Study

STEVE MCHENRY'S BLOG

Click here to join ArmandoMontelongo.com


Amazon Unbox

Visit FamilyChristian.com


Pocket Testament League

Survivor Mall

The UFO Store

Fingerhut



LinkShare

Firefox 2

My Podcast.com

BlogTalkRadio

Dara's Mary Kay Website

Dara's Website


FeedBurner
Syndicate your Blog or Podcast with FeedBurner


Check me out!

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Share/Save/Bookmark

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

UNRAVELING THE MYSTERY OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE

Koinonia House

With talk of a recession hanging in the air it seems the Federal Reserve may once again cut interest rates. While this news caused stock prices to rebound, it most likely went unnoticed by most Americans. The reality is that few people outside the world of finance take a keen interest in such matters. If TV ratings are any indication, the American public in general is more interested in hearing about Britney Spears' custody battle than the news that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke cut the federal funds rate by a quarter of a percentage point.


The actions of the Federal Reserve have a significant effect on our daily lives. However it remains something of a mystery to most Americans. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve is perhaps the most powerful non-elected official in the world, whose decisions affect every aspect of our economy, from interest rates to the cost of groceries. So what is the Federal Reserve and how did it come into existence? The answer might surprise you.

The Meeting on Jekyll Island

In November of 1910, after having consulted with Rothschild banks in England, France, and Germany, Senator Nelson Aldrich boarded a private train in Hoboken, New Jersey. His destination was Jekyll Island, Georgia, and a private hunting club owned by J.P. Morgan.

Aboard the train were six other men: Benjamin Strong, President of Morgan's Bankers Trust Company; Charles Norton, President of Morgan's First National Bank of New York; Henry Davidson, senior partner of J. P. Morgan; Frank Vanderlip, President of Kuhn Loeb's National City Bank of New York; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of Treasury; and Paul Warburg. The secret meeting, as described by one its architects, Frank Vanderlip, went as follows:

"There was an occasion near the close of 1910 when I was as secretive, indeed as furtive, as any conspirator. I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System.

We were told to leave our last names behind us. We were told further that we should avoid dining together on the night of our departure. We were instructed to come one at a time...where Senator Aldrich's private car would be in readiness, attached to the rear end of the train for the South.

Once aboard the private car, we began to observe the taboo that had been fixed on last names. Discovery, we knew, simply must not happen, or else all our time and effort would be wasted..."

What's in a Name?

The goal was to establish a private bank that would control the national currency. The challenge was to slip the scheme by the representatives of the American people. Earlier, it had been called the Aldrich Bill and received effective opposition. The devious planners of the revised bill titled it "The Federal Reserve Act" to mask its real nature. It would create a system controlled by private individuals who would control the nation's issue of money. Furthermore, the Federal Reserve Board, composed of twelve districts and one director (The Federal Reserve Chairman) would control the nation's financial resources by controlling the money supply and available credit, all by mortgaging the government through borrowing.

The conspirators had a problem, however. President William Howard Taft had made it clear he would veto such a bill if it was introduced. They had to make sure he would not win reelection. They first supported ex-President Teddy Roosevelt in the Republican primaries, but he failed to get the nomination. The bankers then supported the Democratic contender, Woodrow Wilson.

In exchange for their support, Wilson promised to sign their bill into law. But the polls indicated that Wilson would only draw about 45 percent of the votes. The bankers needed someone who could draw a sufficient number of Republican votes away from Taft without harming their Democratic candidate. They arranged for Teddy Roosevelt to run against both men by representing a newly invented third party: the "Bull Moose" party.

The plan worked. The Federal Reserve Bill was held until December 23 (two days before Christmas!) before it was presented to the House and Senate. Only those senators and congressmen who had not gone home for the holidays - those who owed favors to, or were on the payroll of, the bankers - were present to sign the legislation.

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was a deliberate charade to pacify the American voters. They'd been crying out for banking reform and had held scores of elections, alternating one set of politicians with another, only to find themselves with the same programs and deeper debt.

The name "Federal Reserve Bank" was designed to deceive, and it still does. It is not federal, nor is it owned by the government. It is privately owned. It pays its own postage like any other corporation. Its employees are not civil service. Its physical property is held under private deeds and is subject to local taxation (government property is not). It is an engine that has created private wealth that is unimaginable, even to the most financially sophisticated. It has enabled an imperial elite to manipulate our economy for its own agenda and enlisted the government itself as its enforcer.

New World Order

Meyer Amschel Rothschild's original plan was to facilitate "a new order of a one world government." This explains why the Great Seal of the United States, on the back side of the one dollar bill, bears the inscription Novus Ordo Seclorum: New World Order. For more information on the Federal Reserve listen to our briefing called Behold a Black Horse.

Related Links:

Wall Street Rebounds on Rate Cut Hopes - AP
Recession in the US 'Has Arrived' - BBC
Dollar May Fall Versus Euro, Yen on Expectation of Rate Cut - Bloomberg
Behold A Black Horse - MP3 Download - Koinonia House
The Vortex Strategy - DVD - Koinonia House
The Vortex Strategy - MP3 Download - Koinonia House


BOOKS & STUDY MATERIALS BY DR. CHUCK MISSLER

LISTEN TO MY BIBLE STUDY
Steve McHenry's Bible Study

STEVE MCHENRY'S BLOG

Click here to join ArmandoMontelongo.com


Amazon Unbox

Visit FamilyChristian.com


Pocket Testament League

Survivor Mall

The UFO Store

Fingerhut



LinkShare

Firefox 2

My Podcast.com

BlogTalkRadio

Dara's Mary Kay Website

Dara's Website


FeedBurner
Syndicate your Blog or Podcast with FeedBurner


Check me out!

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


Share/Save/Bookmark