Oh, and OM; you are not very nice,. from certain threads I've viewed lately. I know it may be hard to control anger when you feel deeply about
issue, but you will get nowhere by calling people names, and attacking their views.
Im actually a nice person in real life, i promise. But alot of the times the arrogence and patronising way people speak to the 'non believers' (also
known as 'sheep' here) gets on my nerves.
its like saying "All opinions are valid, but if you dont agree with mine your a sheep"
"Duhh...Well,... there is a law that says they can implant objects in our body and watch us while we sleep.
Well, violation of the human body by another without consent is a form of assualt, is it not? Any chip will not be mandatory, anyone who knows
anything about psychology should guess this.
My take is that the real ID will come, people will have it. Christians who believe in all that revalations hooey will burn them, etc.
Most people will realise what this really is, A convenience, nothing more, and the world will keep spinning.
Then someone will create the chip idea, and it will be optional, of course, rights can be violated, i dont care really. But the human body cannot be
marked by someone else without permission.
Anyway, they can watch me while i sleep all they want, its not that interesting
this garbage is getting very close to fulfilling the 'law of God'
Which law is this? The big G seems to have alot of laws attributed to him.
"go forth and multiply" is by far the only one i really remember.
I'm not entirely sure how you guys are getting invasion of privacy from this to be honest.
Hey, Delta nine. Your a smart lad, want to be friends?
I think you arnt thinking the right way though. I will admit this is an invasion of privacy. But that in itself isnt bad. Imagine the huge influx of
information if everyone in the world was chipped. it would be collossal, and impossible to glean any real answers because it ignores context.
Just because your privacy is "invaded" doesnt mean people will use this information for their own ends.
Is it that they themselves are trying to 'feel out' public opinion on the idea, to see if they can keep pushing ahead? Like you said, Delta,
they already have the info., why do they need us to get a national id?
They have all the info in one place, we have it all over the place in cards and things which can be destroyed, lost or stolen. This is an equaliser,
so the public and the government are on the same rung, not one after the other.
The just keep stepping closer and closer; at least that is my problem with it.
hmmm nowayreally, i know your a smart person. But you need to remember that just because evidence fits a theory doesnt mean a theory is true.
If that was true i could use this, for example:
just step back and review your evidence, ignore the ideas of the "NWO" for now, just look at what evidence you have now.
You have the national ID. What is this at face value? it is all of your important information in one card. So you dont have hundreds of cards and
papers to lose or be stolen.
This is a good idea, no?
secondly, information in these files will be able to be used in a way to tailor buying habits to the customer.
What other evidence do we have? We have a smoking ban. People say this is a beta test for the NWO. What evidence do they have? Nothing, really.
They are basing the arguement on the fact that the NWO exists already and is trying to change things.
But is eradicating smoking really a huge crime? Its unhealthy and the longer humans continue to poison themselves the longer we stunt our evolution
and our collective intelligence.
Im looking through the forum and im finding theories based on hard to trace sources, biblical prophecies and tenuous theories. If i presented this
kinds of things in a University Essay i would be failed so fast it would make my head spin.
so noway really, everyone else on this thread.
Just for now.
Forget the bible, forget the NWO, forget prophecies and conspiracies.
Just look at the evidence we have (With credible sources) and tell me where the conspiracy is. Where is the perceived evil?