Mandantory passports/Global IDs and how the U.S. Gov't plans on issuing them.

Early next year the U.S. Dept. Of Homeland Security will require all travellers entering the U.S. to show a passport, even U.S. citizens. This is nothing new for foreign travellers and will mainly impact air travellers from the U.S., Canada and Mexico, who in the past have only had to show proof of citizenship (Canadian ID, driver's license, etc..).



It's good to tighten security and mandate passports for inner-North American air travel, especially with 8,000+ offices throughout the U.S. that can issue birth certificates and driver's licenses, that makes for an easy counterfeit market. We all remember how easy it was when we were teens to get fake ID's, it's not that hard for those who wish to enter the U.S. illegally and cause harm to do the same.

Looking at this from a conspiracy angle, let's say the goverment's true objective is to force people to volunteerly accept an I.D. that is part of a global network that contains your personal data (facial scans, finger prints, etc..) and so far 27 other countries (as of now) have access to the same network. Don't think it's possible? Well, it's already a reality. The U.S., UK, and other countries are already issuing the Biometric Passport to persons renewing or receiving a passport for the first time.

Sounds like another step towards global tagging and the possibilities of having an international network like this remind me of the Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report. The scary thing is that the data system is not 100% secure and could find it's way on the black market.




Related News Links:
www.passport.gov.uk
www.pcworld.com
www.msnbc.msn.com
www.schneier.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
US Electronic Passport now issued....Bio-data included!
New Biometric Passports Cracked

[edit on 22/11/2006 by SportyMB]

What does that have to do with Global ID's? I actually approve of the fact that those entering the U.S. have to provide proof of Citizenship instead of a simple Driver's License. This isn't an invasion of civil liberties; it's simply a good idea. Having a Passport is nothing new, but I am sure that many will say that it is only another way for Big Brother to track my movements.

the moronic side to this is that children now need passports whereas a birth certificate used to suffice. I am travelling with my kids next month and had to get my 1 year old son a passport. the passport is good for 4 or 5 years I think. His picture will be a joke in a year, let alone 4 or 5.

That said, they should crack down on the identification allowed when entering the country. This is a US passport, not a global ID and you can still use other forms of id when entering many countries. It's the return trip that you need the passport for.

Excellent find and analysis.

Scary, isn't it?

Apparently they have to know who we are, where we're going and what we're doing to control us more completely.

Only the criminals will be short-circuiting and bypassing the Biometrics.

The government knows that, of course. And they don't care - but are proceeding anyway. Interesting.

Originally posted by soficrow
Excellent find and analysis.

Scary, isn't it?

Apparently they have to know who we are, where we're going and what we're doing to control us more completely.

Only the criminals will be short-circuiting and bypassing the Biometrics.

The government knows that, of course. And they don't care - but are proceeding anyway. Interesting.

Wow, the government knowing who enters the country, that is a terrifying thought. Controlling us would imply needing an entrance and exit visa at the bare minimum, have you visited China recently.

Originally posted by Baphomet79
What does that have to do with Global ID's?

What else do you call it...it's a shared global form of identification. Currently, 27 countries have a shared database for passports. The only difference is with the design and looks of the passport. Soon, the U.S. will probably require many more countries to get on board with this.

I actually approve of the fact that those entering the U.S. have to provide proof of Citizenship instead of a simple Driver's License.

Same here, like I said, it's easy to counterfeit documents these days, we need a more secure form of ID. But just because this is good idea and the US is mandating that everyone shows a passport on arrival, that does not mean that the powers that be are not using this as a means to achieve other objectives.

This isn't an invasion of civil liberties; it's simply a good idea.

Your'e right, it's not invading anyone's liberties. But, imo, this is the first real step towards a global indentification. What better way to make this happen...it's not like the U.S. can tell other countries what kind of national ID they have to have...that's why they're starting with something they CAN control. And by the way things are going now, other governments in addition to the one's that already have, will follow.

Having a Passport is nothing new, but I am sure that many will say that it is only another way for Big Brother to track my movements.

In a way, yes....it will eventually happen, and this will only speed the process.

There's is also a high risk of having personal data used for other purposes. We all know that black market technology is not too far behind the gov'ts (what they release)....and soon the bad guys will have a way to easily scan and gather the data from our passports...or maybe even hack into the passport system.

To clear a few things up, I'm in favor of a more secure passport and national ID....I'm just not cool with any form of global ID/passport that is tied to the same system.

Originally posted by Baphomet79
have you visited China recently.

I Live in China, what's your point?

[edit on 22/11/2006 by SportyMB]

Sounds to me like Chertoff is getting a head start on the H.R. 1268 law that bush signed into law last May. The Real ID act is the only law that I've seen requiring an actual Federal ID, which IMO is what the passport would be. Maybe I'm wrong.

But then again, the Federal ID (H.R. 1268 will take effect in May '08) will be volentary... but if you don't get one, you can't get on a plane to begin with.

I love that! "You don't have to take the ID, but we'll take away your right to fly around the country, your right to enter any federal building; that includes the Supreme Court building (takes away your ability to fight it to the top), and federal libraries, and the such"

Wait a minute, you're telling me that if I don't accept a volentary ID card, then I won't be able to visit my grandfather's grave at Arlington? WTF!?!

I honestly have no problem with a National or even Global
ID. As long as the rules do not say I must mandatorly have my Id on me at all times and show it without justification. I have expressed my support for these things in past articles, mainly Real Id. It does not bother me, and it should not really bother you. The biggest issue most of you have is it may have RFID chips in them. to that I say, if you are not driving, just leave it somewhere when you go about your business. As long as you aint driving, because you need your license to drive anyways, you should never have a problem..

Originally posted by DYepes
I honestly have no problem with a National or even Global
ID. As long as the rules do not say I must mandatorly have my Id on me at all times and show it without justification.

That's just it. You will have to have the National ID on you at all times. If someone (authorative) wants to see your ID for whatever reason (justified or not), and you can't provide it... that can put you in a situation where you cannot prove yourself to be an American citizen. Look the law up, read it, and understand it...

Once you can't prove yourself a citizen, and you "protest" (no matter how peacefully) whatever situation, they would be able to lock you up without any reason and not allow you an attorney. All this can be done under the guise of national security (or control of the general populous).

1. No National ID - you can't prove you are an American citizen. (even thought it will be voluntary)
2. No Protesting it - since you can't prove you are an American citizen, you (as per H.R. 1268 definitions) can be labeled an "alien" and arrested on the spot, no questions asked.
3. Arrested under H.R.1268 definitions (as an alien) you don't have rights to habeas corpus. Read the Military Commissions Act.

It all works together. All the laws Bush has put into effect (they've been signed into law), are working against us and our futures. Period.


Yes, this bothers me a great deal. They are putting the American Populous under the Thumb of Control... and that is raping the rights, freedoms, and liberties that we all share under the U.S. Constitution.

Originally posted by DYepes
The biggest issue most of you have is it may have RFID chips in them. to that I say, if you are not driving, just leave it somewhere when you go about your business. As long as you aint driving, because you need your license to drive anyways, you should never have a problem.

What planet do you come from? What country do you live in? In America, you do not have to carry your driver's license around with you wherever you go (yes, it would prove to be convenient if you did). If you get pulled over without it, you have ample time to turn it in. The license to drive is just that... a license to drive. You do not have to carry it for identification simply because you are driving.

The RFID chip?... As well, per the Constitution, the government has no right what so ever to "track" the American general populous. None.

Ok, I am not exactly sure what part of my statements you are arguing as for the drivers license, so please clarify.

As far as you telling me the law requires me to show my Id for whatever reason whenever wherever, without warrant to do so, and carry ti at all times? Sorry but I have bot read this in any legislation, and since you are making this claim to try and inform me of the truth, I feel it should be your duty to inform me and point me to a source.

Originally posted by DYepes
Ok, I am not exactly sure what part of my statements you are arguing as for the drivers license, so please clarify.

As far as you telling me the law requires me to show my Id for whatever reason whenever wherever, without warrant to do so, and carry ti at all times? Sorry but I have bot read this in any legislation, and since you are making this claim to try and inform me of the truth, I feel it should be your duty to inform me and point me to a source.

Reread the post, DYepes... slowly, thoroughly, and completely.

Originally posted by Infoholic

Originally posted by DYepes
I honestly have no problem with a National or even Global
ID. As long as the rules do not say I must mandatorly have my Id on me at all times and show it without justification.

That's just it. You will have to have the National ID on you at all times. If someone (authorative) wants to see your ID for whatever reason (justified or not), and you can't provide it... that can put you in a situation where you cannot prove yourself to be an American citizen. Look the law up, read it, and understand it...

I have read the law and could not find this requirement. Can you point out the specific area where it says this?

The RFID chip?... As well, per the Constitution, the government has no right what so ever to "track" the American general populous. None.

It depends what you mean by "track". Does maintaining a database of Social Security numbers equate to "tracking"?

There isn't one single law ever written that states in it (for example, this one) "you'll have to have this id with you or you'll get arrested/can't come in"... c'mon...

No, it's not in black and white...but here's a pretty close example of what I'm referring to...

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 division, 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. Such certifications shall be made at such times and in such manner as the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, may prescribe by regulation.

source - Choose #6 since that would be the one that has been passed by both House and Senate and the president has signed, then scroll down to the section of drivers license and fed. id. (direct link to bill/bill section is temp file on Library of Congress Website and doesn't link correctly)

What that tells me, is "if you don't have identification that 'we' (the feds) approve of, then you are s.o.l." Now as far as where they can ask for it... is there anywhere that, without probable cause, law enforcement cannot ask for your ID? That in it's own is a heated debate here on ATS. Probable cause can be anything they can think of, don't kid yourself on that one.

Now, with that being said... I don't care if you are walking down the street, swimming in the sewers, or driving an ambulance... if you are asked at any time, by authority, for whatever reason, to see your Federal ID (ya know, the only one they deem to fit their own criteria)... and you don't have it... you, jso, are screwed. How would you argue with them about whether or not you should be allowed to go free? How do you plan on explaining to them, "I'm sorry officer, I must have left my Federal ID at home. Can I bring it to you later?"... or... "I'm sorry, Mr. Federal Agent, I forgot my Federal ID at home, would you mind getting that MP5 out of my face, please?"

Originally posted by jsobecky
It depends what you mean by "track". Does maintaining a database of Social Security numbers equate to "tracking"?

The SSN database was never intended to be a tracking device. The SS card you and I carry does not "communicate with a readable device".

Tracking, as I refer to it, is just that... tracking. The government knowing by satellite surveillance where we are, the government knowing the last book I checked out at the local library, the last time you purchased a box of condoms, the last time Joe Blow got a prescription refilled at the Pharmacy, the last time Jane Doe went to the doctor for a pap smear. That is tracking. That is the information that would be available "eventually" through the National ID.

This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on driver’s licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID would mean that the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, would know where Americans are at all time of the day and night.

source - As stated in a congressional address.

Originally posted by Infoholic

There isn't one single law ever written that states in it (for example, this one) "you'll have to have this id with you or you'll get arrested/can't come in"... c'mon...

No, it's not in black and white...but here's a pretty close example of what I'm referring to...
< snip >

What that tells me, is "if you don't have identification that 'we' (the feds) approve of, then you are s.o.l." Now as far as where they can ask for it... is there anywhere that, without probable cause, law enforcement cannot ask for your ID? That in it's own is a heated debate here on ATS. Probable cause can be anything they can think of, don't kid yourself on that one.

What you have pointed out are the requirements for a drivers license that meets federal requirements for acceptance by a federal agency. For example, should you want to use your drivers license to use as ID to obtain a federal document such as a passport. Nowhere does it state, imply, insinuate or otherwise suggest that you must carry it at all times, nor does it declare penalties for not doing so.

That is a far cry from your assertion that "You will have to have the National ID on you at all times."

Now, with that being said... I don't care if you are walking down the street, swimming in the sewers, or driving an ambulance... if you are asked at any time, by authority, for whatever reason, to see your Federal ID (ya know, the only one they deem to fit their own criteria)... and you don't have it... you, jso, are screwed.

Wrong. If asked for an ID today, it is not a requirement that you supply a drivers license. A bill enacted to federalize the requirements for a drivers license does not change that.

Originally posted by Infoholic

Originally posted by jsobecky
It depends what you mean by "track". Does maintaining a database of Social Security numbers equate to "tracking"?

The SSN database was never intended to be a tracking device. The SS card you and I carry does not "communicate with a readable device".

Is that what bother you? The words "machine readable"? Newsflash: most drivers licenses have had a magnetic strip on them for years.

As far as SS cards, you're right - they were never intended to be machine readable, probably because the technology did not exist back then, unless you count punch-card readers or large, bulky magnetic tape readers. But SS cards are easily counterfeited, so I would not be surprised to see them updated in the future.

Tracking, as I refer to it, is just that... tracking. The government knowing by satellite surveillance where we are, the government knowing the last book I checked out at the local library, the last time you purchased a box of condoms, the last time Joe Blow got a prescription refilled at the Pharmacy, the last time Jane Doe went to the doctor for a pap smear. That is tracking. That is the information that would be available "eventually" through the National ID.

That the gov't will track our every movement is pure paranoia. And the alarm bells that Ron Paul is ringing shows that he doesn't understand the basic concepts of active as opposed to passive RFID technology.

RFID

I totally support making people have passports who fly into the country. If you're flying between Canada or Latin America etc. and the U.S., for either business or pleasure, you should be able to afford a passport. Drivers' licenses are not proof of citizenship and birth certificates, as said, are not easily authenticated by immigration officers at airports.

edit:

I also think they should require passports at the U.S.-Mexico and U.S.-Canada auto traffic borders. I know it would be an inconvenience for people who live near the borders, so maybe the gov't can issue free passports for people living within a certain distance to help. But securing the borders should be the top priority in the post-9/11 era.

[edit on 11/23/2006 by djohnsto77]

Actually I dont care if they can track you or not.

If you know how much information is stored on the current verisign rfid chips you might understand the critics:

- personal information
- adress
- family
- driver license
- financial information

Also the information on those Chips is unencrypted. Anyone with minimum skill and software can actually walk by and read your RFID info on his PDA. So much about Personal Data "Protection".

IBM, Verisign and all of the Fascist Scum Relations

The point is: When I do not want to implant anything into my body and those chips are forced to every citizen in any country. I cant do anything about it.

Unless I use my old ID. What happens if I wont get medical treatment without having a chip? Or what happens if I dont get any job at all because I do not want some intrusive Glass-Citizen Object in my body?

Btw: I really love the poor child with the IBM-Barcode on his arm because it reminds us of our children who will be sodomized if we do not act now.

Not even mentioning the dirty attitude of that Verisign guy in the Interview.

Originally posted by jsobecky
What you have pointed out are the requirements for a drivers license that meets federal requirements for acceptance by a federal agency. For example, should you want to use your drivers license to use as ID to obtain a federal document such as a passport. Nowhere does it state, imply, insinuate or otherwise suggest that you must carry it at all times, nor does it declare penalties for not doing so.

That is a far cry from your assertion that "You will have to have the National ID on you at all times."

What I pointed out were requirements for a drivers license and/or a Federal ID that will be voluntarily required after May, 2008.

If you don't have either, what do you think the repercussions would be?

Wrong. If asked for an ID today, it is not a requirement that you supply a drivers license. A bill enacted to federalize the requirements for a drivers license does not change that.

I never indicated anything about today. The bill in question does in fact change that effective May, 2008.


As I stated before, if... IF you were asked for your ID (after this bill takes effect) and you cannot provide ample proof (proof them deef fit)... you cannot prove yourself to be an American citizen... thus rendering you an "alien".

If you, having been rendered an "alien", attempt to protest the federal agent that just forbid you access into a "ID requiring area"... you very well could be detained under the USA Patriot Act as "domestic terrorism". At that point, you are now a "detained alien". From here, they could place you in a detention facility of their choice and throw away the key... and you wouldn't be able to fight it... because...

as an "detained alien" with the attatched clause of domestic terrorism... you lose your habeus corpus under the military commisions act!

Now, I would much imagine you are going to critisize my "fear of the worst"... but none the less... these are in fact possibilities that the government has. Do you understand that. They, the government, have the option to impose these measures. Doesn't that bother you? The government should not have the "option" to do these things. If the government in fact has the "option" to do as they wish, or to twist the law to suit them... that indicates "control" to me, and not a means to ensure national security.

[edit on 11/23/2006 by Infoholic]

Originally posted by Infoholic
What I pointed out were requirements for a drivers license and/or a Federal ID that will be voluntarily required after May, 2008.

"Voluntarily required"? Huh?

If you don't have either, what do you think the repercussions would be?

What happens today if you don't have ID on you when asked for it? The very same things will happen in 2008.

And, states can refuse to co-operate with the new federal requirements.

As I stated before, if... IF you were asked for your ID (after this bill takes effect) and you cannot provide ample proof (proof them deef fit)... you cannot prove yourself to be an American citizen... thus rendering you an "alien".

No it doesn't render you an alien. You will still have the opportunity to provide an ID. Nothing changes.

If you, having been rendered an "alien", attempt to protest the federal agent that just forbid you access into a "ID requiring area"... you very well could be detained under the USA Patriot Act as "domestic terrorism".

Why in the world would you protest it? The access rules are the access rules, and you either follow them or you don't get access.

And your conclusion about being detained under the PA is wrong. Nowhere in the legislation does it state that.