The UN Plans To Implement Universal Biometric Identification For All Of Humanity By 2030

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/02/2015 20:10 -0500
The UN Plans To Implement Universal Biometric Identification For All Of Humanity By 2030
Submitted by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,
Did you know that the United Nations intends to have biometric identification cards in the hands of every single man, woman and child on the entire planet by the year 2030?  And did you know that a central database in Geneva, Switzerland will be collecting data from many of these cards?  Previously, I have written about the 17 new “Global Goals” that the UN launched at the end of September.  Even after writing several articles about these new Global Goals, I still don’t think that most of my readers really grasp how insidious they actually are.  This new agenda truly is a template for a “New World Order”, and if you dig into the sub-points for these new Global Goals you find some very alarming things.
For example, Goal 16.9 sets the following target…

“By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration”

The United Nations is already working hard toward the implementation of this goal – particularly among refugee populations.  The UN has partnered with Accenture to implement a biometric identification system that reports information “back to a central database in Geneva”.  The following is an excerpt from an article that was posted on findbiometrics.com…

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is moving forward with its plans to use biometric technology to identify and track refugees, and has selected a vendor for the project. Accenture, an international technology services provider, has won out in the competitive tendering process and will oversee the implementation of the technology in a three-year contract.

The UNHCR will use Accenture’s Biometric Identity Management System (BIMS) for the endeavor. BIMS can be used to collect facial, iris, and fingerprint biometric data, and will also be used to provide many refugees with their only form of official documentation. The system will work in conjunction with Accenture’s Unique Identity Service Platform (UISP) to send this information back to a central database in Geneva, allowing UNHCR offices all over the world to effectively coordinate with the central UNHCR authority in tracking refugees.

I don’t know about you, but that sure does sound creepy to me.
And these new biometric identification cards will not just be for refugees.  According to a different FindBiometrics report, authorities hope this technology will enable them to achieve the UN’s goal of having this kind of identification in the hands of every man, woman and child on the planet by the year 2030…

A report synopsis notes that about 1.8 billion adults around the world currently lack any kind of official documentation. That can exclude those individuals from access to essential services, and can also cause serious difficulties when it comes to trans-border identification.

That problem is one that Accenture has been tackling in collaboration with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, which has been issuing Accenture-developed biometric identity cards to populations of displaced persons in refugee camps in Thailand, South Sudan, and elsewhere. The ID cards are important for helping to ensure that refugees can have access to services, and for keeping track of refugee populations.

Moreover, the nature of the deployments has required an economically feasible solution, and has demonstrated that reliable, biometric ID cards can affordably be used on a large scale. It offers hope for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goal of getting legal ID into the hands of everyone in the world by the year 2030 with its Identification for Development (ID4D) initiative.

The Identification for Development (ID4D) initiative was originally launched by the World Bank, and they are proud to be working side by side with the UN to get “legal identity” into the hands of all.  The following comes from the official website of the World Bank…

Providing legal identity for all (including birth registration) by 2030 is a target shared by the international community as part of the Sustainable Development Goals (target 16.9). The World Bank Group (WBG) has launched the Identification for Development (ID4D) cross-practice initiative, with the participation of seven GP/CCSAs sharing the same vision and strategic objectives, to help our client countries achieve this goal and with the vision of making everyone count: ensure a unique legal identity and enable digital ID-based services to all.

Of course all of this is being framed as a “humanitarian” venture right now, but will it always stay that way?
At some point will a universal biometric ID be required for everyone, including you and your family?
And what would happen if you refused to take it?
I could definitely foresee a day when not having “legal identification” would disqualify you from holding a job, getting a new bank account, applying for a credit card, qualifying for a mortgage, receiving any form of government payments, etc. etc.
At that point, anyone that refused to take a “universal ID” would become an outcast from society.
What the elite want to do is to make sure that everyone is “in the system”.  And it is a system that they control and that they manipulate for their own purposes.  That is one of the reasons why they are slowly but surely discouraging the use of cash all over the world.
In Sweden, this movement has already become so advanced that they are now pulling ATMs out of even the most rural locations…

The Swedish government abetted by its fractional-reserve banking system is moving relentlessly toward a completely cashless economy.  Swedish banks have begun removing ATMs even in remote rural areas, and according to Credit Suisse the rule of thumb in Scandinavia is “If you have to pay in cash, something is wrong.”  Since 2009 the average annual value of notes and coins in circulation in Sweden has fallen more than 20 percent from over 100 billion to 80 billion kronor.  What is driving this movement to destroy cash is the desire to unleash the Swedish central bank to drive the interest rate down even further into negative territory.  Currently, it stands at -0.35 percent, but the banks have not passed this along to their depositors, because depositors would simply withdraw their cash rather than leave it in banks and watch its amount shrink inexorably toward zero.   However, if cash were abolished and bank deposits were the only form of money, well then there would be no limit on negative interest rate policy as banks would be able to pass these negative interest rates onto their depositors without adverse consequences.  With everyone’s wages, salaries, dividends etc, paid by direct deposit into his bank account, the only way to escape negative interest rates would be to spend, spend, spend.  This, of course, is precisely  what the Keynesian economists advising governments and running central banks are aiming at….a pro-cash resistance movement is beginning to coalesce and the head of a security industry lobbying group relates,  “I’ve heard of people keeping cash in their microwaves because banks won’t accept it.”

If you aren’t using cash, that means that all of your economic activity is going through the banks where it can be watched, tracked, monitored and regulated.
Every time the elite propose something for our “good”, it somehow always results in them having more power and more control.
I hope that people will wake up and see what is happening.  Major moves toward a one world system are taking place right in front of our eyes, and yet I hear very, very few people talking about any of this.
So where do you think that all of this is eventually heading?

Ban Ki-Moon Condemns the American Stand on Syria, Endorses Putin’s

Posted on October 31, 2015 by Eric Zuesse.

Eric Zuesse

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/10/ban-ki-moon-condemns-the-american-stand-on-syria-endorses-putins.html 

In an interview with Spanish newspapers that was published October 31st, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon condemned U.S. President Barack Obama’s demand that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad be removed from office, and Moon said: “The future of Assad must be determined by the Syrian people.”

Here is the entire quotation: “The future of President Assad must be decided by the Syrian people. Now, I do not want to interfere in the process of Vienna, but I think it is totally unfair and unreasonable that the fate of a person [diplomatese here for: U.S. President Barack Obama’s demand that Assad be removed from the Presidency of Syria] to paralyze all this political negotiation. This is not acceptable. It’s not fair. The Syrian government insists that Assad should be part of the transition. Many Western countries oppose the Syrian government’s position. Meanwhile, we lost years. 250,000 people have been killed. There are 13 million refugees or internally displaced. Over 50% of hospitals, schools and infrastructure has been destroyed in Syria. You must not lose more time. This crisis goes beyond Syria, beyond the region. It affects Europe. It is a global crisis.”

The U.N. Secretary General is here implicitly blaming all of this — lots of blood and misery — on U.S. President Obama, and on the “many Western countries” who ally with him and have joined with him in demanding regime-change in Syria.

The position of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has been, and is, to the exact contrary of Obama’s: namely, that only an election by the Syrian people can determine whom Syria’s President should be. The U.N. Secretary General is here agreeing with Putin, and rejecting Obama’s demand, that the matter be determined instead by non-Syrians, and by non-democratic means (which is basically like George W. Bush did in Iraq, and like Barack Obama did in Libya).

Suckers in the West fall for the Western aristocracies’ line that Putin and not Obama is wrong on this and is the cause of the dragged-out Syrian war. Such fools don’t even ask themselves whether in this dispute it is Obama, or instead Putin, who is supporting the most basic democratic principle of self-rule by the people. But the average individual is that manipulable: so manipulable as to think that black is white, and white is black; that good is bad, and bad is good. Totally manipulable.

This interview was buried by Spanish newspapers, because the Spanish government is allied with the United States. For example, the most prominent Spanish newspaper to publish even quotations from this interview is El Pais, and their headline for the story is “Catalonia is not among the territories with the right to self-determination.” Even there, the headline is false. What Moon actually said instead on that issue of the Catalonian independence movement, was: “The Catalan question is a very delicate matter and, while the UN Secretary General, I’m not in a position to comment on that because it is a purely internal matter.” Lies and distortions in the Western ‘news’ media are that routine: so obvious, sometimes, virtually any intelligent reader can easily recognize that he’s reading lies and propaganda (like in that ‘news’ story).

This newspaper actually buried the part about Assad and Obama (the blockbuster in the entire story) near the end, but not at the very end, of its report, because one of the standard things that ‘news’ media do if they want to de-emphasize a particular point is to bring the matter up near the end but not at the end. To place it at  the end, would emphasize, instead of de-emphasize, the given point: it’s not the professional way to bury news. Knowledge of how to bury news is important for the managers of any ‘news’ medium, because such knowledge is essential in order to make the medium achieve the objectives of the medium’s owner, the propagandistic function, which is the main reason why wealthy people buy major ‘news’ media, and why major corporations chose to advertise in (and thereby subsidize) these media (which increases that given ‘news’ media-owner’s income).

As to why the managers (including editors) of El Pais wanted their ‘reporter’ to misrepresent Moon as being opposed to Catalan independence, the reason is that the owners of El Pais are opposed to Catalan independence. It’s not only in the editorials. With very few exceptions, a newspaper’s editorials and its ‘news’ reporting are slanted the same way. However, sometimes, for particular reasons, the editorial position is instead slanted the opposite way from the ‘news’ ‘reporting.’ Public relations, or PRopaganda, is a science, not for amateurs. And a major function of management is to apply that science so as to maximize value for the medium’s owners. It’s like any business, but the press is also part of the business of government: moulding the public’s opinions so as to serve the needs of the aristocracy that owns the vast majority of the nation’s wealth. The idea of ‘the free press’ is itself PRopaganda. In reality, the press is far from free.

Anyway, Ban ki-Moon took a rare courageous position here: what he said was correct, though it’s virtually unmentionable in the West. For example: how widely is this news-report being published? It was submitted to virtually all national news-media in the U.S. and several other Western countries. You can google the headline, “Ban Ki Moon Condemns the American Stand on Syria, Endorses Putin’s” to find out how many (and which ones) are actually publishing it.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Foreign powers (US/Israel Military/banking/industrial complex) behind crisis in Syria: UN

http://presstv.com/Detail/2015/09/03/427577/Syria-UN-Daesh-Paulo-Pinheiro-

Thu Sep 3, 2015 1:26PM

A handout image released by Syria’s official SANA news agency shows security forces and people gathering at the site of a car bombing in the northwestern city of Latakia, September 2, 2015. ©AFP

Syria is gripped by a conflict largely driven by foreign powers in line with their "geostrategic interests," says a new UN report, criticizing the international community's failure to protect asylum seekers fleeing the violence-wracked Arab country. 
"The war [in Syria] is increasingly driven by international and regional powers, primarily in accordance with their respective geostrategic interests," the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Syria said in its latest report published on Thursday.
The report is based on 355 interviews as well as medical records, photographs and satellite imagery, documented murders, rapes and abductions committed across Syria between January and July 2015.
The document warned that the Takfiri Daesh (ISIL) terrorist group has expanded its terror campaign in the central and southern parts of Syria, saying, "A resonant cry for peace and accountability rings out.”
The report expressed concerns about “an alarming exacerbation of the sectarian dimension, instigated by the intervention of foreign" militants and extremist elements.

Members of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Syria give a press conference at the UN building in the Swiss city of Geneva, September 3, 2015. ©AFP

The UN commission of inquiry, led by Paulo Pinheiro, further called on the international community to allow in more Syrian refugees, emphasizing that negligence of the Syrians is causing a refugee crisis in Europe.
The panel demanded "expanded resettlement, humanitarian admission, flexible visa policies, family reunification, or academic and sponsorship schemes."
The foreign-sponsored conflict in Syria, which flared up in March 2011, has reportedly claimed more than 240,000 lives up until now. Over 2,000 Syrians have died at sea during their journey towards Europe over the past four years.

Syrian refugee children play at an unofficial refugee camp in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli, September 2, 2015. ©AFP

The Syrian government has repeatedly called on countries supporting and funding terrorists, particularly Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, to stop their hostile practice against the Syrian people.
The UN says the militancy has displaced over 7.2 million Syrians internally, and compelled over four million others to take refuge in neighboring countries, including Jordan and Lebanon.

The US Military's Sexual-Assault Problem Is So Bad the UN Is Getting Involved

Several countries told the US its policies on justice for military sexual assault victims weren’t good enough.

—By Jenna McLaughlin

| Thu May 14, 2015

The UN Human Rights Council's review of the United States United Nations Logo Piotr Zajc/Shutterstock; SoldierJohn Gomez/Shutterstock

 http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/un-human-rights-council-us-military-do-better-victims-sexual-violence

The US military has a problem with sexual violence. That's the conclusion of the Universal Periodic Review Panel, a UN panel that aims to address the human rights records of the 193 UN member states. This is the second time that the panel has scrutinized the United States; the first was in 2010, when the list of concerns included detention in Guantanamo Bay, torture, the death penalty, and access to health care. Its latest report came out Monday morning, and there was a surprising addition to the predictable laundry list of US human rights violations.
In one of 12 final recommendations, the UN Council urged the US military "to prevent sexual violence in the military and ensure effective prosecution of offenders and redress for victims." Other recommendations included stopping the militarization of police forces, closing Guantanamo Bay, ending the death penalty, and stopping NSA surveillance of citizens.
For years US lawmakers and activists have complained about sexual assault in the military, but this is the first time the United Nations has addressed the issue.
Representatives from Denmark and Slovenia were especially outspoken in their criticism of the United States for not doing enough to prevent and prosecute alleged cases of sexual assault. Vojislav Šuc, Slovenia's representative, encouraged the US to "redouble efforts to prevent sexual violence in the military and ensure protection of offenders and redress for victims."
Stephanie Schroeder, a military sexual-assault survivor who traveled to Geneva for the hearing, said in a press release, "Today's outcome shows that redress can be won before the UN—and hopefully lead to meaningful change back home."
The UN panels likely decided to investigate US military sexual violence in response to a report last year from the Service Women's Action Network and Cornell Law School's Avon Global Center for Women and Justice and the Global Gender Justice Clinic. It analyzed statistics from the Department of Defense, survivors' stories from federal cases, and interviews with survivors.
The report concluded, "In cases where an act of sexual assault has already been committed in the military, the U.S. oftentimes fails to promptly and impartially prosecute and effectively redress the assault and thereby violates servicemen and women's rights under international law."
The UN Human Rights Council evaluation targeted the military's reporting process, in which the decision of whether to prosecute cases of alleged sexual assault or harassment is left to superiors in the chain of command rather than an outsider with experience in sexual assault. For years, activists and lawmakers in the United States have tried to change this protocol—but leaders in the military have balked at bringing civilians into bases and military academies to investigate alleged assaults. Advocates say that commanders should not be in charge of handling these cases, since they are not trained in legal or criminal matters and often directly supervise both the victim and the perpetrator. Victims often are afraid to report the assault, fearing retribution or inaction. In a 2014 RAND Corporation survey of service members who reported sexual assaults, 62 percent of those who responded claimed they experienced social or professional retaliation after reporting unwanted sexual harassment, including being fired.
Denmark's representative to the UN Human Rights Council, Carsten Staur, recommended "removing from the chain of command the decision about whether to prosecute cases of alleged assault."  His comments marked the "first time that a human rights body has called upon the U.S. to remove key decision-making authority from the chain of command in cases alleging sexual violence," noted Liz Brundige, the Avon Global Center's director, in a press release.
The State Department, the Pentagon, and the US representative to the United Nations did not respond to requests for comment on the council report.
When the UN Human Rights Council last reviewed the United States in 2010, the US government promised to respond to all of the recommendations—including improvements to health care, criminal justice, and other areas of concern—with a written report of goals. This year, the UN Human Rights Council commended the US for six areas of "positive achievement," including strengthening the social welfare system in the United States, creating a task force on 21st-century policing, taking some measures to address violence against women, upholding some of the rights of LGBT individuals, improving access to health care, and releasing details on CIA interrogation techniques. When the panel reviews the United States again, the US will have to update the United Nations on its progress on sexual assault in the military.
Of course, the problem of military sexual assault is not limited to the United States. Last year, Swedish UN official Anders Kompass leaked to French authorities an internal investigation detailing allegations that French soldiers on a peacekeeping mission in the Central African Republic raped children and traded food for sex. Kompass said that he leaked the report because he was concerned that the United Nations would not disclose its findings or take action. Just last week, after the report was revealed by the Guardian, French prosecutors launched an investigation into the allegations. The whistleblower is now under internal investigation, according to the UN secretary general's office, for a "serious breach in protocol" and risking victims' privacy. French President Francois Hollande has declared he "will be merciless" if the allegations are proven true.
 

UN Report Says Small-Scale Organic Farming Only Way to Feed the World


Image: eatdrinkbetter.com

Nick Meyer | AltHealthWORKS

http://www.technologywater.com/post/69995394390/un-report-says-small-scale-organic-farming-only-way-to

Polio Made a Slight Comeback in 2013 (in countries we are at war with...., go figure)

The number of reported polio cases worldwide rose from 2012 to 2013, even as health organizations step up their effort to fully eradicate the disease. According to the World Health Organization, the annual number of cases rose 70 percent from 223 in 2012, and the number of countries reporting the infections rose from 4 to 8.

The WHO credits the rise due to "spillover" from countries like Pakistan, Nigeria, and Afghanistan—the three countries where polio has never been fully eradicated. While numbers fell in Nigeria and Afghanistan, the polio vaccine is undergoing a large controversy in Pakistan, where vaccination programs are mistrusted  following the United States' fake program used to track down bin Laden. Violence against polio workers in the country, where 20 workers have been killed since July 2012, is still a threat.

Elsewhere, the civil war-torn Syria is facing its own polio crisis, reporting 10 cases last month. That makes it the country's first outbreak of the disease since 1999, and getting aid to is a logistical nightmare given the ongoing violence. The UN estimated that half a million children in the country have not been vaccinated against the disease. A couple of weeks ago, the UN airlifted vaccines for 538,000 people into the northern region of the country.

(the UN also is apparently sending live oral polio vaccine to the Philippines after their devastation???)

This article was originally published at http://www.thewire.com/global/2013/12/polio-made-slight-comeback-2013/356179/

Also related - 

In his fifth annual letter (22 pages, HTML or PDF), Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, argues for setting clear goals and developing ways to measure progress toward improving the human condition. The letter also includes a sidebar by Melinda Gates, co-chair of the Gates Foundation, about initial challenges in obtaining baseline and historical data for a collaborative effort to expand access to contraceptives.In the letter, Gates points to the United Nations Millennium Development Goals as an example of how setting clear and concrete goals can bring focus to high-priority efforts aimed at improving the lives of the world's poorest people. At the same time, Gates acknowledges the difficulty of measuring results accurately and creating an environment where problems, and what is and isn't working, can be discussed openly. "[A]ny innovation — whether it's a new vaccine or an improved seed — can't have an impact unless it reaches the people who will benefit from it," Gates writes. "[I]nnovations in measurement are critical to finding new, effective ways to deliver these tools and services to the clinics, family farms, and classrooms that need them."In the area of polio eradication, a top priority for the foundation, just three countries — Nigeria, Pakistan, and Afghanistan — have failed to eradicate the disease. Gates describes how in northern Nigeria, specially trained staff working independently of foundation-sponsored vaccination campaigns created more accurate maps by walking through every high-risk area and using high-resolution satellite images, enabling them to more efficiently identify unvaccinated children. The measurement systems put in place by the global polio eradication initiative "will be invaluable for other healthcare activities, including routine vaccination of infants," Gates adds — activities that have far-reaching benefits beyond polio eradication.Gates also makes the case for measurement in the field of education reform, based on the foundation's Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project, which concluded in a January 2013 report “that there were observable, repeatable, and verifiable ways of measuring teacher effectiveness," including student surveys and reports by trained evaluators. "[T]he most critical change we can make in U.S. K-12 education is to create teacher feedback systems…that are properly funded, high quality, and trusted by teachers,” Gates writes. "These measurement systems need to provide teachers with the tools to help support their professional development. The lessons from these efforts will help us improve teacher education programs."In terms of the outlook for the next fifteen years, Gates lists two concerns: ongoing reductions in government assistance for international health and development projects, and challenges in aligning the international community around clear goals and efforts to help the world's most vulnerable populations. While many developing countries are seeing economic growth, Gates argues, aid remains critical to innovation in delivering solutions. "[N]ow that we're more precisely measuring indicators like child mortality, people are able to see the impact aid has in stark terms — that it's the difference between putting people on HIV treatment or letting them die. When framed this way, aid has a better chance of becoming a priority for people." "2013 Annual Letter From Bill Gates." Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Annual Letter 12/11/2012. - See more at: http://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/bill-gates-issues-fifth-annual-letter#sthash.Obe4mIgd.dpuf

Uruguay’s Prez Rips Into U.N. Official Over Marijuana Law: ‘Stop Lying’

By NaturalHealthWarriors on December 16, 2013

via Huffington Post

José “Pepe” Mujica shot back on Friday at the president of the International Narcotics Control Board, a U.N. agency, for saying that his administration refused to meet with the agency’s officials before legalizing marijuana this week.

Mujica batted down the criticism, insisting that his administration is open to discussing the law and accusing the INCB President Raymond Yans of applying a double standard by criticizing Uruguay, even as U.S. states pass laws to legalize recreational marijuana consumption.

“Tell this old guy not to lie,” Mujica told reporters, according to Colombian daily El Espectador. “Any guy in the street can meet with me. Let him come to Uruguay and meet with me whenever he wants… He thinks that because he’s in an international position, he can tell whatever lie he wants.”

Yans had said that the law passed by the Uruguayan legislature this week legalizing the consumption and government-controlled production and sale of marijuana would violate the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, which Uruguay has signed.

The INCB president said on Wednesday he was “surprised” that the Uruguayan government “knowingly decided to break the universally agreed and internationally endorsed legal provisions of the treaty.

But Mujica dismissed the criticism as a double standard, pointing out that the U.S. states of Colorado and Washington have already legalized weed and that both of the states’ populations individually exceed Uruguay’s 3.4 million inhabitants.

“Do they have two discourses, one for Uruguay and another for those who are strong?” Mujica asked.

Uruguay’s Senate gave its final approval Monday to a law legalizing the consumption of marijuana creating a government-controlled market for the soft drug’s production and sale. Those wishing to smoke marijuana recreationally must register with the government and limit their intake to 40 grams per month, or whatever they can reap from up to six plants they may grow at home.

Mujica and his supporters argued that regulating marijuana consumption and production would take the profits out of the hands of criminals, rather than continuing using soldiers and police to enforce a prohibition policy that fails to keep people from smoking weed.

The United States has largely refrained from publicly criticizing Uruguay’s actions, though State Department Spokesman Pooja Jhunjhunwala also said the new law would violate the 1961 U.N. convention on drug control in comments to the Washington Post.

But Uruguay’s president said he’d faced international pressure, including from neighboring Brazil, for pushing ahead with his effort to end marijuana prohibition.

“There’s always going to be pressure,” Mujica told Brazilian daily A Folha de São Paulo before the law passed. “There’s an apparatus in the world that lives by repressing, and it costs a lot of money.”