/Continued/

Meanwhile, a barrage of mixed messages erodes our concept of 
privacy. Beepers, cell phones, key ("swipe") cards, and passwords 
all make us aware of the need for personal security. Security, however, 
is not privacy. A person's body and what one does with it (abortion, 
homosexuality, etc.) supposedly are sacrosanct and inviolable. On 
the other hand, if other people's money and health are compromised 
by someone's private behavior (say, smoking or drunk driving), then 
we are told that a person's bodily functions are everybody's business.  

Insurance companies certainly think so. The Maryland Insurance Group 
(part of a Switzerland-based conglomerate in Zurich) sent policyholders 
a notice in 1994 announcing that it would henceforth collect information 
on "your character, habits, hobbies, finances, occupation, general 
reputation, health and other personal characteristics"; that it would, 
at its discretion, talk or write to "neighbors, friends, insurance agent 
and others who know you" as well as access "motor vehicle reports, court 
records, or photographs" and anything else that "may pertain to your 
mode of living, character . . . and personal characteristics."  

Today, such globally accessible dossier-building is standard operating 
procedure.  

More recently, the cloning debate has put a spotlight on geneticists, 
who are hot on the DNA/gene-mapping trail to head off genetic 
"mistakes" and diseases. The criminal-justice system wants biometric 
identifiers for both employees and criminals (apparently interchangeable 
distinctions since September 11). International proponents of biometric 
implant chips u Interpol, for example u use "global cooperation" to 
justify mass identification and tracking techniques.  

The common thread, of course, is a compelling worldwide interest in 
collecting, tracking, and cross-referencing information on private 
citizens. Janlori Goldman, deputy director for the Center for Democracy 
and Technology, saw the handwriting on the wall in 1991 when she 
commented that there is "barely a piece of information about people 
that isn't used for far different purposes than it was initially 
gathered for [sic], and always without approval."  

Among the cybertech pioneers is Professor Kevin Warwick of Reading 
University, working with Blackbaud Inc. (another American software 
giant) and a renowned British subsidiary software company. Warwick 
made the headlines in the summer of 1999 when he had a silicon chip 
transponder surgically implanted in his forearm. For a bemused media, 
he demonstrated his ability to switch lights on and off and to start 
and shut down computers and thermostats as he entered or left a room. 

A computer monitored his every move as he made his way among 
detectors scattered throughout his building. There was only one 
problem: The chip was unstable and had to be removed every few 
weeks, then re-implanted.  

Warwick admitted that he missed the chip when it was removed. The 
Warwick experiments were short-range. The chip emitted radio waves 
through a mobile-phone network and beamed its location to a computer. 
A person could be located on a computer map from a few blocks away.  

Short range, however, was good enough for what Warwick had in mind 
for tomorrow's workers: He touted the business possibilities, 
particularly for companies with high labor costs.  

The implant, he said, was a relatively cheap means of keeping tabs 
on employees. "You can tell when people clock into work and when 
they leave the building," he beamed. "You would know at all times 
exactly where they were and who they were with."  

Although Warwick acknowledged that most people would be "shocked" 
if companies asked their employees to submit to implants, he pointed 
out that many employees already carry swipe cards, which can serve 
as tracking devices. Warwick also suggested that submitting to an 
implant might be made a condition of being granted a gun license, 
since computerized background checks amount to virtually the same 
thing.  

Anyone who owns an automobile or boat with GPS knows that satellite 
tracking is not short-range. The reason Warwick's chip had to be 
removed frequently is that a GPS enhancement required two penlight 
batteries to power it for approximately 40 hours. This chip was 
postage-stamp-sized instead of near-microscopic and had to be 
made compatible with specific kinds of antennas.  

By the time ADS was ready to go commercial with VeriChip in May, 
human chip implants were not science fiction anymore. In light of 
recently well-publicized, horrific child abduction-murders, there 
was, predictably, no shortage of volunteers. Who cared whether the 
chip was invisible or not? Improvements could be expected.  

More portentous suggestions than Warwick's have been made. The 
Fetal Treatment Center at the University of California, San Francisco, 
has connected implantable biotelemetry devices to unborn babies. 
Other specialists, such as Dr. Roy Bakay of Emory University are 
ready to install chip-to-brain implants.  

Charles Ostman, a senior fellow at the Institute for Global Futures 
and science editor of Mondo 2000, believes implanting chips will become 
a routine process. "Neuroprosthetics are. . . inevitable," he says. 
"Biochip implants may become part of a rote medical procedure. 
Interface with outside systems is a logical next step."  

Such ideas emerge at a time when the concept of parent licensing 
(really, "baby licensing"), first promoted by the American Eugenics 
Society (AES) in the 1930's, is making a comeback. (Following the 
Nuremberg Trials, the AES changed its name to the Society for the 
Study of Social Biology.)  

The notion of licensing people to bear children originally was floated 
by Dr. Franz J. Kallmann, a German psychiatrist and member of the Nazi 
Party, who argued before Hitler's Ministry of the Interior in 1935 for 
the sterilization "of the mentally ill." Kallmann relocated to the 
United States in 1936 - probably because he was an ethnic Jew. Once 
he was safely ensconced at Columbia University, however, Kallmann 
continued his "psychiatric genetics" work, often extolling his 
former mentor, Ernst Rudin, head of Hitler's Racial Hygiene Program.  

The American press sang Kallmann's praises for 40 years. In 1964, the 
New York Times ran an admiring story citing his prediction that, unless 
something were done quickly, the birthrate among schizophrenics would 
eventually surpass that of the larger society, and the ranks of the 
mentally ill might soon "overbalance the population." This led to 
American eugenicist Dr. Kenneth Boulding's proposal to require "market 
licenses for babies," with an emphasis on screening out parents thought 
"defective" or "unfit." In November 1975, the renamed
AES's flagship 
publication, Social Biology, carried an article by Dr. David M. Heer 
enlarging upon the "Boulding Proposal." In particular, Dr. Heer 
enumerated methods of "enforcement" for licensing parenthood. Dr. Carl 
Bajema followed in the Spring issue, calling for a waiver of restrictions 
for prospective parents who demonstrated "genetic superiority." Bajema 
even recommended putting to death "unlicensed children who cannot be 
adopted."  

This is not ancient history. This was 1975.

Today, the products of permissive childrearing make up the largest 
population of individuals labeled "mentally inferior" learning disabled, 
emotionally disturbed, hyperactive, ADHD, etc. People holding politically
inconvenient opinions and worldviews, but who have committed no crime, 
also are frequently saddled with psychiatric labels that suggest 
"unfitness." Now here come "cybertechies" promoting
biochip implants 
and GPS tracking as a part of "rote medical procedure."  

What does the ID implant have to do with baby licensing?  

Under a new computerized initiative called the Program Information 
Management System" (PIMS), social workers nationwide are encouraging 
expectant parents to sign a permission form at the hospital that 
allows agents to go into private homes to provide parenting training 
- up to 50 visits annually per family While they are at it, these 
"experts" also collect medical and psychological information that 
can be merged with future written observations about family relationships 
- in effect, tracking each newborn's development (as well as any attitudes) 
from infancy into their school and college years. But make no mistake: 
Their primary mission is to assess parental "fitness."  

When we place the PIMS project alongside such parent-unfriendly 
projects as Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic's "Multi-site 
Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD," we find some very 
troubling prospects. With the recent increase in crime among juveniles, 
computerized dossier-building, and the concurrent war on parents 
waged by schools and various government programs, we have a recipe 
for technological abuse. Microchip implants, used to track, monitor, and 
cross-match information, could greatly enhance political screening in 
the name of "parental fitness." Even those who feel comfortable with the 
political and social winds today may not feel so warm and fuzzy 
tomorrow when they stop to think how fast society's mores and 
priorities can change in just a few years with the right promotional 
packages and enough surveys.  

Forget, however, about banning ID implants: They are already in the 
pipeline. In June 1998, the U.S. Department of Energy's Argonne 
National Laboratory revealed its joint project with Motorola and 
Packard Instrument Company to commercialize, market, and mass-produce 
advanced biochips "and related analytical technologies."  

All that remains is selling people on the idea: How'd you like to avoid 
waiting in lines for the rest of your life? Breeze through a checkout 
line like you owned the place? Watch lights snap on, open doors 
automatically, never have to show an ID, remember a password? You 
wouldn't have to carry a wallet. Ever. Family and friends could 
find you if you were sick or unconscious. Click here!  

From the October 2002 Chronicles magazine pp. 47-49 Under the section, 
Vital Signs   

All Copyrights (c) are acknowledged. 
Material reproduced for educational and research purposes only.

/End/

                             -==-

Source: Raiders News Updates - http://www.raidersnewsupdate.com/


Cheers, Steve..

---