Removal Surgery

I am an inventor as well as a victims of a crime. This cause is best described below
James Walbert
wichita, Kansas
United States
1 Team Member

I am a victim of a serious crime that has happened to me. I am an inventor, that is a victim of Illegal Implantation that is in need of removal of an Illegally implanted device. This device is  designed to track a person while in the privacy of thier private life. I have been threatned to either hand over my inventions or I will be killed for them, "truth".

   Well I am telling the truth and have more evidence then any other victim of this same crime. I am famous for speaking out against this crime and winning cases in court for this same crime. If one is to just google my name they can find my cases online. I have been published in many magazines as well as newspapers sold around the world. The most recent coverage of my case is printed in over 35,000 copies being sold on the newstand of Fortean Time issue number 243 2011. Just to check the validity of my claims to you, please do read this article to confirm. It's legit!   

  This is real and its expensive to get removed! I have been pumping out thousands to just protect my inventions as well as my family from this crime. As, you will see in the video as well as this article above, I am currently trying to stop this crime against myself and others. I have spoke out in Washignton DC against this crime and have also been the driving force for laws to be implemented against this same crime that I am a victim of. So, Please take the time to go over these House Bill's as well as the Senate Bill's too to validate the concern, as well as what I am speaking of.As, to the truth!

CO House Bill 07-1082

ND Senate Bill 2415

OK Senate Bill 47- House Bill 2092

MO House Bill 550

GA Senate Bill 235.ii

WI Assembly Bill 290

CA Senate Bill 362

VA Senate Bill 1046

TN House Bill 2059

OH Senate Bill 349

NH House Bill 686

AK Senate Bill 293

  Here some Radio /shows that I have been doing with professionals for my case. Please take the time to call themn for the further validation of need for donations for this case.

 This show is with the private investigator Melinda kidder.

 This show is with the elected Official Dave Larson

  So, if you can please help me out it would greatly appreciated, I would love to just get on with my inventing and life.

 Here are just a few professionals that are currently advocating for my case. Please goolge these professional as well to check for the "truth"


Politician David Larson, Elected Official to the County of San  Bernardino California .

Politician The Congressional Member Todd Tiahrt

Politician The State Rep Jim Guest

Private Investigator William J. Taylor

Private Investigator Melinda Kidder

Medical Professional, Dr John Hall MD.

Medical Professional, Hector Fernandez MD.

Medical Professional, Industrial Toxicologist REIT. Dr Hildegard Staninger.

Clinical Psychologist. MA. Cathy Meadows


 Here is a current law in Calf. If this is NOT REAL then why the laws against it?


New California Law Forbids Forced RFID Implantation in Humans

John Kuzin 
November 2007 | Privacy In Focus 

California has enacted a statute prohibiting the compelled or coerced implantation of a subdermal identification device, such as a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) microchip or a newer chipless "RFID tattoo." The new law does not impact voluntary implantation. California now joins Wisconsin and North Dakota as states that have banned forced RFID implantation. Florida is among several states considering a similar law. 

The new California statute (SB No. 362, now Chapter 538) was approved by Governor Schwarzenegger on October 12. It establishes a new Civil Code Section 52.7, which provides that "no person shall require, coerce, or compel any other individual to undergo the subcutaneous implanting of an identification device." It creates a civil action under which a person implanted may recover a "civil penalty" of no more than $10,000 per implant and no more than $1,000 "for each day the violation continues," actual damages and compensatory damages, as well as injunctive relief. Punitive damages may be awarded on proof of the defendant's "malice, oppression, fraud or duress" in requiring device implantation. This statute becomes effective on January 1, 2008. 

Why the Statute Believed Needed
Recent RFID technology advances in microchip miniaturization have resulted in the development of hundreds of new RFID-enabled products, including devices designed to identify, track and monitor people. The sponsor of the California law, State Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), introduced the bill after learning that a Cincinnati surveillance company,, had required employees who work in its secure data center to have an RFID chip implanted in an arm. 
In 2004, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved VeriChip Corporation's use of an RFID tag for human implantation to allow medical professionals to access a patient's medical history in case of an emergency. The VeriChip device is an ultra-small glass-encapsulated RFID tag (about the size of a grain of rice) that is injected beneath the skin. According to VeriChip, more than 2,000 people have had its RFID tag implanted. 

VeriChip Corporation, which went public in February of this year, addressed how unresolved privacy issues could impact its business in its February 9, 2007, prospectus filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission: "While we support all pending and enacted legislation that would preclude anything other than voluntary implantation, legislative bodies or government agencies may determine to go further, and their actions may have the effect, directly or indirectly, of delaying, limiting or preventing the use of human-implantable RFID microchips or the sale, manufacture or use of RFID systems utilizing such microchips." 

A December 2006 Department of Homeland Security privacy committee report noted that efficiencies from RFID-enabled identification documents are limited because staff still need some means of confirming that the document holders are who they say they are. This problem could be addressed with subdermal implantation of RFID devices. While subdermal RFID has some promise when used voluntarily, it comes with the same security and privacy risks associated with other RFID-enabled products. Because it is injected beneath the skin and is costly and challenging to remove safely, subdermal RFID presents a Pandora's Box of policy questions in addition to its implications for constitutionally protected rights to freedom and privacy. 

Pending before the California legislature are several other bills, also introduced by Senator Simitian, that are aimed at addressing privacy concerns of RFID use in school identification documents, driver's licenses and similar personal documents.

Find This Campaign On
raised by 6 people in 4 months
0% funded
0 time left
$100,000 USD goal
Flexible Funding This campaign has ended and will receive all funds raised.
Campaign Closed
This campaign ended on January 12, 2013
Do you think this campaign contains prohibited content? Let us know.