Yuval Harari Covid 19 is critical for 'under the skin' surveillance

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
You should become a moderator as people need to watch what they say and can't speak freely.
You already act like the forum police what's stopping you?
The videos speak for themselves imo. END OFF.

originally posted by: ancientlight
The videos speak for themselves imo.

Do they? Is that why you brought up injectable trackers? Because the video said that? Or did you bring that up because you don't have a clue about how close you actually need to be to someone to track a chip inside their body?

I'm positive it's the later.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Ok but let's face facts here.

Proximity devices are at every business using NFCs and RFID readers. So its well within the realm of possibility that businesses, in conjunction with gov't departments, could feasibly track people with injectable microchips. From their electric cars (being pushed more and more and they use NFC tech) to bluetooth devices at home. Tracking like this is not far-fetched and I don't trust the gov't enough to say I know for sure.

They do it now with our data. Gov't buys the tracking data from the brokers. So while it may not be in the vaccines just yet (we really are not 100% certain) it could be in the future.

Just as Harari suggests.

originally posted by: havok
So its well within the realm of possibility that businesses, in conjunction with gov't departments, could feasibly track people with injectable microchips.

It's not feasible unless the scanners are within a couple of inches of each person in each of their destinations. There are much better ways to track people and gather meta data without being bodily-intrusive, they're called cell phones and people pay big money to have one. There are other ways that are nearly as effective and also not at all intrusive. Injecting people with farfetched exotic particulate is not only ineffective, it's unpractical.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I agree somewhat but electric cars have huge fields that can be read from many meters away. And yes people give all their data metrics away for free right now. They already are tracked.

But, I'm saying that the way things are heading and the way businesses are handling data and tracking, that its feasible in the future. Tech advancements and all that.

Also, RFIDs can be read from up to 10m...?

I would hope anything injectable is always a choice but the truth is that in the future it may not be.

We certainly don't know what's coming or what technology they are working on to make "under-the-skin" surveillance more of a possibility as Harari suggests.

originally posted by: havok
I agree somewhat but electric cars have huge fields that can be read from many meters away.

Because those aren't inside a human body which is a terrible conductor.

Also, RFIDs can be read from up to 10m

With a battery and/or antenna. You can go even further out than that but you aren't sticking something like that in a human body.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think we are in the same library but wrong book.
I think thats where its heading.

originally posted by: havok
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think we are in the same library but wrong book.
I think thats where its heading.

Honestly, I question his reading skills. He still hasn't answered my question about what Harari meant with 'under the skin' surveillance then, other than the most obvious covid 'vaccine' , as that's even mentioned in the video : 'covid was a watershed moment' . "Wearables" don't cut it. Under the skin , is not wearable.

Actually, in Sweden they have been using microchips under the skin to open doors / pay etc.

originally posted by: ancientlight
He still hasn't answered my question about what Harari meant with 'under the skin' surveillance then...

Talk a about not reading, I said it three times: wearables.

originally posted by: ancientlight

Actually, in Sweden they have been using microchips under the skin to open doors / pay etc.

And They just joined NATO !!!!! 😉

a reply to: ancientlight

Harari meant that this CV19 has made it possible to surveil the population by "under-the-skin" metrics like blood pressure, temperature, EKG, and other things that we have willingly given the gov't when this pandemic began.

Your second video explains it well enough.

It's not about if there was something in the vaccine, because we don't have conclusive evidence (published papers either) proving that anything was in it that could be considered a device that tracks its users.

It was about what data we gave them by injecting these vaccines and submitted our Identities to them, and then recording the data of our bodies (a.k.a. under-the-skin) and saving that data foe collection by presumably data brokers.

Who then, in turn, sell that data to the gov't.

That's my concise summation.

So no, you cannot debunk and you do believe you are a voice of “the left”. Gotcha

originally posted by: CptGreenTea
What evidence is there of this? You ask "lefties" to debunk a claim you provide no evidence for except a video of a israeli historian professor.

Im all for some wild theories but if your going to say "debunk this!" at least provide some substance as to what the claim is and why it may be legitimate...

What do you wear under your skin?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: ancientlight
He still hasn't answered my question about what Harari meant with 'under the skin' surveillance then...

Talk a about not reading, I said it three times: wearables.

This nut job (Yuval) also said in a different interview: "Private thoughts? That's over. In the future, we will have no need for people, so what will they do? My best guess is video games and a combination of drugs." It could not possibly get any more 1984 than that.

originally posted by: Skepticape
What do you wear under your skin?

Nothing.

A wearable is not a subcutaneous device.

originally posted by: ancientlight
Not shocked at all by any of this . More of they dystopian sick psychopaths wet dreams

Covid 19 is 'critical' for all the under the skin surveillance they want to implement.
Hmm, I wonder how they have added this under the skin ?

Wouldn't have anything to do with magnetic 'vaccines' would it ?

Brighteon video

And please , I would love to see the usual 'lefty debunkers' debunk this .
He says it, it's right there.

The video is of an opinion & not law or protocol. There are people everywhere making videos claiming nonsense. Ive been hearing about ISO900, Project Lucid , Jade Helm etc … for decades & still there is no mark of the beast .
A debit card to a 1950s Baptist would be seen as the sign of the beast .

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Nothing.

A wearable is not a subcutaneous device.

To be fair, they do have wearable glucose monitors that you wear and that have a micro needle poking into you.

That is probably the closest thing but still has nothing to do with injected vaccines.
www.nutrisense.io...

I don't believe that biometric implants are intended to provide literal tracking and surveillance capability, in real time, via an EM signal transmited from a chip implanted in your body. There was another thread on this concept a while back, and the TL;DR was: no, tiny RFID/NFC chips aren't powerful enough (currently) to enable that style of monitoring.

That said....taking a broader view of the situation...what is the stated problem or challenge this technology *is* intended to address?

It's the foundation of a system for 'participants' to gain the convenience and simplicity of doing all of their everyday errands, shopping, passing through their office building's security checkpoint, providing proof of identity (to enter a pub or an airport terminal), interacting with authorities ("I don't need your license and registration maam, just tap this device with your right wrist"), and so on.

All of this sounds OK, and that is part and parcel of the enticement. It sure would be nifty to never have to abandon a shopping trip b/c you forget your wallet, turn around and go home b/c your office badge is sitting at home, etc.

The problem is, there is always a person holding a fishing rod, reeling you in, when you grab at enticements like this.

"Beware of Greeks Bearing Gifts"

a.k.a. Trojan horses

I think there are sincere, genuine people with good intentions, investigating this technology and its benefits, almost certainly in R&D and academic realms.

I also believe there are more nefarious people that couldn't give a FCK about your convenience or efficiency of having a subcutaneous chip implant.

They are thinking about how this will, with wide enough adoption, obliterate the cash economy (and the black market)

They are thinking about how this can be integrated with automobiles and public transit, so if you as an individual are not wanted to be traveling....I hope you have endurance to walk/bike where you need to go.

Fundamentally, it's not the *tracking* of an actual EM signal to be worried about; it is all of the various connection points that this technology will infiltrate, in terms of your economic/social/commercial footprint. The worry should be that your implant corresponds to a record in a database somewhere, and that eventually everybody from McDonalds to the DMV to your car insurer and employer, will have an ability to integrate with.

In the future, once you "opt in" to it, you will have tacitly signed off on maintaining an identity in a large-scale security apparatus that, when someone clicks a button (or there is software bug, or someone mistakes you for another person), your ability to move and act freely. will be eradicated. End of story.

Also, we have been using words like 'opt in' and 'participate' and 'choice'. Understand that the model for 'choice' for this technology will ultimately be patterned after the COVID-19 vaccine 'choice'.

"Oh, it's OK, sure, you can elect NOT to have the chip implant sir. That is your choice. You just won't be able to, you know, drive a car, enter an airport, pay for stuff, or hold a job...all minor issues really. But you still have your choice!"

I don't see a way that this initiative is preempted or reversed at this point. Too much momentum, and there are some really cool benefits to digital ID, BUT also a SHT load of tradeoffs on the negative side of the ledger. I think I'll be in a box in the ground by the time this plan reaches full fruition, but it's my children's generation, and their children's generation, I'm concerned about.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

I enjoy the irony that some members here talk about this NWO 2030, bio-tracking crap ad-nauseam - however dollars-to-donuts carry a mobile phone around and use a computer. I can guarantee IF any NWO, elite, bilderberg group cared enough to track you specifically as a individual, they would be able to get more than enough information about you at this very moment without imaginary vaccine trackers.