The U.S. government intends to further their control over the lives of Americans by introducing microchipping for children in the near future.
As time goes by, the government seems to want to regulate the lives of Americans more and more. Sometimes these decisions for further regulation actually help the American people, but this is still up for debate depending on who you are, and sometimes, the reasons behind these decisions are dubious and must be called into question.
The latter scenario has been occurring recently as news of the future of tracking people has been spread around.
The concept is simple but the implications behind it are serious: the U.S. government intends to introduce microchipping for children in the near future in an effort to better keep track of them.
Though it’s easy to say that this technology would simply protect children from being kidnapped or getting lost, it goes much deeper than that. Proponents of microchipping, such as mother of three Steffany Rodriguez-Neely, have pointed out that,
“If it’ll save my kid, there’s no stuff that’s too extreme. Microchipping would be an extra layer of protection, if something bad does happen.” She added, “If a small chip the size of a grain of rice could have prevented a tragedy, I think most parents would have said, ‘I think I would have done it.’”
Credit: Mirror Spectrum
Rodriguez-Neely doesn’t seem to take into account what having a microchip could mean for the child once they grow up or what else the microchip might be used for without the parent’s or child’s permission.
Electronics expert Stuart Lipoff attempts to compare microchips in humans to barcodes on products in the store, but also falls short. He told NBC,
“When barcodes first came out in the late 1960s, people were appalled. They were wary of them and did not understand the concept. Today, it is so commonplace, we don’t even notice it. A microchip would work much in the same way.”
There is a significant difference between barcodes that identify and hold information about products and tracking devices that store records inside of people. Some microchips may only work when they are scanned, but others used in pets can also track the location of the pet at all times using GPS, and that’s where the true concern lies.
If parents are able to gain access to their child’s location, there’s a likelihood that this information could be hacked and complete strangers could also track them.
In addition, the children are stripped of their freedom to choose whether they want the chip implanted in them and must live with the decision their parents make for them for the rest of their lives.
One argument in favor of the microchip is the ease with which information about a person can be stored and retrieved, such as important medical records, bank accounts, and much more. However, is the convenience of the chip worth the unforeseen troubles that would accompany the introduction of this device?
The idea behind the microchip conjures up thoughts of science-fiction tales gone awry, but the choice would ultimately, or at least hopefully, be given to citizens. If they embrace it with open arms, microchips could become the norm, but if they reject it, the idea would fade away like many others.
If NBC reporter Melanie Michael, who interviewed several people to uncover facts and opinions about the future of the microchip, is right, then this technology could be introduced “sooner rather than later.”
Credit to trueactivist.com
Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/the-government-wants-to-microchip-all-kids-sooner-rather-than-later/
One thing is certain about the United Kingdom vote to leave the European Union that prompted Prime Minister David Cameron’s resignation, jolted global stock markets and delivered a political blow to President Obama and Hillary Clinton.
It’s a stumbling block for the “one-world government” and “one-world currency” that the Bible says will eventually be imposed across all nations during the end times.
That’s according to Franklin Graham, the famed evangelical leader who runs Samaritan’s Purse and Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.
“Last night the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union,” he wrote on Facebook on Friday. “With the breakdown of immigration laws and economies, millions of Europeans feel that their politicians have failed them.
“Boris Johnson, one of UK’s most popular leaders of the #Brexit movement hailed the results as a ‘glorious opportunity.'”
Graham continued: “We don’t know what the #EUReferendum vote means long-term, but I know that this is at least a temporary setback for the politicians in this country and around the world who want a one-world government and a one-world currency. The Bible speaks that one day this will take place. Join me in praying for all of those impacted and that Europe’s leaders, as well as our leaders in the United States, will look to Almighty God for wisdom and discernment in these trying and complex times in which we live.”
The 52 percent to 48 percent margin was a political defeat for Obama, who urged Britons just a few weeks ago to stay in the EU.
“The United States wants a strong United Kingdom as a partner. And the United Kingdom is at its best when it’s helping to lead a strong Europe,” he said at the time.
Obama said in April that if the U.K. chose to leave, American efforts would continue to focus on a trade deal with the EU, and Britain then would drop to the back of the line.
However, on Friday, State Department spokesman John Kirby tempered the comments th president made before the vote.
“We don’t anticipate anything changing the special relationship that we have with the U.K.”
Hillary Clinton also urged the U.K. to remain in the union, but Donald Trump suggested if he were British, he would want to leave.
He said, “The people of the United Kingdom have exercised the sacred right of all free peoples. They have declared their independence from the European Union and have voted to reassert control over their own politics, borders and economy. A Trump administration pledges to strengthen our ties with a free and independent Britain, deepening our bonds in commerce, culture and mutual defense. The whole world is more peaceful and stable when our two countries – and our two peoples – are united together, as they will be under a Trump administration.”
The vote already is inspiring others. Officials in Italy, France and the Netherlands have called for their own European Union-related votes, and officials in several other nations said they were trying to stamp out that very movement.
The New York Times called it a “stunning turn of events,” and stock markets worldwide plunged several percentage points in the wake of the announcement.
The vote highlighted “the power of anti-elite, populist and nationalist sentiment at a time of economic and cultural dislocation,” the report said.
Supporting Graham’s observation, the Times said, “European leaders acknowledged that the British vote would further limit their ability to move forward with economic and political integration, a process that had all but stalled anyway.”
The report warned the vote is a “disaster” for the European Union, “raising questions about the direction, cohesion and future of a bloc built on liberal values.”
“The main impact will be massive disorder in the EU system for the next two years,” Thierry de Montbrial of the French Institute of International Relations told the Times. “There will be huge political transition costs, on how to solve the British exit, and the risk of a domino effect or bank run from other countries that think of leaving.”
CNBC reported former Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan, long an advocate for globalism, warned the vote casts a shadow over that agenda.
“This is the worst period, I recall since I’ve been in public service,” Greenspan said on “Squawk on the Street.” “There’s nothing like it, including the crisis – remember October 19th, 1987, when the Dow went down by a record amount 23 percent? That I thought was the bottom of all potential problems. This has a corrosive effect that will not go away.”
The Daily Mail characterized the continent as “shocked” and reported a coalition of national representatives already was warning the E.U. soon would “crumble to pieces.”
“This is the beginning of the end for the E.U.,” Sweden Democrat Party member Peter Lundgren said. “So many other countries will follow the U.K. and Europe will fall.
“It’s just a matter of time. Britain has set a precedent. Other member states will follow and the whole thing will fall apart. It will happen very soon.”
The London Telegraph said one of the long-term impacts could be a Trump presidency.
The report said, “Dozens of the most brilliant minds in the Democratic Party will gather at the Hillary Clinton for President HQ to work out where the vote leaves their candidate. The immediate answer is: in grave danger.”
The vote, the report said, proves with “the utter contempt for mainstream politicians felt by the white, working classes of virtually all Western countries, the prospect of a President Trump has never seemed more likely.”
The Telegraph said that for more than a year, Democrats “have assured themselves that America surely would not be foolish enough to favor a maverick, proudly xenophobic, boorish billionaire over the wisdom, experience and poise of Mrs. Clinton.’
“Their confidence echoes that of the British establishment, so sure the electorate would not – could not – defy the collective authority of virtually all the country’s senior politicians, economists and international leaders – until it did.
“Waking in her home in upstate New York this morning, Mrs Clinton – who previously warned against a vote to leave the EU – must have experienced a sense of dread.”
Vanity Fair held a dim view of the U.K.’s future, forecasting the possibility it will be “reduced to a rump state of England and Wales.”
And the sentiment – the rejection of centralized decision-making – already has spread, the magazine said.
“Variants of visceral anger can be found across the continent among various right-wing parties, who are presumably celebrating the blow delivered to the European project. After all, the E.U. as we know it will be forced to change, or likely face a string of similar referendums in member states. Perhaps that is a natural setback in the evolution of the common market, but the feeling of panic is palpable in what used to be called the chancelleries of Europe, for the British vote provides momentum and inspiration to some extremely undesirable forces elsewhere in its 28 member nations. With good reason, E.U. leaders are urging Britain to leave as soon as possible; they have concerns about contamination.”
The magazine continued, “The same spirit of defiance, of course, undergird the support for Donald Trump, who happened to find himself in Britain today and has expressed his wholehearted support for the decision.”
Credit to wnd.com
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/franklin-graham-u-k-vote-deals-blow-to-1-world-government/#pGK37E3gPd4qZXiT.99
