Rfid tags in texas school boycotted due to religious beliefs

[Jazzz]

Do you have a mobile phone? Clearly superior bugging & tracking technology at this point in time.

Not as much fun to wibble hysterically about though.

Do you think that the students who are refusing to wear these Orwellian tags and taking their school to court are 'wibbling'? You know, it actually takes some guts to stand up to authority in such a way, putting your head above the parapet?

For your information, there are plenty of concerns to be had about mobile phones.

 

[elbows]

Do you think that the students who are refusing to wear these Orwellian tags and taking their school to court are 'wibbling'? You know, it actually takes some guts to stand up to authority in such a way, putting your head above the parapet?

Having read the court filing, it seems there are other students who refused the tags, but were apparently not subject to the same actions by the school. It is suggested that the religious aspect of the complain, and the handing out of leaflets, is responsible for this different treatment.

I do believe there are some serious issues here, and despite being no fan of religion I am tolerant of religious freedoms that dont harm others. However I reserve the right to say what I said earlier in this thread about the best way to deal sensibly with issues of information & control.

And yes, regardless of what I just said I consider the following which is in the court document to be dreary wibble, and dont think that taking the piss out of it undermines the other issues:

"Plaintiff and her father object to the requirement that Plaintiff wear the Smart ID badge on the basis of Scriptures found in the book of Revelation. According to these Scriptures, an individual's acceptance of a certain code, identified with his or her person, as a pass conferring certain privileges from a secular ruling authority, is a form of idolatry or submission to a false god."

Also note the 'and her father', and I will point out that it may take more guts to stand up to your parents and not buy into their interpretations of religious texts than it does to stand up to another authority with whom your relationship is far more temporary.

(source is https://www.rutherford.org/files_images/general/11-21-2012_TRO-Petition_Hernandez.pdf )

For your information, there are plenty of concerns to be had about mobile phones.

Err yes, thats what I said, and I've mentioned it on a number of occasions on these forums over the years. Havent noticed you joining in with anything useful on the subject though, I assume because none of your drooling heros have gone on about it at length, or dressed it up in exciting pyramids, lizards or NWO horseshit.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

You know, it actually takes some guts to stand up to authority in such a way, putting your head above the parapet

If only we were all as brave as you.

 

[free spirit]

I respect the students who've taken a stand against the wearing of RFID tags in school, and the tracking of their movements that this involves within the school.

I've no respect for idiots who then jump on that bandwagon to bang on about RFID tags being tracked from satellites and then link this to the erratic behaviour of squirrels.

RFID tags are very unlikely to be trackable by satellite as the signal would be too weak (or the radio signal sent from the satellite in the first place would be so strong as to cause serious problems for other RFID machines on earth. I suppose it's vaguely possible they might use this technology on a very targeted basis, but certainly not in a widespread way.

Squirrels act erratically when they're scared, so if they're becoming more erratic around you over time, then maybe that's something you want to have a think about.

 

[Jazzz]

Having read the court filing, it seems there are other students who refused the tags, but were apparently not subject to the same actions by the school. It is suggested that the religious aspect of the complain, and the handing out of leaflets, is responsible for this different treatment.

Which, as a defence of the education authority, is really neither here nor there. They only have to pick on one person to completely negate the idea that participation was voluntary. Also, note that it is a far more forceful rebellion to declare non-compliance than to simply not wear the tag and perhaps claim forgetfulness when challenged.

It makes perfect sense to pick on the 'hardest' case, to bring the rest into line. There is a Japanese saying, "the nail that sticks out gets hammered down". This is state control.

 

[elbows]

They offered to remove the rfid chip from her badge but apparently this still wasnt good enough.

Picking on the hardest case does not bring the others into line if the others are still allowed not to wear the tag.

When you went to school and they took registration to make sure you were there, did you stand up and complain about state control?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Right.

So, there are two key ways in which you might gain the consent to do something regarded as unpalatable.

The first, is the Hegelian Dialectic (renamed by Icke as Problem-Reaction-Solution). This involves covertly creating a problem, then offering your unpalatable thing as the solution to the problem you created in the first place. See - Al Qaeda, which remains CIA creation.

"Thesis, antithesis, synthesis" (the actual "Hegelian Dialectic") is somewhat different from what you're proposing (synthesis, thesis, antithesis), which is the manufacture of a problem for which you already have a solution.

The second is the stepping-stone approach. It's too much to start microchipping everyone - we aren't going to take it. So you start off bit by bit. Biometrics in passports. National ID register (nearly flew). RFID tags for students. Students particularly good because they will grow up thinking it's normal, so you get the new generation. Criminals. Children. People likely to need medical attention. Then once you have large sections of society already using things, so much easier to make it universal.

Except, of course, that it's not that simple, insofar as it would take at least another 15 years for all passports to become biometric, the NIDR didn't "nearly fly", it crashed and burned every time it went through the legislature and the technical infrastructure couldn't be built because most of the bodies from which data would be drawn didn't and don't use unitary systems, which pushes your "singularity" w/r/t tagging back even further. Add to that the fallibility of RFID tags and the ease with which they're defeated, and it would be a pretty pointless investment.

Regarding the RFID chips in the case being passive, don't think for an instant that that means future chips are being limited to being passive. What they are looking for is to successfully introduce tagging to the school - using active chips will cost more, might potentially be less reliable, and perhaps more likely to give students the jitters.

This is all happening.

Even an active chip, if it is small enough to implant (and you have to get past the whole issue of assault on the person in order to implant, in the first place: It's not like vaccination), it's small enough to be futzed by anything from low-wattage EMP to direct electrical shock. That goes for most current technology - "hardening" adds size and weight, so you'll go from "grain of sugar" to "garden pea", and implantation becomes more complicated than merely shooting a tiny pellet into someone with a compressed air injector.

 

[stuff_it]

I have a student ID card with an RFID and a magnetic strip, in fact I have worked loads of places where you get one of these - eg city centre hospitals. I quite like mine as it enables me to get cheaper coffee. In all honesty I don't in fact give a shit who knows that I prefer mocha to vanilla laté.

In the case of a school I'd be more concerned that it was being used to enable lower staff/student ratios, for example. In my uni classes a register without these would be impractical as some of the lectures have over 100 students, but in a school this should never happen.

 

[Jazzz]

They offered to remove the rfid chip from her badge but apparently this still wasnt good enough.

Picking on the hardest case does not bring the others into line if the others are still allowed not to wear the tag.

When you went to school and they took registration to make sure you were there, did you stand up and complain about state control?

Damn right "it wasn't good enough". Why the hell should children be expected to wear pretend RFID badges? How on earth can you quote such an obviously insane proposition, and think it unreasonable to reject?

"Picking on the hardest case does not bring the others into line if the others are still allowed not to wear the tag." well, this is somewhat simplistic, but the point is you don't want mass rebellion. You want to introduce your new somewhat difficult-to-palate thing slyly, like the supposed boiling frog that doesn't notice the water temperature creeping up. So to start with, you just get heavy with the anti-campaigners, those who dissent strongly. You don't force 100% compliance. Control those guys, then with that achieved, you can later turn the screw on the softies. This is how you do it.

 

[free spirit]

unless you're this tory government, in which case you just unleash such a massive shitstorm on all fronts that you manage to get most of it through as you've overwhelmed those who'd usually have got it together to oppose you one measure at a time.

 

[Jazzz]

"Thesis, antithesis, synthesis" (the actual "Hegelian Dialectic") is somewhat different from what you're proposing (synthesis, thesis, antithesis), which is the manufacture of a problem for which you already have a solution.

It's how to apply the Hegelian Dialectic - with deception - to get the thing you want.

Except, of course, that it's not that simple, insofar as it would take at least another 15 years for all passports to become biometric, the NIDR didn't "nearly fly", it crashed and burned every time it went through the legislature and the technical infrastructure couldn't be built because most of the bodies from which data would be drawn didn't and don't use unitary systems, which pushes your "singularity" w/r/t tagging back even further. Add to that the fallibility of RFID tags and the ease with which they're defeated, and it would be a pretty pointless investment.

Even an active chip, if it is small enough to implant (and you have to get past the whole issue of assault on the person in order to implant, in the first place: It's not like vaccination), it's small enough to be futzed by anything from low-wattage EMP to direct electrical shock. That goes for most current technology - "hardening" adds size and weight, so you'll go from "grain of sugar" to "garden pea", and implantation becomes more complicated than merely shooting a tiny pellet into someone with a compressed air injector.

It's a point of interest about vaccination. Why do you think common law assault would apply to injections of microchips but not vaccines? Vaccination without consent is indeed assault (with a weapon).

Expect the technology to improve. It probably all exists already secretly.

 

[stuff_it]

It's how to apply the Hegelian Dialectic - with deception - to get the thing you want.



It's a point of interest about vaccination. Why do you think common law assault would apply to injections of microchips but not vaccines? Vaccination without consent is indeed assault (with a weapon).

Expect the technology to improve. It probably all exists already secretly.

Injection of anything without consent is assault, and the number of non-mental-health related diseases for which you can be treated without your consent is very small and all are things where refusing treatment makes you a danger to the public, in fact afaik you can't be forced in the uk to let your children be vaccinated.

Actually why bother.

 

[Jazzz]

Injection of anything without consent is assault, and the number of non-mental-health related diseases for which you can be treated without your consent is very small and all are things where refusing treatment makes you a danger to the public, in fact afaik you can't be forced in the uk to let your children be vaccinated.

Actually why bother.

Well I don't know why bother if you are making the same point as me?

Of course, it's an interesting point - could compulsory microchipping ever be lawful? But that doesn't seem to be the point you were striking.

 

[Blagsta]

Jazzz, read some proper books ffs

 

[Delroy Booth]

Right.

So, there are two key ways in which you might gain the consent to do something regarded as unpalatable.

Go on....

The first, is the Hegelian Dialectic (renamed by Icke as Problem-Reaction-Solution).

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's how to apply the Hegelian Dialectic - with deception - to get the thing you want.

So it's not actually the application of the Hegelian Dialectic, it's a manipulation of the elements of the Hegelian Dialectic that some self-important tossrag has decided is on a par with the Hegelian Dialectic.

It's a point of interest about vaccination. Why do you think common law assault would apply to injections of microchips but not vaccines? Vaccination without consent is indeed assault (with a weapon).

A vaccine enters the body through a very small needle. |mpingement is minimised. Implantation of a chip robust enough to withstand the various issues I've mentioned (EMP, electrical surges, shielding etc) would require minor surgery because protection against EMP can't be miniaturised - it's physical and in a proportion to the size of what it protects - it's basically a "Faraday Cage". We haven't yet reached a stage where even vaccination can be conducted without consent, so minor surgery without consent...?
There's also the other minor issue I've mentioned, which is that any technology that can be implanted can be removed or futzed.

Expect the technology to improve. It probably all exists already secretly.

It already exists, full stop. Implantation of passive and active electronics has been going on for years, but implanted active electronics only tend to function properly in controlled (i.e. laboratory) environments. The real world has too much random input for unshielded tech to function well.

 

[1%er]

If they had these RFID tags when I was a kid I wouldn't have got into so much trouble for bunking off, I'd have given the card to someone who went to class and I'd be registered in that class

As has already been pointed out there are far better ways than RFID to track peoples movements and as far as I know they are not being implanted into people, if they were someone would have found one by now.

Conspiracy theorists are always going on about outdated technology

 

[SpookyFrank]

If only there was some kind of human who could stand at the front of the class and simply look to see who was there and who wasn't. They could even have a list of names and simply tick off the names of the kids who were present.

They could also, as a useful secondary function, impart some knowledge to the kids while they sat and waited for their daily period of government-mandated detention to end. One thing they could maybe teach kids about is the concept of a social contract, an unspoken agreement whereby the state is answerable to and bound by the will of the general population and no cunt has a right to go inserting chips into anyone's kids for any reason.

Maybe then they could explain to kids what happened when, in the days before RFID, people were simply tattooed with index numbers to help keep track of them.

 

[Jazzz]

A vaccine enters the body through a very small needle. |mpingement is minimised. Implantation of a chip robust enough to withstand the various issues I've mentioned (EMP, electrical surges, shielding etc) would require minor surgery because protection against EMP can't be miniaturised - it's physical and in a proportion to the size of what it protects - it's basically a "Faraday Cage". We haven't yet reached a stage where even vaccination can be conducted without consent, so minor surgery without consent...?
There's also the other minor issue I've mentioned, which is that any technology that can be implanted can be removed or futzed.


It already exists, full stop. Implantation of passive and active electronics has been going on for years, but implanted active electronics only tend to function properly in controlled (i.e. laboratory) environments. The real world has too much random input for unshielded tech to function well.

You are contradicting yourself. You say there are technical obstacles to everyone being microchipped with active chips - but then claim that the technology already exists?? Please find a consistent position.

 

[el-ahrairah]

Please find a consistent position.

lololololol etc

 

[ViolentPanda]

You are contradicting yourself. You say there are technical obstacles to everyone being microchipped with active chips - but then claim that the technology already exists?? Please find a consistent position.

I said that the technology already exists. I said that, without shielding, it can only function properly in a controlled environment, not "in the wild". I said that with the shielding necessary for functioning "in the wild", the size of the electronics would be prohibitively large. Thoroughly consistent, you arse.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

I respect the students who've taken a stand against the wearing of RFID tags in school, and the tracking of their movements that this involves within the school.

I've no respect for idiots who then jump on that bandwagon to bang on about RFID tags being tracked from satellites and then link this to the erratic behaviour of squirrels.

RFID tags are very unlikely to be trackable by satellite as the signal would be too weak (or the radio signal sent from the satellite in the first place would be so strong as to cause serious problems for other RFID machines on earth. I suppose it's vaguely possible they might use this technology on a very targeted basis, but certainly not in a widespread way.

Squirrels act erratically when they're scared, so if they're becoming more erratic around you over time, then maybe that's something you want to have a think about.

WTF are you talking about willis....

seriously...

if the tracker chip of any kind can be connected to then it can be traced. If it's within a detection zone where it can be read then the readers themselves can be comprimised or if not the centralised machine which agrigates the data...

no one as far as I've ever seen has needed to hack an oyster card to for example be able to check on the movements of it or it's user at a given time.... which is what in essence you're saying...

just because you're to technologically illiterate to understand the way the tech works and the infrastructure which surrounds and supports it to make it 'work' doesn't mean anyone else is.

Equally to Jazzz and pals it doesn't mean that those of use who do are in some sort of secret Jimmy Saville worshipping cult with nefarious and evil intents...


Seriously it's like watching guppies trying to explain fission...

 

[elbows]

How come your insulting rants so rarely have anything to do with what they person you are targeting has actually said?

The aggregation and analysis of large amounts of data collected from a variety of sources is one of the issues of our age. But that has nothing to do with someone refuting specific misconceptions about whether a specific technology can be directly tracked from a long range. And the case that this thread about does not involve someone complaining about a variety of their personal data being collected in a manner that attempts to achieve 'total information awareness'.

 

[elbows]

As for the squirrels, anybody who cares about technology and animals would be better off starting with something sane that is worthy of further investigation, such as whether whales are being messed up by sonar or other technologies.

 

[free spirit]

WTF are you talking about willis....

seriously...

if the tracker chip of any kind can be connected to then it can be traced. If it's within a detection zone where it can be read then the readers themselves can be comprimised or if not the centralised machine which agrigates the data...

no one as far as I've ever seen has needed to hack an oyster card to for example be able to check on the movements of it or it's user at a given time.... which is what in essence you're saying...

just because you're to technologically illiterate to understand the way the tech works and the infrastructure which surrounds and supports it to make it 'work' doesn't mean anyone else is.

Equally to Jazzz and pals it doesn't mean that those of use who do are in some sort of secret Jimmy Saville worshipping cult with nefarious and evil intents...


Seriously it's like watching guppies trying to explain fission...

What has any of that has to do with whether RFID tags can be directly tracked on a widespread basis via satellite as the poster I was obviously responding to had been making out?

How about you stop willy waving for long enough to read the fucking post for a change eh.

 

[free spirit]

In case you're not managed to work it out Garf, this was the poster I was referring to, asserting that RFID tags can be tracked by 'satelight'.

Why would they need too right down the name of the person, when they can track them via satelight WHENEVER THEY WANT? They can see who it is WHENEVER THEY WANT!

WAKE UP.

They can see all of us whenever they want! Satelight camras track us all the time - why do you think there are more than 3000 of them? They can tell whos got the RFID chip just by LOOKING at them!

How do you explain the way squirrels behave these days otherwise?

 

[Jazzz]

Such as using an active tracking device that broadcasts a signal, as opposed to one that needs to pass a reading device (and to pass it within certain speed and distance parameters). The whole thing with RFID is that it's passive, not active. It's like a barcode: it's there, but it does nothing until a scanner of the right sort scans it for the information imprinted on it - for a barcode, that's item type and price, for an RFID tag, it's "this tag relates to XXXX XXXXX" to which the scanner attaches the computer equivalent of "who has just passed Harrods, Knightsbridge".

Oh look, turns out VP is completely wrong here. The chips are active.

As part of a controversial trial that could someday include 112 schools and nearly 100,000 students, Northside Independent School District in San Antonio, Texas, recently issued students at two of its campuses new badges with an embedded RFID (radio-frequency identification) chip in order to track their locations.

​

Unlike passive chips that transmit data only when scanned by a reader, these chips have batteries and broadcast a constant signal so they can track students’ exact locations on school property, down to where they’re sitting—whether it’s at a desk, in a counselor’s office, or on the toilet.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2011352/texas-school-uses-rfid-badges-to-track-student-locations.html

 

[Jazzz]

I said that the technology already exists. I said that, without shielding, it can only function properly in a controlled environment, not "in the wild". I said that with the shielding necessary for functioning "in the wild", the size of the electronics would be prohibitively large. Thoroughly consistent, you arse.

I said - expect the technology to improve, and possibly it exists already. Which of course meant - as quite possibly to overcome the obstacles you talk about. You are so obsessed with disagreeing with whatever I say that you contradict yourself. What you really are trying to say is: the technology has reached a ceiling which is already in the public domain. I say - utter bullcrap. Already you have been shown to make false assumptions about the nature of this RFID.

 

[Wilf]

the skin and senses are all neural interfaces as it happens

 

[Wilf]

By the by, a question for CTers: right, this one that's about to enslave us is some sort of tag malarky. Before that it was vaccines... barcodes.... dunno, chain letters, lumphammers. What happened, did those technologies achieve the goals of the NWO? Did they succeed - or did we fight the threat off?