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.
Originally posted by clearwater
I don't think it's that big a deal, alot of Canuckistanians already have passports.
I find the iron curtain thing of American's needing permission to leave their country much more disturbing.
Originally posted by jsobecky
originally posted by Infoholic
Now, I have shot down your every argument. You have nothing to base your argument. Would you like to continue? I sure hope every single American is watching this thread. They all need to see through the lies that you and your type try to sell.
No need to start calling people liars, etc. He was offering his interpretation of the bill, the same as you are offering yours. I personally agree with his assessment of the situation. You are creating a false alarm based upon your paranoia and a bad interpretation of the bill.
Originally posted by jsobecky
You have taken a bill that is intended to provide a uniform, non-counterfeitable drivers license and tried to turn it into a conspiracy to create a tracking device replete with financial history and DNA profile capable of monitoring our every move. You have shown a total ignorance of and disregard for the problems facing law enforcement and the threats to our nation. Your only proof is to parrot the verbage of the bill and add your own unfounded conclusions. Having failed at that, you now resort to personal attacks.
This bill establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical and possibly other characteristics. What is even more disturbing is that, by mandating that states participate in the “Drivers License Agreement,” this bill creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that will be shared with Canada and Mexico!
This bill could have a chilling effect on the exercise of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. It re-defines "terrorism" in broad new terms that could well include members of firearms rights and anti-abortion groups, or other such groups as determined by whoever is in power at the time. There are no prohibitions against including such information in the database as information about a person’s exercise of First Amendment rights or about a person’s appearance on a registry of firearms owners.
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.
There are no limits on what happens to the database of sensitive information on Americans once it leaves the United States for Canada and Mexico - or perhaps other countries. Who is to stop a corrupt foreign government official from selling or giving this information to human traffickers or even terrorists? Will this uncertainty make us feel safer?
Originally posted by DYepes
well my original point in the first post I made was that there is nothing stipulated in this law that states I must carry it on me at all times, and also present it or face consequences if approached without cause. I went over the section, and the majority of that whole bill from the source you cited, and there was nothing in there confirming such regulations. Of course you responded by saying it will occur as if it is fact, without anything in the bill to back up such claims.
Originally posted by SportyMB
...................(facial scans, finger prints, etc..) and so far 27 other countries (as of now) have access to the same network.
................... The U.S., UK, and other countries are already issuing the Biometric Passport to persons renewing or receiving a passport for the first time.
Originally posted by clearwater
I find the iron curtain thing of American's needing permission to leave their country much more disturbing.
Originally posted by DYepes
No Infoholic it is not called common sense, it is called you are trying to spread baseless fear as far as I see. If it is not written in law, it is not law. Please tell me exactly how you can state otherwise without being incorrect?
Originally posted by DYepes
I fail to see how nuclear facilities, courthouses, research labs or military bases are places or things that are to be enjoyed? that is what this legislation is targetting. And now you are trying to throw off your initial topic by brignign up HR 418, which from what I have actually reviewed here (number 2) is exclusivley in relation to immigrants, refugees, and the rights of the government to refuse admission. But that is not about the global national id's so I will skip that for now.
Originally posted by DYepes
In specificially discussing the national identification, there is nothing in the law stipulating the requirement to carry on you wherever you go and be asked for it without warrant or face consequences. likewise, there are no additional locations where this Id will be required. Anywhere you will need a National Id in the future, would be where you use a state or any other kind of ID now. The basis for the Federally acceptable identification as written in this law is for the purpose of having a specific identification to access sensitive areas of Federal Departments, probably due to the fact many state identifications are widely being distributed unauthorized and/or counterfettid. A Federally recognized id would likely be Federally distributed and be held easier for accountability.
(3) OFFICIAL PURPOSE.—The term ‘‘official purpose’’ includes
but is not limited to accessing Federal facilities, boarding federally
regulated commercial aircraft, entering nuclear power
plants, and any other purposes that the Secretary shall determine.
Originally posted by DYepes
You are manipulating the information with your opinions and "premonitions" and trying to pass them off as fact.
Originally posted by Infoholic
Originally posted by jsobecky
originally posted by Infoholic
Now, I have shot down your every argument. You have nothing to base your argument. Would you like to continue? I sure hope every single American is watching this thread. They all need to see through the lies that you and your type try to sell.
No need to start calling people liars, etc. He was offering his interpretation of the bill, the same as you are offering yours. I personally agree with his assessment of the situation. You are creating a false alarm based upon your paranoia and a bad interpretation of the bill.
Why would you quote me and say there's no need to start calling people liars? I, nor anyone else, have partaken in such debauchery.
Oh my, that means the RFID, DNA, etc. info stored on the ID card wasn't my idea after all.
[edit on 11/24/2006 by Infoholic]
Originally posted by jsobecky
I bolded, italicized, and underlined the section where you accused him of lying. I can do no more for you if you slip into denial.
Originally posted by jsobecky
The paranoid ranting of one legislator of what is possible to store on an RFID chip does not a fact make.
Originally posted by Infoholic
Thank you for pointing that out.
However, wouldn't you agree that if the options are in fact being discussed on the congressional floor, that would in fact make them an option? They are not considered "paranoid rantings" when they are debating the pros and cons before agreeing to the bill's language.
Originally posted by jsobecky
Well, I would agree that they are a possibility, esp. given today's technology. I think that where we disagree is the probability that they would ever be implemented. But we can agree to disagree, no?
There was some description in the bill of what info should be included in the chip. The only bio data I remember seeing was a fingerprint. But that would be necessary to make it more difficult to counterfeit, imo.
(9) A common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements.
Originally posted by jsobecky
What is more troubling to me are sub-dermal implants. Did you know that Mexico is already using chip implants in some of their officials? And Britain is using them in criminals as part of an early release program.
The idea is beginning to take hold here in the US also. VeriChip is an American company. Chips are being voluntarily used to store medical data in some patients.
We must be diligent, for sure. But we must also be smart when it comes to using technology. I'm against bigger gov't., but we really do need a Technology Dept. to act as a watchdog agency.