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.

 

Did you ever realize...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 10:20 PM
link   
...if there was no such thing as ID, or all forms of ID were done away with, no one could pretend to be you?

It's like rights... When you were given all these rights you had no say on for a reason, they took away your natural absolute freedom. They even made it so these rights costs to defend. Now if you dont have the money you loose the lil approved freedoms they gave you in this actual central governmental prison which sets you far away from your natural absolute freedom.

It's a conspiracy so that you have to buy protection:

1) from an ID somebody else could use
2) to maintain your rights that they set up to excape you
3) to fight the law that's multiplying to get you in legal trouble one way or the other down the road or up the hill

It's time to get rid of rights and the law and all forms of ID in general! And yes, names even shouldnt be edged in stone for ID for some central governmental oganization. Why should some stranger be even accessable to (and able to know) your name or your kid's name or your dog's or cat's name? What in hell are you being protected from by allowing some stranger to and be able to know those? Names should be non-binding and should be a social custom where they're shared just between family and friends and liked ones. Everywhere else you should go by handles you make up with, in some cases, a made up password. So that if you go to school the teacher will address you by your handle. And of course it should be under a rule that no one in that body of oganization can take up a handle someone else is using if passwords arent being used.

And yes, where they're able to ID you by fingerprint and DNA should be disabled and done away with. Then it's 100% that no one can pretend to be you by any possible fabricated fruadrulent means. See how they did O.J. the first time with the brain to teach a whole nation.
Ha, some may say it was worth it just so criminals could be caught till they get played themselves by this kind of thing by someone else or even by the very law enforcers.

As for marriage... I dont get why ppl go get marriage licenses or whatever. And I dont get why anybody would fight for a right to marry. They've got many brainwashed into thinking to limit their freedom even further. If you want to marry it shouldnt take some central government's appoval or certification. Not like you'd cheat if you couldnt get that, correct? Hell, if you're gonna cheat a peice of paper wouldn't stop that. Get that through your head!


[edit on 22-2-2008 by Mabus]



posted on Feb, 22 2008 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Mabus
 




...if there was no such thing as ID, or all forms of ID were done away with, no one could pretend to be you?



Uh, quite the opposite. Anyone could pretend to be you.

I could borrow money and say "Hey, Im Mabus and I promise I will pay you back". Then stiff you w/ the bill. Shoot, why stop there. I could make threats agaisnt the president, claim to be YOU and you get thrown in jail.

I want to know people are who they say they are. I dont just take people's words for it.

And why stop there? I could kill someone and say Im Mabus and I did it!

Sorry, I have no problems with IDs or DNA testing for crime scenes!!

[edit on 22-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]

[edit on 22-2-2008 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Feb, 23 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Well when you get issued a new type of ID that's full proof to make it YOU, and someone does something in it somehow, dont even try to fight against the sure case against YOU then that you cant disprove since you had no problem with accepting it in the first place.

Switchable handles for names wouldnt count in a ID-less society. The person who did the crime would have to be in person saying they did it for it to be some kind of confession. And it would depend on who they confess to. If it's not law enforcement capturing it all on camera, but some other person(s) as witnesses off camera (even on camera because it could be possible coercion depending on what's showcased) it could be reasonable doubt brought up in the judge or jury in a court of law.



 
0

log in

join