Are You Up For A Chip Implant?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by SHallowvale
Yes. Preventing the spread of disease and reducing the amount of deaths from a highly contagious and, at the time, untreatable disease.
I strongly disagree with both microchipping in humans for a range of reasons as well as lockdowns for a range of reasons that are not relevant to this thread.
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by Lucifer323
All the non communist secular liberal societies. Several examples in the Western World
Such as?
Edit: @Lucifer323 im still waiting!
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by Lucifer323
I strongly disagree with both microchipping if humans for a range of reasons as well as lockdowns for a range of reasons that are not relevant to this thread.
Cool. My point was that getting people vaccinated and having lockdowns were not the same thing as forced micro chipping (and all the conspiracies that come along with that).
Original post by SHallowvale
Vaccines and lockdowns to keep people healthy and prevent people from dying =/= Mass microchipping people to control and track the population and install a social credit system.
Vaccines are also not mandatory either.
Vaccines are also not mandatory either.
All totalitarian systems are justified through keeping people safe.
Yet. Also maybe not but the government will punish people who don't through third parties ("oh we're not forcing you to do X, what we'll do is make it impossible for you to get a job instead etc",)
Original post by Starship Trooper
All totalitarian systems are justified through keeping people safe.
Yet. Also maybe not but the government will punish people who don't through third parties ("oh we're not forcing you to do X, what we'll do is make it impossible for you to get a job instead etc",)
Yet. Also maybe not but the government will punish people who don't through third parties ("oh we're not forcing you to do X, what we'll do is make it impossible for you to get a job instead etc",)
The two are not the same in either intent or scope.
Original post by Starship Trooper
All totalitarian systems are justified through keeping people safe.
Yet. Also maybe not but the government will punish people who don't through third parties ("oh we're not forcing you to do X, what we'll do is make it impossible for you to get a job instead etc",)
Yet. Also maybe not but the government will punish people who don't through third parties ("oh we're not forcing you to do X, what we'll do is make it impossible for you to get a job instead etc",)
Indeed.
Original post by PilgrimOfTruth
The realities of micro-chipping humans are here and have been for some time. Sweden has been involved in putting chips under people's skin on a trial basis for a few years I believe.
In a recent interview financial guru Melissa Ciummei warns of the events currently going on around us and believes it's all part of a huge financial reset needed because the FIAT currency has collapsed. She believes that vaccine passports are really digital / data passports that will become part of a Chinese style social credit system that will govern most aspects of our lives. You can watch that interview here:
https://bluecat.media/melissa-ciummei-this-is-about-a-financial-reset/
Within that interview Melissa highlights that the "powers that be" would like to implant us with a chip or tattoo that carries our medical and financial data.
Today I saw a news article highlighting that a Swedish company has developed an implantable chip that can hold your Covid passport data. See here:
Company Creates Microchip Implant That Stores Covid Vaccine Status Under Your Skin
https://www.ladbible.com/news/company-creates-microchip-implant-that-stores-your-vaccine-status-20211221
"Epicenter, a startup based in Stockholm, made headlines earlier this year when more than 100 employees got access passes to their office implanted into their arms. Now it’s unveiled a gadget consisting of an NFC (Near Field Communications) implant that contains data, which can be retrieved with a reader device such as a NFC-compatible smartphone.
Epicenter's Chief Disruption Officer Hannes Sjöblad said: “Implants are very versatile technology that can be used for many different things, and right now it is very convenient to have Covid passport always accessible on your implant.”
"In a video, Sjöblad demonstrated how the chip – which is the size of a grain of rice – works, simply waving a smartphone across his arm. A document containing his vaccination status then instantly appears on the phone’s screen. Sjöblad said the procedure is ‘completely reversible’, and also does not require a special phone app. "
So open question to TSR members.
How do you feel about having a chip inserted under your skin in your arm or hand?
Are you up for it?
If someone wanted to steal your identity or money (as they might previously have done by stealing your bank card or wallet) does this not suggest they might now pin you down and slice the chip out of your body?
Do you think such chips have any inherent dangers or are they a good thing?
In a recent interview financial guru Melissa Ciummei warns of the events currently going on around us and believes it's all part of a huge financial reset needed because the FIAT currency has collapsed. She believes that vaccine passports are really digital / data passports that will become part of a Chinese style social credit system that will govern most aspects of our lives. You can watch that interview here:
https://bluecat.media/melissa-ciummei-this-is-about-a-financial-reset/
Within that interview Melissa highlights that the "powers that be" would like to implant us with a chip or tattoo that carries our medical and financial data.
Today I saw a news article highlighting that a Swedish company has developed an implantable chip that can hold your Covid passport data. See here:
Company Creates Microchip Implant That Stores Covid Vaccine Status Under Your Skin
https://www.ladbible.com/news/company-creates-microchip-implant-that-stores-your-vaccine-status-20211221
"Epicenter, a startup based in Stockholm, made headlines earlier this year when more than 100 employees got access passes to their office implanted into their arms. Now it’s unveiled a gadget consisting of an NFC (Near Field Communications) implant that contains data, which can be retrieved with a reader device such as a NFC-compatible smartphone.
Epicenter's Chief Disruption Officer Hannes Sjöblad said: “Implants are very versatile technology that can be used for many different things, and right now it is very convenient to have Covid passport always accessible on your implant.”
"In a video, Sjöblad demonstrated how the chip – which is the size of a grain of rice – works, simply waving a smartphone across his arm. A document containing his vaccination status then instantly appears on the phone’s screen. Sjöblad said the procedure is ‘completely reversible’, and also does not require a special phone app. "
So open question to TSR members.
How do you feel about having a chip inserted under your skin in your arm or hand?
Are you up for it?
If someone wanted to steal your identity or money (as they might previously have done by stealing your bank card or wallet) does this not suggest they might now pin you down and slice the chip out of your body?
Do you think such chips have any inherent dangers or are they a good thing?
Can you describe what is a Chinese style Social Credit System? As readers here still confuse the terms.
Original post by Lucifer323
For the sake of mankind we should say NO to the following:
Microchip implants
Social Credit Systems
Communism
Left-wing Biology
Political & Medical Tyrannies
None of the above are compatible with secular liberal democracies.
@TCA2b
@The RAR
@Starship Trooper
Microchip implants
Social Credit Systems
Communism
Left-wing Biology
Political & Medical Tyrannies
None of the above are compatible with secular liberal democracies.
@TCA2b
@The RAR
@Starship Trooper
In a secular liberal democracy private businesses are free to produce these microchips and people are free to go and get them implanted, which is all that is happening in the OP.
Original post by Captain Haddock
In a secular liberal democracy private businesses are free to produce these microchips and people are free to go and get them implanted, which is all that is happening in the OP.
There is a difference between free to get them implanted and forced to get them implanted. Speaking of future scenarios. Just as you have freedom to get vaccinated or you can reject them and loose your job or your life will become exponentially more difficult...
Original post by Lucifer323
Can you describe what is a Chinese style Social Credit System? As readers here still confuse the terms.
This article helps explain it:
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/china-social-credit-system-explained
This article suggests we need to reject it from ever coming to Britain:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/we-need-to-act-now-to-block-britain-s-social-credit-system
Original post by Lucifer323
Irrelevant to my post.
Not really. It is all big brother, communist style surveillance. Just sayin'
Original post by hotpud
Not really. It is all big brother, communist style surveillance. Just sayin'
No it's not.
It would be if society is corrupted further.
Original post by Starship Trooper
Sounds like someone has been watching too many science fiction films, tbh.
I remember scare stories about mandatory vaccines and government imposed lockdowns back in the 2000s. Still waiting for the conspiracy theories to come true.
I remember scare stories about mandatory vaccines and government imposed lockdowns back in the 2000s. Still waiting for the conspiracy theories to come true.
What a weird timeline that'd be, eh?
Original post by Captain Haddock
In a secular liberal democracy private businesses are free to produce these microchips and people are free to go and get them implanted, which is all that is happening in the OP.
One could say the same about vaccine passports. That companies are free to develop the software that supports them and businesses are free to use that software if they wish.
The problem comes when such technology is either mandated for populations and/or if governments permit such companies and businesses to actively discriminate against groups of people through the use of such technology.
Thus as a VERY crude example you could produce say a scanning machine that could determine your ethnicity.
Businesses could then decide to only allow people into their shops or venues based on type of ethnic people they choose to allow.
This would constitute a form of clear discrimination for which we have laws. We've spent years trying to remove discrimination in society.
Governments should NOT imo be permitting the use by businesses of any kind of technology that engages in forms of discrimination.
Hence, in respect of vaccine passports and any associated microchips that might be used to hold passport data, the government should NOT imo be permitting the use of such because they simply discriminate against groups of people, such as those who are not vaccinated but yet have strong and lasting natural immunity.
In the end the ethics of how a technology is used and exploited are far more important than the functionality and convenience of the technology itself
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by PilgrimOfTruth
One could say the same about vaccine passports. That companies are free to develop the software that supports them and businesses are free to use that software if they wish.
The problem comes when such technology is either mandated for populations and/or if governments permit such companies and businesses to actively discriminate against groups of people through the use of such technology.
The problem comes when such technology is either mandated for populations and/or if governments permit such companies and businesses to actively discriminate against groups of people through the use of such technology.
There's a difference between discriminating against someone based on something innate and beyond their control, e.g. their ethnicity, sex, age, sexuality, etc, and discriminating against someone because they choose not to use a certain piece of technology.
The government already mandates that people use certain technology. For example, it's required by law that people driving have to wear a seatbelt. Both the government and companies can discriminate against you if you refuse to wear one, e.g. by removing your drivers license or sacking you from a job. Do you think this is wrong?
Just to clarify, I don't support mandatory vaccinations.
I kinda agree God help me with @SHallowvale
This sort of thing is largely inevitable and out of our control. That doesnt mean we shouldn't have any reservations or skepticism or even hostility towards it. But we have to accept it is going to happen.
For Instance I'm always reminded of the move to a cashless society. This has all sorts of similar problems that I am well aware of but is happening at an accelerated rate.
.
This sort of thing is largely inevitable and out of our control. That doesnt mean we shouldn't have any reservations or skepticism or even hostility towards it. But we have to accept it is going to happen.
For Instance I'm always reminded of the move to a cashless society. This has all sorts of similar problems that I am well aware of but is happening at an accelerated rate.
.
I think real liberalism or classical liberalism of the kind Lucifer is reminiscent for is basically obsolete as a system.
The world is just far too complex now fir a system that was designed two centuries to handle. The best you could do would be to try and preserve such a system but this would basically require tweaking the guidelines and violating some areas in very significant ways basically state enforced liberal democracy which is kinda a ridiculous concept kinda like if Stalin Really liked Locke and Paine et al.
The world is just far too complex now fir a system that was designed two centuries to handle. The best you could do would be to try and preserve such a system but this would basically require tweaking the guidelines and violating some areas in very significant ways basically state enforced liberal democracy which is kinda a ridiculous concept kinda like if Stalin Really liked Locke and Paine et al.
Original post by SHallowvale
There's a difference between discriminating against someone based on something innate and beyond their control, e.g. their ethnicity, sex, age, sexuality, etc, and discriminating against someone because they choose not to use a certain piece of technology.
The government already mandates that people use certain technology. For example, it's required by law that people driving have to wear a seatbelt. Both the government and companies can discriminate against you if you refuse to wear one, e.g. by removing your drivers license or sacking you from a job. Do you think this is wrong?
Just to clarify, I don't support mandatory vaccinations.
The government already mandates that people use certain technology. For example, it's required by law that people driving have to wear a seatbelt. Both the government and companies can discriminate against you if you refuse to wear one, e.g. by removing your drivers license or sacking you from a job. Do you think this is wrong?
Just to clarify, I don't support mandatory vaccinations.
The seatbelt analogy continues to be a poor one that can't really in any way compare with the situation that is occurring with vaccine passports.
If you were going to use that analogy then the equivalent example would be that there are 2 cars, 2 drivers one wearing a blue seat belt and one with a black seat belt and the authorities would then be discriminating against the person wearing the blue seat belt saying "Sorry Sir but you are required to wear a black seat belt and if you refuse to do so we will remove your free right to drive a car".
That I'm afraid is the equivalent scenario for what we see with vaccine passports.
It's plain to see in the above scenario that there is clearly no scientific or health basis for mandating a black seat belt over a blue one. A seat belt is a seat belt, end of. Both drivers are protecting themselves. Thus any such mandate forcing black seat belts must have an ulterior motive and agenda behind it.
In respect of vaccine passports the situation is just the same. There are, as far as I can see, absolutely no scientific or health reasons behind them. There can not be because the vast majority of ALL Covid cases for people aged 18yr and over are the fully vaccinated community [1].
So unless you're actually using the passports to actually ban the VACCINATED people then the passports are a total nonsense. That being the case there must be an ulterior motive or agenda behind the use of vaccine passports.
As they stand they are completely discriminatory because they are being "sold" on the basis of protecting people in large venues (which is clearly a nonsense as I have just explained) but they are no different to our blue/black seat belt scenario.
If the aim is to prevent Covid infected people coming in then we know 100% that being vaccinated DOES NOT guarantee that.
There are equally millions of people who have acquired natural immunity to Covid now.
On what possible basis should we be discriminating against such people?
There is no such basis.
Those with natural immunity are imo as safe as, if not safer, than those with no natural immunity and who have been vaccinated.
Immunity is immunity.
But even that isn't enough.
The vaccines don't bestow sterilising immunity which means people who have been vaccinated do still get Covid, symptomatic Covid and indeed as I have said the fully vaccinated people currently account for the vast majority of ALL Covid cases for anyone aged 18yrs and over.
Equally natural immunity isn't totally infallible so it is possible though highly unlikely, for a person with natural immunity to become re-infected
This being the case it's patently clear that vaccination status is NOT any kind of useful measure for determining if a person is a risk to others or whether they are currently carrying and spreading Covid. The ONLY measure for that is an actual Covid test.
Hence if we are letting people at large venues on a public health basis, then we should be testing those people on the spot to see if they have Covid and if we are going to test them then their vaccination status is totally irrelevant.
Hence vaccine passports are imo absolutely nothing to do with public health and must have an ulterior motive agenda behind them.
It's pretty obvious to many what that agenda is but unless and until government declare it openly I think many people like myself will staunchly and rightly refuse to comply with vaccine passports.
Citations:
[1] - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by PilgrimOfTruth
Did you not read the article?
It's not conspiracy theory at all. Its here right now and 1000s of Swedes and I believe Austalians have had RFID chips implanted in their hands for quite some time.
Here's an article from 2016:
https://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/wearables/australians-embracing-superhuman-microchip-technology/news-story/536a08003cb07cba23336f83278a5003
Australians embracing super-human microchip technology
"IT may sound like sci-fi, but hundreds of Australians are turning themselves into super-humans who can do things with the wave of the hand
"Shanti Korporaal, from Sydney, is at the centre of the phenomenon after having two implants inserted under her skin.
Now she can get into work and her car without carrying a card or keys, and says her ultimate goal is to completely do away with her wallet and cards.
“You could set up your life so you never have to worry about any password or PINs” she told news.com.au.
“It’s the same technology as Paypass, so I’m hoping you’ll be able to pay for things with it.
“With Opal you get a unique identification number that could be programmed into the chip. Any door with a swipe card ... it could open your computer, photocopier. Loyalty cards for shops are just another thing for your wallet.”
The microchips, which are the size of a grain of rice, can act like a business card and transfer contact details to smartphones, and hold complex medical data."
It seems to me that this has all been planned many years ago. Covid vaccine passports will really just be data passports containing all our personal data, financial, medical and other and that will surely form the basis of a Chinese style Communist social credit system.
So . . . are you up for such an implant?
It's not conspiracy theory at all. Its here right now and 1000s of Swedes and I believe Austalians have had RFID chips implanted in their hands for quite some time.
Here's an article from 2016:
https://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/wearables/australians-embracing-superhuman-microchip-technology/news-story/536a08003cb07cba23336f83278a5003
Australians embracing super-human microchip technology
"IT may sound like sci-fi, but hundreds of Australians are turning themselves into super-humans who can do things with the wave of the hand
"Shanti Korporaal, from Sydney, is at the centre of the phenomenon after having two implants inserted under her skin.
Now she can get into work and her car without carrying a card or keys, and says her ultimate goal is to completely do away with her wallet and cards.
“You could set up your life so you never have to worry about any password or PINs” she told news.com.au.
“It’s the same technology as Paypass, so I’m hoping you’ll be able to pay for things with it.
“With Opal you get a unique identification number that could be programmed into the chip. Any door with a swipe card ... it could open your computer, photocopier. Loyalty cards for shops are just another thing for your wallet.”
The microchips, which are the size of a grain of rice, can act like a business card and transfer contact details to smartphones, and hold complex medical data."
It seems to me that this has all been planned many years ago. Covid vaccine passports will really just be data passports containing all our personal data, financial, medical and other and that will surely form the basis of a Chinese style Communist social credit system.
So . . . are you up for such an implant?
No point using logic or evidence with some people. If it doesn't fit their view you've been watching movies or are a conspiracy theorist.
These people have been in denial about civil liberties for ages.
In answer to your question, no it is a transparently sinister idea and I'm not up for it.
Original post by PilgrimOfTruth
The seatbelt analogy continues to be a poor one that can't really in any way compare with the situation that is occurring with vaccine passports.
If you were going to use that analogy then the equivalent example would be that there are 2 cars, 2 drivers one wearing a blue seat belt and one with a black seat belt and the authorities would then be discriminating against the person wearing the blue seat belt saying "Sorry Sir but you are required to wear a black seat belt and if you refuse to do so we will remove your free right to drive a car".
That I'm afraid is the equivalent scenario for what we see with vaccine passports.
It's plain to see in the above scenario that there is clearly no scientific or health basis for mandating a black seat belt over a blue one. A seat belt is a seat belt, end of. Both drivers are protecting themselves. Thus any such mandate forcing black seat belts must have an ulterior motive and agenda behind it.
In respect of vaccine passports the situation is just the same. There are, as far as I can see, absolutely no scientific or health reasons behind them. There can not be because the vast majority of ALL Covid cases for people aged 18yr and over are the fully vaccinated community [1].
So unless you're actually using the passports to actually ban the VACCINATED people then the passports are a total nonsense. That being the case there must be an ulterior motive or agenda behind the use of vaccine passports.
As they stand they are completely discriminatory because they are being "sold" on the basis of protecting people in large venues (which is clearly a nonsense as I have just explained) but they are no different to our blue/black seat belt scenario.
If the aim is to prevent Covid infected people coming in then we know 100% that being vaccinated DOES NOT guarantee that.
There are equally millions of people who have acquired natural immunity to Covid now.
On what possible basis should we be discriminating against such people?
There is no such basis.
Those with natural immunity are imo as safe as, if not safer, than those with no natural immunity and who have been vaccinated.
Immunity is immunity.
But even that isn't enough.
The vaccines don't bestow sterilising immunity which means people who have been vaccinated do still get Covid, symptomatic Covid and indeed as I have said the fully vaccinated people currently account for the vast majority of ALL Covid cases for anyone aged 18yrs and over.
Equally natural immunity isn't totally infallible so it is possible though highly unlikely, for a person with natural immunity to become re-infected
This being the case it's patently clear that vaccination status is NOT any kind of useful measure for determining if a person is a risk to others or whether they are currently carrying and spreading Covid. The ONLY measure for that is an actual Covid test.
Hence if we are letting people at large venues on a public health basis, then we should be testing those people on the spot to see if they have Covid and if we are going to test them then their vaccination status is totally irrelevant.
Hence vaccine passports are imo absolutely nothing to do with public health and must have an ulterior motive agenda behind them.
It's pretty obvious to many what that agenda is but unless and until government declare it openly I think many people like myself will staunchly and rightly refuse to comply with vaccine passports.
Citations:
[1] - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports
If you were going to use that analogy then the equivalent example would be that there are 2 cars, 2 drivers one wearing a blue seat belt and one with a black seat belt and the authorities would then be discriminating against the person wearing the blue seat belt saying "Sorry Sir but you are required to wear a black seat belt and if you refuse to do so we will remove your free right to drive a car".
That I'm afraid is the equivalent scenario for what we see with vaccine passports.
It's plain to see in the above scenario that there is clearly no scientific or health basis for mandating a black seat belt over a blue one. A seat belt is a seat belt, end of. Both drivers are protecting themselves. Thus any such mandate forcing black seat belts must have an ulterior motive and agenda behind it.
In respect of vaccine passports the situation is just the same. There are, as far as I can see, absolutely no scientific or health reasons behind them. There can not be because the vast majority of ALL Covid cases for people aged 18yr and over are the fully vaccinated community [1].
So unless you're actually using the passports to actually ban the VACCINATED people then the passports are a total nonsense. That being the case there must be an ulterior motive or agenda behind the use of vaccine passports.
As they stand they are completely discriminatory because they are being "sold" on the basis of protecting people in large venues (which is clearly a nonsense as I have just explained) but they are no different to our blue/black seat belt scenario.
If the aim is to prevent Covid infected people coming in then we know 100% that being vaccinated DOES NOT guarantee that.
There are equally millions of people who have acquired natural immunity to Covid now.
On what possible basis should we be discriminating against such people?
There is no such basis.
Those with natural immunity are imo as safe as, if not safer, than those with no natural immunity and who have been vaccinated.
Immunity is immunity.
But even that isn't enough.
The vaccines don't bestow sterilising immunity which means people who have been vaccinated do still get Covid, symptomatic Covid and indeed as I have said the fully vaccinated people currently account for the vast majority of ALL Covid cases for anyone aged 18yrs and over.
Equally natural immunity isn't totally infallible so it is possible though highly unlikely, for a person with natural immunity to become re-infected
This being the case it's patently clear that vaccination status is NOT any kind of useful measure for determining if a person is a risk to others or whether they are currently carrying and spreading Covid. The ONLY measure for that is an actual Covid test.
Hence if we are letting people at large venues on a public health basis, then we should be testing those people on the spot to see if they have Covid and if we are going to test them then their vaccination status is totally irrelevant.
Hence vaccine passports are imo absolutely nothing to do with public health and must have an ulterior motive agenda behind them.
It's pretty obvious to many what that agenda is but unless and until government declare it openly I think many people like myself will staunchly and rightly refuse to comply with vaccine passports.
Citations:
[1] - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports
Goodness me, you sure do like to type! You may want to work on your brevity sometime, you could have condensed what's written here into one or two sentences.
So your objection isn't just that certain technology is mandated by the government or that companies are allowed to discriminate against people based on said technology, then? It seems like your only objection is that the technology itself shouldn't be mandatory to begin with because you don't think it's effective.
Your counter analogy with regards to seat belts isn't comparable to vaccine passports. The colour of a seatbelt doesn't affect your safety, so there is no need for a seatbelt to be a specific colour. Being vaccinated however, as opposed to not being vaccinated, does affect on your safety. You are safer being vaccinated. All a vaccine passport would do is confirm that you've been vaccinated.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
