[스크랩] [스크랩] 베리칩은 666인가?/짐승사인

2008년 5월까지 -새 북미연합국(미국,캐나다,멕시코) 통합시민 RFID- IT/Internet/RFID 2006/10/16 00:52 2006년 10월 2일자 New American 특별기고 8~20페이지에 세가지 중요한 내용을 다루고 있습니다. 첫째 내용은; 2010년까지 미국,캐나다,멕시코, 세 나라는 '북미공동안전과 번영을 위해 합병(North American Security & Prosperity Partnership)'하게 되고, 둘째 내용은; 2008년 5월까지 '새 북미연합국(New North Amercian ID) 통합시민 RFID'을 시행하는 것과, 셋째 내용은; 여기에 대한 '북미연합정부(North American Government)'를 나누어서 설명하고 있는 것 중에서 둘째 것을 올립니다. In May 2005, the federal government gave U.S. citizens de facto national ID cards. Title II of the Real ID Act calls for new federal standards in driver's licensses. 2005년 5월에 연방정부는 미국시민들에게 연방신분증을 주기로 하였다. 타이틀 2의 법령이란 운전면허자에게 주어지는 연방정부 시행령을 말한다. Unless states comply by May 2008, their citizens will not be able to enter federal buildings, board planes, collec Social Security payments, or establish accounts with national banks. 2008년 5월까지, 이 시행령에 따르지 않는 시민들은 연방정부 건물들에 들어갈 수 없고, 비행기도 탈수 없고, 사회보장 연금을 받을 수 없고, 미국의 은행구좌를 개설할 수 없다. 이 문제는 1996년에 미국의회를 통과하였다. 그때 텍사주 상원의원 Ronald Paus는; On that date, American will not able to get a jab, open a bank account, apply for social security or medicare, exercise their second amendment right, or even take an airplane fight, unless they can not produce a state issued ID that conforms to the federal specification. 그날, 미국 사람들은 연방정부 시행령에 따라서 주정부가 요구하는 개인의 신분증명을 발급받지 않고서는 직업을 얻을 수 없으며, 은행구좌 개설이나, 사회보장연금 또는 의료보험 신청이나, 헌법개정을 주장할 권리가 없고, 나아가서 비행기 탑승도 할수 없으며, 생산도 못한다. (이번에 나온 것은 이것의 연장선상이나, 다른 점은 3개국이 연합으로 확대시켰습니다) And as with the animal ID system, there seems to be an ulterior motive behind the national ID initiative ㅡ to enable the implementation of a merger between Canada, the United States, and Mexico. 그리고 동물에게 실시했던 ID처럼 연방정부신분은 앞으로 그렇게 되는 동력이 된다. 그것은 캐나다와 미국과 멕시코 간에 합병할 수 있게하는 수단이 된다.  (주) 여기서 말하는 것은, 이것을 근거하여 '앞으로 사람에도 동물에게 시행했던 바이오칩(Biochip)을 적용시키게 된다'는 것입니다. A book-length document called Buildding a North American Community, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, explains how a unified ID would facilitate the combining of the three counties; 책 길이 분량의 문서는 "북미공동사회구성"이라는 제목으로 외교협의회(CFR)에서 발간하였다. 문서에는 세 나라가 연합하는 데 통일된 ID를 어떻게 시행해야 되는지를 설명하기를;  "The three countries should develop a secure North American Border Pass with biometric identifiers. This document would allow its bearers expedited passage through custome, immigration, and airport security throughout the region." "이 세 나라가 안전하고 이용하기 쉽게 북미국경통과 생체측정신분으로 발전시키는 것이라 했다. 이 문서에 따르면 이 지역에서 세관, 이민국, 공항의 보안요원들이 이것을 가진 사람은 통과와 처리하게 된다 하였다. (주) 이 내용에서 감추어진 비밀은 미국, 캐나다, 멕시코, 3개국에서 국경검문으로 과격분자, 곧 테러분자들이 입국을 못하게 막기 위함이라 하지만, 실상은 3나라가 유럽식으로 연합하게 되고 화폐도 통일하게 됩니다. 그렇게 하는 것은 지구정부를 위한 지역적인 통합을 이루어 나가는 한 과정입니다. 그러기 위한 첫 시작이 북미대륙을 하나로 묶어서 힘을 강화시키겠다는 것입니다.    Creating the North American Union by Dennis Behreandt October 2, 2006 http://www.thenewamerican.com   윗 내용은  북어메리컨 유니온 문서 내용중  일부분, 프리메이슨 CFR이 문서내용을 작성 2005년도에 미국, 멕시코, 캐나다가 합병, 북어메리컨 유니온을 만들엇읍니다. 비밀리에 세나라 지도자들이 모여 통과 시켯으며, 언론에 전혀 알리지도 않앗읍니다, 시민들은 대부분 이러한 사실을 모르고 잇읍니다. 북어메리컨 문서내용을 자세히 보면, 신약성경에 나오는 내용과 일치하고 잇읍니다. 베리칩 없이는 매매할수 없다는것,    북어메리칸  유니온 ,베리칩 내용중, 베리칩 없이는 비행기도 탈수없고, 은행개좌도 열수없고,직없도 가질수 없으며, 의료보험도 가질수 없는등,생산도 할수 없고,사회보장 연금도 받을수 없는등 무시무시한 계획을 세워 통과 시켯읍니다.결국은 베리칩 없이는 매매가 불가능 하다는 것이지요. 신약성경에 나오는 666/짐승사인 내용과 일치   The plans for a North American Security and Prosperity Partnership are steps on the way to a North American Union. (Tell your representative and senators "NO North American Union!" Also, click here to send a message to your representative and senators in support of H. Con. Res. 487 to stop the NAU.) On June 21, viewers of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight heard the alarming introduction to a segment of the program devoted to the future of the United States of America. "The Bush administration's open-borders policy and its decision to ignore the enforcement of this country's immigration laws is part of a broader agenda," Dobbs intoned. "President Bush signed a formal agreement that will end the United States as we know it, and he took the step without approval from either the U.S. Congress or the people of the United States." The agreement Dobbs was talking about was crafted a year earlier. on March 23, 2005, then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and Mexican President Vicente Fox met with President Bush in Waco, Texas, to discuss plans for integrating Canada, the United States, and Mexico. During that meeting, the three heads of state argued that the three nations are "mutually dependent and complementary" and need to work together more closely on a range of issues. "In a rapidly changing world, we must develop new avenues of cooperation that will make our open societies safer and more secure, our businesses more competitive, and our economies more resilient," the three leaders said in a joint statement. The standard diplomatic language was a prelude to a radical proposal calling for the merger of the three nations in several import!!!!ant ways. Under a so-called Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), the nations will no longer have separate borders, but will "implement common border-security." The three nations will no longer respond on the national level to emergencies but will have a "common approach to emergency response." And, in a move that has tremendous implications for the growing immigration crisis, the three leaders agreed that the United States' north and south borders would be eliminated. Under the SPP plan, the three nations will "implement a border-facilitation strategy to build capacity and improve the legitimate flow of people and cargo at our shared borders." This plan is nothing short of revolutionary. As Dobbs put it on his CNN program, it is "an absolute contravention of our law, of our Constitution, every national value." Though the plan sounds like a new innovation, it is not new. It is the next step in a progression of steps that, in a manner very similar to the process used in Europe to supplant individual nations with the European Union, will ultimately lead to the formation of a new government for the United States, the North American Union. If not stopped, the plan for a North American Union will supplant the former independent states of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. And this is not conjecture. The North American Union is official U.S. policy. The European Template The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) serves as the intellectual incubator for most of the foreign policy direction followed by the executive branch of the federal government. Before the trilateral meeting between the heads of state in Waco on March 23 of last year, the CFR had already undertaken an initiative with its counterparts in Mexico and Canada (Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales and the Canadian Council of Chief Executives) to study the possibility of integrating the three nations. Laying the foundation for the Waco meeting, the CFR produced a document entitled Creating a North American Community: Chairmen's Statement Independent Task Force on the Future of North America. The document called for "the creation by 2010 of a community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity for all North Americans." The CFR is proposing nothing less than a plan to create a North American Union, similar to the European Union. The CFR protests that this is not its intention. "A new North American community will not be modeled on the European Union or the European Commission, nor will it aim at the creation of any sort of vast supranational bureaucracy," the Chairmen's Statement said. But this is exactly the kind of statements that were made about the EU during its earlier phases of development. The EU got its start in 1950 with the plan for European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). The plan was developed by Robert Schuman, who would become a socialist prime minister in France, and French planning minister Jean Monnet in 1950. The so-called Schuman Plan was adopted via the Treaty of Paris in 1952. The ECSC merged the coal and steel industries of West Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg and created a supranational governing organization. According to Georgetown University historian Carol Quigley, "This was a truly revolutionary organization since it had sovereign powers, including the authority to raise funds outside any existing state's power." As Quigley noted, "This 'supranational' body had the right to control prices, channel investment, raise funds, allocate coal and steel during shortages, and fix production in times of surplus." In short, "The ECSC was a rudimentary government," Quigley concluded. Creating a regional, supranational government was always the aim in Europe. In 1990, the European Commission admitted as much in the publication Europe — A Fresh Start: "Monetary union and economic integration are two long-standing ambitions which the six founding States ... set themselves." The document continued, describing the intent of the EU's founders: "We see, then, that the institutions set up since 1950 on the initiative of Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet are responding well to the aim of their founders: broadening the scope of democratically and efficiently organized collective action to cover the new arenas of interdependence among Europeans." The end result of this gradual planning has been union in Europe. That union was the goal all along was not readily apparent during the decades of its development. The long-term aim of the ECSC was hidden by its purportedly narrow scope. From its name alone, it appeared that the six-nation arrangement had only to do with coal and steel. Later EU precursors followed the same plan. The European Economic Community, at first glance, appeared to be nothing more than a free trade arrangement. It was nevertheless founded on the Monnet doctrine that economic integration must precede political integration. Such deception, in fact, remained one of the key elements in crafting the EU, right up until recent years, a fact referenced by Villy Bergström, a recent former deputy of the Swedish central bank. "I have never before seen such manipulated, obscure and faked policies as in relation to Swedish relations to the EU," Bergström wrote a few years ago. "Information has been evasive and unclear, giving the impression that membership of the EU would mean much less radical change than what has been the case." The strategy of building the EU through piecemeal means paid off. Following the creation of the ECSC, European internationalists supported by the U.S. government added additional elements to the emerging European superstate. Though they suffered setbacks — a nascent European Defense Community was rejected by France, and initial plans for a European Political Community were shelved shortly after the creation of the ECSC — those setbacks were temporary. The Treaty of Rome created the European Economic Community in 1957. The EEC was the immediate predecessor of today's European Union. An EEC for North America North American integration got its big start with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The arrangement was billed as little more than the creation of a free trade arrangement between Canada, Mexico, and the United States. But it really was the initial step toward regional integration. According to professor Guy Poitras of San Antonio's Trinity University, one of the factors motivating the creation of NAFTA was the view that it was an import!!!!ant early step toward further integration. In his book Inventing North America, Poitras noted that NAFTA's creation of regionalized interdependence gave "a structural foundation for the task of inventing North America." In a pro-NAFTA article in the Washington Post in 1993, William Orme, Jr. pointed out that the then-fledgling trade pact was indeed a steppingstone to further integration. "NAFTA," Orme admitted, "lays the foundation for a continental common market, as many of its architects privately acknowledge. Part of this foundation, inevitably, is bureaucratic: The agreement creates a variety of continental institutions — ranging from trade dispute panels to labor and environmental commissions — that are, in aggregate, an embryonic NAFTA government." That free trade agreements like NAFTA must evolve into political unions is taken for granted among academics that work closely with such issues. In 1998, Glen Atkinson, professor of economics at the University of Nevada in Reno, described this step-by-step process in an article entitled "Regional Integration in the Emerging Global Economy" in the Social Science Journal. Integration "must be an evolutionary process of continuous institutional development," Atkinson wrote. Indeed, the development of supranational governing organs is inevitable, though it will erode national sovereignty, he writes. "The need for shared institutions among the parties is critical for integration, which will lead to a weakening of national sovereignty in some areas of interest. Sovereignty, however, must reside someplace in order to enforce regional working conditions, intellectual and other property rights and other concerns." NAFTA, being a "free trade" arrangement, is only a preliminary step. According to Atkinson: The lowest level of integration is a free trade area which involves only the removal of tariffs and quotas among the parties. If a common external tariff is added, then a customs union has been created. The next level, or a common market, requires free movement of people and capital as well as goods and services. It is this stage where institutional development becomes critical. The stage of economic union requires a high degree of coordination or even unification of policies. This sets the foundation for political union. Now, according to those most concerned with creating a North American Union, it's time to move beyond NAFTA. Professor Robert Pastor of American University serves also as vice-chair of the CFR Task Force on North America and is one of the primary intellectual architects of North American regionalism. According to Pastor, even after NAFTA, U.S. policy has been too nationalistic. "Instead of trying to fashion a North American approach to continental problems, we continue to pursue problems on a dual-bilateral basis, taking one issue at a time," Pastor said in testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere on June 9, 2005. "But incremental steps will no longer solve the security problem, or allow us to grasp economic opportunities. What we need to do now is forge a North American Community," Pastor stated. This, in fact, has been a major goal of the Bush administration and of the Mexican administration of Vicente Fox. In a paper entitled Closing the Development Gap: A Proposal for a North American Investment Fund, Pastor and coauthors Samuel Morley and Sherman Robinson point out that Mexican President Vicente Fox has long advocated a North American common market. "Soon after he won Mexico's presidential election on July 2, 2000, Vicente Fox proposed a Common Market to replace the free-trade area," Pastor, Morley, and Robinson wrote. "He invited President George W. Bush to his home in February 2001 and persuaded him to endorse 'The Guanajuato Proposal.'" President Bush quickly signed on to the plan. In a joint statement with Fox released by the White House on February 16, 2001, Bush described the outcome of the meeting. "After consultation with our Canadian partners, we will strive to consolidate a North American economic community whose benefits reach the lesser-developed areas of the region and extend to the most vulnerable social groups in our countries," said the Bush/Fox statement announcing a new "partnership for prosperity." A Deepening Union With the announcement on March 23, 2005 of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, the Bush administration, along with the governments of Mexico and Canada, has taken the next step toward a European Union-style superstate in North America. The SPP features a wide range of initiatives on matters related to security and commerce. These include: Create a proto-parliament called the North American Competitiveness Council. According to official SPP documents, this body will "address issues of immediate import!!!!ance" and provide "strategic" advice. It will also "provide input on the compatibility of our security and prosperity agendas." Under the purported threat of an avian flu pandemic, the parties to the SPP will harmonize plans for continuity of government in the event of a crisis. Begin harmonizing security organs by creating a "common approach to critical infrastructure protection," and "develop and implement joint plans for cooperation for incident response, as well as conduct coordinated training and exercises in emergency response." Create a single energy policy for North America by "improving transparency and regulatory compatibility." The SPP also has tremendous implications for immigration. As NAFTA erased most remaining barriers hampering the flow of capital between Canada, Mexico, and the United States, the SPP will look for ways to eliminate bottlenecks hampering the flow of people. According to the official SPP agenda, the new international body will work to "identify measures to facilitate further the movement of business persons." Specific policies likely to be followed by the SPP can be found in the CFR report entitled Building a North American Community that was released just after the March 23, 2005 SPP meeting in Waco, Texas. In its recommendations, the CFR report suggests, "The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments' physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America." This goes a long way toward explaining the maddening lack of urgency that is apparent in Washington concerning the issue of illegal immigration from Mexico. If the SPP follows the CFR template — a virtual certainty — there will no longer be a border to cross illegally. Moving Fast Perhaps the most import!!!!ant difference between the formation of the European Union and the effort to build a North American Union is the speed at which the North American version is moving ahead. In Europe, union took decades, with efforts starting just after World War II and culminating in the 1990s. In North America, issues related to union first began only in 1965. According to economist Glen Atkinson, "NAFTA has evolved over several stages beginning with the Canadian-U.S. automobile pact of 1965 and the Canadian-U.S. Free Trade Agreement of 1989." Now, little more than a decade after NAFTA comes the SPP. A measure of the rapidity with which this drive for a North American Union can affect the lives of citizens is the planned super highway linking the U.S.'s northern and southern borders. The plan for this highway is breathtaking. It includes plans to start construction in 2007 on the so-called Trans Texas Corridor, to be built in large part by a Spanish construction company. According to the magazine International Construction Review, the project "would be part of the 'super-highway' spanning the United States from the Mexican border at Laredo, making its way through Texas, Kansas and Oklahoma and connecting with the Canadian highway system north of Duluth, Minnesota. Because it would provide a connection all the way between Canada and Mexico, the project is also described as the North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA) super highway." A further measure of the speed with which a North American Union is likely to develop is found within the CFR's recommendations for the SPP. That organization, which so often drafts the foreign-policy blueprints followed by the federal government, calls for "the creation by 2010 of a North American community.... Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly, and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America." It is incredible, but just four years from now — if the CFR template is followed — the United States may cease to exist as an independent political entity. Its laws, rules, and regulations — including all freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution — will be subject to review and nullification by the North American Union's governing body. Sure, the United States will still be here in name. American soldiers will still fight, mostly, under the U.S. flag. There will be a U.S. president and both houses of Congress will continue to meet and pass legislation. Nevertheless, in very import!!!!ant ways, the United States will become nothing more than a province — albeit an import!!!!ant one — in the emergent North American superstate.   한국 VeriChip(베리칩) 수입계약 IT/Internet/RFID 2006/10/03 00:23 2002년 12월 6일 Applied Digital Solutions(ADS)는 한국과 VeriChip 독점판매 계약이 체결?다고 발표했다. 멕시코와 에콰도르가 수억만불의 계약이 끝난 상태에 있는 ADS사의 VeriChip은 미국내에서 사람의 몸에 넣을 장소가 발표 되었는데, 현재까지는 아리조나 1, 플로리다 4, 택사스 2, 등 일곱 장소라고 한다. 플로리다 팜 비치에 소재하는 Technology 회사 ADS 는 나스닥 주식에 상장된 회사이다. ADS사에 따르면 한국은 마이크로칩 상품 독점 판매권 계약에 서명했다. 그 계약은 향후 5년동안 한국시장에 한하여 켈리포니아 소재 무역회사로부터 한국이 수입하게 된다. ADS 사는 한국의 수입사 이름을 밝히지 아니하고 가명으로 한국의 "세계적인 종합과학기술(GIT)"에 ADS가 생산하는 베리칩을 한국시장에 독점판매권을 허용한다고 했다. 계약에 따르면 최저가격으로 한국에서 판매하도록 했으며 한국 GIT측은 3개월 주기로 반드시 5000개의 베리칩을 소비해야 된다고 명시되었다고 한다. 따라서 한국 GIT 는 개인 신상정보가 들어 있는 베리칩을 반드시 사람의 몸에 주입시켜야 된다.  또한 GIT는 같은 기간에 모든 정보를 읽게하는  스케너216 개도 함께 소비해야한다는 내용이다. 기본 계약에는 향후 5년동안 GIT가 한국 판매독점권을 갖게 된다.  그리고 ADS 가 생산하는 베리칩을 GIT는 5년동안 최소 75,000개의 베리칩과 함께 7,500개의 스케너를 시중에 판매하도록 되었다고 한다.    ================================================================================================================ 윗 내용을 세밀하게 한번 관찰해 보십시오, 베리칩 스캐너를 5년동안  한국에 7,500개를 시중에 판매해야 되며,베리칩을 5년동안 75,000개를 팔아야 한다고 윗 기사는 말해주고 잇읍니다. 베리칩 스캐너란 말그대로, 베리칩스캔(인간스캔도 포함)하는 기계를 말합니다.   그리고 인간의 몸에 베리칩을 반드시 주입 시켜야 한다고 내용에 나와 잇읍니다.    5년안에. 왜? 무엇때문에? 왜 인간의 몸에 반드시(끔찍합니다.)   5년안으로 무슨 일이 일어나는것은 아닌지? 하필 5년안 인가?   아니길 바랄 뿐입니다.    세계 각지에서 베리칩을 홍보,생산 판매하며, 미국 군인들 부터, 병원까지 실시하며, 멕시코 정부 관료들은 이미 베리칩을 이식햇고, 정부요직에서 근무하는 자들도 베리칩 이식을 이미 햇다는 기사들을 보앗는지요.    한국은 어떻고요, 이미회사와 재벌기업들이 베리칩 생산 ,홍보, 선전등에 박차를 가하고 잇으며, 강아지 추적용이라고 칩을 이미 시중에서 팔고  잇읍니다. 이것은 시작에 불과할 뿐이지요. 아래 내용 기사를 보면 더 끔찍합니다.

출처 :주님을 기다리는 신부들 원문보기 글쓴이 : 처음처럼 예수사랑