It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
So the first angel went and poured out his bowl on the earth, and harmful and painful sores came upon the people who bore the mark of the beast and worshiped its image.
Please don't take the Mark of the Barack!
Great find, thanks for the post!
Originally posted by Jesus H Christ
Leagally required or not, it makes no difference. It is yet another stepping stone to the ultimate realization of their plans. By doing things in this manner we will be desensitized to all things "Chip". Be it RFID or GPS capeable. It will become the norm. It will get you into clubs faster, knock a few bucks off the grocery bill and pay for your gas with it by linking it to a credit card. How convieniant.
Baby steps folks, Baby steps. If you want to see how far baby steps will eventually get you think back to 1990. Cell phones were almost non existant, only Doctors carried pagers, almost no one owned a personal computer and even if they did there was no internet perse to gather information at the pace we do today. If you had a Sega genisis you were
a serious gamer and cars were still being made with tape decks from the factory.
That wasn't even 20 yrs ago. Where the # do you think we are going to be 20 yrs from today?
Think about it.
Originally posted by conspiracyrus
reply to post by Nightflyer28
Class II implantables are almost exclusively RFID chips... good job quoting ... now read it
Class III are pacemakers and the like
I love it how people are lining up to get implanted before the bill is even out ... proves how the majority of us are dumber than dirt
[edit on 1-9-2009 by conspiracyrus]
Classes and Tiers and What Difference Do They Make?
[the FDA] established three classes of medical devices (Classes I, II, and III), corresponding to devices of low, medium, and high risk. In 1994, the FDA implemented a three-tier system that ranks devices according to the intensity of required review. ..Some devices are novel, and some devices are similar, or nearly equivalent, to existing devices. For high-risk novel devices, the FDA requires a full pre-market approval
Class I devices present minimal potential for harm to the user and are often simpler in design than Class II or Class III devices. These devices are subject only to general controls. General controls cover such issues as manufacturer registration with the FDA, good manufacturing techniques, proper branding and labelling, notification of the FDA before marketing the device, and general reporting procedures
Class II devices are those for which general controls alone are insufficient to assure safety and effectiveness, and additional existing methods are available to provide such assurances. Therefore, Class II devices are also subject to special controls in addition to the general controls of Class I devices. Special controls may include special labeling requirements, mandatory performance standards, and postmarket surveillance. Devices in Class II are held to a higher level of assurance than Class I devices that they will perform as indicated and will not cause injury or harm to patient or user.
A Class III device is one for which insufficient information exists to assure safety and effectiveness solely through the general or special controls sufficient for Class I or Class II devices.
Originally posted by CharlesMartel
reply to post by thetruth777
Will this device be in the hand or forehead?
a class II implantable device is a "implantable radiofrequency
transponder system for patient identification and health information."
Originally posted by DYepes
I just cant believe this thread is on page nine and still talking about forced implants/vaccines and mark of the beast. Not to mention that a vaccine is pretty much never givenn though the hand or forehead. It does not make much sense.
Please, for the love of God, can we edit the title now to include (hoax), it seems like people are still coming to this thread believing what has been pretty much thoroughly reviewed pages ago and found to be false.
The bill in its entirety is in my sig. Review the section in question in its entirety. Nothing mandates a forced device entry. An it surely does not set a forced device entry as a pre-condition to health care anywhere in the bill.
IT is linked in my sig. Please find it.
[edit on 9/2/2009 by DYepes]