Dan Price’s blog
Weblog of a cyber-geek

This is somewhat of a conspiracy, but it is truly strange that on June 6th 2006 (06/06/06), George Bush announced a plan for a biometrics system to be implemented in the USA to track all immigrants.

666 (Greek passages read 616) is supposed to be the “Mark of the Beast” or the “Number of the Beast”, mentioned in Revelation 13. The passage:

““And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.”
Revelation 13:16-18″

In general, I’m not one for conspiracies. However, surely it’s a bit strange that on 06.06.06., George Bush gives a speech about immigrants and ID cards, including mentioning biometrics:

“What really Congress needs to do is to use a biometric technology to create a new tamper-proof identification card for every legal foreign worker,” he said. “We need a tamper-proof card. If you’re here legally working, here’s your card, and you got to show it. And a business owner has got to call for it, and if they hire somebody without the tamper-proof card, they’re in violation of the law and will be fined.” (Taken from New York Times article).

YouTube also had a video of Bush announcing this plan:

Perhaps this is just a massive coincidence, but it’s interesting at least. On a date some associated with the Antichrist and the Mark of the Beast, Bush talks about bringing in a new ID system for immigrants, meaning they won’t be able to work without having ID on them. ID cards are becoming more popular, with governments assessing whether or not to implement them on a national scale so that we are all watched. Some have even suggested chip implants into our arms or other areas of the body so that we can be scanned and our identity validated. Who knows? Perhaps one day, we will have chip implants in our right hands or even implants into our brains (a suggestion made not long ago on a BBC documentary). Is this passage coming true today?

Well finally, Clinton (or at least her campaign) have admitted defeat and thrown in the towel. The long hard battle to become Democratic Candidate is over and Obama has clinched it. The next thing on Obama’s list is probably picking his running mate - his Vice President if he ends up winning.

Personally, I think picking Clinton for this would be a bad idea. An online petitionкомпютри втора употреба calling for Obama to make her his Vice President in the campaign has started and there is definitely plenty of support for this. However, would Obama want to pick a candidate who could possibly overshadow him in the campaign or at least prove as popular as himself? What about all of the comments that have passed between them? (Remember: “shame on you Barack Obama…”).

It would make sense for Obama to pick a candidate who reaches out to groups of people where he isn’t very popular himself - typical Blue Collar workers and Latinos for example. Clinton is strong in these areas. But at what cost? The Clinton crowd and the Obama crowd are quite different and after such a bitterly divisive campaign, would they, or could they, just “kiss and make up”? I don’t think so. In my opinion, Obama should pick a candidate who is popular with Latinos and Blue Collar workers in a similar way to Clinton is, but that it shouldn’t be Clinton herself.