Doesanyone know anything about martial law and rfid implants

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/al/birmingham/crime/
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/al/bessemer/crime/
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/al/prichard/crime/

Mate ... some scary stats there ...

 
I'll have to check this to be sure.

Can you send a drone over my place tomorrow at about 8AM ... I will be in the spa with mine on.

You need to wear one while in the spa because mentally you can be quite prone to alien influences when relaxed.

I therefore wear mine when in bed, the spa, on the toilet, but not while at work.

They won't let me wear it at work.

Obviously I wear it when moderating ...
 



Thankfully, I live near none of those. It isnt surprising for birmingham (industrial capital of alabama and most populated[I believe])

Prichard is kind of a surprise and the only time I have been to bessemer, involved me driving through it. Although it wouldnt surprise me if my current city had a pretty bad rating too. 🙁
 
I am amused now by the chipping topic.

When you have a whole world willingly writing into Facebook what they wont tell Mommy and Daddy you don't need a chip the world. Just a chip or two fast enough to keep up.

And the Martial Law of the future will probably hang a simple sign on each of the top level Net centers. "The Internet has been closed. Thank you for visiting."
 
The Health Care Bill (HR3200) does make provision for a "National Medical Device Registry", whatever that means; specifically read starting on Page 1000 in the linked pdf. The Bill plainly states the the device is to be "implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining" and can be read to imply RFID chips or could simply mean a "pace maker" implanted into a patient to keep the heart beating regularly. Th Bill also calls for it to be implemented within 36 months after passages, which dates it to be March 2013. Unfortunately, the Bill does not clarify the definition or describe what an implantable device is; but regardless, the government authorizing any type of implantable device (and making it mandatory as part of the individual purchase clause now being disputed) and creating a registry and database to track and monitor such devices is nefarious, screams of Big Brother, and is one step closer to making America a European style socialist Nanny State.
You can be skeptical of the intent of an implantable device, but you can not deny the verbiage within the Health Care Bill implementing implantable devices, creating a national registry and database of said devices. The simple fact that the verbiage is even written into the Bill deserves the highest level of scrutiny. And, guess what, whether you are skeptical or not, they've got you too, the primary difference is that some folks will deny it while others live in the reality of the text within the Bill. Regardless of the government's intent, even implying "implantable" devices is an egregious offense to the Constitution, privacy, and individual liberty.

It has been proven that Obama and the Dumbocrat majority in Congress have no regard for the Constitution; Obamacare, Cabinet Appointments, Executive fiat are just a few examples. The recent drone attack on Al-Awlaki, who was an American citizen, is the most recent proof. Personally, I believe that he should have been convicted and tried in a civil court and not killed without the due process that is a Right of all Americans. You may disagree, but consider this and let's draw a parallel to Timothy McVeigh. In principle, both McVeigh and Al-Awlaki were "enemies of the State" however the American government afforded more rights to Timothy McVeigh than what was afforded to Al-Awlaki. The difference here is how the President and Administration viewed and exercised their powers and regard the Constitution; with McVeigh, the Bush Administration and DOJ tried and convicted him in civil court with the full rights and privileges given to all American citizens, whereas Obama plainly disregarded Al-Awlaki's rights as an American citizen and murdered him without due process.

Slippery slope indeed!

Time to wake up to the lies hidden in plain sight.
 
I still give em 10 points for wacking the guy whether he is is a US citizen or not.

The guy had a huge track record as an enemy of the state ... and how were they going to grab him and get him back without injuring a heap of your seals ... not to mention trashing more helicopters etc?

I think where there is plenty of evidence to support a person is an enemy of humanity then try them in absentee and send them a white rose ... followed by a Hellfire missile with their name on it.

Cheap ... fire and forget.

 
Just ask the guy who wants to demagnetize himself, ask him how he got himself in that situation and apply it to yourself.

I guarantee you that no RFID reader can work in strong magnetic fields.
Then use your newly aquired super powers to evade martial law.

Regards
 
For chunkymonster, seriously? You think, for one minute, that anyone (left or right) will allow citizens to get "chipped" with RFID devices? Maybe in a sci-fi world, but not the one we live in.

Never going to happen. Not now, not ever. I would suggest you are over-interpreting the legal language in the bill to suit your own political agenda. Sorry, my friend, but I think you are WAY off the mark here.
 
Again, I agree that Al-Awlaki was guilty and justly got what he deserved. But, I also see it as another example of the Obama Administration's disregard for due process and circumventing the Constitution. To maintain the facade, at least the Obama Administration and DOJ could have held an absentee trail and convicted Al-Awlaki BEFORE having him killed; at least then they could say they followed due process and adhered to rule of law instead of executive fiat.
Ok, so rather than keep an open mind, you assume I have an agenda and choose to label people who disagree with your opinion. I have no agenda. I can only read the verbiage written into the Bill and make a best guess as to what it means. I plainly stated that the verbiage could mean a pace maker is an implantable device. But in the absence of any definition of what an "implantable device" is and the information to be stored on such a device, the intent and meaning is open to interpretation. You presume you know my interpretation by stating I have a political agenda. However, what you simply fail to realize or did not comprehend is the mere fact that the verbiage is the Bill and the lack of clear definition inherent in the verbiage is, in of itself, cause for question by any reasonably intelligent person.

Now, whether you want my opinion and interpretation or not, I'm going to give it anyway. I agree with you that mandating a RFID implant would never happen. I believe the Health Care Bill is out of the purview of the government and is unconstitutional. No freedom and liberty loving American would allow themselves, or there family, to be chipped. Mandating RFID implants is reason for wholesale riot and cause for open revolution. However, it would be naive to think and is no great leap of the imagination that the Federal government could make it a requirement of participation and that you must have an RFID to receive Federal health care benefits. The precedent exists for States and citizens to meet mandates in order to participate and receive Federal benefits, why would Obamacare requiring RFID chips be any different?
 
Try chipping me and your gonna be looking down the barrel of one of the many vintage rifles in my collection.

Then again im cheap i might do it for money. How deep are those things? Can i cut it out with a pocket knife?
 


As a person who is not an American citizen I am deeply offended by all the American pundits and media only making a fuzz about this because of the man's nationality, and so should you. Basically they're saying only Americans deserve the right to a trial, the rest of us are fair game... the next time Americans wonder why much of the world dislikes their country they should remember this instead of deluding themselves that the whole world is jealous of American [strike]debt[/strike] wealth and freedom.

P.S. America doesn't have trials in absentia, ever, and it's one of the reasons America has so much trouble going after organized crime and terrorists.
 
If access to chemicals that can be combined to make explosives, possible chemical weapons themselves, having a crisis to make sure all monies are tied up, no cash, because its easy to copy, make sure all taxes are paid, all transactions are openly seen, for governments needs, for protection against enemies of the state, for even tracking enemies, where anything sold would lead to that enemy etc etc etc
Naw, they wouldnt try it.....
 


Actually we can't say he was a "combatant" since Al-Qaeda is not a proper military (as described by the Geneva Conventions). To me it doesn't matter that they killed this man, but in the legal world this is all very controversial. There is no Geneva Convention (yet) regarding terrorist groups, heavily armed drug cartels or insurgencies so it comes down to where the governments involved in these conflicts draw the line between organized crime and warfare.
 
Actually we can
If someone did this to one of my family, theyd be combatant, whether anyone wanted to play with words or not.
Save the legal beagle smeagle, hes a murderer, whos at war with us, we recognize it as such, it has no points to whatever group hes affiliated with whatsoever, period
 
Each country has redefined its legal abilities regarding this, and since no ones applied to reach an overall consensus, it doesnt really matter at this point.
Wheres the lawyers when theres guns at your head, and you need to act?
Law, like government, is too slow to react
 


You mean he's a "enemy combatant" (who gets a drone strike up his ass) when he wears a turban and a beard and a common murderer (a criminal who gets a trial) when he wears a suit.

I'm not loosing any sleep over his death but you've got to admit the distinction between criminal and combatant has become rather arbitrary (not a lot has to change for the government to start assassinating suspected gang leaders in American cities and then suspected killers and then suspected robbers and so on). We need to have a Geneva Convention on terrorists/drug cartels/insurgents and/or trials in absentia to at least be able to pretend we're upholding the law.
 


Brave words, but I suspect you have no intention of giving up your right to trial. So why should anyone else do it? I thought you conservatives were scared as sh*t of the government, so why the sudden 100% rock solid faith that the government won't abuse their power to kill innocents, or just make a mistake, like when they put innocent people on deathrow? It's hard to undo vaporization by a hellfire missile when new evidence shows the suspect was innocent. Obviously Al Awlaki was guilty of something but since you people think Obama is evil you should really be scared that the next target won't be so unequivocally guilty.
 
And, by the way, didnt we drop bombs and blow the hell outta alow of Nazis, and also kill them while they were in other countries, non occupied ones?
No trial there at all
Simply a declaration
It was us, not the Brits who hid behind the trees and shot them while they marched in line, full regalia, out in the open, and they too cried unfair when we did what we did.

Weve learned from history, and all those "wasteful" wars, maybe the rest should catch up, cause if were not No. 1, someone else will be, and theyre next
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom