Story ran in “Before It’s News” October 1, 2012
Story ran in “Before It’s News” October 1, 2012
Interesting, this Identity-tied-to-Commerce concept becoming so popular across the globe. Seems like I’ve read something about that in the Bible somewhere…..oh, yeah, Revelation 13:17!
National ‘virtual ID card’ scheme set for launch By: Ian Burrell The Independant
The Government will announce details this month of a controversial national identity scheme which will allow people to use their mobile phones and social media profiles as official identification documents for accessing public services.
People wishing to apply for services ranging from tax credits to fishing licences and passports will be asked to choose from a list of familiar online log-ins, including those they already use on social media sites, banks, and large retailers such as supermarkets, to prove their identity.
Once they have logged in correctly by computer or mobile phone, the site will send a message to the government agency authenticating that user’s identity.
The Cabinet Office is understood to have held discussions with the Post Office, high street banks, mobile phone companies and technology giants ranging from Facebook and Microsoft to Google, PayPal and BT.
Ministers are anxious that the identity programme is not denounced as a “Big Brother” national ID card by the back door, which is why data will not be kept centrally by any government department. Indeed, it is hoped the Identity Assurance Programme, which is being led by the Cabinet Office, will mean the end to any prospect of a physical national ID card being introduced in the UK.
The identification systems used by the private companies have been subjected to security testing before being awarded their “Identity Provider” (IDP) kitemark, meaning that they have made the list of between five and 20 approved organisations that will be announced on 22 October.
The public will be able to use their log-ins from a set list of “trusted” private organisations to access Government services, which are being grouped together on a single website called Gov.uk, which will be accessible by mobile.
A cross-section of social media companies, high street banks, mobile phone businesses and major retailers has been chosen in order to appeal to as wide a demographic as possible.
The system will be trialled when the Department of Work & Pensions starts the early roll out of the Universal Credit scheme, a radical overhaul of the benefits system, in April.
Users who access the Government’s online one-stop-shop of public services will be asked to identify themselves by choosing one organisation from a selection of logos. (This feature is called a “Nascar screen”, in reference to the logo-filled livery of the famous American racing cars.)
Major web sites are able to recognise individuals by their patterns of use, the device they are accessing from and its location. Facebook, for example, asks users who sign on from an unusual location to take a series of security questions including identifying friends in photographs.
Privacy campaigners are not wholly convinced by the programme. “Although this is a fine scheme in principle and is backed by ministers the danger is that it could be side-lined and used as a fig leaf by the data-hungry government departments,” said Guy Herbert, general secretary of No2ID, which has been consulted by the Cabinet Office.
Details of the “identity assurance” scheme are being finalised amid growing concerns over identity theft and other forms of cybercrime. Foreign Secretary William Hague and Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, who is at the head of the Identity Assurance Programme, will today (Thurs) meet international experts at the Budapest Conference on Cyberspace. Mr Maude will give a keynote speech.
The Cabinet Office believes its new identity model will “prevent ‘login fatigue’ [from] having too many usernames and passwords” and save public money by increasing trust in online services. The system is likely to be adopted by local authorities nationwide. The Government hopes the identity system will form the basis of a universally-recognised online authentication process for commercial transactions on the Internet, boosting the economy and strengthening Britain’s position as a leader in e-commerce.
In recent weeks, the Cabinet Office’s Government Digital Service has backed a UK working group of the Open Identity Exchange, which was set up in America to bring organisations including Google, AOL, PayPal and Experian together to find a simple method of online verification that doesn’t require multiple passwords.
Members of the Cabinet Office team travelled to the White House in May to exchange ideas with American counterparts working on the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC). The heads of the British and American identity assurance programmes will debate the subject next week in London at the RSA cyber security conference. Read More
Hidden Obamacare Secret: “RFID Chip Implants” Mandatory for All by March 23, 2013
Republican Congressman Ron Paul from Texas, states on his website:
Note when you go to the above Patriot Action Network website, and try to follow the links to this official government information, the information is no longer there. I am witness to the fact the info was there at one time on the .gov website because I researched all this myself and saw it. And for all you SNOPES addicts out there, you should know that SNOPES is liberal-leaning and generally “debunks” or ”confirms” certain things according to how it benefits or harms the liberal agenda. I read nearly the entire healthcare bill when it was posted for a couple of days online and saw this language myself in the bill. (Here is a “.gov” link to an FDA document from the Federal Register section which cites the healthcare bill and uses references to the “device definitions” from the healthcare bill). Along with the Verichip Corporation who is manufacturing the chip, I also discovered these guys: Registrar Corp This is a company (according to their website) who contracts with facilities and companies in the device and drug industries to manage their data and ensure compliance with the registry laws. Here is their little blurb on the home page: Registrar Corp provides Registration, U.S. Agent, and Compliance Assistance for U.S. and Non-U.S. Companies in the Food and Beverage, Medical Device, Drug, and Cosmetics Industries. It also states “Registrar Corp is not affiliated with the U.S. FDA” even though the company’s whole name is FDA Registrar Corp. Registrar Corp is headquartered in Hampton, VA, but has offices worldwide. On their website they reference Federal legislation for the convenience of the businesses they serve. I found this piece of legislation interesting in that it is an FDA ruling that laid some groundwork for the Obamacare medichip, by first creating a database of all devices, (which would include anything implantable). This groundwork was laid in 2007 under the George Bush’s second term, by the way. I found this statement (on the FDA.gov Device Registration And Listing Notice of Changes for 2013 document) somewhat telling: “Knowing where devices are made increases the nation’s ability to prepare for and respond to public health emergencies.” (yeah, right!)
I spent an hour searching trying to find out who actually owns FDA Registrar Corp to no avail. But I did find someone who had better luck: a writer Tara Bradford, who got a tip from a reader comment and followed up. Here is what she found when she was trying to find out why FDA Registrar Corp was charging and collecting government fees for overseas food shipment. Here’s a portion of her article:
In fact, the $9.95 the FDA Registrar Corp. charges per shipment is NOT required by the FDA. Claims the company makes about using their services to file a prior notice claim are misleading. FDA Registrar Corp. are brokers operating out of Hampton, Virginia and the executive listed on their website, David Lennarz is also affiliated with a direct marketing company, known as Contact Direct. And Contact Direct’s focus? Why they maintain a global database of industry contacts, serving the “specialized needs of the Food, Beverage, Biotechnology, Pharmaceutical & Life Sciences Industries.” Quite an enterprising group of businesses they’ve got going.
Tonight when the exceedingly clever Lori Witzel (thank you, Lori!) provided information via a comment about an FDA Registrar Corp.’s executive’s affiliation with Contact Direct, alarm bells went off. It all seemed suspicious enough last Thursday, when FDA Registrar Corp. first claimed a fee was needed per shipment and wouldn’t give any information about where the fees were channeled. Tonight I again went online at FDA Registrar Corp.’s site and asked a few questions of their Live Help desk, such as “You are a private company not affiliated with the FDA, so why should consumers pay you a fee to file a notice to a government agency?” “Where do those fees go?” The help desk person stalled, asked which country I’m from, etc. etc., but never answered my questions. So I gave up and did a Corporate Check for the State of Virginia. It suggested that FDA Registrar Corp. had once been known as FDC Corporation and was linked to Hampton Roads Technology, as well as Contact Direct.
Ms. Bradford’s premise was a suspicion that FDA Registrar Corp was a less than reputable company, posing as an arm of the FDA by having FDA in their company name and profiting by charging fees that they led people to believe were US government-imposed. However, MY premise is this: In light of the fact our government is so in bed with “big corporation” such as the pharmaceutical industry giants, etc, who buy loopholes and waivers and tax breaks with their huge campaign contributions, what exactly IS the nature of the relationship of Registrar Corp with the government? And what do they do with their database information they collect? For that matter, how about the company who makes Verichip? (The maker of Verichip is the “Digital Angel Corporation“-does that give you chills or what??) Are they owned by Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi? I am willing to bet that someone in government, in the Obama Camp, is at least a partial owner of this company. Here is a link to a book that you can access and read for free online that will tell you everything you ever wanted to know about the Verichip.
And now we come to it. On Sunday March 21, 2010 the Senate Healthcare bill HR3200 was passed and signed into law the following Tuesday. Like I said before, there are a legion of horrible and just plain evil aspects to this bill and I’m sure you’ve heard a lot them by now. I don’t want to discount them but what cannot be missed here is this new law now opens a prophetic door on a magnitude not seen since the reformation of Israel.
This new law requires an RFID chip implanted in all of us. This chip will not only contain your personal information with tracking capability but it will also be linked to your bank account. And get this, Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip), reads, and I quote: “Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment”. It is now the law of the land that by March 23rd 2013 we will all be required to have an RFID chip underneath our skin and this chip will be link to our bank accounts as well as have our personal records and tracking capability built into it.
In just a minute I’m going to show you the black and white of the law itself and you can see it with your own eyes and wonder why an event of this magnitude which is nothing less than seismic in nature is met with little more than silence in the Christian community.
Is it now starting to dawn on you just where exactly we are in prophecy? I’ll ask that question again in a minute and follow up on it, but now I want to show you the law itself. I’ve downloaded a PDF copy of HR3200 from the government’s website so what I’m about to show you is from the bill itself its nothing that I’ve written. You can access it all and see it all for yourself straight from the source itself.
H.R. 3200 section 2521, Pg. 1001, paragraph 1. The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘and is— ‘‘a class III device; or ‘‘a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”
What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? As you saw earlier, it is the device approved by the FDA in 2004.
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuid…
A class II implantable device is an “implantable radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”
Going back to what we just looked at, the creation of the national medical device registry in section 2521, page 1002 line 5:
“In developing the registry, the secretary shall…”
And the law continues on with a laundry list of items that the secretary must do in the process of creating this registry. In this laundry list of items to do, Line 17, subparagraph B: “validating methods for analyzing patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources and for linking such data with the information included in the registry as described in subparagraph (A)“
Going back to subparagraph A [right above subparagraph B], it says: “including in the registry, in a manner consistent with subsection (f), appropriate information to identify each device described in paragraph (1) by type, model, and serial number or other unique identifier;”
Don’t be confused by the intentional obfuscation and skillful wording, This law first creates the national device registry and then immediately list all the task the secretary of health and human services will have do in the process of creating this registry.
The very first two items in the list mandates that the secretary first gives a unique identification to each of the items listed in paragraph 1 which is:
‘‘a class III device; or ‘‘a class II device that is implantable.”
Then, the very next thing the secretary is to do is to create the process by which “patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources”, which is electronic medical records, that are linked to these newly and uniquely identified items from paragraph 1 which are the class III and class II implantable devices.
Class III devises are items such as breast implants, pacemakers, heart valves, etc. A Class II device that is implantable is, as you seen from the FDA, an implantable radio frequency transponder, RFID chip. From breast implants, to pacemakers, to RFID chips which one is the only possible one that can used for the stated purpose in section B which is, “for linking such data with the information included in the registry”? As we know from subsection A, the information in the registry is the name of a device. In plain speak, we are in a clear way being told that our electronic medical records are going to be linked to a class II implantable device!
Continuing a few lines down in this same section, section B subsection ii on still on page 1002, the “patient safety and outcomes data from multiple sources”, that is to be linked is clearly spelled out as electronic medical records. It reads: “link data obtained under clause (i) with information in the registry”. Information in the registry is, as we know from subparagraph A, the name of the device. So what is the data obtained under clause i? Back up a few lines to clause i
It reads: “obtain access to disparate sources of patient safety and outcomes data, including Federal health-related electronic data”. Again, from breast implants, to pacemakers, to RFID chips which one is the only possible one that can used for the stated purpose in section B? That stated purpose is “for linking such data” and the such data is electronic medical records.
What we already have already seen in just the creation of this registry, is the device that will serve as the link, which is an RFID microchip that is categorized as a Class II implantable device, as well as what it will be the link for which is your electronic medical records.
In case the law wasn’t clear enough on that point, still in the laundry list of things to do a few more lines down on the next page, page 1005
“The Secretary to protect the public health; shall establish procedures to permit linkage of information submitted pursuant to subparagraph (A, remember subparagraph A is the class 2 implantable device reference) with patient safety and outcomes data obtained under paragraph (3, which is electronic medical records); and to permit analyses of linked data;”
Continuing on to page 1007, in the STANDARDS, IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA, AND CERTIFICATION CRITERIA section, the secretary of health and human services is given full power to intact all mandates from the laundry list of to-do items in the creation process of the registry as well as dictate how the devises listed in the National Medical Device Registry are to be used and implemented.
“The Secretary of the Health Human Services, acting through the head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, shall adopt standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for the electronic exchange and use in certified electronic health records of a unique device identifier for each device described in paragraph 1 (National Medical Device Registry), if such an identifier is required by section 519(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360i(f)) for the device.”
Now on Page 503, section E Lines 13-17 and I quote: “encourage, as appropriate, the development and use of clinical registries and the development of clinical effectiveness research data networks from electronic health records, post marketing drug and medical device surveillance efforts“. Let me say that again, medical device surveillance efforts!
Now lets look at section 163 of HR3200, which gives the government a direct electronic access to your bank account which will work in conjunction with an implanted chip.
Page 58 Lines 5 through 15 reads: (D) enable the real-time (or near real time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identity detection card; (E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims
What does this mean? It means that the government will give everybody a health ID card that contains a machine readable device (magnetic strip or RFID chip) similar to a credit card. Embedded in this chip or strip is your Health Identification Number. When you visit a medical provider, the medical claims will be processed while you are still in the office. The medical providers will be paid in real time. The portion that you owe will be deducted from your bank account, in real time, according to HR 3200.
Notice here in this part which is at the beginning of 2000 plus pages of the law, it is carefully worded “which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identity detection card”. Here we are told that it may be a card. As you have already seen, deeper in the law [Sec. 2521 Pg. 1000] what this “may” utilize is clearly spelled out as a “class II device that is implantable”.
We can only speculate at this point why the law is set up this way. Most likely this section was written to account for the gap in time from when the process of chipping begins to when everyone has received a chip. A means of starting with a card for the sake of expedience while the process of chipping citizenry plays out. One thing is certain, the law mandates that within 3 years we will all have a chip under our skin that will serve this purpose.
Evidence of this logic is found in the deadline set for the start of the registry on page 1006.
“EFFECTIVE DATE.—The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish and begin implementation of the registry under section 519(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as added by paragraph (1), by not later than the date that is 36 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, without regard to whether or not final regulations to establish and operate the registry have been promulgated by such date.”
Also on page 259, this law requires the use of Electronic medical records system in all hospitals by 2012 which will leave a gap of at least a year before the class II implantable device is required.
Republican Congressman Ron Paul from Texas, states on his website:
“Buried deep within the over 1,000 pages of the massive US Health Care Bill (PDF) in a “non-discussed” section titled: Subtitle C-11 Sec. 2521— National Medical Device Registry, and which states its purpose as…….. He quotes that part of the law and then goes on to say: “In “real world speak”, according to this report, this new law, when fully implemented, provides the framework for making the United States the first Nation in the World to require each and every one of its citizens to have implanted in them a radio-frequency identification microchip for the purpose of controlling who is, or isn’t, allowed medical care in their country”.
That is from a currently serving member of congress. Cutting through all the political ease, the bottom line is that eventually if you want to participate in a government healthcare plan you will have to have this chip implanted in you. This law mandates that you have to have insurance and by virtue of this law guarantees that all private healthcare insurers will be driven out of business with only the government option left. We will be in a single payer system and you will have to have an imbedded chip to be a member of this system and it is mandatory that you be a part of this system. Source