Thousands Of Swedes Are Inserting Microchips Under Their Skin

Can you name any form of technology, from the pointed stick up, that wouldn’t be beneficial to any dictatorial ruler? If the hypothetical possibility to abuse a technology a valid reason to dismiss it out of hand, why are you using the internet?

 

The internet does not dictate how I pay for my purchase, and nor does it track where I go.

 

Again - you are digressing into Biblical prophecy, of which I am well aware however, this only serves to help the demons. We are a long way from some kind of one world Gov't. Even from a Biblical/prophecy perspective the term "one world Gov't" could allude to a number of things - a one world system rather than some human ruler that rules over the world.

The focus needs to be on the factors that proceed totalitarianism. The canaries in the coal mine of totalitarianism are screaming.

It is not that we have some kind of totalitarian gov't right now. This was not the case during the rise of Hitler and other totalitarian regimes either. Hitler did not arise out of totalitarianism. Hitler arose due to the safeguards against totalitarianism being removed.

1) Lack of Transparency in Gov't - criminalization of whistle blowers while those who commit criminal acts in Gov't go free - rampant Gov't corruption.
2) Erosion of individual liberty and protections of individual liberty
3) Erosion of freedom of the press and control of the press
4) State Propaganda and censorship
5) Erosion of the Rule of Law
6) Erosion of Right to Privacy and arbitrary search and seizure.
7) Use of fear of an external or internal threat to get citizens to trade liberty for security.

Never mind "one world Gov't" - all of the above is happening right now ! This nation was founded on the idea individual liberty was above the legitimate authority of Gov't. "Give me liberty or Give me Death"

It is now our "Patriotic Duty" to give up individual liberty.. "Ding Ding Ding" !! Citizens are on their knees begging to trade essential liberty for security... over a risk of harm that is 400 times less than the risk of harm from walking.

The founders knew well the age old trick using fear of an external threat to get citizens to trade liberty for security.

B. Franklin "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security"

Stalin used this trick - fear of an external threat to get people to trade liberty for security - "Security for the Motherland"
Hitler did the same "Fatherland Security"

Bush - lacking the creativity to come up with a new name did exactly the same thing - "Homeland Security"
Bush made it our "Patriotic Duty" to give up essential liberty

Obama came along and changed the name of the Patriot Act to the equally Orwellian doublespeak "Freedom Act"

When the head of the NSA lied to congress (Felony 1) about en mass spying on US citizens (Felony 2) and was caught - not only was Clapper not punished - he kept his job. On the other hand whistle blowers who have tried to out Gov't criminality have been persecuted (and I am not talking Snowden or Manning - I am talking those that tried to go through legitimate channels)

Obama defended the NSA saying "If we want increased Security - we have to give a little"

I nearly fell out of my chair when I heard this. It was one thing for Bush (aka village idiot) to not understand the founding principles, Obama on the other hand was a Harvard Constitutional scholar and civil rights activist.

There is no way that Obama did not know exactly what he was saying and the historical context and implications of his statement. This was a complete 180 from everything he had previously stood for. FULL STOP>

Yet - he said it anyway.

 

Sure, probably decades away, but it has to start somewhere. A chip like this is probably a proto-type of a more advanced version, which will do much more to control the populations in the future.

This is happening right now, and I am hoping it will not become a new normal, but rather a warning example.

I agree about the use of fear to increase government intrusion. The fear of terrorists has been used heavily since 2001, and still is.

 

His eyes are bigger than the damn football he performs magic with (when he can be bothered)...

 

Terrorists - and more recently Russia. The war on drugs, Communism, Socialism. Fear Fear Fear - the creation of which is the job of the MSM.

 

Suarez - teeth dilemma sort of...

 

Nor do these microchips. Both technologies could be used to (and indeed those kind of things would require both in combination), but they’re not automatically consequences of the technology existing or even us using it.

It’s like the classic “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. Abuse or questionable use of technology will happen regardless of what the technology in question actually is. We continue to develop and use different technologies despite that by applying sensible checks and essentially balancing the risks and benefits. We don’t automatically throw anything out just might be abused because again, that would apply to literally anything.

 

Yes ridiculous anyone would want to do this, if it's implanted you can't leave it behind if you want to go off the grid.. can you

 

Yep. And you can't say you don't have your ATM card on you when someone sticks a gun on your head and wants to drain your bank account. Once everyone wears these chips they KNOW you have it on you, and its just a matter of picking a weak looking victim.

 

Yes they'll cut off your arm and the blood will spurt everywh.... sorry I just tried to out-gruesome scenario you, but you are 100% correct.

 

Borg is something Swede, isn't it?




My cats have ID chips
and a vaccine for their Immune Deficiency Virus
as well as Leukemia.

Swedes are closing in on Feline Rights

 

Brojn Borg was a fine tennis player, and maybe still is.

 

Obviously one can have the implant put into the left hand and do away with the concerns of the mark of the beast in the Revelations of the Bible.

 

No. I hate being controlled. I don't have a mobile or smart phone, either. Seems silly, when I am on the internet. I guess I'd have to go really old fashioned and go sit and have a cup of tea or coffee with folks and actually... talk? God forbid. lol

One thing I find on the internet that I don't in real life is the great diversity of thought.

 

I also have no mobile phone, though to be honest I don't have a very mobile lifestyle, either. Closest I come to it is an iPod, and it does come in handy from time to time.

 

Now if they ever make contact lenses that can take pictures or scan faces that can identify muggers, rapists, murderers etc., that would be helpful.

 

Suarez studied football under Mike Tyson...

 

It’s hardly difficult to identify someone who had a card or search them for it but it’s still a high risk/low reward kind of crime regardless of the technology, which is why it doesn’t happen very often. Stealing ATM cards is much more common because it’s generally safer and more profitable. This kind of technology essentially eliminates that risk. It introduces new, different risks of course but the clear implication that it’s fundamentally worse than any technology it might replace hasn’t been supported.

You’ve still not given a definitive explanation as to why you object to this idea (beyond the out-of-context Biblical quotes). Have you realty thought the entire thing through or was it just a knee-jerk reaction you don’t want to walk back on?

 

Plenty of reasons have been given. If you are ok with it, that's fine. Are you ok with others rejecting it? I do not wish to carry a scannable chip on me which contains my personal information, access to my bank account, my health records, a gps to track my movements. If people need to know those things about me and I am willing to share, then I will tell them. No unauthorized scanning.

 

They will need an upgrade every two years..

 

There is the obvious privacy problems, and govt control problems.

But what about health problems? RFID is passive but it does reradiate, so these people get EM energy exposure from a device embedded in their skin. And an RFID chip will reradiate for every RFID reader that it encounters and that will be many many times a day. If such a person sits in a coffee shop and in range of a reader, the RFID chip will reradiate the entire time. Nobody knows about the safety issue.

 

We have camera's that can do this. The Chinese arrested some criminal after he walked into a bar and a camera with facial recognition software recognized him and alerted police.

 

I’ve not seen any specific reasoning, just generic comments (such as the Biblical references) or speculative predictions. I’ve no issue with anyone rejecting anything but only if its presented with clear and rational reasons. I do object to knee-jerk rejections of new technology, especially if it’s based on misunderstandings, misrepresentation or exaggerated rhetoric.

The chips referred to in the OP article will only contain a unique ID. Those chips won’t hold any personal data and won’t include any kind of GPS tracking. They literally just take the place of keys, contactless cards, ID cards etc – any actual data involve will already exist in central databases. There are legitimate questions to be asked, including around security but no more than the questions surrounding whatever technologies or processes they’d be used to replace.

There are other forms of implantable chips proposed which could hold data (though probably limited due to practical reasons, maybe the kind of thing you might have on a medical bracelet or a physical ID card) and as or when they’re proposed for any kind of implementation, the same kind of questions should be asked in the context of their specific application.

 

Imaging criminals sawing off arms and carrying them to the ATM.