Digital ID's for everyone

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

That's not exactly what we agree with as you are attaching some very heavy and silly implications to this statement.

So you are suggesting a conspiracy whereby the is2020.org statement to that effect is untrue, have you asked them why the even said such a thing, on both their main site, and one of their main live projects?

King Mob wrote: »

And this is something you keep insisting and trying to connect to various statements when it isn't true. For example, no where on ID2020's website does it say anything of the sort. Not once does it mention a "data mark". It does not mention any of the technologies you try to insinuate that it's involved with. It does not talk about or imply any of the things you claim about it's use beyond being an id. And again, you are ignoring what the website actually does say. It's a digital(ie. not physical) biometric (ie. uses biometrics) lifelong (the digital id will last for life, not a physical thing that will last for that long) for of id to ensure consistency of medical treatments Again, you are insisting on the idea of it being a "mark" because you believe in biblical prophesy which isn't even correct according to yourself. If this is not the case, then simply state that you don't believe the bible made this prophesy. Otherwise, we will continue to assume this is true. I don't understand however why you keep trying to avoid this fact. You keep dancing around the subject and even try to cover up where you get some of your information. (for example when you didn't post a direct link to your source "Saved Magazine".) If you have to keep doing this, why do you still think your conspiracy theory is true?

Let's be honest now, this 'really' is a load of waffle (nevermind the loaded misdirection, as already highlighted).

Can you please just tell us what your point is (let's start one singular point, at a time) to avoid such word-waffle from ever recurring.

Ask one question (that means one question mark at the end of one sentance), and yes, get one reply to it.
Any misdirection however (ufos etc) won't be responded to.

King Mob

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So you are suggesting a conspiracy whereby the is2020.org statement to that effect is untrue

That's not what I'm saying. You are once again misrepresenting me.

I don't think Id2020's statement is false.
I believe your interpretation of it is false. I believe the made disparate connections you make to that statement are false.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Let's be honest now, this 'really' is a load of waffle (nevermind the loaded misdirection, as already highlighted).

Can you please just tell us what your point is (let's start one singular point, at a time) to avoid such word-waffle from ever recurring.

I thought my point was very clear.
You are attributing many things to people that aren't true, making connections that aren't actually there and you're making claims that aren't true.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Ask one question (that means one question mark at the end of one sentance), and yes, get one reply to it.
Any misdirection however (ufos etc) won't be responded to.

It's not misdirection. I'm specifically addressing the root of your conspiracy theory. You're trying to pass it off as "misdirection" because you don't want to be direct and honest about the root of your conspiracy theory.
I think this is because you know that it would turn many people off your ideas.

What I don't understand is why you still maintain your belief when you have to be so deceptive about it.

Again, if this isn't the case, all you need do is state that you don't believe the bible made a prophesy.

I suppose my question is: "why did you remove all the paragraph breaks in my quote?"

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

That's not what I'm saying.

Either you understand the meaning of the singular concept which form the topic of this forum, or you don't.
....Or you're in the wrong thread, or misbehaving.

King Mob wrote: »

I don't think Id2020's statement is false.
I believe your interpretation of it is false.

Read the statement, read their website then read their projects (the only basis of 'evidence at hand')
That's all there is available or/and to consider for the time being.

Not your own desperate and repeated proven comedic misdirection:
ufos/books/tvshows/ufos/scifi/moon/clouds/alexjones etc etc,
you are actually attributing silly connections and making silly claims or associations that simply are not true.

I believe both your interpretation or words, and your non-understanding, or even lack of self-education of the pool of evidence of id2020.org work.
Are the basis, foundation and projection of your deliberate twin falsehoods. This is all very sinister and deceptive.

again.... one question at a time.
Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?



Their own current live iRespond project:

King Mob

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Either you understand the meaning of the singular concept which form the topic of this forum, or you don't.
....Or you're in the wrong thread, or misbehaving.

Read the statement, read their website then read their projects (the only basis of 'evidence at hand')

But you see, I have read the statement and it doesn't match with your other claims. Like how their statement and website says nothing about their ID being a mark of any kind.

I've also read what you claim to be "their" projects. You have said many things that aren't true. Like for instance that one group was approached by Bill Gates when that never happened.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Not your own desperate and repeated proven comedic misdirection:
ufos/books/tvshows/ufos/scifi/moon/clouds/alexjones etc etc,
you are actually attributing silly connections and making silly claims or associations that simply are not true.

Ok, so if you are saying that it is misdirection, then does this mean that you don't believe the biblical prophesy and that your previous posts claiming that you did believe were wrong?

You keep saying it's misdirection, but you can't explain why. You are labeling it "misdirection" in a very silly attempt to avoid the issue. It's not fooling anyone.
It's a bit strange that you think it might.

Again, it would be easily cleared up if you would just directly address it.
But you won't.
We all know why.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

again.... one question at a time.
Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?

And I've answered this several times very directly.
What you take this statement to mean doesn't match up with reality.

For example, you believe that this statement refers to the idea of a physical mark of some kind.
To that, my answer is no.

You also believe that this "concerted push" is some form of global conspiracy for the purpose of controlling people.
To that, my answer is also no.

Again, you are not accurately representing and interpreting that statement, so I can't really answer with a simple yes or no.

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

But you see, I have read the statement and it doesn't match with your other claims. Like how their statement and website says nothing about their ID being a mark of any kind.

The statement is exactly as it reads. You're simply in denial.

The majority of their projects use a QRCode/tag (a mark) for Digital ID.

King Mob wrote: »

Like for instance that one group was approached by Bill Gates when that never happened.

You're trying to dissassociate Bill Gates from the Bill Gates Foundation? Very sad and embarissing for you.
https://news.rice.edu/2019/12/18/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record/

“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, ‘Hey, we have a real problem — knowing who’s vaccinated,’” said McHugh

King Mob wrote: »

Ok, so if you are saying that it is misdirection, then does this mean that you don't believe the biblical prophesy...

Yes it is misdirection, much like your stuff about clouds/alexjones/aliens/moon...

Whatever it says eleswhere isn't 'evidence based', so a meaningless distraction.

id2020.org and it's projects are the only evidence at hand to consider.

Why not just stick with the facts and stick with the evidence?

A sinister sci-fi agenda perhaps...

King Mob wrote: »

What you take this statement to mean doesn't match up with reality.

This is meaninless twaddle.

The statement is made of words, to form a sentence 'of meaning' (and not my meaning) but it's own natural meaning, and re-referenced by their own projects.

You can't process a simple sentance that id2020 have published?

King Mob wrote: »

For example, you believe that this statement refers to the idea of a physical mark of some kind. To that, my answer is no.

What twisted interpretation is this?

They demonstrate this used in their many projects is as a QRcode visual mark or pattern. Any digital data string can be used for this. If this isn't a mark of any kind, get your eyes fixed, pronto!

King Mob wrote: »

You also believe that this "concerted push" is some form of global conspiracy for the purpose of *controlling* people. To that, my answer is also no.

Nobody said anything about control, only you.



But why not anyway, show an example of a concerted push for a global DigitalID didn't have a level of control. You can't as it hasn't been done before at this scale. We can look at other smaller examples the 1m locked up in China however, that have to scan QR Codes to enter thier homes. Or the many forced to use their face to unlock their phone there also.

King Mob wrote: »

"Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" Isn't really a sentence.

Deliberate avoidance of a simply abbreviated question, very sad.

King Mob wrote: »

"Will they supply Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" No.

Well 1.1bn to start with by 2030 (or before) is their exact manifesto.
Their other project clearly states for 'everyone on the planet'.

King Mob wrote: »

"Will they *force* Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" No.

Again, this is your misdirection and fake news.

That was never in question here.

A 'push towards' is 'not' a 'forced into' action.

King Mob wrote: »

"There is .... push Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" No.

Yes, 1.1bn to start with by 2030 (or before) is their manifesto.
Their other project states for 'everyone on the planet'.
It's clearly a global exercise.

King Mob wrote: »

"Do they believe that there should be a push to supply Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" Yes, but not for your definition for "digital ID".

So, YES, you say there is a "push to provide a Digital ID to everyone".






www.id2020.org/digital-identity
And by their definition (by their works and examples), not mine



We can only look at the 'evidence of workings' of 'their' own, many projects:

Early Projects (among many):
https://www.irespond.org/
https://everest.org/ (fiscal transacational use)
Mypass : https://medium.com/id2020/welcome-th...ce-76b0ebe6776
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/id2020-alliance-launches-digital-id-program-with-government-of-bangladesh-and-gavi-announces-new-partners-at-annual-summit-300921926.html

King Mob

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

The statement is exactly as it reads. You're simply in denial.

The majority of their projects use a QRCode/tag (a mark) for Digital ID.

But you haven't show that it is their projects. You've made connections there that don't exist.
And then when you extrapolate further, a QR code becomes a physical tattoo, which again, is not stated anywhere in the ID 2020 site or statement.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

You're trying to dissassociate Bill Gates from the Bill Gates Foundation? Very sad and embarissing for you.

Nope. You are again misrepresenting me because you can't honestly address the point.
You claim that they were approached by Bill Gates and funded by him.
This is not what that article said.
You did not accurately report what was in the article.
I believe this is because you got the information not from the article, but from places like "Saved Magazine".

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Yes it is misdirection, much like your stuff about clouds/alexjones/aliens/moon...

I never mentioned any of those things. Why are you misrepresenting me?

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Whatever it says eleswhere isn't 'evidence based', so a meaningless distraction.

Ok. So to confirm you are now stating that the bible's prophesy isn't true and it doesn't at all factor into the beliefs you have about this ID issue.
Again, if you ignore this point, I will continue with the assumption that you do believe that it's a biblical prophesy.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

This is meaninless twaddle.

The statement is made of words, to form a sentence 'of meaning' (and not my meaning) but it's own natural meaning, and re-referenced by their own projects.

You can't process a simple sentance that id2020 have published?

Yes, but you're the one who's changing it's meaning to mean something it doesn't.

Again, you are saying that they are admitting to this "push" as if it's ongoing.
Yet it says "now is the time" which, using the natural meaning of the term, implies this push is yet to happen and they are urging people to do it.
You often leave that part out of the quote for obvious reasons.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

What twisted interpretation is this?

They demonstrate this used in their many projects is as a QRcode visual mark or pattern. Any digital data string can be used for this. If this isn't a mark of any kind, get your eyes fixed, pronto!

No, you claim that it's used in their projects, but you haven't shown this.
You make connections that aren't there and often don't tell the truth about what's in articles.

Secondly, it's not really a "mark" if it's on your phone.
Thirdly, the QR code is always refered to as the method of accessing the digital id. It's not the id itself. That's the distinction you are misunderstanding.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Nobody said anything about control, only you.

But why not anyway, show an example of a concerted push for a global DigitalID didn't have a level of control. You can't as it hasn't been done before at this scale. We can look at other smaller examples the 1m locked up in China however, that have to scan QR Codes to enter thier homes. Or the many forced to use their face to unlock their phone there also.

Lol...:rolleyes:

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Deliberate avoidance of a simply abbreviated question, very sad.

But I directly answered your question in many ways in clear terms.

It's a bit strange for you to be moaning about ignored questions though...

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Again, this is your misdirection and fake news.

We're getting very Trumpian here...

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So, YES, you say there is a "push to provide a Digital ID to everyone".

Again, you're misrepresenting me. I made a full statement there, and to say that I agree with you on the matter is dishonest.

Not only that, it kind of shows your previous statement that I did not answer your question to be a bit of a lie...

King Mob

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Early Projects (among many):
https://www.irespond.org/

And just to highlight some the points I made about you and the links you post:
https://www.irespond.org/our-solution/

The Biometric Private Key
The iRespond digital identity solution relies on the latest biometrics, currently focusing on iris scans, which have been proven to be the most accurate, unique and reliable means to biometrically identify individuals.

Unlike other iris-scanning techniques, iRespond deconstructs the iris into a unique template that can’t be forged or duplicated. The template in turn is paired with a 12-digit string of randomly generated numbers forming a unique numeric ID (UNiD).

Here's a happy little picture of them using the technology:

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

Here's a happy little picture of them using [one optional part] the technology:

This is just one of x16 biometric 'measurements'. Any/all available personal data such as mobile numbers, addresses are also seeked. In itself it's meaningless. All this compiled data collection requires digitisation.

Even then, this part is one 'part' of the 'pair'.

The other *neccessary* item to make the secure blockchain DigitalID 'PAIR' is the 'UnID' (much like a serial number). This is the basis of the technology, which produces the end-user technology, the Azure blockchain digital token, in most cases is presented visually or scanable as a QRCode for service access.



This is the case in Kenya where another project uses the QRCode mark for digital fiscal wallets in another pilot called gravity.earth (gravity cloud platform). The QRcode is used along with a 'voice 1:1 biometric", and uses the 'UniD' PAIR to complete the final authentication (eye scans are not used at any stage).

Everest (https://everest.org/) use a face (photo), and all/any paper/card documentation, and requests for age, address, gender, option of further biometrics ALL as one part, before being compiled and 'digitised' to code. Then the UniD is added to make the PAIR, for final creation for their own EverID (DigitalID), which is actually a full transactional (digital wallet) tracking platform in itself.

In another case in over in Texas the 'My.Pass' the only biometrics taken from their target homeless group are i) fingerprinting and ii) complete facial scans. Also added is personal data such as paper/cards ID, or mobile numbers, before digitisation. Then the 'UniD' PAIR is added to create, again the new DigitalID (eye scans are not used at any stage).

Many other pilot projects exist, you should read up.
There is even direct work with the state of Bangladesh to create DigitalIDs at birth or vaccine point.

Meanwhile all you additional previous claims have been debunked, as per previous page.
Do educate yourself on the various programs and pilot technologies, next time.

You agreed with the id2020.org statement (below) surrounding the push for Digital ID for everybody, then later backtracked, and claimed it wasn't their own statement of intent https://id2020.org/digital-identity (bottom of page)

???Strange.



Answer the question, Y/N?
Stop your clear scared misdirection (trump, skygods etc).

Q. Is there "a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone?"

Also suggested in their iRespond:

King Mob

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Here's a happy little picture of them using [one optional part] the technology:

So not only are you misrepresenting my statement and adding in meaning I did not write nor intend you are directly misprepresenting the information contained in your own link.

That isn't "one optional part of the technology."
It is the technology.

The Biometric Private Key
The iRespond digital identity solution relies on the latest biometrics, currently focusing on iris scans,

"Relies on" does not me "an optional part of"...

There's also this statement that you've contradicted many many times and yet consistantly failed to quote it along with the other quotes you pulled from that site:

which have been proven to be the most accurate, unique and reliable means to biometrically identify individuals.

Do you disagree with this statement?

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

You agreed with the id2020.org statement (below) surrounding the push for Digital ID for everybody, then later backtracked, and claimed it wasn't their own statement of intent https://id2020.org/digital-identity (bottom of page)

Again, misrepresentation despite me being very clear.
I'm not disagreeing with what ID2020. I never had. I have not backtracked on anything.
What my actual position is: you are misrepresenting what that statement means.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Answer the question, Y/N?
Stop your clear scared misdirection (trump, skygods etc).

Q. Is there "a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone?"

Again, I've answered this question many times.
For what you incorrectly believe this statement means, my answer is no.

For that the statement actually means, my answer is "that's what ID2020 believes."

Again, you demanding answers when you refuse to answer ones directly is very hypocritical and funny.

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

That isn't "one optional part of the technology." It is the technology.

So Very Incorrect and misinformed.

It's only a (current) measurement 'method', as a 'part item' in one project example.

Various other methods (x16 biometrics) can also easily be used in place of an iris if desired. It can even rely on the digitisation of paper documents.
This is proven already.

In Texas they use only Face and fingerprint scans (nothing else for the biometric data collection stage), they also do use document digitisation. Before the process of creating a DigitalID commences (UnID, Blockchain etc) Mypass : https://medium.com/id2020/welcome-th...ce-76b0ebe6776

In Kenya they use 'Voice metrics' as the biometric measurement item, for digitisation. https://everest.org/ (fiscal transacational use) Indeed they can also the digitisation of any/all available documents and 3rd party data. Before the process of creating a DigitalID commences.

Without the UniD as part as the PAIR there simply is 'no DigitalID created' which can meet or be usable on their protocol. The data collection part can really be anything, even name and dob can work as starting source. Hence why the very basis of their platform is ideal, to start the ID process, for someone without any posessions, in a remote field, with no electric, no facilities outside of a single mobile phone.

Without the UnID part it cannot function.
Without e.g. Iris can, it CAN function (any other digitised data can be used).

..Before finally the data PAIRING can avail of Azure cloud upload and blockchain, to create the final usable secure encrypted digital key.

In most of their cases, this final key (DigitalID) is presented as QR Codes.
Read the links, watch the promo videos showing the QR code held up on a smartphone, download the PDF all available from the links above, before mindlessly commenting again.

King Mob wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with what ID2020. I never had.

Fine. This is 'their' (not mine) statement of intent.
Drink it up, soak it in.

There is a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone
www.id2020.org/digital-identity

One of 'their' (again, not mine) many projects clarifies this further.

Digital IDs for everyone on the planet.
https://www.irespond.org/our-solution/

---

The next question is how this will work and what form it will take.
The only evidence to consider is ('their') works and ('their') projects.

Dohnjoe

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Sure can, please, see the detailed specifics below in case you missed it.

Nope it was complete waffle and whataboutery. Explain what the conspiracy is simply..

For example; "In 1969 man didn't land on the moon, the US faked it, it was shot in a studio."

It's quite straightforward and easy to do. Moon landing hoaxers and flat earthers can do it, I am fairly sure you can manage..

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Nope it was complete waffle and whataboutery. Explain what the conspiracy is simply..

For example; "In 1969 man didn't land on the moon, the US faked it, it was shot in a studio."

It's quite straightforward and easy to do. Moon landing hoaxers and flat earthers can do it, I am fairly sure you can manage..

He explained for two weeks and you still asking him what is all about?

Gates funded a Vaccine digital marker tattoo study. Which means he liked the idea!
Microsoft ( is Gates company) he's one founder of the company and they've signed up to vaccine ID implementation.
Gates is involved in both, then he's not just focused on one way to ID people.

4068ac1elhodqr

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Explain what the conspiracy is simply..

This is simple, do try to keep up, and read the previous page post (#397) which explains it clearly in precise detail, even for simples.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113328764&postcount=397

If you wish to have any credibity whatsoever (unlikely due to the agenda or practice of active diversion and deflection), you'll quit the flat-earth (FYI: the earth is a round sphere) type nonsense also, like... lol! and also, wft?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113328764&postcount=397

King Mob

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So Very Incorrect and misinformed.

You keep saying I'm incorrect and misinformed, then you ignore all the points I make including the ones where i point out where you make incorrect statements.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

It's only a (current) measurement 'method', as a 'part item' in one project example.

But as your link says:

[Iris recognition has] been proven to be the most accurate, unique and reliable means to biometrically identify individuals.

Since this is the case, then why would they be persuing other methods?
Why would they want to use a physical mark which would not be more accurate unique or reliable?

Again, you are assuming that the UNiD Has to be some kind of physical mark, but none of your links or sources actually say that.
It's simply a number assigned to you in a database. That's all. The QR codes etc are just another way of identifying that number.
But as the links your posted yourself say, the most accurate, secure and reliable way to identify some one is with an iris scan.
It also had the benefit of hitting all the other points you claim they want. Unlike a physical mark on a phone or a body, it's permanent and not easily removable or lost. It's impossible to fake or hack. It's actually biometric. And it's actually birth to death.

Again, this is all based on the information provided in your links.
Have you not read them?

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Fine. This is 'their' (not mine) statement of intent.
Drink it up, soak it in.

There is a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone
www.id2020.org/digital-identity

Yes, and as I said, you are misrepresenting what that statement means. Possible on purpose, possibly not.
For example, the natural language of the statement seems to say that the push hasn't happened yet and these guys just think the push is a good idea.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

One of 'their' (again, not mine) many projects clarifies this further.

Digital IDs for everyone on the planet.
https://www.irespond.org/our-solution/

Yup.
And that project uses iris scans, something which you rejected as impossible at the start of the thread and dismissed as silly.
It's a project that does not involve a mark on the persons body.
It's a project that does not involve controlling what people buy or sell.
It's a project that is not forced on anyone.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

The only evidence to consider is ('their') works and ('their') projects.

Lol "their works"?
That sounds awfully biblical....

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Gates funded a Vaccine digital marker tattoo study. Which means he liked the idea!

That's not true though...

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

That's not true though...

He did not fund the study the poster linked to

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

He did not fund the study the poster linked to

No. The poster claimed that, but the link that he believed said this actually said no such thing.

The only other reference to this was a picture of a google search that pointed to "Saved Magazine" which is a conservative christian conspiracy magazine that promotes ideas like chemtrails.
Thus it is not trustworthy.

Did you not check up on that claim?

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

No. The poster claimed that, but the link that he believed said this actually said no such thing.

The only other reference to this was a picture of a google search that pointed to "Saved Magazine" which is a conservative christian conspiracy magazine that promotes ideas like chemtrails.
Thus it is not trustworthy.

Did you not check up on that claim?

Yes he funded a study into digital marking. Look below the picture in black (quantum dots) they mention Bill Gates foundation backed it. I have only looked at two claims made by the poster. It not a topic i have done lot of research, so i leave it with you guys.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/invisible-ink-could-reveal-whether-kids-have-been-vaccinated/

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Yes he funded a study into digital marking. Look below the picture in black (quantum dots) they mention Bill Gates foundation backed it. I have only looked at two claims made by the poster. It not a topic i have done lot of research, so i leave it with you guys.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/invisible-ink-could-reveal-whether-kids-have-been-vaccinated/

Yes, and Bill Gate's foundation is not Bill Gates.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Yes, and Bill Gate's foundation is not Bill Gates.

I doubt you even read it.

Taken from the article.
Says The work was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and came about because of a direct request from Microsoft founder and philanthropist Bill Gates himself,

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I doubt you even read it.

Taken from the article.
Says The work was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and came about because of a direct request from Microsoft founder and philanthropist Bill Gates himself,

Yes I did.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is not Bill Gates.
I understand however that you guys aren't too big on accuracy.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Yes I did.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is not Bill Gates.
I understand however that you guys aren't too big on accuracy.

Bill gates is mentioned in the article i posted.
Bill and Melinda gates foundation has nothing to do with Bill Gates
I let the poster deal with your crazy antics, too late for it me to bothered.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Bill gates is mentioned in the article i posted.
Bill and Melinda gates foundation has nothing to do with Bill Gates

And now with the misrepresentation again...
That's not what I said.

And yes, Bill Gates was mentioned, but it does not say that Bill Gates funded anything.
Saying that Bill Gates funded this project is at best a distortion, at worst, a lie.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

And now with the misrepresentation again...
That's not what I said.

And yes, Bill Gates was mentioned, but it does not say that Bill Gates funded anything.
Saying that Bill Gates funded this project is at best a distortion, at worst, a lie.

Your world, that's the case. I think it clear from the article Bill Gates was the one who funded it and pushed for it. Who released the funds was it Roger Rabbit?

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Your world, that's the case. I think it clear from the article Bill Gates was the one who funded it and pushed for it. Who released the funds was it Roger Rabbit?

Why does the article make the distinction between Bill Gates and his and his wife's foundation?

princereingold

any updates on Bill gates outstanding success at death and sterilization in africa and india by way of vaccine testing??

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Why does the article make the distinction between Bill Gates and his and his wife's foundation?

You know what direct request means do you?
He used the foundation funds to sponsor this study.
The foundation named for him and his wife and you think he not involved

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You know what direct request means do you?
He used the foundation funds to sponsor this study.

You've dodged the question. As per usual.

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

The foundation named for him and his wife and you think he not involved

Lol. Another misrepresentation. As per usual.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

You've dodged the question. As per usual.


Lol. Another misrepresentation. As per usual.

I let you debate the other poster he's entertaining your nonsense this time :eek:

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I let you debate the other poster he's entertaining your nonsense this time :eek:

If you say so.
You're the one dodging questions and misrepresenting people though.
If it upsets you when people point this out to you, maybe don't do it.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

If you say so.
You're the one dodging questions and misrepresenting people though.
If it upsets you when people point this out to you, maybe don't do it.

You're trying to claim Bill funded nothing. Totally ignoring the funds came from his foundation. Directed by request for that to happen.

Info three people control and Bill one of them.
The foundation is controlled by its three trustees: Bill and Melinda Gates, and Warren Buffett. Other principal officers include Co-Chair William H. Gates, Sr. and Chief Executive Officer Mark Suzman.[5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You're trying to claim Bill funded nothing.

That's a misrepresentation.
Again.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

He explained for two weeks and you still asking him what is all about?

Gates funded a Vaccine digital marker tattoo study. Which means he liked the idea!
Microsoft ( is Gates company) he's one founder of the company and they've signed up to vaccine ID implementation.
Gates is involved in both, then he's not just focused on one way to ID people.

And what's the conspiracy?

Explain it. Bill Gates is doing what exactly, to whom, for what reasons and when is this happening..

Bill Gates wanting poor people (or eventually all people) to have access some sort of universal ID is not some conspiracy, it's the primary purpose of that project.

4068ac1elhodqr

Dohnjoe wrote: »

And what's the conspiracy?
Explain it. Bill Gates is doing what exactly, to whom, for what reasons and when is this happening..

You've sorta/kinda, explained it yourself as below:

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Bill Gates wanting poor people (or eventually all people) to have access some sort of universal [DIGITAL] ID is not some conspiracy, it's the primary purpose of that project.

It is a conspiracy (Digital ID's for everyone) on many levels, as explained in the post #397 https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...&postcount=397

(Again) Mainly:

i) that the majority of people aren't aware of its existance, it's scope, ambitions and reach.
ii) that the majority of people (of the few who are actually aware of the program) simply don't understand it (as proven here), it's workings, functionality i.e. 'it's form' or it's most likely, final realisation.
iii) that the majority of people haven't even considered it's implications, it is being pushed as only 'good' thing, only. There has been zero debate as to if it's value or end results is only 'good thing'.

---

Now the actual matter of Bill Gates (aka the Bill&MGatesFoundation here) is an 'additive' CT matter, mostly in realation to CT point (ii) above.

Bill has funded a wide range of unique technologies, many of which focus on creating 'part of the form', of any mass digital identification tool, for id2020.org at point of vaccine. Also within that are various other issues, his relentless push for the 'entire planet' to get the vaccine (ignoring herd immunity and so on). His reach, wealth, influence and power means that he could easily get behind one of the vaccines he directly funds, as push for his backed vaccine to be the only one to use, globally. It goes on, he has a (mixed) track record for combining technology embodiments and vaccines together as one.

Dohnjoe

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

You've sorta/kinda, explained it yourself as below:

No I didn't.

Most of us still live in a world of largely paper identification, a sizeable chunk have no proper identification at all. It only makes sense that in a digital world, we are going to move to digital identification, it's inevitable. If that's going to be done, it has to be done right, proper standards, etc. There's at least one project aiming to tackle that issue.


Conspiracy version: that's all part of some nefarious conspiracy by "Bill Gates" and "insert powers-that-be", predicted by the bible, to insert/mark/tattoo/inject some sort of "hidden agenda" digital thing in/on the population in order to control/track us for unspecified reasons

If yes, that's the conspiracy

If no, explain the conspiracy in one sentence (without diversion tactics/waffle)

Timberrrrrrrr

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No I didn't.

Most of us still live in a world of largely paper identification, a sizeable chunk have no proper identification at all. It only makes sense that in a digital world, we are going to move to digital identification, it's inevitable. If that's going to be done, it has to be done right, proper standards, etc. There's at least one project aiming to tackle that issue.


Conspiracy version: that's all part of some nefarious conspiracy by "Bill Gates" and "insert powers-that-be", predicted by the bible, to insert/mark/tattoo/inject some sort of "hidden agenda" digital thing in/on the population in order to control/track us for unspecified reasons

If yes, that's the conspiracy

If no, explain the conspiracy in one sentence (without diversion tactics/waffle)

I would love a digital passport/driving licence, never a need to renew and never lost.

4068ac1elhodqr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I would love a digital passport/driving licence, never a need to renew and never lost.

Says the chap that weeks ago also said he would refuse to activate bluetooth on his phone, for fear of tracking or privacy issues. And would also refuse to even download such an App (they're currently pushing for 50%min uptake).

Thus, can't see a likely candidate for e.g. Quantum Dot Tattoos here.

Further more, also claimed to be on a park bench for 2hrs reading a book, at the time, was in contradiction to his own state's recommendations (so actually lucky such a digital identifier wasn't active).

But in fairness, ok, yes there are some conveniences to a universal DigitalID concept (mass redundancy of human resources would be result too).

One of the questions part (iii) on the previous page, was that this has only been presented as a good force, a force for good only. Zero mention of any negative aspects or consequences.

4068ac1elhodqr

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No I didn't...
It only makes sense that in a digital world, we are going to move to digital identification, it's inevitable. If that's going to be done, it has to be done right, proper standards, etc. There's at least one project aiming to tackle that issue.

Maybe it's inevitable, maybe not. But...

As to the 'form' it will take only the 'creators' will have the ability to say.

As it's pushed out (1.1bn in first phase, more later), it won't be compulsary, but may become defacto-mandatory, by way of convience.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

[your] Conspiracy version: that's all part of some nefarious conspiracy by "Bill Gates" and "insert powers-that-be", predicted by the bible, to insert/mark/tattoo/inject some sort of "hidden agenda" digital thing in/on the population in order to control/track us for unspecified reasons

That's your own particular theory/view, no one else. All a bit fanciful waffle mixed with untruths and misdirection.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

If no, explain the conspiracy in one sentence (without diversion tactics/waffle)

Read the last page, am not going to direct you to the same reference post x3 times in one day, if you refuse to read it the 1st two times.

Also BillGates is simply an additive factor to, an accelerant and facilitator.

Dohnjoe

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Maybe it's inevitable, maybe not.

It's inevitable. E.g. you'll be struggling to find many places in modern countries that accept physical cash in 10 years, or maybe less. Likewise digital identification will eventually become the norm (it's already the norm in several countries). Terrifying I know.

As to the 'form' it will take only the 'creators' will have the ability to say.

And regulators, officials, governments, etc. For something like global digital ID, international consensus will be painstakingly slow if at all, e.g. the Chinese would be very unlikely to agree to all international norms due to their controlling/totalitarian stake in everything

As it's pushed out (1.1bn in first phase, more later), it won't be compulsary, but may become defacto-mandatory, by way of convience.

If you want to travel, it's compulsory to have a passport. If you want to open a bank account now, KYC is mandatory. If you want to drive a car, a driving license is mandatory.

You need to stop scare-mongering yourself about mandatory things in life. And no, "they" won't be lashing you to a table forcing you to get a mandatory digital tattoo/vaccine/chip/RFID/whatever (which is really what this is all psychologically about)

Read the last page, am not going to direct you to the same reference post x3 times in one day, if you refuse to read it the 1st two times.

Yes you are. You are repeatedly referring me to a complete sidestep every time I ask the question. I know this, you know this. This is either because

1. You can't answer it, you don't have a coherent conspiracy.

2. Worse, you do have a theory, but even you know that laid bare it is completely idiotic and are smart enough not to give it daylight

Which is why we get all this Alex Jones deflection stuff. This isn't my first rodeo with this stuff, always the same.

Timberrrrrrrr

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Says the chap that weeks ago also said he would refuse to activate bluetooth on his phone, for fear of tracking or privacy issues. And would also refuse to even download such an App (they're currently pushing for 50%min uptake).

Wrong, I said the option is there if I didn't want to.

Thus, can't see a likely candidate for e.g. Quantum Dot Tattoos here.

Further more, also claimed to be on a park bench for 2hrs reading a book, at the time, was in contradiction to his own state's recommendations (so actually lucky such a digital identifier wasn't active).

If I did have this tattoo on my arm, wrist, wherever ... how hard would it be to cover?

But in fairness, ok, yes there are some conveniences to a universal DigitalID concept (mass redundancy of human resources would be result too).

One of the questions part (iii) on the previous page, was that this has only been presented as a good force, a force for good only. Zero mention of any negative aspects or consequences.

You choose to only see negatives, you believe it will be used for nefarious purposes, I'm not that paranoid.

Timberrrrrrrr

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Maybe it's inevitable, maybe not. But...

As to the 'form' it will take only the 'creators' will have the ability to say.

As it's pushed out (1.1bn in first phase, more later), it won't be compulsary, but may become defacto-mandatory, by way of convience.


That's your own particular theory/view, no one else. All a bit fanciful waffle mixed with untruths and misdirection.


Read the last page, am not going to direct you to the same reference post x3 times in one day, if you refuse to read it the 1st two times.

Also BillGates is simply an additive factor to, an accelerant and facilitator.

As is your own paranoia, you choose to make up nefarious reasons why this will be bad and refuse to see how this could be a good thing.

4068ac1elhodqr

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's inevitable. E.g. you'll be struggling to find many places in modern countries that accept physical cash in 10 years, or maybe less. Likewise digital identification will eventually become the norm (it's already the norm in several countries). Terrifying I know.

All depends on timeframes, needless to to say, COVID has added a rush factor to this (cash as one example). However in (more) modern Japan they only have 20% cashless, and will often use paper/documentation as a preference for official use.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

And regulators, officials, governments, etc. For something like global digital ID, international consensus will be painstakingly slow if at all, e.g. the Chinese..

The Chinese are a law unto themselves.

State uptake has already begun Bangladesh, Kenya, Far East and smaller sub-regions (Texas) all have trials and early implimentation. They don't get to poke about with source code, only told of the project benefits and where to sign.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

If you want to travel, it's compulsory to have a passport. If you want to open a bank account now, KYC is mandatory. If you want to drive a car, a driving license is mandatory.

This is true, but you can't use your passport to drive a car, eh?



With Universal or (almost) global DigitalID, you can do almost anything, anywhere. A bit like a single-source multi-use password-manager. Now consider what happens should something goes wrong...

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You need to stop scare-mongering yourself about mandatory things in life. And no, "they" won't be lashing you to a table forcing you to get a mandatory digital tattoo/vaccine/chip/RFID/whatever (which is really what this is all psychologically about)

Again there is no chip/chipping (common misdirection tool) used at any point.
Again a simple suggestive push-towards isn't a 'force' (as you were told before), also you fail to understand the difference between 'manditory and/or (different) compulsary' (roll of eyes).



As, or if it is (somewhat) inevitable, in time.

There should be debate and consideration.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Yes you are.

Read the last page, and the page before that.
You're just afraid to accept something that makes sense.
And are trying to re-phrase it to your own interpretation.



Hence the purposeful misdirection, exageration and deflection (so lazy).

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Which is why we get all this Alex Jones deflection stuff e.g.
This isn't my first rodeo with this stuff, always the same.

Rodeo, wtf. ...and Alex Jones (also) wtf, lol.

Is that all you have for usual misdirection and irrelevance?


Looks like, after your what decades? - of pushback against all/any theory you don't like. You've been served cognitive defeat, served on a plate.


And so... need to vomit up ufo/alexjones/chips/flatearth tripe, as a lazy default crutch to discredit anyone you disagree with.

Fun, fun, funny times!

4068ac1elhodqr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Wrong, I said the option is there if I didn't want to.

Eh, that implies, and you directly implied you wanted the bluetooth (traking) turned off, as you sat there 2hrs against state advice. Hardly a good role model now.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

If I did have this tattoo on my arm, wrist, wherever ... how hard would it be to cover?

The QDT is one single delivery option (perhaps the most likely). The project assumes global rollout, so would be expected 'by default' to have it. Covering it is easy. Making it un-scanable by a simple handheld iRed scanner, that will upload a 16kb data file to the Azure cloud, and return various identifers on return, ...not so much.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You choose to only see negatives, you believe it will be used for nefarious purposes, I'm not that paranoid.

Incorrect. I clearly stated it has many good factors (it really does) some are great, and these would all be listed, in the sales pitch. The negative factors, they would not be discussed (much like here).

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

As is your own paranoia, you choose to make up nefarious reasons why this will be bad and refuse to see how this could be a good thing.

Please get a better word than this lazy 'nefarious' jargon. It's incorrect in this case, and very much overused by yourself for dramatic effect.



Considering two sides to a story is a sign of intelligence.

And (again) I have said there are many positve aspects, so you can quit this 'nefarious' lol, path of suggestion also as it's clearly a falsehood.


A balanced (two sided) consideration should be the sensible approach to debating this issue of 'Digital IDs for everyone', nothing wrong with that.

the_syco

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

Bill Gates referring to digital ID microchipping on an AMA in Reddit

Are you referring to a digital certificate as opposed to a piece of paper with an easily copied signature? That sounds like a great idea!

King Mob

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

That's your own particular theory/view, no one else. All a bit fanciful waffle mixed with untruths and misdirection.


Read the last page, am not going to direct you to the same reference post x3 times in one day, if you refuse to read it the 1st two times.

But you've been asked many many times to clarify your position on biblical prophesy.
Your previous posts seem to show that you believe in it and it's the basis for your conspiracy theory.
You have used sources such as Saved Magazine which among other silly conspiracy theories also subscribes to the notion of the biblical prophesy.

If this isn't the case, all you have to do is to clearly state that you don't believe in the idea that these digital Ids are the mark of the beast predicted in the bible.

But as Dohnjoe points out, we suspect there is a reason that you aren't going to do this.
As such, unless you directly address it and state otherwise, we will continue with the conclusion that you believe in the biblical prophesy and that it's the basis for your conspiracy theory.

Timberrrrrrrr

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Eh, that implies, and you directly implied you wanted the bluetooth (traking) turned off, as you sat there 2hrs against state advice. Hardly a good role model now.

I never implied I wanted it turned off, I said I could turn it off if I wished, the same as I could just leave my phone at home.

The QDT is one single delivery option (perhaps the most likely). The project assumes global rollout, so would be expected 'by default' to have it. Covering it is easy. Making it un-scanable by a simple handheld iRed scanner, that will upload a 16kb data file to the Azure cloud, and return various identifers on return, ...not so much.

This implies that people would the randomly stopped and asked to show their ID scan, you are going down the rabbit hole now.

Incorrect. I clearly stated it has many good factors (it really does) some are great, and these would all be listed, in the sales pitch. The negative factors, they would not be discussed (much like here).

The made up ones you mean?

Please get a better word than this lazy 'nefarious' jargon. It's incorrect in this case, and very much overused by yourself for dramatic effect.

My use is perfectly fine in this instance.


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/nefarious

Considering two sides to a story is a sign of intelligence.

And (again) I have said there are many positve aspects, so you can quit this 'nefarious' lol, path of suggestion also as it's clearly a falsehood.

Yet you choose to imply that it would be used by (????) For nefarious reasons.

A balanced (two sided) consideration should be the sensible approach to debating this issue of 'Digital IDs for everyone', nothing wrong with that.

I agree there is nothing wrong with that.

Dohnjoe

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

With Universal or (almost) global DigitalID, you can do almost anything, anywhere. A bit like a single-source multi-use password-manager. Now consider what happens should something goes wrong...

You can use your passport as valid ID to open a bank account, to rent an apartment, ID for starting certain employment or education, ordering a sim card, booking travel tickets, etc

A digital form of that is apparently terrifying to you

Because you believe that certain potential digital ID is literally the work of the devil, I don't mean that figuratively, you believe it's the work of the actual devil, Satan, from the bible..

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You can use your passport as valid ID to open a bank account, to rent an apartment, ID for starting certain employment or education, ordering a sim card, booking travel tickets, etc

A digital form of that is apparently terrifying to you

Because you believe that certain potential digital ID is literally the work of the devil, I don't mean that figuratively, you believe it's the work of the actual devil, Satan, from the bible..

I think part of it might be the Global aspect of it as a "one world government" is also a common feature in biblical based conspiracy theories.

Dohnjoe

King Mob wrote: »

I think part of it might be the Global aspect of it as a "one world government" is also a common feature in biblical based conspiracy theories.

Indeed.

It's underpinned by a belief that the "powers-that-be" are ceaselessly obsessed with "branding" human beings like cattle, whether it be with vaccines (the anti-vax lot are big into this) or digital (RFID's, microchips, digital tattoo's, etc)

Philanthropists like Bill Gates have unwittingly become their "devil in disguise", most of that was kicked off by anti-vaxxers who are mental over his work with vaccines and his efforts in getting them to the poorer parts of the world. As such, the wider audience of loons latch onto anything the Gates foundation has anything to do with, extrapolating all sorts of evil narratives behind innocuous helpful technology, medicine or other

It's moonbat stuff of the highest order. We're just getting an attempted polished turd version of it here, with all the religious mumbo-jumbo and other assorted woo carefully edited it out to make it look "more legit".

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Philanthropists like Bill Gates have unwittingly become their "devil in disguise", most of that was kicked off by anti-vaxxers who are mental over his work with vaccines and his efforts in getting them to the poorer parts of the world.

I actually ran into the claim that he wants to depopulate Africa irl the other week.

This stuff has a way of sticking for some people when it isn't lumped together with the religious claims.