"DON'T 'TAG ME' BRO!"

Since 2003 I have done everything within my power to avoid use of my Social Security Number.

I suggest and contend that this number is a forerunner to a coming system biblically been referred to as the "Mark of The Beast" and having avoided it's use I can attest that whereas it may not be the completion of the prophecy it certainly fits the initial stages.

I have often said that it does not actually require an RFID implant (such as VeriChip.. Now ironically also known as “X-MARK“) to actually fulfill the prophecies.

Many times in Scripture a "Mark" is "symbolic" (Such as the “Mark of Cain“ mentioned in the OT and the "Mark of God" prophesied to be placed on the foreheads of end-time believers). Thus, any reference to a "Mark of The Beast" to be placed on the hand and forehead could very well be far more symbolic in nature and mean something different than suggested by many of the speculative dogmas.

Years ago when studying the scripture I realized that even the SS card/number actually DOES fulfill this prophecy because it is "on the hand" by way of a physical card that may be "held IN the hand" and because people "memorize" their number it can be said to have been "placed on the forehead" in a figurative sense.

As for buying, selling, etc. let me just say that because I avoid use of it there are many things which I cannot do that those who do use it CAN.

Think of how many times it is requested by people such as employers, health care providers, loan officers, DMV, etc. and when you fail to note it they will often either look it up themselves or refuse you jobs, services, a license, health care, government benefits, a bank account or even a home.

Without such things how is one expected to buy or sell?

If things do not change there will soon be a new number to contend with called the National ID Card (which is currently being implemented) and likewise the RFID implanted ID system is slowly but surely gaining momentum (as seen in the video featured).

The question is.. when does one begin to "get out of Babylon"?

At what point should people start the process of doing what they can to avoid being caught up in a system where people are no longer much more than a number?

I cannot tell you to do as I have and begin the migration of non-use ... but ...I do encourage you to become aware of what is going on.

If you see the snake coming you can avoid being bitten but once it latches in it is too late.

Here is some information regarding the Social Security Number to consider:



When the Federal government started issuing Social Security cards five decades ago, some people worried the Social Security number would evolve into an all-purpose, national identification system. They were right. These days, the number tracks everything from college students to video-store customers, and it's virtually impossible to get by without one. Still, many Americans resist it, believing the number has the power to unlock personal information. Privacy experts say people are right to guard their Social Security numbers, but they also warn that keeping the number secret is no guarantee of privacy.

MANY AMERICANS BELIEVE it's illegal to use the Social Security number as an I.D. It's an understandable misconception; up until 1971, the Social Security card actually came with a printed warning against using the number for identification purposes. But that was never more than a suggestion, and one the U.S. government itself has rarely followed.

Evan Hendricks, editor of the "Privacy Times" newsletter, says the evolution of Social Security number is a symbol of what happens to personal data in the modern world.

Hendricks: They said it was only going to be for the purpose of tracking your Social Security account, and then slowly and quietly it was used for driver's license records, now you have to give it to your bank, all government agencies use it as the identification number, so the original promise that it was only going to be used for one purpose was one of the great lies to the American people.

And some Americans are rebelling against the Social Security number. In the last few years, groups opposed to the number have proliferated on the Internet, with Web sites and mailing lists. Many groups are motivated by religious beliefs. Scott McDonald, a construction worker in Alabama, runs a Web site known as "Fight the Fingerprint."

McDonald: In the book of Revelation it talks about this numbering system that a kind of worldwide government will require people to have to buy or sell. And I see that happening with the Social Security number. Whether it is the mark of the Beast or not, it conforms to all the criteria.

But religion isn't the only reason he and other people object to the Social Security number. McDonald says many of the members of his mailing list simply worry about the number's power to cross-reference all sorts of private data, ranging from financial records to medical histories.

McDonald: That a single identifier can bring all that information together in one location, which makes it, in essence, one huge, large database. Everything about you can be collected through the Internet right now using that number.

Hostility to universal identification systems runs deep in American culture, something that may explain why it took decades of incremental change for the Social Security number to become the national identifier. Representative Ron Paul of Texas, one of the most outspoken privacy hawks in Congress, says his constituents are very suspicious of the number.

Paul: We've done some polling, and 80 percent of the people in my district and across Texas are very concerned and upset about the trends of the federal government toward using the Social Security number the way they do.

The most recent flashpoint in the battle over the number has been the 1996 Illegal Immigration and Reform Responsibility Act, which directed states to require Social Security numbers from all driver's license applicants. Congressman Paul interpreted the law as an effort to use the Social Security number to create a de facto national ID card by yoking all the state driver's license databases together with the Social Security number as the common denominator. The system would have taken effect in October 2000. But this fall, Congressman Paul and other conservative Republicans got the House and Senate to repeal it.

Congress has put some other limits on the government's use of the number. Most government agencies can ask for the number, but usually only on a voluntary basis, and they're supposed to tell you when it's voluntary. Only a few agencies can demand the number outright, most notably the Internal Revenue Service.

The private sector, on the other hand, is free to demand the Social Security number, whenever it wants do; a situation that sometimes leads to a test of wills with customers. Privacy advocate Twila Brase describes her experience with a nurse's aide at her doctor's office.

Brase: ... and so she said "Oh, I see you didn't fill in your Social Security number, and could I have it?" And I said, "Well, I don't give it out." And she said, "We have to have it." And I said, "No you don't, you can just find another number," at which point she tried to leaf through my entire medical record to find the Social Security number, which I'd never given. And then she was frustrated, and she said, "Fine. I guess we will."

Brase, who runs a lobbying group known as Citizens for Choice in Health Care, says although she makes it a point to withhold her number, she understands why most Americans give in.

Brase: If you're not a nurse, not part of the medical profession, you think that possibly not giving out your Social Security number will be detrimental to your health. And so, the pressure is on to just comply.

So is it worth all the time and effort to be stubborn about your Social Security number? Robert Gellman is a consultant who has worked on privacy issues in and out of government since the 1970s. He says people should protect the number, but they shouldn't think that's enough to protect their privacy.

Gellman: People react emotionally to the disclosure of the Social Security number, but they may pay less attention to other substantive bit of information about themselves, where they work, how much they make, and that sort of thing.

Gellman says in some ways, the six-decade-old controversy over the dangers of a national identity number has been overtaken by technology.

Gellman: Linking records is not that difficult anymore, even if you don't have a common number. You can do fuzzy searching to match names, even if the names are in different forms, and addresses, and it's actually not that difficult.

Gellman wants to see a comprehensive national policy on the privacy of personal information, and he says the obsession with the Social Security number often serves to distract citizens and elected officials from more pressing privacy questions, such as whether customers should have the right to see the personal information that companies and the government have already collected.

*****

As people trade their freedom away for a “perception of safety” it becomes easier and easier to just go with the flow .. But like the flow of water …does not often a flow lead to a waterFALL???..

…Think about it and …

…BE LOVE & BE LOVED!