Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
Announcements and links |
| Henry Cavill Hayden Christensen Comics Continuum Doctor Who Online Ebay | Charlie Hunnam Outpost Gallifrey Anne Rice David Tennant Tenth Planet | |
| Welcome to The Garden District. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our fabulous features: |
| New World Disorder | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 31 2007, 06:27 PM (2,606 Views) | |
| Denovissimus | Jul 24 2007, 01:05 PM Post #21 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
Chips: High-tech aids or tools for Big Brother? Debate rages over proliferation of ever-more-precise tracking technologies By Todd Lewan Updated: 5:38 p.m. CT July 23, 2007 CityWatcher.com, a provider of surveillance equipment, attracted little notice itself — until a year ago, when two of its employees had glass-encapsulated microchips with miniature antennas embedded in their forearms. The “chipping” of two workers with RFIDs — radio frequency identification tags as long as two grains of rice, as thick as a toothpick — was merely a way of restricting access to vaults that held sensitive data and images for police departments, a layer of security beyond key cards and clearance codes, the company said. “To protect high-end secure data, you use more sophisticated techniques,” Sean Darks, chief executive of the Cincinnati-based company, said. He compared chip implants to retina scans or fingerprinting. “There’s a reader outside the door; you walk up to the reader, put your arm under it, and it opens the door.” Innocuous? Maybe. But the news that Americans had, for the first time, been injected with electronic identifiers to perform their jobs fired up a debate over the proliferation of ever-more-precise tracking technologies and their ability to erode privacy in the digital age. High-tech helper or Big Brother? To some, the microchip was a wondrous invention — a high-tech helper that could increase security at nuclear plants and military bases, help authorities identify wandering Alzheimer’s patients, allow consumers to buy their groceries, literally, with the wave of a chipped hand. To others, the notion of tagging people was Orwellian, a departure from centuries of history and tradition in which people had the right to go and do as they pleased without being tracked, unless they were harming someone else. Chipping, these critics said, might start with Alzheimer’s patients or Army Rangers, but would eventually be suggested for convicts, then parolees, then sex offenders, then illegal aliens — until one day, a majority of Americans, falling into one category or another, would find themselves electronically tagged. Thirty years ago, the first electronic tags were fixed to the ears of cattle, to permit ranchers to track a herd’s reproductive and eating habits. In the 1990s, millions of chips were implanted in livestock, fish, pets, even racehorses. Microchips are now fixed to car windshields as toll-paying devices, on “contactless” payment cards (Chase’s “Blink,” or MasterCard’s “PayPass”). They’re embedded in Michelin tires, library books, passports and, unbeknownst to many consumers, on a host of individual items at Wal-Mart and Best Buy. But CityWatcher.com employees weren’t appliances or pets: They were people, made scannable. “It was scary that a government contractor that specialized in putting surveillance cameras on city streets was the first to incorporate this technology in the workplace,” says Liz McIntyre, co-author of “Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID.” Darks, the CityWatcher.com executive, said his employees volunteered to be chipped. “You would think that we were going around putting chips in people by force,” he told a reporter, “and that’s not the case at all.” Yet, within days of the company’s announcement, civil libertarians and Christian conservatives joined to excoriate the microchip’s implantation in people. “Ultimately,” says Katherine Albrecht, a privacy advocate who specializes in consumer education and RFID technology, “the fear is that the government or your employer might someday say, ’Take a chip or starve.”’ Some critics saw the implants as the fulfillment of a biblical prophecy that describes an age of evil in which humans are forced to take the “Mark of the Beast” on their bodies, to buy or sell anything. Others saw it as a big step toward the creation of a Big-Brother society. 'Surveillance society' “We’re really on the verge of creating a surveillance society in America, where every movement, every action — some would even claim, our very thoughts — will be tracked, monitored, recorded and correlated,” says Barry Steinhardt, director of the Technology and Liberty Program at the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, D.C. In design, the tag is simple: A medical-grade glass capsule holds a silicon computer chip, a copper antenna and a “capacitor” that transmits data stored on the chip when prompted by an electromagnetic reader. Implantations are quick, relatively simple procedures. After a local anesthetic is administered, a large-gauge, hypodermic needle injects the chip under the skin on the back of the arm, midway between the elbow and the shoulder. John Halamka, an emergency physician at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston got chipped two years ago, “so that if I was ever in an accident, and arrived unconscious or incoherent at an emergency ward, doctors could identify me and access my medical history quickly.” (A chipped person’s medical profile can be continuously updated, since the information is stored on a database accessed via the Internet.) 'Marked for life' But it’s also clear to Halamka that there are consequences to having an implanted identifier. “My friends have commented to me that I’m ’marked’ for life, that I’ve lost my anonymity. And to be honest, I think they’re right.” Indeed, as microchip proponents and detractors readily agree, Americans’ mistrust of microchips and technologies like RFID runs deep. Many wonder: Do the current chips have global positioning transceivers that would allow the government to pinpoint a person’s exact location, 24-7? (No; the technology doesn’t yet exist.) But could a tech-savvy stalker rig scanners to video cameras and film somebody each time they entered or left the house? (Quite easily, though not cheaply. Currently, readers cost $300 and up.) What’s the average lifespan of a microchip? (About 10-15 years.) What if you get tired of it before then — can it be easily, painlessly removed? (Short answer: No.) How about thieves? Could they make their own readers, aim them at unsuspecting individuals, and surreptitiously pluck people’s IDs out of their arms? (Yes. There’s even a name for it — “spoofing.”) The company that makes implantable microchips for humans, VeriChip Corp., of Delray Beach, Fla., concedes that’s a problem — even as it markets its radio tag and its portal scanner as imperatives for high-security buildings, such as nuclear power plants. “To grab information from radio frequency products with a scanning device is not hard to do,” Scott Silverman, the company’s chief executive, says. However, “the chip itself only contains a unique, 16-digit identification number. The relevant information is stored on a database.” VeriChip Corp., whose parent company has been selling radio tags for animals for more than a decade, has sold 7,000 microchips worldwide, of which about 2,000 have been implanted in humans. Tagging the 'high risk' patient The company’s present push: tagging of “high-risk” patients — diabetics and people with heart conditions or Alzheimer’s disease. In an emergency, hospital staff could wave a reader over a patient’s arm, get an ID number, and then, via the Internet, enter a company database and pull up the person’s identity and medical history. To doctors, a “starter kit” — complete with 10 hypodermic syringes, 10 VeriChips and a reader — costs $1,400. To patients, a microchip implant means a $200, out-of-pocket expense to their physician. Presently, chip implants aren’t covered by insurance companies, Medicare or Medicaid. For almost two years, the company has been offering hospitals free scanners, but acceptance has been limited. According to the company, 515 hospitals have pledged to take part in the VeriMed network, yet only 100 have actually been equipped and trained to use the system. Some wonder why they should abandon noninvasive tags such as MedicAlert, a low-tech bracelet that warns paramedics if patients have serious allergies or a chronic medical condition. “Having these things under your skin instead of in your back pocket — it’s just not clear to me why it’s worth the inconvenience,” says Westhues. Silverman responds that an implanted chip is “guaranteed to be with you. It’s not a medical arm bracelet that you can take off if you don’t like the way it looks...” In fact, microchips can be removed from the body — but it’s not like removing a splinter. The capsules can migrate around the body or bury themselves deep in the arm. When that happens, a sensor X-ray and monitors are needed to locate the chip, and a plastic surgeon must cut away scar tissue that forms around the chip. The relative permanence is a big reason why Marc Rotenberg, of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, is suspicious about the motives of the company, which charges $20 a year for customers to keep one its database a record of blood type, allergies, medications, driver’s license data and living-will directives. For $80 a year, it will keep an individual’s full medical history. |
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Jul 24 2007, 03:38 PM Post #22 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
Bush Executive Order: Criminalizing the Antiwar Movement by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, July 20, 2007 Email this article to a friend Print this article The Executive Order entitled "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq" provides the President with the authority to confiscate the assets of whoever opposes the US led war. A presidential Executive Order issued on July 17th, repeals with the stroke of a pen the right to dissent and to oppose the Pentagon's military agenda in Iraq. The Executive Order entitled "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq" provides the President with the authority to confiscate the assets of "certain persons" who oppose the US led war in Iraq: "I have issued an Executive Order blocking property of persons determined to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq or undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people." In substance, under this executive order, opposing the war becomes an illegal act. The Executive Order criminalizes the antiwar movement. It is intended to "blocking property" of US citizens and organizations actively involved in the peace movement. It allows the Department of Defense to interfere in financial affairs and instruct the Treasury to "block the property" and/or confiscate/ freeze the assets of "Certain Persons" involved in antiwar activities. It targets those "Certain Persons" in America, including civil society organizatioins, who oppose the Bush Administration's "peace and stability" program in Iraq, characterized, in plain English, by an illegal occupation and the continued killing of innocent civilians. The Executive Order also targets those "Certain Persons" who are "undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction", or who, again in plain English, are opposed to the confiscation and privatization of Iraq's oil resources, on behalf of the Anglo-American oil giants. The order is also intended for anybody who opposes Bush's program of "political reform in Iraq", in other words, who questions the legitimacy of an Iraqi "government" installed by the occupation forces. Moreover, those persons or nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), who provide bona fide humanitarian aid to Iraqi civilians, and who are not approved by the US Military or its lackeys in the US sponsored Iraqi puppet government are also liable to have their financial assets confiscated. The executive order violates the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution. It repeals one of the fundamental tenets of US democracy, which is the right to free expression and dissent. The order has not been the object of discussion in the US Congress. Sofar, it has not been addressed by the US antiwar movement, in terms of a formal statement. Apart from a bland Associated Press wire report, which presents the executive order as "an authority to use financial sanctions", there has been no media coverage or commentary of a presidential decision which strikes at the heart of the US Constitution.. Broader implications The criminalization of the State is when the sitting President and Vice President use and abuse their authority through executive orders, presidential directives or otherwise to define "who are the criminals" when in fact they they are the criminals. This latest executive order criminalizes the peace movement. It must be viewed in relation to various pieces of "anti-terrorist" legislation, the gamut of presidential and national security directives, etc., which are ultimately geared towards repealing constitutional government and installing martial law in the event of a "national emergency". The war criminals in high office are intent upon repressing all forms of dissent which question the legitimacy of the war in Iraq. The executive order combined with the existing anti-terrorist legislation is eventually intended to be used against the anti-war and civil rights movements. It can be used to seize the assets of antiwar groups in America as well as block the property and activities of non-governmental humanitarian organizations providing relief in Iraq, seizing the assets of alternative media involved in reporting the truth regarding the US-led war, etc. In May 2007, Bush issued a major presidential National Security Directive (National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20), which would suspend constitutional government and instate broad dictatorial powers under martial law in the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency" (e.g. Second 9/11 terrorist attack). On July 11, 2007 the CIA published its "National Intelligence Estimate" which pointed to an imminent Al Qaeda attack on America, a second 9/11 which, according to the terms of NSPD 51, would immediately be followed by the suspension of constitutional government and the instatement of martial law under the authority of the president and the vice-president. (For further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, Bush Directive for a "Catastrophic Emergency" in America: Building a Justification for Waging War on Iran? June 2007) NSPD 51 grants unprecedented powers to the Presidency and the Department of Homeland Security, overriding the foundations of Constitutional government. It allows the sitting president to declare a “national emergency” without Congressional approval. The implementation of NSPD 51 would lead to the de facto closing down of the Legislature and the militarization of justice and law enforcement. "The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government...." Were NSPD 51 to be invoked, Vice President Dick Cheney, who constitutes the real power behind the Executive, would essentially assume de facto dictatorial powers, circumventing both the US Congress and the Judiciary, while continuing to use President George W. Bush as a proxy figurehead. NSPD 51, while bypassing the Constitution, nonetheless, envisages very precise procedures which guarantee the powers of Vice President Dick Cheney in relation to "Continuity of Goverment" functions under Martial Law: "This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions." (NSPD 51, op cit.) The executive order to confiscate the assets of antiwar/peace activists is broadly consistent with NSPD 51. It could be triggered even in the absence of a "Catastrophic emergency" as envisaged under NSPD 51. It repeals democracy. It goes one step further in "criminalizing" all forms of opposition and dissent. to the US led war and "Homeland Security" agenda. ________________________________________________________________ Scroll HERE for the actual text of the vile order |
![]() |
|
| la anaconda de chocolatee | Jul 24 2007, 07:50 PM Post #23 |
|
Skittle Skank
|
Silverman responds that an implanted chip is “guaranteed to be with you. It’s not a medical arm bracelet that you can take off if you don’t like the way it looks...” this statement is stupid, because anyone who is diabetic or has severe allergies, what not wear it all the time because it is important, they dont take if off no matter what they are wearing. glad to hear though that this microchipping is not very acceptable amoung alot of experts and even laypersons. I dont think that they would be able to get the majority to readily accept this. Hopefully this disdain and distrust will continue. |
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Jul 25 2007, 11:36 AM Post #24 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
If the forces of evil have their way than a bigger 9/11 would occur and people will be willingly standing in line to get microchipped in an effort to maintain security. :wanker |
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Aug 20 2007, 04:27 PM Post #25 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
Smile … Or Else ‘Behavior Detection Officers’ are now watching passengers’ facial expressions for signs of danger. It’s a new level of absurdity for America. WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY By Patti Davis Special to Newsweek Updated: 11:40 a.m. CT Aug 16, 2007 Aug. 16, 2007 - It was bound to happen. Now even a frown or grimace can get you into trouble with The Man. “Specially trained security personnel” will be watching passengers for “micro-expressions” that will reveal treacherous agendas and insidious intentions at airports around the country. These agents, who may literally hold your fate in their hands have been given a lofty, Orwellian name: "Behavior Detection Officers." Did anyone ever doubt that George Orwell’s prophecies in “1984” would arrive? In that novel, he wrote, “You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.” In the study of “micro-expressions”—yes, it is actually a field of study and there are some who are arrogant enough to call it a science—it has been decided that when people wish to conceal emotions, the truth of their feelings is revealed in facial flashes. These experts have determined that fear and disgust are the key things to look for because they can hint of deception. Let’s see, fear and disgust in an airport? I’m frightened and disgusted weeks before I have to show up at an airport. In fact, I’ve pretty much sworn off the whole idea of going anywhere by airplane. It’s bad enough that I might be trapped in a crowded plane with no food or water and nonworking toilets for hours; now there are security agents interpreting our facial expressions. The face police, in place at more than a dozen U.S. airports already, aren’t identified as such. But the watcher could be at curbside baggage, the ticket counter or near the metal detectors and X-ray machines. The Transportation Security Administration hopes to have as many as 500 Behavior Detection Officers on the job by the end of 2008. But what about the woman who is getting on a plane to see a dying relative? Or the man who is traveling to another state to see a cancer specialist in a last bid for extending his life? What about the guy who just had a fight with his spouse and now worries that a plane crash would mean their last words were in anger? We’ve all had the experience of having a bad day, being in a rotten mood—especially at the airport, which has become a modern-day chamber or horrors. On those days, doesn’t it seem like everyone we meet looks sour and unpleasant? The opposite is also true. When we’re happy and joyful, we look at others and see happiness in them. Or even if we don’t, we look at them kindly and with compassion. It’s human nature to look at others through the lens of our own reality. Here’s where it gets really absurd. Apparently, these Behavior Detection Officers work in pairs. One scenario is that an officer might move in to “help” a passenger retrieve their belongings after they’ve been screened. And then the officer will ask where the passenger is headed. If the passenger’s reaction sets off alarm bells in the officer’s well-trained mind, another officer will move in and detain them. Let’s be really clear here. If a stranger moved in on me like that, I’d tell that person to go to hell, throw in a few other expletives for good measure and probably give them the finger as I stomped off. Of course, I wouldn’t be stomping very far. So while TSA employees are confiscating our scissors and water bottles, they’re going to secretly be staring at us, looking for some telltale sign of terrorist intent in a grimace, a sigh, a crinkled nose? Who knows what? In the end, the Behavior Detection Officers are the ones who are really acting suspicious. Which is the truth of the matter anyway. © 2007 Newsweek, Inc.
|
![]() |
|
| Julesy | Aug 21 2007, 02:39 PM Post #26 |
|
deliciously domestic
|
lol we got detained at the Canadian border. Probably due to the fact We dont smile much. they looked through all my shit and asked stupid questions like 'what do you do for a living?' like if I was a smuggler/mule I would tell them. I said"Im a lunch lady at an elementary school" *plays Incubus TALK SHOW ON MUTE* come one, come all into 1984.... |
![]() |
|
| la anaconda de chocolatee | Aug 21 2007, 09:58 PM Post #27 |
|
Skittle Skank
|
I would probably get flagged! My normal facial expression, how I look when I am neither smiling nor angry nor upset nor sad, makes me look like I am grumpy or sad. Because the way my lips form when they are lying naturally, without my mouth open, people often ask me if I am okay, they typically think that I look angry or sad when I am neither. It is how my normal face is structured when I am not giving any expression. Graham is this way too, one thing we have in common. He often looks that way too and he told me people also think that of him all the time as well. |
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Aug 22 2007, 12:12 PM Post #28 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
People always tell me I look mean, like I'm angry, and I just tell them I'm a deep thinker. I think this is all a crock of shit. |
![]() |
|
| Julesy | Aug 22 2007, 02:19 PM Post #29 |
|
deliciously domestic
|
everyone tells me i look mean too. wtf? am I supposed to go around smiling all fucking day? ive looked mean ever since i was a baby. see pic below. lol!
|
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Aug 22 2007, 03:55 PM Post #30 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
Aww but cute mean! It's like you're saying "why the fuck are you pointing that thing at me"! LOL |
![]() |
|
| la anaconda de chocolatee | Aug 23 2007, 03:27 AM Post #31 |
|
Skittle Skank
|
haha! It does look like you are saying that! I know jules! I say the same thing! Who the hell walks around with a smile all day long? No one, so why am I expected to just cause my natural face looks a little on the mean side to you? I cant help it! Leave me alone about it before I actually do get mean! Which hardly ever happens! I am nice to people about 99% of the time, in fact I am probably nice a lot more than I should be |
![]() |
|
| Jane | Aug 23 2007, 04:40 PM Post #32 |
|
Board Bitch!
|
Michele and Jules I am exactly the same! Ir's so annoying when strangers tell me to cheer up! |
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Aug 23 2007, 10:18 PM Post #33 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
I often tell people smiling hurts my face!
|
![]() |
|
| la anaconda de chocolatee | Aug 24 2007, 01:39 PM Post #34 |
|
Skittle Skank
|
haha!!! Graham calls it my terminator face |
![]() |
|
| Julesy | Aug 24 2007, 02:19 PM Post #35 |
|
deliciously domestic
|
lol Im often called MEAN LITTLE GIRL. ever since I was a little girl. Maybe thats why I dont get hit on or people dont fuck with me. good!!
|
![]() |
|
| Jane | Aug 24 2007, 04:55 PM Post #36 |
|
Board Bitch!
|
Mean Girls!!!
|
![]() |
|
| Julesy | Sep 9 2007, 11:57 PM Post #37 |
|
deliciously domestic
|
wow Jesse. I sorta blew off this whole NWO crap then I saw this movie. http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ changed my whole perspective. these 'elite' want to govern the whole fucking world and they are slowing doing it! and everyone is oblivious to it!
|
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Sep 10 2007, 05:44 PM Post #38 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
I'm not oblivious to their evil schemes!
|
![]() |
|
| Julesy | Sep 10 2007, 09:49 PM Post #39 |
|
deliciously domestic
|
yeah but we are the Minority! |
![]() |
|
| Denovissimus | Sep 11 2007, 09:26 PM Post #40 |
|
Immortal Heretic
|
Finally watched it Jules, thanks for posting it. Like I mentioned in Julien's Juice, the bulk of the material I've already known, but its always fascinating to watch it all compiled like that. Great learning experience for someone who hasn't the time to do the research, or to read the research put out there. I like to read the research. But a movie like this and Loose Change go a long way toward getting such crucial information out to the masses. However, as great as this film is, there is another layer which has been overlooked. It was asked toward the end, when speaking about Aaron Russo (look up his America: From Freedom to Facism), he asked that Rockefeller "why?" They have all this money and power, why do they continue to do this? His answer...to get every microchipped. Okay, and then what? Is that their ulitmate expression of godhood? No. For these desires, and the lenghths of time it is taking to attain them, go beyond the life spans of the human pawns striving through secrecy and bloody deceit to put it all in place. No. There are other players involved, lurking in the shadows of nightmares. They are the true leaders pulling the human strings. Some can call them alien, some can call them devils and demons, but these forces are all one thing...Evil. And their end goal, oh its insidious. Their end goal, is to not only enslave us body and mind...but soul as well. And what are our souls? Forms of energy. What what happens when one is able to harness and combine into whatever twisted design a mass of energy? It gives you power, power to create, power to destroy. Indeed, the power of God. It is believed that ultimately this is a battle between the forces of good and the forces of evil. This universe is governed by the laws set in place by whatever represents the good. What the forces representing the forces of evil want is enough power to undue all of that, to create a universal energy of chaos. Its madness is what it is. On a scale beyond our understandings and imaginations. This is what I really believe we are faced with. Here, on the surface of reality, bound in the flesh, still scratching our heads like listless monkeys wondering and fighting over god and greed. This is what we are faced with. Now, what can we do about THAT. It is not without hope, for the means of what we can do exist. And it begins with one word....Love. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Rowan ruminates · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Zeta Original | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
2:08 PM Jul 11
|
Infinite Results.
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy







2:08 PM Jul 11