Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

If you don't think our troops deserve BODY ARMOR

Posted By: Lilly on 2005-10-13
In Reply to: So much for caring about the troops. You are a joke. nm - sm

provided by the President who is all too eager to see them die but never had the guts to put is own life on the line for his country, then YOU are the one who doesn't care about our troops.


If I'm a joke, you're a disgrace and a fraud.




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

    The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
    To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


    Other related messages found in our database

    Troops die without body armor. Why the delay?





    For Lack of Body Armor, Troops Die. Why the Delay?





    Paul Rieckhoff on body armor in USA Today: Rieckhoff and other veterans are calling for a congressional investigation. That's justified. Tracking their complaints could save lives in future wars — not to mention this one.

     From USA Today

    After Army and Marine Corps generals were summoned Wednesday to a closed-door briefing on Capitol Hill, the brass emerged with vows to improve body armor for all U.S. troops in Iraq.


     That's good to hear, but shouldn't it have happened sooner?


     Members of Congress were reacting to a newly reported analysis by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner, which concluded that 80% of the fatal injuries to Marines in the study might have been prevented by additional armor coverage. Side armor, a special concern, is just beginning to arrive in Iraq.


     The armor situation fits a deadly pattern of blunders by the war's architects. The quick invasion of Iraq happened as planned, but — as former Iraq civilian administrator Paul Bremer acknowledges in his new book — the Bush administration didn't anticipate the widespread and lethal insurgency that followed.


     The occupying U.S. troops soon found themselves facing deadly new tactics with inadequate armor on both their vehicles and themselves. This tragic miscalculation has had tragic consequences.


     To date, 1,510 soldiers and 633 Marines have died in Iraq, many of them killed by rifle shots or explosions in which better armor could have made a difference.


     Army generals say the body armor used by soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan has already been improved seven times. All soldiers there have bullet-proof body vests called Interceptors, which have front-and-back ceramic plates. Side panels, which are added to the Interceptors to provide more coverage, are just now being distributed to Marines.


     Defending their body-armor decisions, Army spokesmen conjure up images of medieval combatants whose ever-heavier personal armor brought their horses to their knees. A soldier wrapped in armor can't fight in the heat of Iraq, they say.


     Maybe not, but the Pentagon owes further explanations to military families and to Congress, which since 2001 has appropriated $302 billion to cover operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Some of the questions that need answering include:


     • Was there proper planning? Thousands of troops arrived in Iraq with old-style flak jackets. Not until January 2004 did all troops have the new Interceptor vests, according to a Government Accountability Office report released last year.


     •Was the armor upgraded fast enough? The Marine Corps says it moved quickly to add side armor upon learning the news from the examiner's report. But the Army has yet to supply its soldiers with side protection.


     • Do the services have adequate supply systems? Those systems appear hobbled by slow turnarounds and poor reliability. In November, more than 18,000 vests were recalled for failing to meet ballistics tests.


     Army and Marine commanders know that no battle plan survives the first contact with the enemy. The question is how quickly the services adapt. The answer in Iraq is tooslowly, says Paul Rieckhoff, who led an Army platoon there protected only by the flak jackets, which can't stop an AK-47 round.


     The body armor delays mirror problems with the Humvee. Not until last July did the Army finally replace its soft-skinned Humvees, proven tragically vulnerable to roadside bombs, with a fully armored version.


     Rieckhoff and other veterans are calling for a congressional investigation. That's justified. Tracking their complaints could save lives in future wars — not to mention this one.



    Like body armor?

    Army order soldiers to get rid of better body armor or lose death benefits
    Army Orders Soldiers to Shed Dragon Skin or Lose SGLI Death Benefits

    By Nathaniel R. Helms

    Two deploying soldiers and a concerned mother reported Friday afternoon that the U.S. Army appears to be singling out soldiers who have purchased Pinnacle's Dragon Skin Body Armor for special treatment. The soldiers, who are currently staging for combat operations from a secret location, reported that their commander told them if they were wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin and were killed their beneficiaries might not receive the death benefits from their $400,000 SGLI life insurance policies. The soldiers were ordered to leave their privately purchased body armor at home or face the possibility of both losing their life insurance benefit and facing disciplinary action.

    The soldiers asked for anonymity because they are concerned they will face retaliation for going public with the Army's apparently new directive. At the sources' requests DefenseWatch has also agreed not to reveal the unit at which the incident occured for operational security reasons.

    On Saturday morning a soldier affected by the order reported to DefenseWatch that the directive specified that all commercially available body armor was prohibited. The soldier said the order came down Friday morning from Headquarters, United States Special Operations Command (HQ, USSOCOM), located at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. It arrived unexpectedly while his unit was preparing to deploy on combat operations. The soldier said the order was deeply disturbiing to many of the men who had used their own money to purchase Dragon Skin because it will affect both their mobility and ballistic protection.

    We have to be able to move. It (Dragon Skin) is heavy, but it is made so we have mobility and the best ballistic protection out there. This is crazy. And they are threatening us with our benefits if we don't comply. he said.

    The soldier reiterated Friday's reports that any soldier who refused to comply with the order and was subsequently killed in action could be denied the $400,000 death benefit provided by their SGLI life insurance policy as well as face disciplinary action.

    As of this report Saturday morning the Army has not yet responded to a DefenseWatch inquiry.

    Recently Dragon Skin became an item of contention between proponents of the Interceptor OTV body armor generally issued to all service members deploying in combat theaters and its growing legion of critics. Critics of the Interceptor OTV system say it is ineffective and inferior to Dragon Skin, as well as several other commercially available body armor systems on the market. Last week DefenseWatch released a secret Marine Corps report that determined that 80% of the 401 Marines killed in Iraq between April 2004 and June 2005 might have been saved if the Interceptor OTV body armor they were wearing was more effective. The Army has declined to comment on the report because doing so could aid the enemy, an Army spokesman has repeatedly said.

    A U.S. Army spokesman was not available for comment at the time DW's original report (Friday - 1700 CST) was published. DefenseWatch continues to seek a response from the Army and will post one as soon as it becomes available. Yesterday the DoD released a news story through the Armed Forces News Service that quoted Maj. Gen. Steven Speaks, the Army's director of force development, who countered critical media reports by denying that the U.S. military is behind the curve in providing appropriate force protection gear for troops deployed to Iraq and elsewhere in the global war against terrorism. The New York Tiimes and Washington Post led the bandwagon of mainstream media that capitalized on DefenseWatch's release of the Marine Corps study. Both newspapers released the forensic information the Army and Marines are unwilling to discuss.

    Those headlines entirely miss the point, Speaks said.

    The effort to improve body armor has been a programmatic effort in the case of the Army that has gone on with great intensity for the last five months, he noted.

    Speaks' assessment contradicts earlier Army, Marine and DoD statements that indicated as late as last week that the Army was certain there was nothing wrong with Interceptor OTV body armor and that it was and remains the best body armor in the world.

    One of the soldiers who lost his coveted Dragon Skin is a veteran operator. He reported that his commander expressed deep regret upon issuing his orders directing him to leave his Dragon Skin body armor behind. The commander reportedly told his subordinates that he had no choice because the orders came from very high up and had to be enforced, the soldier said. Another soldier's story was corroborated by his mother, who helped defray the $6,000 cost of buying the Dragon Skin, she said.

    The mother of the soldier, who hails from the Providence, Rhode Island area, said she helped pay for the Dragon Skin as a Christmas present because her son told her it was so much better than the Interceptor OTV they expected to be issued when arriving in country for a combat tour.

    He didn't want to use that other stuff, she said. He told me that if anything happened to him I am supposed to raise hell.

    At the time the orders were issued the two soldiers had already loaded their Dragon Skin body armor onto the pallets being used to air freight their gear into the operational theater, the soldiers said. They subsequently removed it pursuant to their orders.

    Currently nine U.S. generals stationed in Afghanistan are reportedly wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin body armor, according to company spokesman Paul Chopra. Chopra, a retired Army chief warrant officer and 20+-year pilot in the famed 160th Nightstalkers Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), said his company was merely told the generals wanted to evaluate the body armor in a combat environment. Chopra said he did not know the names of the general officers wearing the Dragon Skin.

    Pinnacle claims more than 3,000 soldiers and civilians stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan are wearing Dragon Skin body armor, Chopra said. Several months ago DefenseWatch began receiving anecdotal reports from individual soldiers that they were being forced to remove all non-issue gear while in theater, including Dragon Skin body armor, boots, and various kinds of non-issue ancillary equipment.

    Last year the DoD, under severe pressure from Congress, authorized a one-time $1,000 reimbursement to soldiers who had purchased civilian equipment to supplement either inadequate or unavailable equipment they needed for combat operations. At the time there was no restriction on what the soldiers could buy as long as it was specifically intended to offer personal protection or further their mission capabilities while in theater.

    Yes, it makes me feel better, my body is my body
    and nobody can tell me what to do with my body or what is in my body till the 120th day!
    And to 'sm' or 'm' or whatever she calls herself on this board, I wish the same she wished to 'abc' in her nasty reply 11/16/08.

    And I have become VERY thick skinned
    So if he knows your soul before you have a body, and the body he planned for that soul is killed (sm
    Does he just give the same soul to a different body? Just curious how your beliefs work.
    You might not deserve him, but I do, and so...sm
    do millions of other Americans, and we will vote for him, and he will win!
    You obamamatrons will deserve what you get.

    That's why polls deserve little to no attention
    nm
    You don't deserve a dignified response. nm

    x


    The rich dont deserve a tax cut? They already pay a
    nm
    Right, Obama does not deserve to be a candidate
    nm
    Doesn't even deserve an answer
    Blaming McCain and Palin for this is idiotic.
    What about it? It ain't his body.
    You think I'd carry a child for 9 months, give birth and then hand it over to the father - NOT! 
    It's MY body, and always will be - before,
    Go screw with your OWN body.
    Yes, I think ALL kids deserve affordable healthcare.

    I know a little 5-year-old boy with a cancerous brain tumor.  His family owns a local construction company and makes decent money, maybe even the $80,000 you speak of.  They still have had to have 2 fundraisers just to cover costs associated with saving this precious little boy's life, and they have "decent insurance."


    So yes, I think ALL FAMILIES, regardless of income, should have access to more affordable insurance.  What happens if one of the parents becomes unemployed?  They lose their healthcare coverage.  I do not like the fact that most insurance is covered through your employer.  Many people have to work the whole time they are fighting cancer or other diseases for fear of losing their health insurance.  Even people making $80,000 per year can drown in medical bills that total in the hundreds of thousands, so I don't think their children should be excluded from CHIP healthcare either.  People making $80,000 would not get on the program for free, but at a much more reasonable cost than most insurance companies would charge.


    When I say I think ALL children in the USA should have free or affordable healthcare, I mean ALL children, rich and poor.


    While she does deserve our thoughts and prayers, I dare say...
    some will say she deserves as much respect as the left showed to Mrs. Palin's handicapped child and pregnant daughter.
    911 and Katrina victims don't deserve compassion?
    Wow....Oh that's right...he's on Fixed Noise.  That means he must be the perfect pub.  Get a grip.  The man's a radical right winger just like the rest of the crew over there.
    911 and Katrina victims don't deserve compassion?
    Wow....Oh that's right...he's on Fixed Noise.  That means he must be the perfect pub.  Get a grip.  The man's a radical right winger just like the rest of the crew over there, which is the why, by the way, he got kicked off CNN.  Hopefully Lou Dobbs will be next. 
    Body by Fisher?
    Lawyers Spar Over Role of Religion in 'Intelligent Design' As Pa. Court Battle Over School Policy Opens
    There's only so much ignorance that a body can take
    nm
    Nope. NOTHING I have, in or out of my body,
    YOUR 'god' is not necessarily MY God. My God does not happen to be a judgemental control-freak like your 'god' is.
    Agree to disagree. I don't think we deserve Barack Obama...
    and with his same stances on things, I wouldn't vote for him, I don't care what party he represented. It is not about party for me. It is about the stand of the man. And for me it is nobama, no way, no how...no matter what ticket he is running on.
    He didn't deserve the Nobel Peace Prize
    "What do you have against clean environment, alternative energy, jobs creation and a global warming plan?"

    I don't have anything against a clean environment, alternative energy or job creation. I don't, however, buy into the global warming hype, especially when it's pushed as hard algore is trying to sell it because he is a politician and I don't trust him anymore than I trust the rest of them. There HAD to have been someone more worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize than that clown. (I'll bet he traded some of his carbon credits for votes.)
    I agree. Trolls dont even deserve a response.
    nm
    No, I am not confusing the body with an 844-ft mountain top...
    What I am referring to are the many cases where schools will have rules that ban crosses or any form of Christian expression, but allow Muslims/Sikhs to wear headscarves. The ACLU by and large will not take those cases even if asked. If situation reversed, they will sue on behalf of Muslims/sikhs without being asked.

    Again...the first ammendment guarantees freedom of religion and the free expression thereof. The last 4 words mean as much as the first words.

    The first ammendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion...like the church of England that required everyone to follow that religion. There is nothing in the constitution that uses the words separation of church and state. The founding fathers did not seperate Christianity from the government...it is interwoven in the founding documents, on our currency, on the walls of Congress. It is part of the American heritage. From the drive to come here for religious freedom came the drive to set out the other individual freedoms.

    As I said, if people find sharing the gospel annoying a simple I am not interested works with most Christians. There is always a radical fringe associated with any religion...some more than others. There is a radical political fringe.

    All I am saying is that Christians are discriminated against in this country. And the same people who will rise up and decry discrimination against Muslims, et al, will not rise up and decry the same discrimination against Christians. I would think civil liberties apply to ALL of us....

    I said nothing about putting a cross on public ground...don't know why you went off on that tangent. :)
    It's not for you to decide what a woman does with her body
    Mind your own business. Keep your own legs closed when the rapist approaches.
    If you're so worried about your body........
    and you think so much of YOUR bodyl, at what point do you think about the body of an unborn child? Shouldn't you be worried about YOUR body before you get pregnant?

    What about the freedom and rights of a living being that just happens to be carried in a womb? If you don't want a baby, then how about NOT getting pregnant in the first place? And please don't give me the garbage about "it happens", blah, blah, blah.....there's always a way to make sure it doesn't happen.
    While a fetus remains a part of MY body, is sure
    And it will never be yours, or anyone else's.


    I just get tired of hearing "It's my body, I can
    do what I want to with it."  I had a second child totally unplanned for and totally not expected (my first only being 7 months old when I got pregnant), but the thought of abortion never crossed my mind.  That baby was a human being, not just a fetus to me.  That child is now 26 years old and expecting her first child.  She has brought so much joy into my life that I can't even bear to think what it would be without her.  Had I chosen to abort her, I would have missed one of the greatest blessings I had ever been given.  It wasn't just my body that was involved.  The only choice I made was taking the risk for an unwanted pregnancy.  If I didn't want to be pregnant, I probably should have been more careful.  Now, I'm so happy that I wasn't very careful.  She is a beautiful young woman that I treasure dearly.
    Well, I read the stench of body odor on the mall
    was almost unbearable in places. Believe me, I live in a town where we have those persons who refused to bathe (don't know how bathing hurts the environment, but they think it does), and they are lovingly referred to as the great unwashed.  The radiology clinic where I worked at began to refuse to take them unless they washed...anyway these are always the ones who show up at the anti-Bush, anti-war rallies in our area.
    So SP wrapping the flag around her body for a political photo op
    x
    What about feeling the baby move inside your body? sm
    So the baby I felt moving in my tummy at 20 weeks gestation wasn't alive?
    Exactly right, we all deserve human rights, ALL OF GOD'S CHILDREN, MUSLIM, WHITE, RACIST, REPUB,
    nm
    Say it ain't so....Family Upset Over Soldier's Body Arriving As Freight..sm

    I hope this family is able to effect a change in this. This would be something worth quitting your job and marching for change.  I'm heartbroken reading of the audacity of the military to ship a fallen soldier as freight.  This has to be a mistake. Pinch me I'm dreaming...Democrat. 


     


    Family Upset Over Soldier's Body Arriving As Freight


    Bodies Sent To Families On Commercial Airliners



    POSTED: 4:46 pm PST December 9, 2005

    UPDATED: 10:19 am PST December 12, 2005








    There's controversy over how the military is transporting the bodies of service members killed overseas, 10News reported.

    A local family said fallen soldiers and Marines deserve better and that one would think our war heroes are being transported with dignity, care and respect. It said one would think upon arrival in their hometowns they are greeted with honor. But unfortunately, the family said that is just not the case.

    Dead heroes are supposed to come home with their coffins draped with the American flag -- greeted by a color guard.

    But in reality, many are arriving as freight on commercial airliners -- stuffed in the belly of a plane with suitcases and other cargo.















    John Holley and his wife, Stacey, were stunned when they found out the body of their only child, Matthew John Holley, who died in Iraq last month, would be arriving at Lindbergh Field as freight.

    Matthew was a medic with the 101st Airborne unit and died on Nov. 15.

    When someone dies in combat, they need to give them due respect they deserve for (the) sacrifice they made, said John Holley.

    John and Stacey Holley, who were both in the Army, made some calls, and with the help of U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, Matthew was greeted with honor and respect.

    Our familiarity with military protocol and things of that sort allowed us to kind of put our foot down -- we're not sure other parents have that same knowledge, said Stacey Holley.

    The Holleys now want to make sure every fallen hero gets the proper welcome.

    The bodies of dead service members arrive at Dover Air Force Base.

    From that point, they are sent to their families on commercial airliners.

    Reporters from 10News called the Defense Department for an explanation. A representative said she did not know why this is happening.



    Thank God our troops

    Okay...so you are okay with troops in ...
    Afghanistan...just not in Iraq...?
    Yes, has nothing to do with the troops.
    And no, it does not make her a resident expert. Explain the differences of opinions amongst our own troops. Not all of them believe what they are doing is justified. Not every mother believes it either. It has nothing at all to do with being prideful of our sons and daughters. My point being is that their job is done. My brother is a gunny and is doing his job, but he no longer feels justified in doing it, and he is not alone. And I believe HIM. If the other poster is a resident expert because her son is in Iraq, then I guess that makes me a resident expert as well, no?

    Yes, Liberal Thinker, and proud of it. I have not abandoned compassion. My agenda is to stop this needless war. My compassion is expanded to all not just a few. It started in my brain, and I am letting it spill out my mouth.

    Yes. I criticize that with which I do not believe. That is our right is it not?

    And last time I looked, this is a political forum, and a liberal forum at that.
    It has nothing to do with our troops.
    Why are you taken it so personally? You must realize that for every picture of sunshine your son sends you there is one that depicts suffering and starvation and death. I have family fighting it Iraq. It's doesn't change my stance that I feel that they are there unjustly. That's the real deal. Not quite sure how having family there makes you the resident expert. The point to my post was that we shouldn't be there anymore. Our troops have done what the Bush administration wanted done on the initial invasion. Now we are there fighting for an ideal that doesn't exist. So, in that perhaps you don't have a clue. If you son dies at the hands of an insurgent, those same insurgents who benefit from keeping unrest in the country and keeping it destabilized, a situation that our government and you refuse to recognize or better yet do anything about, I wonder if you will feel the same? Would his death be justified then? We are not fighting terrorists anymore in Iraq. They've moved on to other countries. What happens if there is another strike? Our troops are too thin and they are tired. Draft? Getting on your patriotic horse isn't help us end this war any sooner. There is no pride in this war anymore, if there ever was.

    We have been paying Pakistan since 2001 to help fight terrorism. They haven't done much with our 10 billion dollars have they? If Al- Qaeda is to blame for Bhutto's death, then Pakistan should deal with it, and I don't believe we should be sending them anymore money. We shouldn't have been sending them money to begin with.

    This is a widespread virus of Islamic extremism that we have concentrated mostly in Iraq while Al-Qaeda has gained strength in other countries while our military is being depleted. It is to their benefit this war continues because it destabilizes OUR country. Unless we have a full coalition from other countries to help fight this war, it cannot be won and we are wasting our time and our money on a pipe dream.

    We do not have infinite resources to fight a civil unrest that will probably never be rectified. This war was handled poorly from the beginning and it is getting worse by the day.

    I don't think YOU are paying attention to what is really go on in Iraq. Do you want your son there indefinitely? How about your son's son? This is a religious war for them, it will never end unless we end it.

    That's what the troops are supposed to be doing
    The key word is *securing.*  It's an extreme exaggeration to say that the U.S. was supporting Hezbollah by making sure a Suni and Shiite combined rally did not get out of hand, but it's par for the course of for the dramaticists known as the mainstream media.  Poor and misleading reporting is what they specialize in.
    Say thanks to the troops...(see link)...sm
    nm
    Oh, so that is your message to our troops...
    Go to work and do your job. Just live with the protesting and ignore it?
    Somehow, I don't think our troops see things that way. sm
    I don't think that is a good analogy. 
    The troops speak

    Replying to a post below, I thought this would be a good link in a separate message in case people skip over it below.


    The US Military troops speak and here is what they say - 68% for McCain, 23% Obama.  Here is the link below.


    http://activemilitaryformccain.blogspot.com/


    So if you take that, plus Obama has a 5 point lead over McCain in today's polls, plus the 11% who are not decided it is a very close call.  November 4th is going to be an excited day for sure.


    Yes, hurrah for the troops.....sm
    I saw this the other day, and while I do not hold much stock in the mainstream polls that poll the dems 3 or 4:1, I was very heartened to see this story. Of course, I could only find it on Fox, and another military website.

    Seems the mainstream media didn't want the rest of the American public to know about it, which is hardly surprising.


    At any rate, since I believe the majority of those polled for this study are older military, who most likely are Republican, of course they support John McCain. They know that he is the most able leader for our country in times like these.


    I'd also like to post this video again. Dear Mr. Obama:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8
    I agree with you about the troops.
    I also believe that the REAL disgrace was for them to be sent into a war based on lies and the blind ambitions of the imperial wizard and his henchmen. I also do not believe that a policy based on "saving face" is worth sharing one more drop of blood over...on either side.
    You just blew your pro troops facade. sm
    but you are pretty easy to read. It isn't about the war or Cindy Sheehan or the price of gasoline.  It's about your virulent and soul destroying damnable hatred for George W. Bush that even goes so far as to extend to his family.  You, and those like you, put this country and our troops at risk every single day.  Why not do the right thing since you hate this war so very much.  BE A HUMAN SHIELD.  As if.
    So much for caring about the troops. You are a joke. nm

    I think you would be very surprised at how the troops see you, Lilly.

    I am sure the troops in Afghanistan would be interested to know they are not there.
    ,
    I never said I didn't support the troops!
    You took what I said way out of context. I support the troops, I just want to know when it will be over. I want to know when our government will start to pay attention to OUR country instead of going around trying to fix everyone ELSE'S problems. I have a brother in the military...in Iraq. I never said I didn't support them. Unfortunately for them, they don't have a say in what they are having to do.
    Implanted Chips in Our Troops? sm
    Implanted Chips in Our Troops?

    A Florida company wants to get under the skin of 1.4 million U.S. servicemen and women. VeriChip Corp, based in Delray Beach, Fla., and described by the D.C. Examiner as one of the most aggressive marketers of radio frequency identification chips, is hoping to convince the Pentagon to allow them to insert the chips, known as RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) chips under the skin of the right arms of U.S. servicemen and servicewomen to enable them to scan an arm and obtain that person’s identity and medical history. The chips would replace the legendary metal dog tags that have been worn by U.S. military personnel since 1906.

    The device is usually implanted above the triceps area of an individual’s right arm, but can also by implanted in the hand if scanned at the proper frequency. The VeriChip responds with a unique 16-digit number, which can correlate the user to information stored on a database for identity verification, medical records access and other uses. The insertion procedure is performed under local anesthetic, and once inserted it is invisible to the naked eye.

    The company, which the Examiner notes has powerful political connections, is in discussions” with the Pentagon, VeriChip spokeswoman Nicole Philbin told the Examiner. The potential for this technology doesn’t just stop at the civilian level,” Philbin said. Company officials have touted the chips as versatile, able to be used in a variety of situations such as helping track illegal immigrants or giving doctors immediate access to patient’s medical records.

    On Monday the Department of State started to issue electronic passports (e-passports) equipped with RFID chips. According to reports the U.S. government has placed an order with a California company, Infineon Technologies North America, for smart chip-embedded passports.

    The Associated Press said the new U.S. passports include an electronic chip that contains all the data contained in the paper version name, birth date, gender, for example and can be read by digital scanners at equipped airports. They cost 14 percent more than their predecessors but the State Department said they will speed up going through Customs and help enhance border security.

    The company's hefty political clout is typified by having former secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, on its board of directors.

    Thompson assured the Examiner that the chip is safe and that no one — not even military personnel, who are required by law to follow orders — will be forced to accept an implant against his or her will. He has also promised to have a chip implanted in himself but could not tell the Examiner when.

    I’m extremely busy and I’m waiting until my hospitals and doctors are able to run some screens, he told the newspaper.

    Not everybody agrees with Thompson, the Examiner reported, noting that the idea of implanting the chips in live bodies has some veterans’ groups and privacy advocates worried.

    It needs further study,” Joe Davis, a retired Air Force major and a spokesman for the D.C. office of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, told the Examiner.

    And Liz McIntyre, co-author with Katherine Albrecht of Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track your Every Move with RFID, said that VeriChip is a huge threat” to public privacy.

    They’re circling like vultures for any opportunity to get into our flesh,” McIntyre told the Examiner. They’ll start with people who can’t say no, like the elderly, sex offenders, immigrants and the military. Then they’ll come knocking on our doors.”

    In an e-mail to the Examiner, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., wrote: If that is what the Defense Department has in mind for our troops in Iraq, there are many questions that need answers. What checks and balances, safeguards and congressional oversight would there be?” Leahy asked. What less-invasive alternatives are there? What information would be entered on the chips, and could it endanger our soldiers or be intercepted by the enemy?”

    The company, the Examiner wrote, is also unsure about the technology. According to company documents, radio frequencies in ambulances and helicopters could disrupt the chips’ transmissions. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, VeriChip also said it was unsure whether the chip would dislodge and move through a person’s body. It could also cause infections and adverse tissue reactions,” the SEC filing states.

    But Philbin downplayed the danger of the chips.

    It’s the size of a grain of rice,” she said. It’s like getting a shot of penicillin.”

    Newsmax.com