Microchip implantation for surveillance and compliance has been called a conspiracy theory, but they already have the microchip. From Robert Wheeler at theorganicprepper.com:
While half of the American voting public is no doubt waiting in earnest for the announcement of a release of the COVID vaccine and as totalitarian states and governments the world over attempt to require proof of negative tests before travel, a new tool in the shed of government surveillance and control is revealing itself.
The microchip has arrived.
While many are still attacking anyone warning of the “coming Microchip” as a conspiracy theorist, Luddite, or religious fanatic, that microchip has arrived.
But governments aren’t having to market the chip as a method to track, trace, and control their populations. Instead, they are marketing the chip as a way to track and detect COVID and other coronaviruses. Clearly, this is a much easier sell to a public literally terrorized by their governments and mainstream media outlets for the last six months.
Raul Diego details the creation and coming rollout of the new biochip in his article, “A DARPA-Funded Implantable Microchip to Detect COVID-19 Could Hit Markets By 2021,” where he writes,
The most significant scientific discovery since gravity has been hiding in plain sight for nearly a decade and its destructive potential to humanity is so enormous that the biggest war machine on the planet immediately deployed its vast resources to possess and control it, financing its research and development through agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and HHS’ BARDA.
The revolutionary breakthrough came to a Canadian scientist named Derek Rossi in 2010 purely by accident. The now-retired Harvard professor claimed in an interview with the National Post that he found a way to “reprogram” the molecules that carry the genetic instructions for cell development in the human body, not to mention all biological lifeforms.
These molecules are called ‘messenger ribonucleic acid’ or mRNA and the newfound ability to rewrite those instructions to produce any kind of cell within a biological organism has radically changed the course of Western medicine and science, even if no one has really noticed yet. As Rossi, himself, puts it: “The real important discovery here was you could now use mRNA, and if you got it into the cells, then you could get the mRNA to express any protein in the cells, and this was the big thing.” (Source)
From Lucy Steigerwald at antiwar.com:
On September 16, The Washington Post reported that the Obama administration may be looking for a détente in the encryption wars. For proof, they offered a leaked draft of a National Security Council paper which said that Obama should not support a law mandating a decryption backdoor in tech devices.
This bodes very well. For months, federal law enforcement has been in a tizzy over the prospect of automatic encryption in Apple and Android devices. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director James Comey said that it would benefit pedophiles. Other national security officials echoed these melodramatic sentiments. Later, UK Prime Minister David Cameron came out against unbreakable encryption. Recently GOP candidate Jeb Bush said that “evildoers” would use this enhanced privacy for…doing evil.
Apple seems to be leading this new “you can’t stop us” charge, since it began with last year’s announcement that their IOS8 would make Apple itself unable to comply with certain law enforcement requests. Previously, users could choose to encrypt their devices, but making it all automatic means someone would have to opt out of these privacy measures. This could set a fantastic precedent for privacy. Now a user need not have the tech savvy of an Edward Snowden in order to have their data secret. It will be automatic. It will be an easily purchasable commodity, even in this era of Smartphones.
The US government is currently in a fight with Microsoft, who fought a warrant in a drug investigation because their servers are in Ireland, not the States. Microsoft argues that this precedent does not bode well for dissidents in more authoritarian countries, in which governments might try to force tech companies to reveal identifying information. Strong encryption, as the NSC paper notes, would in many ways lead to increased trust in the US, and certainly in US companies. The Post sums it up: that the NSC thinks that letting Apple and the other companies have their automatic encryption “would counter the narrative that the United States is seeking to expand its surveillance capability at the expense of cybersecurity.”
Official sentiment – barring that of law enforcement – seems to be going a little more in this direction. If Obama really does back off of support for a law, and Congress is unlikely to actually get one together, privacy may simply win by default. Companies move faster than bureaucracy, and they are getting more scrappy since Snowden.
To continue reading: Are We Getting Somewhere on Tech Privacy?