The "Cashless" Implant Society Draws Closer
By Constance Cumbey - June 28, 2007
See also Alliance of Civilizations
There are days reading the news that I have to pinch myself. Surely this is some type of a bad dream from which I shall soon awake. Unfortunately, the painful realization is that I am awake and this Orwellian nightmare is really happening. This time, it's trying to get under our skin -- literally.
I first viewed this startling development in a June 25th article appearing in YAHOO! NEWS CANADA, the American Medical Association has adopted a statement that such devices could be medically beneficial. Charitably, for those of us with "paranoid phobias" have to make "informed consent." I then undertook a successful internet search to find the actual report myself. That American Medical Association Ethics Commission Report, "Radio Frequency ID Devices in Humans," is available for download online.
Despite serious health concerns, which even the AMA acknowledges, they push for the implants anyway. Looking behind the action, I find power, money, and an old player in the form of "Verichip," variously known at different times as "Digital Angel," and "Applied Digital Solutions."
Given the acknowledged risks, it is astounding that the American Medical Association would even consider the process. Perhaps they were influenced by those of their number who have succumbed to temptations and even financial inducements put forth by their manufacturers.
Acknowledged risks per the report include:
"Physical risks to patients . . . These devices may present physical risks to the patient. Though they are removable, their small size allows them to migrate under the skin, making them potentially difficult to extract. However, this tendency may be minimized by constructing RFID tags from materials that permit surrounding tissue to encase the device. In addition, RFID tags may cause electromagnetic interference, which may interfere with electrosurgical devices and defibrillators. Finally, it has not been determined whether RFID tags might affect the efficacy of pharmaceuticals.
"PATIENT PRIVACY AND SECURITY . . . The primary concerns surrounding human RFID labeling pertain to their potential impact on patient privacy and security. Physicians must assure patients that their medical information will be held in confidence (see Opinion E-5.05, “Confidentiality”). Moreover, maintenance of privacy is required to protect patients from embarrassment, potential social discrimination, loss of health care coverage, or other detrimental consequences (see Opinion E-5.059, “Privacy in the Context of Health Care”). . . . At this time, the security of RFID devices has not been fully established. Physicians, therefore, cannot assure patients that the personal information contained on RFID tags will be appropriately protected. In light of these security concerns, the FDA currently requires RFID transponders to store only a unique electronic identification code to be read by the scanner.2 This identification code can then be used to access patient identity and corresponding health information stored in a database. To protect confidentiality and privacy, the medical community should advocate for the adoption of other protections, such as computer encryption or digital signatures. Ultimately, the medical community should undertake appropriate efforts to prevent unauthorized access to patients’ information contained on RFID tags." (see also E-5.07, “Confidentiality: Computers,” AMA Policy Database).
Well, look upon the bright side. At this time, they have thrown us "paranoids" a little temporary hope by suggesting that ethically there should be "informed consent."
"INFORMED CONSENT . . . To properly respect patient autonomy, RFID tags should not be implanted or removed without the prior consent of patients or their surrogates (see E-8.08, “Informed Consent,” and E-8.081, “Surrogate Decision Making”). During the consent process, decision-makers should be informed of the potential risks and benefits associated with RFID tags, including the many uncertainties regarding their efficacy. Patients are also entitled to know who will be granted access to the data contained on RFID tags and the purposes for which this information will be used."
"Homeland security" and migrant labor concerns are also heightening the momentum for planned even forcible RFID implantation. In 2006, the British press reported on USA discussion of chip implants for migrant workers. According to that account, Verichip chairman Scott Silverman made such a proposal on Fox TV. The colorful British account of his appearance notes even more powerful factions behind same, Tommy Thompson, formerly Homeland Security chief on the Board of Directors of Applied Digital Solutions/Verichip/Verimed and their assorted snoopervision (spelling is intentional) devices.
A google search using the terms "RFID chips" "prisoners" and "implants" yielded much disturbing material that perhaps this was not a new development. One disappeared story, still available as of the time of this writing on a google cache was entitled "44,000 prison inmates to be RFID-chipped . . . No escape for Ohio jailbirds . . ." For the time being the chipping was to be on "watches." The program was to be a "pilot project." The same article calmly noted that similar projects were in active use in several states, including my own of Michigan.
Since a small child, I received warnings at my parents' and grandparents' feet that such a system would one day come. I was also taught that it was one I must resist. I was more than shocked in the year 2002 when the Jacobs family of Florida announced it wanted to be the first family in America to "be chipped." They received their implants sequentially on national morning TV programs, including the Today Show (the one I personally videotaped), Good Morning America, and CNN programming. Even before that program, they had received a theological endorsement of this procedure from none other than Pat Robertson. He featured both the Jacobs family and a Dr. Joseph Kickasola, a theologian from his Regent University. They solemnly informed Christians that there were no theological risks to taking this body implant as "they were taking it voluntarily." Only if it was compulsory would the Biblical injunction against it kick in," opined Robertson employee Kickasola.
Well, traditionally, hasn't it always been the case that before one starts drafting, they always take volunteers? Taking the prophesied mark was a sure ticket to guaranteed hellfire. Review Revelation chapters 13 and 14 for those clear warnings. Further, there is strictly no advantage either in the here or the hereafter for crossing that "digital divide." The same book containing the warnings against the mark warns that those who took the mark broke out in horrible sores all over their body. They longed for death but death would not come. Hardly a pretty picture!
My position on this? Not my dog, not my cat, not my children nor my grandchildren, and definitely not me. It is amazing to me that Christians are undergoing marginalization on this at the same time as full implementation is in place.
I had an amazing WRIF radio debate with Benjamin Crème in May, 1982. As I was against his new "Maitreya the Christ," "Betraya the Christ" or whatever his name is supposed to be, Crème labeled me "a fundamentalist." I said, "Mr. Crème, I can understand your aversion to fundamentalism and the Bible as the written word of God. After all, if I were on the FBI's 10 most wanted list, I wouldn't want my friends dropping by the post office. If they did come to the post office and they did read those posters on the wall, I certainly wouldn't want them to take it literally. Everything the Bible warned against, you have proclaimed tonight on this very show 'we are going to do.' I started enumerating. Crème was howling for mercy.
Reviewing the materials I have collected over the past 26 years on this topic, many of which are now archived with the University of Michigan's Bentley Historical Library, it is clear that those who I was monitoring had BIG PLANS they hoped to achieve before the end of the century, as many as possible in the 1980's. It is further clear that they are now once again on the militant march.
Back to the AMA report which triggered my keyboard spasms for this article suggested there were two ways the medical community could go:
"Finally, physicians should be aware of emerging non-medical applications of human-implantable RFID devices. For instance, active RFID technologies might be considered for the tracking or surveillance of individuals who pose a threat to others. Although this is only one of many possible uses of RFID technology in the future, it alerts the medical profession to the need for continuous assessment of the appropriate role of physicians participating in RFID labeling of human beings. Indeed, certain uses could constitute an infringement upon patients’ individual liberties, placing physicians in a position to act as patient advocates by promoting the use of other, less intrusive alternatives, when available."
May God give us the grace and the strength to resist. May God give our pastors the grace and courage to give fair warning. May we all wake up and realize exactly what time it is! "Lead us not into temptation, BUT DELIVER US FROM EVIL." Amen, Amen!
© 2006 - Constance Cumbey - All Rights Reserved
Constance Cumbey is an active Michigan lawyer. Constance practices her profession primarily in, Southeastern Michigan, USA. Sometimes she also works in what she calls her "old stomping grounds" of Michigan's State Capital, Lansing, Michigan where she practices administrative, state law related matters. She's enjoyed active and stimulating careers in government, politics, law and as a published and translated author. In the past she served as a national officer of the National Association of Women Lawyers and chaired the Family Law subcommittee of the General Practice Section of the American Bar Association.
Before beginning her legal career, she worked as a legislative analyst for the Speaker of the Michigan House of Representatives, and while in law school as a consultant to the Appropriations Committee of the Michigan State Senate. She also served as the first charter position Executive Assistant to the Mayor of the Detroit enclave City of Highland Park, Michigan. Seven years into her legal career, she went on to become the author of the first major critical book about the New Age Movement, THE HIDDEN DANGERS OF THE RAINBOW: The New Age Movement and our Coming Age of Barbarism (1983); A PLANNED DECEPTION: The Staging of a New Age Messiah (1986). Currently, she's completing a volume about Javier Solana, the Barcelona Process, Israel and the European Union.
Home | Articles |No Place to Hide?