~ hehe Y is IT "they" only EVER tell US about ALL the so~called bennnnnies of "their" evil fucking shit HUH ???? y is that ...folks whats ta say "they" or any other evil fuck wants to use these"chips" 4 evil purposes ..ya know like turn off your pace maker ,"shoot" the "wrong" dose in yer IV or take over yer car,plane,train, voting machine ... & on &on &on& fucking ON humm ....nawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww "nobody" ever uses "tech" 4 evil ...ends nope Oops it's 4 the kids u c ??? just ask ole billy "the vaccine guy/ micro~spy guy " gates of hell or hows 'bout u's trust those ole nazi's & go geet in the .... shower
HAVE YOU CHIPPED THE CHILDREN?
No longer can we speak of it in future tense because our everyday lives are subjected to surveillance encounters 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Some surveillance encounters obtrude our routine, like getting a ticket for running a red light when no one is there except a camera on the corner. However, the majority of the surveillance encounters are part of everyday life and is for the most part, unremarkable.
Massive surveillance systems now underpin modern existence.
Big Brother watches us on a daily basis; we wind up on camera surveillance hundreds of times a day. But there are other things that are used watch and monitor us on a daily basis like supermarket loyalty cards, coded access cards to get in the office, and cell phones.
It is that these systems represent a basic, complex infrastructure which assumes that gathering and processing personal data is vital to contemporary living.
Surveillance is two-sided; it is convenient, and, benefits us in many ways. Yet at the same time, risks and dangers are always present in large-scale systems and of course, power does corrupt or at least skews the vision of those who wield it.
Many people believe that certain types of surveillance technologies are intrusive like the use of biometrics such as fingerprints or iris scans. However, the most controversial proposed surveillance technology is the introduction of the subcutaneous RFID chip.
Recently, the so-called conspiracy theory crowd has been running through the internet news cycle a story that in December of this year, all children in the European Union will be chipped at birth.
Public clinics in the European Union are said to have been alerted. This chip will be linked to a satellite through a powerful GPS sensor and it is said the GPS chip will have an edge of error of about 5 meters when tracking a child and is said to be beneficial in finding lost or kidnapped children.
All children born after 2014 will be getting the chip and all confirmation for those children will be required beginning in 2020.
The data, collected from one or more sensors in the body, would be transmitted to cell phones or tablets where apps would give parents and pediatricians insights into the baby’s health and condition in “real-time,” but what many people do not realize is that this technology exists now, and has already been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in humans. Not only do these chips “silently and invisibly” store and transmit personal data, but they can also be encoded to perform a variety of other functions.
Now, there are skeptics who have declared that all of this is bunk or an urban legend. They claim there is no proof that this will happen and yet there are sources that are not featured in conspiracy websites where we have to wonder what is in store for children, and the elderly with regard to utilizing the technology of the subcutaneous RFID chip.
In 2006, a published report entitled “A Report on the Surveillance Society” proposed locating and tracking once reserved for pets, will be used for children, the elderly, the mentally challenged, and to any adult who voluntarily wants the chip implanted under their skin.
The report emphasizes that the most accurate referencing in a surveillance society would be the mandatory use of Geographical Information Systems which would actually track the geographical movements of people, vehicles or commodities using RFID chips.
It also documents that both GPS and RFID are increasingly being seen as solutions in law enforcement and personnel management. Electronic monitoring has also been introduced as a condition of being granted bail and in 2004, some 631 adults and 5751 juveniles, some as young as twelve years old, were ‘tagged’ allowing them to await trial at home rather than be remanded into custody.
Offenders released from prison are also increasingly subjected to electronic monitoring either as a condition of early release from prison under the Home Detention Curfew Scheme or as a condition of being released on parole.
The first human use of RFID chips has been in elderly people suffering from degenerative diseases in the United States, and around 70 people with degenerative brain conditions have now been implanted to enable care takers to locate them easily. Researchers and technological enthusiasts have also been implanting themselves with chips for several years, and at least one chain of Spanish nightclubs has offered patrons the chance to have cash and access privileges held on implanted chips. However, an even bolder action occurred in February 2006 when a security company on Ohio, implanted two of its workers with RFID chips to allow them to access company property. CityWatcher.com, a private video surveillance company, said it was testing the technology as a way of controlling access to a room where it holds security video footage for government agencies and the police.
Although such an invasive procedure was carried out voluntarily, it raises enormous questions of the integrity of the body and privacy in relation to employers. It is also not entirely surprising that the call for everyone to be implanted is now being seriously debated now, especially the idea of parents implanting children with RFID in order to locate them.
We don’t think twice about having the vet put microchips in our dogs and cats if they can help reunite a missing pet with its family. But how willing would you be to have a microchip embedded in your children?
According to a widely distributed NBC News Report, putting microchips in children will happen “sooner rather than later.”
The WFLA report that challenges the debunkers who say that chipping is myth – electronics experts are now saying that microchipping children is safe and effective, and that Americans eventually will come to accept the process to insure their kids’ safety. One day, the report says, it will become as common as barcodes.
The report features a Tampa Bay mother of a special needs child who is prone to trust strangers, and has given her a few moments of panic. The mom says that if it will keep her children safe, it’s anything but extreme.
The report then features an electronics expert who says that microchip testing in humans is already happening: “The military is not only testing this out, but already utilizes its properties,” says Stuart Lipoff. “It’s not a matter of if it will happen, but when.”
The question is obvious: would you be willing to have your children embedded with a chip if it will help guarantee their safety? What if everyone had to be mandatorily chipped in the advent of a National Security measure? I know that TSA lines are longer; wouldn’t it be more convenient to have a chip inside you that would clear you for flights before hand?
If it was a law to be chipped or have your children chipped, would you break the law?
Would you support the chipping and tagging of refugees entering your country?
Pressure is on to find IDs that work for several purposes – border crossing, fraud control, access to government information and perhaps commercial and semi-commercial identification as well. The key problem is that once established, systems can easily acquire an apparent life of their own which is much easier to initiate than to halt or redirect.
Agendas such as the ‘war on terror,’ curbing the migration of undesirable groups and even the quest for solutions for credit card fraud, are shaping the development of RFID systems.
Chips are also being proposed for health monitoring as nanoparticles can be embedded in each chip that can provide vital information in a health emergency.
We are moving into a time when the extraordinary advances that have been made in the fields of nanotechnology, neurology, psychology, computer science, telecommunications and artificial intelligence, will be used for health monitoring, surveillance, and direct communication to the human brain.
The temptation to use these emerging technologies to control the public will become almost irresistible to the technocracy and many people feel that in the future governments will require chips with nanotech be injected into the populace for this purpose.
Nanotechnology is a manipulation of matter and works with the very basic building blocks of life. The scale is incredibly small: one nano-meter is one-billionth of a meter. So, it’s invisible, rarely listed in ingredients although there are more than an estimated 1,000 products now on the market – no one knows the exact number of products; and it is unregulated and untested for either short or long-term dangers.
Products using nanotechnology are found in: cosmetics including sunscreens and anti-aging creams, medicines, energy, electronics, clothes [for example, to make them very lightweight, or for socks to resist odors], paints, various coatings, and scratch-resistant car bumpers.
Nanotechology used for health monitoring is still medical surveillance and once again the obvious question is: would it be beneficial to be chipped for health reasons?
In medical surveillance, diagnostic surveillance technologies can move from individual diagnostics towards ever broader surveillance, applied to larger and larger proportions of the population. In particular, they have a tendency to creep into forensic purposes. A number of technologies used for medical diagnosis have also been applied to forensics examinations for the finding of murder victims, crime investigations and autopsies.
DNA analysis of tissue fragments; analyses of bodily performances such as posture, gait, or facial expression, analyses of body parts, and images or imprints like fingerprints, height, weight, bodily proportions. Many of these are now being proposed for surveillance purposes in the form of extensive databases against which identities can be checked.
With an RFID chip, medical doctors do not necessarily have the need to engage with an individual who has a medical condition. They merely use language that reflects a more mechanical view of the patient. You go from being a named patient with a bad knee, to merely the knee replacement coded and signed ready for tracking and prepared in room 223.
The passage in the Obamacare proposal page 1,001, illustrates this perfectly. The Affordable Health Care Act Subtitle C-11 Sec. 2521— National Medical Device Registry reads:
“The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of post market safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘and is ‘‘a class III device; or ‘‘a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.””
There have been many attempts to downplay this section by those who don’t want to believe that this may entail an implantable device, namely, a transponder or chip, however, this is exactly what this is meant to address along with other devices that can be used to prolong and sustain life.
In fact, the very purpose of these devices are to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary, in order to identify and observe those with genetic defects or mental problems.”
Now I am sure there are many people who believe that all of this chip nonsense doesn’t apply to them, or that they will never accept the chip because of the religious fear that you are accepting the Mark of the Beast.
However, at least 30 million people carry an RFID tag on them every day in their car keys or in their access control card to get into their office building or to buy gas or to pay a toll. New credit and debit cards will no longer be swiped, as they will be scanned by an RFID chip already embedded in the card.
The controversy and discussion about RFID technology will not end anytime soon. But both sides agree that a sizable dose of debate is needed to hammer out the kinks. Meanwhile, the technology is appearing in an increasing number of places – though even if you look around, you still might miss it.