By Mark Daniels
Global Political Awakening
According to Alexander Bolton, in his article, "Political momentum grows for revoking birthright citizenship", Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina called on "all Americans" to carry a biometric identification card to prove to employers they are eligible to work legally.
Why wouldn't every American want to submit to carrying a "biometric" ID card in order to stop illegals from crossing our border? Oops, I guess it won't do that will it. It is only after they cross the border that we will catch them if they don't have an ID card, right? Sounds good so far......
Why wouldn't every American want to submit to carrying a "biometric" ID card in order to stop illegals from crossing our border? Oops, I guess it won't do that will it. It is only after they cross the border that we will catch them if they don't have an ID card, right? Sounds good so far......
Unless, of course, "comprehensive immigration reform" is really about something more sinister? Is all the recent news and controversy about Arizona's illegal immigration woes really an attempt to prepare the American people to give up their constitutional rights? Do people like Senator Graham really want to use Biometrics to track U.S. citizens every move?
Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, posits in his article,"Is Biometric, national ID Card an immigration game changer? "The Democrats' immigration-reform proposal (pdf) is 26 pages long. Pages 8 through 18 are devoted to "ending illegal employment through biometric employment verification." I don't think the Democrats are going to like me calling this a biometric national ID card, as they go to great lengths to say that it is not a national ID card, and make it "unlawful for any person, corporation; organization local, state, or federal law enforcement officer; local or state government; or any other entity to require or even ask an individual cardholder to produce their social security card for any purpose other than electronic verification of employment eligibility and verification of identity for Social Security Administration purposes."
Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, posits in his article,"Is Biometric, national ID Card an immigration game changer? "The Democrats' immigration-reform proposal (pdf) is 26 pages long. Pages 8 through 18 are devoted to "ending illegal employment through biometric employment verification." I don't think the Democrats are going to like me calling this a biometric national ID card, as they go to great lengths to say that it is not a national ID card, and make it "unlawful for any person, corporation; organization local, state, or federal law enforcement officer; local or state government; or any other entity to require or even ask an individual cardholder to produce their social security card for any purpose other than electronic verification of employment eligibility and verification of identity for Social Security Administration purposes."
So, yet again, we have the Democrats and the Republicans presenting this false dichotomy, acting like they are disagreeing about so-called "Immigration Reform" while they actually agree on one thing...."ALL AMERICANS" SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PRESENT THEIR PAPERS in order to work; support themselves, feed themselves, provide shelter for themselves.
Well, then you may ask.....what's the harm? In short, it is a clear violation of our right to privacy. Not to mention that it would also help accomplish what the "Globalists" have been attempting for a long time now.....to gain control over the masses.
According to one globalist, Zbigniew Brzezinski, "There is a new and unique development in human history that is taking place around the world; it is unprecedented in reach and volume, and it is also the greatest threat to all global power structures: the ‘global political awakening.’
Brzezinski seems to be concerned about the masses of people "awakening" to the injustices and inequalities around the world. Don't think for a moment that the United States is the first nation to implement a Biometric National ID Card; several countries in the European Union have them. Well, since the global elites are too few in number to accomplish their goals for population control, they need "front men". So, let me introduce you to Senator Chuck Schumer and the aforementioned, Senator Lindsey Graham.
In a Washington Post op-ed on immigration reform, Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), wrote:
"We would require all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who want jobs to obtain a high-tech, fraud-proof Social Security card. Each card's unique biometric identifier would be stored only on the card; no government database would house everyone's information. The cards would not contain any private information, medical information or tracking devices. The card would be a high-tech version of the Social Security card that citizens already have."
In an article at CATO @ LIBERTY, Jim Harper, reports: "First, let there be no doubt that this is a national ID card. As I’ve written in the past, a national ID has three characteristics: It is national—this is. It’s practically or legally required—this is. And it’s for identification—yep.
Students of card security will recognize one of the adjectives in the sentence as rather extravagant. No, it’s not “high-tech”—that’s a throwaway. The extravagant claim is “fraud-proof.”
The senators may mean one of three things, only one of which might be true. All three have to be true or their implication of a bullet-proof card system is false:
1) Impervious to fraud in issuance. Issuance is the weakest link in card security. Today at the hundreds and hundreds of DMVs across the country, ingenious young people (under 21—understand their motivation?) regularly submit identity documents falsely—siblings’ birth certificates or driver’s licenses, for example, or fake Social Security cards, utility bills, and such. Illegal aliens do too. Many DMV workers are gulls. Some can be made willing gulls for the right price. The same will be true of Social Security Administration workers. If the motivation is high enough, there is no practical way of making a national identity document fraud-proof in issuance.
2) Impervious to alteration. With various printing methods, secure card stocks, and encryption, card security is the easiest to do. It is possible to create a card that can’t be altered except at extraordinary expense.
3) Impervious to forgery. Odd though it may seem, technology does not govern whether a card can be forged—motivation does. Any card can can be forged if the price is right. Were a single card to provide entrĂ©e to work in the United States, it’s virtually guaranteed that criminal enterprises would forge the physical card and defeat the digital systems they need to.
The idea of a “fraud-proof” card (in whatever sense the senators mean) sounds nice. But it doesn’t bear up under the stresses to be encountered by a national ID system that governs whether people can earn a living (and probably much more). During the decade or more that this system is being designed and implemented, new ways of attacking biometrics and encryption will emerge. A reasonably ”fraud-proof” card today is not still fraud-proof in 2020.
Each card’s unique biometric identifier would be stored only on the card; no government database would house everyone’s information.
It is possible to have a biometric card without a biometric database. The card would hold a digital description of the relevant biometric (such as fingerprint or iris scan). That algorithm would be compared by the card or by a reader to the person presenting it, determining whether it should be accepted as theirs.
The promise not to create a biometric database is a welcome one. The senators should require—in law—that the enrollment process and technology be fully open and transparent so that non-government technologists can ensure that the system does not secretly or mistakenly collect biometrics.
But the promise not to create a national identity database is almost certainly false.
Let’s review how an identity card is issued at a motor vehicle office today: People take the required documents to a DMV and hand them over. If the DMV accepts their documentation, the DMV creates a file about the person containing at least the material that will be printed on the card—including the person’s photograph. Then the DMV gives the person a card.
What would happen if DMVs didn’t keep this file? A couple of things—things that make the senators’ claim not to be creating a national identity database highly doubtful.
If there were no file and a card were lost or stolen, for example, the person would have to return to the card issuer again—with all the documents—and run through the entire process again. Because they have databases, DMVs today can produce a new ID and mail it to the address of record based on a phone call or Internet visit. (They each have their owndatabases—much better than a single database or databases networked together.)
If no file exists, multiple people could use the very same documents to create ID card after ID card after ID card in the same name but with different biometrics. Workers in the card issuing office could accept bribes with near impunity because there would be no documents proving that they had issued cards wrongly. Criminal use of the system would swamp it.
So that they can provide customer service, and for security reasons, state DMVs keep information about license holders, including a biometric of a sort—a photograph. Senators Schumer and Graham may think that they are designing a database-free biometric identity system—such a thing can exist—but the realities they confront will drive it to become a full-scale biometric national identity database."
Senators, why not do it without the national ID?
Kurt Nimmo, in article at MediaMediocrity, writes: "A biometric ID system is not about securing the border or preventing terrorism. It is about tracking citizens.
“By far the most significant negative aspect of biometric ID systems is their potential to locate and track people physically. While many surveillance systems seek to locate and track, biometric systems present the greatest danger precisely because they promise extremely high accuracy. Whether a specific biometric system actually poses a risk of such tracking depends on how it is designed,” explains the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Earlier this month, a biometric ID card was introduced at a large technology show in Hanover, Germany. The card will mandatory for all Germans on November 1, 2010. “ The card has three functions: 1. biometric identity verification, 2. electronic identity verification, 3. authenticated electronic signature,” Fox News reported on March 2."
Watch the following YouTube video of an interview on Fox News with Congressman Ron Paul. Pay attention to how Megan subtly tries to make the Congressman appear naive about the subject. When he is proven to be correct about his fears, it will be too late!
Well, if you are not concerned, yet.....Do some more research! See what's happening in places like New Zealand. You too, can join the Global Political Awakening!
