Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 22:43:47 -0400
To: IAHF List
From: John Hammell firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: SMART CHIPS GET UNDER OUR SKIN: Well written news story from the UK on societal resistance to implanted microchips
IAHF List: [ See superb article underneath my comments] The elements of coercion are attempting to acclimate us to the idea of having implanted microchips by requiring them to be put into pets if you transport them between countries, and in many towns and cities as well. Applied Digital Solutions http://www.digitalangel.net/ has an animated series of cartoons advertising their different microchip products, and they too are trying to acclimate us to eventually accepting implanted chips- despite protests to the contrary. The article below takes a close look at this intense civil liberties issue.
Given that the UN's Codex Alimentarius Commission seeks control over everything we ingest for population control purposes, (including control over our vitamins), health freedom fighters must be mindful of developments on these other fronts as well, if we are to monkeywrench the globalists nefarious plans to force us under total dictatorial global fascist control. For additional insight, see the excellent website Prison Planet Breakout http://www.nick2211.yage.net/breakout.htm documenting the rise of the global police state to assist the Resistance. This website includes an interesting article about the city of Southampton England, which is "test driving" the cashless economy which the elements of coersion intend to force upon all of us in the not too distant future(unless we oppose it en masse, of course!!)
If you appreciate IAHF's efforts to monkeywrench these plans, kindly send a donation to IAHF POB 625 Floyd VA 24091 or donate electronically via paypal at http://www.iahf.com where you can also jump to http://USavegas.org to purchase a device that will help you get much better gas mileage, better horsepower, with less emissions so that you can save some money, while helping to conserve oil, a non renewable resource. Only IAHF tells the truth, the whole truth, and nothin' but the truth about the Codex International Threat to Health Freedom.
Please forward this to more people, and show it to the pastors of as many churches as possible so that they too can join the Resistance. The more folks develop self sufficiency by leaving the city for the country, by growing food and herbs, the better because the ruling elite are trying to drive us all off the land and back into the city where they can control us more easily, and cull our numbers.
ZDNet UK > News > Story
Smart chips get under our skin
15:08 Tuesday 23rd January 2001
While sci-fi concentrates on apocalyptic visions of intelligent machines, us humans are busy putting machines under our skin
The mystique and fear surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) tends to focus on the idea of sentient machines somehow challenging man's role on earth, conjuring up images of HAL, the softly spoken computer with malicious intent. Less talked about is the reverse idea of humans adopting some of the qualities of machines via embedded or implanted chips.
As technology advances so the gap between human and machine closes, fuelling ever more feasible science fiction scenarios that inevitably provide us with new worries. To some, the idea of computer-assisted bodies fuels fears that we are all about to become automatons like the evil cyborg men made famous in Dr Who.
In reality, the relationship between computers and us is far more contrived, giving machines powers that serve the most mundane purposes. While we worry about the idea of contaminating our bodies with technology thousands of our pets are unconcernedly roaming around with chips implanted in their necks.
The use of chips in pets -- now a legal requirement for anyone wanting to ship a cat or dog abroad -- seems fairly harmless but suggestions that it be extended to their owners is greeted with less enthusiasm.
But such implants are no longer the preserve of fiction. One US-based company, Applied Digital Solutions, has already developed a microchip -- dubbed Digital Angel -- which was originally marketed as a tracking device for humans. The makers dwelt on benevolent uses of the chip -- such as allowing doctors to monitor heart conditions. But despite its short lifespan (it was only launched in October) the company has decided to abandon its embedded chip idea in favour of wearable devices.
"We are not pursuing any applications for embedded chips and we have moved away from that for a couple of reasons," says a spokesman for Applied Digital Solutions. While he insists that the main reason is an economic one -- a small end market and the amount of time such a technology would take to get FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approval are the reasons he states -- he also cites privacy worries and ethical issues. "We don't want the adverse publicity. There are a number of privacy concerns and religious implications -- fundamentalist Christian groups regard it [implanting computer chips] as the Devil's work," he says.
It would seem that even those companies that had hoped to turn the notion of embedding chips into humans into a viable business opportunity are having second thoughts. Perhaps they are put off by the myriad civil liberty groups willing to fight tooth and nail to prevent such technologies being adopted.
The biggest concern appears to be that once humans are fitted with computerised implants, all other Big Brother fears will look like a walk in the park.
The theory goes that once such devices are put inside of us, it will be a quick and easy step for governments to centrally coordinate and monitor our movements. It would certainly make all the current RIP-based plans for Internet snooping appear costly and technically complicated way in comparison.
Some privacy advocates claim governments already have the technology to spy using human implants and worry that in a society obsessed with surveillance such devices could be the last straw. Head of Privacy International Simon Davies believes implanted chips that could be employed as tracking devices could be as little as five years away.
"The pattern for these things is they start as medical uses, then becomes used in the military or in prisons. Then become voluntary, then compulsory," he says. For the time being though, Davies is more concerned by the likelihood that devices like mobile phones and PDAs could be used to monitor our activities. In the future, he argues, nanotechnology, where atom-sized robots are used, could pose a very real threat to privacy.
"Then technology will be as universal as the smallpox injection, which raises very grave privacy issues," he says.
Even scientists, usually relatively blase about such issues are concerned about the possibility of a "chip network". Professor Brad Myers of the Computer Science department at Carnegie Mellon University in the US raises no objections to the idea of chip implants, but concedes he is worried about government use of such technology should it become the norm.
"If the chips are wirelessly connected to networks, that opens up a whole new set of issues," he says.
BT -- which has followed developments in the use of chip implants closely -- believes communications using smart chips will have "profound implications on how people communicate with networks".
The company's chief futurologist, Ian Pearson, is not convinced however that implants will necessarily be the favoured method of use.
"There is nothing you can do with embedded chips that you can't do with wearable ones, and I can't imagine there will be queues of people lining up to get chips embedded," he says. He predicts the idea of wearable identity chips could be implemented within five years. Pearson too is concerned about privacy using implanted chips: "They give an extra capacity for surveillance. We are already living with complete invasion of privacy and I would hate to live in a society that was policed to the extent embedded chips would allow," he says.