This latest Russian 'sanctions tilt' toward nuclear confrontation comes alongside a quiet and apparently unconnected launch of a global digital ID system through the City of London’s slick mouthpiece magazine, The Economist.
Under the innocuous sounding headline ‘Estonia Takes The Plunge’ we're told by a characteristically unidentified writer that, ‘Some good ideas never take off because too few people embrace them’. There are never enough cowering serfs for these City types! Your digital identity is 'a privilege, not a right’, The Economist explains in this barrow-boy's sales pitch.
What the Economist’s secret author is not telling us is that the only real threat to our identity is the National Security Agency (NSA) and GCHQ’s voracious appetite for cracking every secure connection and collecting our every keystroke known to man, particularly our passwords. They claim everyone is a threat to national security before accelerating into a quick skid back and forth through the chicane of hacking and data protection law.
This is where we re-examine the one-word reason why our forefathers bothered writing laws in the first place to force “securocrats” to go before a judge every time they want to put anyone under surveillance: Gestapo. Nazi ID cards and occupied Europe's universal surveillance system, operated in collaboration with the US IBM Corporation, has been documented by Edwin Black in his 2001 book 'IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America's Most Powerful Corporation'. Our senior spooks may never have heard of, let alone read Edwin’s mighty tome, but I suspect it's more that they don't really want to know.
In a 1962 speech at the University of California Berkley called ‘The Ultimate Revolution’ fellow of the Royal Society for Literature and ‘Brave New World’ author Aldous Huxley warmly contested George Orwell’s dystopian 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' warning about a future tyranny only in that he believed it would be more subtle than Orwell’s prediction. Huxley explained that, rather than guns and torture being used to control populations a kind of self-limitation or ‘internal coercion’ was more likely, set in a propagandized world that stifled the culture and politics of dissent. Whilst Huxley imagined the use of drugs to mollify popular opposition it was clear to him that many methods might be used in coercing mass populations to toe the line.
US Naval Intelligence veteran William Cooper, who predicted Bin Laden's role in the 9/11 attacks on his radio show in July 2001 and was the shot dead by FBI officers that November echoed Huxley. He believed the invulnerable elite were striving to bring in, 'A system of eternal, oppressive debt,' where people would be, 'chained to a computer for the rest of their lives, in a propagandized world to make them think that they are happy in this system.'
Following the premise that those that want to herd mass populations around need to treat people like animals, they're the sort of people who seek out mankind's most deep rooted fears and go to work on them. What about the fear of eviction for starters? You can concentrate anyone's mind by threatening to throw them out of their home. The threat of removing access to food, water or heat is another good one.
The power elite know that the more you threaten to deprive people of their basic human needs, set out conveniently by psychologists in Maslow's hierarchy, the better they behave themselves. Any psychologist will tell you the best way to stoke those fears are by turning off the supply of cash, or even just threatening to. That's why they have always seen banking as the key to social engineering, shackling vast populations unconsciously with 'internal coercion' and the crazy dream of armies of placid, socially engineered citizens that go with it.
It sounds wrong because it's evil and no amount of spin will make it right. These techniques are being used today across the loan sharks' 'austerity blighted' Western world and just so happen to be a direct assault on all the basic human rights set out post-Hitler in the UN Charter.
If technology is to be used to control populations it must be sold to us as pure progress with any downside or moral questions ignored. Twice over the last week we’ve seen exactly that, firstly with the British government attempting to smuggle in a new technique for Genetically Modified (GM) designer babies, with DNA from three parents. No mention in the Department of Health's 'mitochondrial donation' proposals of Britain and America’s shameful promotion of Francis Galton and 'master race' Eugenics in the 1930s.
Secondly driverless cars are being licensed for the first time on British roads with the help of ten million pounds of public money and this is presented by Shell's former chief economist, now Business Secretary Vince Cable as a ‘breakthrough’. Enough to make a Luddite of anyone who dares imagine a driverless car breaking through one's windscreen in a head on collision, or breaking through a bus queue at 80 miles an hour? Who's going to jail for that inevitable first death, and all the rest?
Back in 1869 Irish scientist Mary Ward had the dubious honor of being the first person ever killed in a car crash and since then she's been followed by half a million or so more. The cultural straitjacket we are in through the ever greater drive to feed the whims of the rich, to new markets and new profits, is so tight today that the wisdom of new technologies is rarely, if ever questioned. Old Aldous Huxley would no doubt smile and say ‘I told you so’.
Then there is the modern use, by cardiac surgeons, of techniques to remotely induce heart abnormalities so they can watch how the healthy heart behaves while they interfere with its delicate electrical circuits. There seems no end to the craving for newer and greater technology at the expense of an increasingly marginalized and impoverished underclass that are left without life's essentials, who aren't fit enough, or with the impertinence to walk away from the race.
Blogger and single mum from North Wales, Julie Beal, has probably done more than anyone in Britain, professionals included, to join the dots on The Economist's cuddly digital ID system which she calls 'Global Smart ID'. Using publicly available documents quoted in briefings on her website www.getmindsmart.com Julie may have identified the software and privatized providers which, coupled with the Verichips could roll out across the Western world. As well as a contactless payment system for the chip, networks of '433MHz compatible' RFID detectors already exist to track them around the NATO countries but are shrouded in military secrecy.
Digitizing our bank accounts from the old-fashioned cash and check book systems has also proceeded fast from the first introduction of ATM’s in the early 1970s which worked on magnetic strips, through credit and debit cards with signature authorization, through 'chip and pin' to the latest ‘contactless’ payment cards we are now only a hair’s breadth from payment by microchip implant. Are we being given any choice in any of this? Now the chip only has to move off the card, and under our skin.
Would you submit to the indignity of having a microchip implanted in your body? Well, some already have, seeing it as a trendy form of ID to access closed VIP areas and if it’s inside your body, great! It can’t be lost or stolen. Even under such coercion not everyone would accept the ID pay-chip. Society would surely start to formally divide into “tecnotronic” classes across the spectrum from loyalty to the soft-fascist tyranny right across to open rebellion against it.
Science fiction, a dystopia along the lines of Orwell or Huxley? But as with so much Sci-Fi, like Isaac Asimov’s conundrum about machines becoming more powerful than man, when morals are dispensed with, there's nothing to stop these crazy dreams becoming reality. The technology, the Verichip, is already tried and tested, even if allegedly carcinogenic. The question for the elite, as society breaks down into these new classes from loyal SS-like slaves to dupes, secret rebels and outlaws will be how do we make the human slave chip cool? So everybody wants it?
The answer is an event that could happen any day. Since US President Richard Nixon took the dollar off the Gold standard in 1971 the world economy, as well as nations and individuals, has become ever more indebted. Disastrous 2008 bailouts have sealed the fate of many great nations into the iron grip of a criminal banking elite to whom they owe trillions upon trillions of unpayable debt.
A military exchange or major default may now be enough to bring the whole house of cards down, precipitating the greatest financial crash in history in a fraction of a second. It would be far worse than the 1929 crash because governments now do not have the reserves or lines of credit to do any Roosevelt style ‘New Deal’ and spend their way back into the growth. The “banksters”, to put it bluntly, have us by the short and curlies.
The chaos that would ensue from such a collapse in businesses, supply and confidence would see money stolen by banks and other criminals from individuals and from hacked accounts. The “unstealable chip” might then be considered a reasonable way out of the chaos. The Economist's sales patter would be sugar-coated of course but the bottom line would be simple, take the chip if you want to eat.
Something similar is described in Revelation 13, the Christian Bible’s final book written nearly 2000 years ago by Jesus’ close friend the apostle John on the Greek island of Patmos.
This so-called “beast technology” may not be just "science fiction” after all. It's an unhappy rumination that a modern human being, ensconced in today's banking cult, might be prepared to treat their fellow creatures like a herd of cattle but it will not have been the first time we have seen societies promote to key positions of power, practitioners of man’s inhumanity to man.
Though the technology, as well as the means of implementing it, is ready to go humanity may not be quite so stupid and pliable as the power elite seem to believe. They are going to have, to coin a phrase, one hell of a fight on their hands if they think they can drive us all into slavery.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.