Indonesian HIV/AIDS patients face microchip tagging A controversial bill requiring some HIV/AIDS patients to be implanted with microchips has gained support from lawmakers in Indonesia’s remote province of Papua. Associated Press reports that legislator John Manangsang welcomed the plan to insert small computer chips beneath the skin of what he described as “sexually aggressive …
So let me get this straight - If you get caught smuggling a relatively small amount of drugs into Indonesia, you automatically get the death penalty. But if you deliberately infect people with a fatal disease (which is basically murder) you 'could face six months in jail or a $5,000 fine' ?. That is just messed up.
As for tracking chips... Wrong, wrong, wrong.
I pray that Jackboot-Jacqui doesnt read this article or we may pretty soon find that there is 'overwhelming public support' for us all to be fitted with them. After all... we are all potential criminals.
Hey what's the big deal, in 1665 people painted crosses on the doors of plague houses - this is just a modern equivalent........
In fact lets force everybody to have an RFID chip implanted. Now I come to think about it why not go the whole hog and make the chips run on a hex frequency of 0x29A (double pun intended) ;-)
thingi
p.s. Mines the one with the mark of the beast on it.
"Manangsang claimed authorities would be better placed to identify, follow and, in due course, punish those who deliberately infect others with the disease."
Well, since you're planning their punishment already, without them having actually committed any crime, why bother waiting for them to commit the crime? Save the victim the trauma, and just haul the sentenced-without-a-trial non-criminal to jail now.
I would love to know their definition of "sexually aggressive", though. To me, that would imply someone forcing themselves onto someone else, which I sincerely hope is already against the law. Though I imagine there won't be any formal definition. It'll all be a vague relative thing, if they attempt any definition at all. More likely, it'll be like the US Supreme Court's definition of obscenity -- we'll know it when we see it. You can't argue with a rigid, well-defined, not-open-to-misinterpretation, unambiguous definition like that.
> Since when....has Indonesia been part of the UK?
Indonesia is an ex Dutch colony. At one time the UK had a province in the SE of Papua island. The Dutch of course have provided the UK with a monarch in the past. The ex UK province passed to Australian control. The UK provides a monarch for Australia. Curious, is it not?
Unlike in Kalimantan and other islands now part of Indonesia, the (west) Papua political situation has never stabilized under Indonesian rule. Curious, is it not?
The objective appears less AIDS and more political dissidents. Yet that the most populous Islamic country could be the one to introduce the Great Satan's "Mark of the Beast" (viz, the current Amish farmers' lawsuit on RFID in the USA) - curious, is it not?
Perhaps it is indeed a trial run. Watch the story - like the outbreaks of civilian massacres by guns (Port Arthur, Hungerford, Dunblane, Columbine, etc, etc) that resulted in moves to gun control in developed countries - if it repeats elsewhere, it will not be curious.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
