It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

National ID. There is still time to stop it.

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2005 @ 09:39 AM
link   
The Real ID Act itself is scary, scarier yet is the provision buried in the bill to exempt the Department Of Homeland security from judicial review.




H.R. 418 [the Real ID Act of 2005] would provide additional waiver authority over laws that might impede the expeditious construction of barriers and roads along the border. H.R. 418 would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive any and all laws that he determines necessary, in his sole discretion, to ensure the expeditious construction of barriers and roads under IIRIRA § 102...

Section 102 of H.R. 418 would amend the current provision to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive any law upon determining that a waiver is necessary for the expeditious construction of the border barriers. Additionally, it would prohibit judicial review of a waiver decision or action by the Secretary and bar judicially ordered compensation or injunction or other remedy for damages alleged to result from any such decision or action.


This may seem like an obscure provision in a big bill, in reality it is a poison pill, designed to defang the judiciary and bring an end to judicial review. The rule of Constitutional law is under direct threat with this bill. Given the timing of this bill, right when the religious right is waging a jihad against the judiciary, it seems unlikely that this is an accident.




posted on May, 10 2005 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Your view is too narrow, Jemison. All of these identifying numbers will be attached to your ID in some fashion just as SSN is presently. I've had my driver's license scanned before when cashing a check.

By the way, this ID is not the "mark". The chip that comes after IS. Also, there is no such thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Following that train of logic, virtually ALL prophecies are self-fulfilling for the fact that SOMEONE made a choice to take a certain action...

I am paranoid of nothing. I just know what will be...it only takes some reading and understanding.


hatchedcross, look up Verichip. Presently, I think they are planning on injecting it just under the skin on your right tricep. But the other area of consideration is in the middle of the right hand between the bones of the ring and middle fingers.


[edit on 10-5-2005 by BadMojo]



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I don't get why there is even discussion of the bill, we stand no chance what so ever of stopping it or even slowing it. As for those talking of civil war if it goes through, you need to grow the hell up and get a grip on reality. There will never be a civil war here in the united states again, the people simply do not have the backbone for it. The ruling could come out tomorrow that we all had to have the chip implanted within 2 years time and everone would act all mad for a day, then the following day they would wake up and not care anymore.



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   
That is a sad truth AH. I, for one, plan to have my own plot to plow by the time the $h!t hit s the fan...as far away from technology as possible.



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   
All of this rhetoric about REAL ID legislation is totally just a misunderstanding. Have any of you that are "scared" of REAL ID read the bill? It has nothing to do with a national ID card!!!!!!!!!!! It's a bill to make a national standard that states must comply with when issuing drivers liscenses. Thats it. Thats all. No RFID tracking chip, No national ID card.

The bill is to make it harder for states like California to issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens (not just mexican workers but possible terrorists as well). As some of you might know, all you need for to get a drivers license or ID card in most states is a birth certificate and social security card, both are easily forged, and almost never verified. The bill requires a state to verify the social sec. # which only takes seconds, and to maintain a copy of the documents.

Look, I don't see the big deal, do you want illegal aliens to get legal ID's?
The bill has NO effect on most of us because we have all the nescessary documents and/or we live in states that already meet or exceed the new minimun standards.


H.R.418
REAL ID Act of 2005 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 202. MINIMUM DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ISSUANCE STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL RECOGNITION.
(a) Minimum Standards for Federal Use-

(1) IN GENERAL- Beginning 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, a Federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver's license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the requirements of this section.
(2) STATE CERTIFICATIONS- The Secretary shall determine whether a State is meeting the requirements of this section based on certifications made by the State to the Secretary of Transportation. Such certifications shall be made at such times and in such manner as the Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, may prescribe by regulation.

(b) Minimum Document Requirements- To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall include, at a minimum, the following information and features on each driver's license and identification card issued to a person by the State:

(1) The person's full legal name.
(2) The person's date of birth.
(3) The person's gender.
(4) The person's driver's license or identification card number.
(5) A digital photograph of the person.
(6) The person's address of principle residence.
(7) The person's signature.
(8) Physical security features designed to prevent tampering, counterfeiting, or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes.
(9) A common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements.

(c) Minimum Issuance Standards-

(1) IN GENERAL- To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall require, at a minimum, presentation and verification of the following information before issuing a driver's license or identification card to a person:



read the bill here

Any body see anything about a national ID in the bill? Any where did it say you need to provide your religon, political party, blood type? No. It Does Not.

This is not a "mark of the beast" or a communist ploy to control the population. It's just a standardization of a common document. If you want to get worked up about it fine, but it's a States Rights versus Federal Government issue, not a conspiracy to control the citizens.

//ed. to shorten quote AND provide link//

[edit on 10-5-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Did you happen to notice the word "minimum"? "Physical security features" has quite a broad range of implementation.

Understand that this will be LATER "interpretted" for more detailed requirements as HOMELAND SECURITY deems necessary. Please, read between the lines...

[edit on 10-5-2005 by BadMojo]



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Implementing RFID and/or some kind of tracking device would not be possible in Sweden - not in about ten years at least.

How come I can say such things? Simple. I am involved in politics and governmental work, and most of the politicians I know of at the top-level say no to such things. Sweden has a strong sens of integrity, or at least they try to have.

Our identification cards provide following information:

1) Unique personal number
2) First name and surname
3) Unique card number
4) Picture
5) Magnetic stripe

Manufacturer of the card is XPonCard www.xponcard.com...

The cards are usually requested by:

1) Law enforcement
2) Banks
3) Postal service
4) Shops (usually when buying with a credit card)



[edit on 10-5-2005 by StarLight]



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   
More people should be upset about this,and why the hell isn't this on the news?Oh thats right,I forgot...our news is screened and filtered before we get it.So that they can pass bills like this in secret.Ugh....things like this make me sick...and makes Canada look all the nicer.



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 09:56 PM
link   
There is no longer any time to stop it. The bill passed 100-0.

www.sfgate.com.../n/a/2005/05/10/national/w155857D84.DTL



posted on May, 10 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   
I started a new thread indicating that the Senate passed it--UNANIMOUSLY.


Hm...I'm due to renew my license in February 2006...wonder what'll go on then...?



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:45 AM
link   
Does anyone want to take a guess on repurcussions if the Security features are "accidently" disabled, ie demagnatized or the RFID stops working?


Will it be a felony, or a misdemeanor... how does this tie into the "new/expanded definition of terrorism? that was attached to the bill? Would this be considered a Terroristic Act?



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Can someone tell me why these laws being up for congree to vote on is kept from the people of the united states? ATS should vote someone in to keep an eagle eye on those folks. Keep the rest of us informed about the things going on behind closed doors, and away from those these types of laws effect.
We need a real snoop, detective type person with the same values I see in most of you posting here on this thread.
Votes anyone?



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Thermo Life is a Viable Energy Source for ActiveRFID Tags, ZigBee Chipsets, Wearable Electronics and Medical Devices

I pulled this from Raiders News. I believe this should answer your question regarding power and similar issues. I knew that this was an existing problem, and now it appears they've worked past that obstacle...



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   
As mentioned above, what's interesting about this bill is the portion which says that the Secretary of Homeland Defense can eliminate the process of judicial review if he needs to do so while building "barriers and roads". The EFF has this analysis of the bill at www.eff.org...


II. Waiver of Laws to Facilitate Barriers at Border44
Section 102 of the IIRIRA generally provides for construction and strengthening of barriers along U.S. land borders and specifically provides for 14 miles of barriers and roads along the border near San Diego, beginning at the Pacific Ocean and extending eastward. IIRIRA § 102(c) provides for a waiver of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA)45 and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)46 to the extent the Attorney General determines is necessary to ensure expeditious construction of barriers and roads...

H.R. 418 [the Real ID Act of 2005] would provide additional waiver authority over laws that might impede the expeditious construction of barriers and roads along the border. H.R. 418 would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive any and all laws that he determines necessary, in his sole discretion, to ensure the expeditious construction of barriers and roads under IIRIRA § 102...

Section 102 of H.R. 418 would amend the current provision to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive any law upon determining that a waiver is necessary for the expeditious construction of the border barriers. Additionally, it would prohibit judicial review of a waiver decision or action by the Secretary and bar judicially ordered compensation or injunction or other remedy for damages alleged to result from any such decision or action.

What the heck does this mean? What kind of wall-building is likely to invoke judicial review? Border-based concentration camps? Why are they planning something like this in Congress but we don't know anything about it?

[edit on 11-5-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps

What the heck does this mean? What kind of wall-building is likely to invoke judicial review? Border-based concentration camps? Why are they planning something like this in Congress but we don't know anything about it?


Any attempt by the government to tighten the border in california is instantly challenged by "Open Borders" groups and environmentalists. I believe the intent of stopping Judicial Review for this project was to keep construction from being halted or delayed by a long legal battle. As for "concentration camps", I seriously doubt that.

At any rate the bill limits exactly which area and project the judicial review is revoked for. The area in question is referred to by locals as Smugglers Gulch because of the high rate of drug trafficing and illegal border crossings. It's probably not fair if you're an "open borders" group who can't get public support for your views and are forced into using the courts to work your agenda. Same for some environmental groups.

I don't really support revoking judicial review, I don't think the constitution should be ignored by any branch of government. But I also understand the importance of securing the border in that area, and recognize the danger of doing nothing there. Suggesting "Concentration Camps" are going to be built is stretching it a bit, don't ya think?

As for congress not informing us about what they are doing, all I can say is that there are numerous websites that list all new bills and there contents as soon as they are submitted to congress. Not to mention you can watch debate on legislature and ALL votes on bills are recorded by CSPAN I, II, and III. If you want to know what congress is up to, you can find out, but you're Senator is not going to stop by on your lunch break and brief you.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   
looking4truth, have you ever seen this in any other bill? I'm just an amateur at following "the hill" (who has time to babysit one's government these days?) but it seems to me like this is a test balloon to see how many people will notice this sort of specification regarding judicial review. Do you know of another bill that had protection against judicial review inside which passed the Senate without a nay? I ask without sarcasm because I really don't know.

Frankly, all Americans know how porous the border with Mexico is but if we need an internal, American passport (which is what national ID will become) then why do we also need to build walls?

Either you keep America free internally (no national ID, build big walls) or you restrict the American citizens and then there's no need for a wall. (national-id means mexicans/terrorists are immediately identified non-citizens so walls are unnecessary).

Why do we need both?



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I see what you're getting at but the REAL ID bill doesn't have a provision for a national ID card. It isn't even mentioned in the bill.

As for the judicial review, there are several times when this has been used, for example Area 51 is exempt. Revoking judicial review is a bad idea, I'll agree with that, it puts them above the law. However in this case I could almost understand the reasoning behind it. Alot of people feel that since the area mentioned in the bill is so dangerous that it's a national security crisis. At least(at the very least) they limited the exemtion from review to just that project, I'm glad they didn't give it for all Homeland Security border projects.

Actually it's a pretty common practice. Take the E.P.A. for example, when it was created in the 1970's the president was given the authority to make government facilities exempt from E.P.A. rules, hence making a facility like Area 51 exempt from judicial review of it's environmental practices. However the exemptions are rarely if ever used. Congress can amend the the bill to get rid of such exemptions if the president abuses them. You'll find this junk in all kinds of bills.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Come on, l4t...what do you call "minimum document requirements and issuance standards for federal recognition"? Everyone will have an ID for which our NATIONAL government has issued MINIMUM standards.


"(2) STATE CERTIFICATIONS-.....Such certifications shall be made at such times and in such manner as the Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, may prescribe by regulation." I would like to point out the "SHALL BE MADE" part. That is a FUTURE provision allowing for whatever is deemed necessary by the Secretary of Transportation in consultation with Secretary of HS.


You may be giving our government alot more credit for "looking out for our well-being" than they deserve...



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jemison


Try again, Jemison. You've sadly underestimated the criminal element. Police and possibly banks are only ones INTENDED to scan this info.


I've had a drivers license for 21 years. It has NEVER been scanned.


Have you written a check lately at the grocery store? I have had to actually scan my ID through a machine and it takes your picture plus thumb print.




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join