It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Give DNA or no job; A.F.P.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Explain in greater detail how it's pushing you to do thing's you don't want to do.




posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
Explain in greater detail how it's pushing you to do thing's you don't want to do.


They'll do it like they have done with Chip and Pin in the United Kingdom.

They will claim that it boosts security and then private companies will remove the older items. By the end of Feb, nearly 70% of credit and bank cards no longer will be signed for in the U.K. it'll be pin only...which isn't safer.

They will then introduce something else, after Chip and Pin to boost security once more. I've heard they are trying for finger-print ID soon and then it'll move on and on...



posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   
And do you have to have a credit card? Finger print ID's SHOULD be done anyway's! With identity theft becoming a more common place occurence, only your fingerprint can prove you are you.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 03:52 AM
link   
the genome can be used for identification, and some of you collectivists don't care if this happens, considering the current orwellian frenzy i'll have a hard time arguing against that.

But, the real danger, and i believe you're purposely oblivisous to that fact, is its useage in Eugenics. the current power elites are putting a holocaust machinery in place, complete with so called less lethal weapons, hidden camps and surveillance mechanisms, as well as firearms bans in many countries, can't you see that?


why would they do that if it's hideously expensive and alledgedly won't be used (and you know what 'used' means). furthermore, they are not immortal and will be replaced at some time, then, some maniac will inevitable know everything about you.

PS: at this point, i'd like to let you in on something: powerlessness is not desireable, the 'Fuehrer Principle' is a principle of betrayal, it necessarily favors those who are percieved as leaders, which can be changed in a heartbeat, btw. when this happens, and it happens no matter what (see communist revolution, French revolution, etc. ) it's always the most ruthless and bloodthirsty who win the game of bloodshed, you understand?

guess whose blood will be shed.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
And do you have to have a credit card? Finger print ID's SHOULD be done anyway's! With identity theft becoming a more common place occurence, only your fingerprint can prove you are you.



once your biometric features are stolen, they will be burned forever, do you honestly believe a fingerprint can't be forged, or DNA?

DNA replicates - in the cell and in the lab


PS: you're clearly Orwellian, you're not oblivious, so good luck, you'll prolly need it

[edit on 10-1-2006 by Long Lance]



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 05:12 AM
link   
Long Lance,

That's a bold claim. Back it up with evidence since you seem so sure this is occuring.

Need I remind you the term "orwellian" is derived from a work of fiction and not historical occurance's. There's no plan to live in an orwellian society. Everyone still has freedom, freedom of choice etc. Please provide evidence we're heading into an orwellian society. I've yet to see any credible evidence posted by anyone here.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
Long Lance,

That's a bold claim. Back it up with evidence since you seem so sure this is occuring.

Need I remind you the term "orwellian" is derived from a work of fiction...




yes, but if i don't use metaphors, people will rightfully ask me to elaborately explain wtf i mean. really, it doesn't take much fantasy to predict abuse of new tecnologies: it's inevitable, once you place too much power in a single tech (DNA identification, discrimination, etc ever seen Gattaca) people WILL find ways around it, it's adaption, a natural principle.


so, on to the links:

arbitrary censorship galore


one existing way to alter your genetic profile, that's just the beginning


PS: you'd better start to listen to such warnings, i'm not posting this to feel good ya know?



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Produkt, the bank I have been using changed last year to using card only, so yes in fact I do. Especailly since it is only one of the few that my Uni uses.

The other banks are all changing to this, and to earn a living I have to have money payed into a bank and to pay for rent I have to have money come out of the bank and so on and so fouth.

Nobody has the right to keep data such as my DNA, my finger prints and so on and so fourth. But Banks a private company, definetly should never hold more information on me than is needed. Fingerprints, are not needed. They won't make things more secure...



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   


one existing way to alter your genetic profile, that's just the beginning



www.newscientist.com...

Bone marrow donors risk DNA identity mix-up


Would you care to elaborate what your point is? This article doesn't discuss an evil intentional mix up, but does point out how human, human's really are.



arbitrary censorship galore




news.com.com...

Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."



This appears to be an extension of current laws against harassment. As we all know, harassment is a crime. Just because it's easier to commit this crime on the internet doesn't make it ok. So are you saying you have a problem against online harassment being a criminal offense? Would your view's of harassment also bleed into the real world as well?

Amazingly I've never had a bank account. I've never owned a credit card. I've never taken out a loan and yet... I still get paid. I still pay my rent. I'm pretty interested as to what job require's you to have a bank account.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
Amazingly I've never had a bank account. I've never owned a credit card. I've never taken out a loan and yet... I still get paid. I still pay my rent. I'm pretty interested as to what job require's you to have a bank account.


I am in the process of training to be a barrister, I hold two main jobs one working in a music story the other as a FreeLance Dj.

The University I attend, requires I hold a bank account so that they can place my money into it and to also charge me if they need to. I am only allowed to use one of three banks, otherswise I would not be able to go to University. One of the jobs I hold and in fact, every job I have seen in the U.K. but two require you to have money paid into a bank account.

It is illegal in the United Kingdom for builders to be paid "Cash in Hand" for example and they are planning to introduce this across the spectrum, due to the fact it is easier to monitor for tax.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:04 PM
link   


Like it or not, they will in the next 20 years have a database of DNA, vocal recognition and so on and so fourth because that is what a lot of people want to see.


So true, though I'd give it only 10 years, tops, for a pretty broad database.



Working in the legal field/training, you see it a lot in Courts how they are pushing for it along with the Police and the Government. People really need to get to gether and start to point out the problem with all of this...the ability to make someone a criminal easily, when this evidence is owned by the Police who are a heavily corupt organisation.


And this is an IMPORTANT point. The people in such positions will wield an incredible amount of power, and this is really one scary by-product of such a database. With access to such information, one could theoretically frame one for anything... There would need to be multiple fingers in this pie, as a check and balance to make sure such corruption was not absolute....



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:10 PM
link   
That's UK tax law for ya. Here in the states every job pay's by cheques, but we also have the option of direct deposit into bank account's. After talking to a friend about this from the UK, she told me the jobs require it because they pay your wages through the banks. I can understand now why they require you to have a bank account.


df1

posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
Maybe, but no one is forcing anyone else to be tagged like that. Nor would society as a whole allow any government agency tag anyone. Nor does any government agency have the legal right to invade your personal body to do such a tagging procedure. Basicly, forced tagging won't happen.

Bull. We are already traveling down this road. Employee drug testing is driven by government which require companies that do business with government to drug test their employees or the company will not be eligible for government contracts. This is invasion of your body by government by coercion pure and simple.

The same approach will be done to impose tagging. And the sheeple will meekly wait in line to be tagged just like they do now for drug testing.
.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:24 PM
link   
So what your saying is you have a problem with getting a drug test because why? Drug's are illegal, if a job position require's you to have a drug test, then unless you are a drug user I fail to see the problem.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:29 PM
link   


And this is an IMPORTANT point. The people in such positions will wield an incredible amount of power, and this is really one scary by-product of such a database. With access to such information, one could theoretically frame one for anything... There would need to be multiple fingers in this pie, as a check and balance to make sure such corruption was not absolute....


Honestly I think some people are just too full of themselve's to think the government want's something they have. I'd like to point out yet again, taking an active role in politic's can fix alot of the problem's you guy's have. Sitting around complaining and saying woe is me solve's nothing.

Can someone explain why the government would want to frame anyone on this website. Please.. do elaborate on your fear's.


df1

posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
So what your saying is you have a problem with getting a drug test because why? Drug's are illegal, if a job position require's you to have a drug test, then unless you are a drug user I fail to see the problem.

I have problem with your arguement because it is the same tired arguement used to justify warrantless searches. (If you haven't done anything wrong, you shouldnt have a problem with being searched.)

I have a problem with drug testing because I do not see myself as livestock owned by my employer or the government.

I have a problem with drug testing because drug testing is a government restriction of personal freedoms imposed on businesses by government contracting regulations which totally circumvents the legislative process.
.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
Can someone explain why the government would want to frame anyone on this website. Please.. do elaborate on your fear's.


Did they say "On this website"?

The Government has reasons to frame people, just like the Police do World Over. It helps to solve a problem by making someone a "Scape Goat". Why do you think the Police set people up? Or do they not in your world?



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
So what your saying is you have a problem with getting a drug test because why? Drug's are illegal, if a job position require's you to have a drug test, then unless you are a drug user I fail to see the problem.


No, some drugs are illegal others are given legally by doctors. Even opiates can be legally taken and that is the problem. People who are legally taking drugs get side-lined.

Also, as long as anything I am doing in private isn't causing harm to the company they have no need to know. This is just like when Rover [Car Company] had new employees take tests to find out if they had AIDs or not. It is invading their own privacy.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 01:04 PM
link   
This is why when you go for a drug test they ask if your on medication's and your to provide a note saying as such. No, no one but drug abuser's are side-lined.

Even if you take illegal drug's in the privacy of your own home, it's still illegal. All I can say to those people is, stop abusing the law or don't get a job that require's drug testing.

Aids is a very awfull disease. Personally I'd like to know if I'm working with someone who has it, wouldn't you? Or would you rather sit by and wait for something to go wrong and end up becoming infected with it?



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Produkt, that's not strictly true.

I've been in places where people are taking drugs and not touched them myself, however they would have been found in my system if a test was taken. A vast quantity of 18 to 25 year olds, who go out into pubs and clubs would also fail these tests and not be directly taking any drugs.

Certain over the counter medication can result in people failing these tests and have no access to doctors notes. Which can ruin the rest of their lives.

Why should I have to take any drug tests, if I can do my job perfectly. Why does it matter?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join