By Clyde Lewis

As you struggle with the Angel on your shoulder and the Devil in your head you may have to contend with the transmitter under your skin. Biometric chips are on the ready to record all of what you do, all of what you buy, and every place you travel. The pros and cons need to be evaluated and your conscience may tell you that the chip on your shoulder may be a bad thing, but do you really have a choice?

Over the past few decades we have thrown ourselves into a virtual fast forward mode. In the past dreamers would write Science Fiction stories that practical scientists would label improbable.

The allegories would be warnings to anyone who would even think of tampering with the sacred whims of Mother Nature. The fearful and religious would shout out the warnings from radio shows to the pulpits that our out of control science would come back and bite us if we abused our abilities as mortal men.

I often ponder if anyone can stop for a moment and actually see the future ahead? It seems that it is not as difficult as it was 20 or 30 years ago. It seems that the "future" that the Orwell and Huxley talked about is not happening in the nebulous tomorrow but the literal one.

Computer technology continues to expand. Voice interface and biometrics are an inevitability.

About 5 years ago I was talking about biochip technologies and their use for tracking stray animals. I also covered the use of systems that were being used for the purpose of tracking Salmon.

The idea was to demonstrate that once the animals were successfully used as guinea pigs for the new technology, humans would not be too far away.

At the turn of the new Millennium I filed a newsletter report about a company called Applied Digital Solutions (ADS). It was reported that ADS received patent rights to a new technology named Digital Angel (TM). Digital Angel was reported to be a miniature digital transceiver specifically designed for human implantation. As soon as I had heard about the technology I had contacted the Florida company and wanted an interview.

They had informed me that they would unveil their technology in the near future and that people would be standing in line to receive it.

I remember saying to the guy, "You are so sure?"

He told me that yes the technology was safe and that people would want the chip for safety reasons.

The tracking chip would be used to send and receive data that would be vital for law enforcement and health officials.

ADS reported that the implantable transceiver would send and receive data that would be continuously tracked by Global Positioning Satellite technology.

When implanted within the human body, the device would be powered electromechanically through the movement of muscles, and it can be activated either by the 'wearer' or by the monitoring facility.

It would provide a tamper-proof means of identification for enhanced e-business security, animal tracking, locating lost or missing individuals, tracking the location of valuable property and monitoring the medical conditions of at-risk patients.

Even before Applied Digital told us of their new product I had talked about this kind of technology. I had called it IDENTCOM 4000. I presented it in an article back in 1998.

The article was written to demonstrate that the monitoring chips were already being put into a plan of action for monitoring purposes combined with unmanned flying drones that would patrol neighborhoods and would be able to monitor the movement of citizens who were prone to rebellion.

The critics that I faced were those who told me that my hidden agenda was to thrust God Fearing Christians into believing that this piece of technology was the makings of the Mark of the Beast.

Of course I was not going to disingenuous by saying no.

The idea of a chip under the skin was enough to make my skin crawl and I think many people would see the requirement of such chips invasive and against their constitutional rights.

Due to civil liberty and privacy issues, the ACLU announced opposition to mandatory microchip implantation when applied to humans. The ACLU, Christians and conservatives were all in agreement here.

However I learned that "Mark of the Beast" be damned people would demand the chips. Many would voluntarily accept the chips and while many are now claiming that they would never take the chip there are many things that can happen that certainly can change minds about the "evil" of such technologies.

I was told that NO ONE would take the chip knowing first hand that the very Idea is blasphemous and that it quite possibly could be the very beast mark that the Apostle John warned everyone about nearly 2000 years before.

Well now I can say "whatever."

I have seen just how strong people are when the shit hits the fan.

The country knuckled under when we were broadsided by a bunch of terrorist assassins in September of 2001 and the world will knuckle under when it comes to the insertion of a subcutaneous chip.

I can't preach to anyone about how evil these chips are when I see missing children on milk cartons and on billboards. I can't even open my mouth and cry out how inhumane it is when cloning is banned outright and chips are "okay."

The benefits of these chips are overwhelming. Why wouldn't you stand in line for this? Why wouldn't anyone give up their right to privacy for safety and convenience?

It's the new millennium and the new attitude. All things that were once evil are now acceptable. So why fight it? You need to live and there is no religious myth that will keep you from keeping up with the Joneses.

Is there anyone who can give a rational rebuttal as to why these chips are the Mark of the beast?

I did back in the 1990's and many people were behind me. I made rational and heartfelt predictions of where we were headed and how the little things would enslave us but now there is no way of even getting through.

It's comical to see that in the past monitoring chips and bracelets were only used on animals and criminals.

Now I honestly give up. I am not unhappy. I am looking forward to being chipped.

You are probably scratching your head and wondering if I have lost the faith.

Well I may have lost it to some degree. Especially when it comes to the inevitability of surrendering to the chip.

After all, in every Science fiction story, there always seems to be some element of desperation before a person surrenders his humanity and become part machine against his will. We have already accepted high tech gadgetry as a way of life.

I was riding the bus the other day and some idiot got on the bus and claimed that his bus pass was in his backpack. He held up the bus for what seemed to be an eternity.

He opened his backpack and pulled out his pocket CD player shoved he ear pieces in his ear, turned on the music and then yelled out "HERE IS MY PASS!"

Let's hear it for priorities.

He needed the machine in his ears before he could even muster the energy to hold his day pass up.

It probably would have been more of a convenience if the moron were scanned.

His chip would have revealed that he paid his 50 bucks for a pass.

Can we see that Robotic implants are advantageous to being a part of this well oiled and well orchestrated machine?

Our kids have already been exposed to Cyberpunk fiction making it look glamorous and almost superhuman to have a chip in your head.

It won't be long before infants will have them. What would be once voluntary would be mandatory.

Elaine M. Ramish made this statement for the Franklin Pierce Law Center:

"A mandatory national identification system via microchip implants could be achieved in two stages: Upon introduction as a voluntary system, the microchip implantation will appear to be palatable. After there is a familiarity with the procedure and a knowledge of its benefits, implantation would be mandatory."

To the people who say that they will refuse a chip think about this.

No one requires you to have a driver's license; you don't necessarily need one.

Not unless you need it for ID or to get around. Social Security numbers were first voluntary, then mandatory. Biometric chip implants are universally inevitable. I am assured that we shouldn't fear the future.

Why should you? It will all be under control.

Return To Ground Zero

Voice Your Opinion