Get ready to be issued a Federal ID

[urbsdad6]

As more and more of our freedoms are removed I keep realizing we no longer live in a Democratic Republic. If you look very closely you will see that we live in a Dictatorship with two parties of touchy-feely feel good politicons that offer no real choice but to follow the sheople to the slaughter!

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5...ml?tag=nl.e589


Doc Urb

[MORTARDUDE]

A big part of the reason that President George Smirk has let our Southern borders became so porous, is to use the 50,000,000 illegal aliens in this country, as an excuse to inact national laws requiring identification of all "citizens" at all times. Remember the WW2 movies where Europeans were asked "to show their papers" ? This is tatamount to a dictatorship. Our states and their counties will lose what rights they have as a massive all-encompassing national database will be created, containing information you will not be privy to, and possibly erroneous data, a database that will override anything the states have control over. Altho this might sound like a great idea, it is NOT. The illegal aliens will still be here, will not be apprehended, will not be paying all the taxes we are forced to, will still send billions upon billions of money out of the country, and will still have many children who will automatically become American Citizens. Anyone who has fought for this country should be ashamed of what is happening here.

Larry

[MORTARDUDE]

Senate approves electronic ID card billBy Declan McCullagh, CNET News.com
Published on ZDNet News: May 10, 2005, 8:10 PM PT

Forward in EMAIL Format for PRINT Federal government Privacy Security threats
Last-minute attempts by online activists to halt an electronic ID card failed Tuesday when the U.S. Senate unanimously voted to impose a sweeping set of identification requirements on Americans.

The so-called Real ID Act now heads to President Bush, who is expected to sign the bill into law this month. Its backers, including the Bush administration, say it's needed to stop illegal immigrants from obtaining drivers' licenses.

If the act's mandates take effect in May 2008, as expected, Americans will be required to obtain federally approved ID cards with "machine readable technology" that abides by Department of Homeland Security specifications. Anyone without such an ID card will be effectively prohibited from traveling by air or Amtrak, opening a bank account, or entering federal buildings.

After the Real ID Act's sponsors glued it to an Iraq military spending bill, final passage was all but guaranteed. Yet that didn't stop a dedicated cadre of privacy activists from trying to raise the alarm in the last few days.

UnRealID.com, which calls the legislation a "national ID card," says that more than 10,800 people filled out its online petition to senators.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation hastily created a "Stop The Real ID Act!" campaign last week, and the ACLU denounced the bill as a measure that would create "a system ripe for identity theft." Security guru Bruce Schneier offered his own negative critique.

If the Real ID Act had been a standalone piece of legislation--instead of being embedded in an unrelated military spending bill--its passage in the Senate might have been less certain.

The House approved it in February by a relatively narrow vote of 261-161, and some senators had condemned it. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., warned last month that the Real ID Act creates "de facto national ID cards" and the National Immigration Law Center said it will make it harder even for legal immigrants and citizens to get drivers' licenses.

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican and Real ID Act sponsor, applauded the Senate vote on Tuesday. "The Real ID is vital to preventing foreign terrorists from hiding in plain sight while conducting their operations and planning attacks," Sensenbrenner said. "By targeting terrorist travel, the Real ID will assist in our war-on-terror efforts to disrupt terrorist operations and help secure our borders."

[Gimpy]

Larry said!

Thanks Larry!

[SuperScout]

For those of us who have had the privilege of serving our country to the point of retirement, there's a little card in our respective wallets that contains more information than your family tree about the carrier. And even for those who long ago volunteered, including our current crop of warriors, the armed forces ID card is a virtual treasure trove of information. For those who have ever been pulled over by a state trooper or county mounty, recall his warm and invintg words, "May I see your driver's license, proof of insurance, and registration?" This is not a frightening event, unless you have something to hide, and is normal police procedure. So the boogy-man of a national ID card is about as exciting as watching the wallpaper turn yellow. If you're worrying about a national database, you're looking in the wrong place. It already exists, is in the possession of the IRS, and was used extensively by the Veterans Administration to find Vietnam era veterans so studies could be conducted on Agent Orange andother toxic cocktails to which we were subjected. This database contains all the info needed to issue National ID's, but the problem is that there is no oversight availability or accountability for how it's used, by whom, or to what purpose. One of the caveats I'd insist upon is that an oversight committee be appointed, consisting of some real savvy civilians, as to how this database is tapped for ID purposes etc., etc.

Here are some of the wonderful and positive benefits of a national ID system.

1. Clear proof of who really belongs in this country, and who should be deported.
2. Accurate and immediate info about organ donations in the event of death.
3. Accurate and incontrovertible proof of right to vote in the correct precinct.

There are probably a hundred more positive reasons to mandate a national ID card system, and for the life of me, I can't think of a negative. I fail to see how individual rights are even remotely impacted by a national ID system. How a national ID card would adversely impact legal immigrants is a bogus cry and has to basis in fact.

And for those historically and politically challenged, the porous borders are not a recent invention of the current President, as even the least liked Texan in all history, LBJ, used them over on his ranch near Stonewall, Texas. Wetbacks have been a problem for decades, but the situation has grown to the point of critical mass, and needs to be dealt with now.

[MORTARDUDE]

Brice :

Your arguments may seem reasonable to some, but here is where I take issue with you...

1. Clear proof of who really belongs in this country, and who should be deported.

( If you really think these ID cards will be used to deport anyone, then I have some swamp land in the Mojave desert to sell you. )

2. Accurate and immediate info about organ donations in the event of death.
( most states have this information of their driver's licences now )

3. Accurate and incontrovertible proof of right to vote in the correct precinct.

( who has the right to vote is a function of local government, not the Federal government ..dead wrong on this one pal. )

This is an attempt to take away control from local and state governments and further erode our liberties in the name of "terrorism" which simply doesn't exist ( I have posted about this many times on here ). You are a prime example of the story about how to boil frogs. Put them in a kettle of cold water and slowly turn up the heat until they boil without ever jumping out of the pot. If you tried to put them into a pot of boiling water they would jump right out. Deal with it.

Larry

[Gimpy]

What Larry said!

[MORTARDUDE]

Interesting article from 2 years ago...will any of this change with National ID cards ? Of course not ...

pertinent quotes from this :

..."but cities like Phoenix and states like Arizona have created an unbelievable billion-dollar-a-year welfare state at taxpayers' expense that lures illegal immigrants here.... "

... "Where would the money come from to deport illegal immigrants pursuant to law? The approximate $1 billion illegal immigrants cost the state (and there's no telling what they cost the city) every year would cover it. President Eisenhower deported 1 million illegal immigrants in 1954, so there is a system in place that can and sometimes does work. ...."


..."Americans for Immigration Control reports that 25 percent of federal prisoners are immigrants. Bill O'Reilly reports one-third of illegal immigrants are on welfare; and "Public Costs of Immigration" says that immigrants are 50 percent more likely to get welfare than natives - with a whopping 70 percent being more likely to get food stamps, at a cost of $3.7 billion a year..."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

http://www.pan2004.com/articles/art2003jul06.html

Not only are they illegal : they're a menace to society

By Kathy McKee, Arizona Republic, July 6, 2003

Are day labor centers good for the community?

Absolutely, positively no.

Let's make one thing clear: Day labor centers are for the benefit of illegal aliens. Legal immigrants can go to Department of Economic Security job centers and dozens of legitimate temporary labor agencies throughout the Valley.

Phoenix blatantly thumbs its nose at federal law by illegally building these centers for illegal aliens. INA ? 274 states that encouraging "an alien to . . . reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such residence is or will be in violation of the law," or who "aids and abets the commission of any of the preceding acts" has committed a federal felony. Obviously, helping illegal aliens find work is "encouraging" them to "reside in the United States," so why isn't the entire Phoenix City Council, which voted unanimously for the day labor center, being prosecuted and sent to jail?

INA ? 274A makes it unlawful to recruit an alien for employment or refer him for a fee, so the city is illegally facilitating employers who are illegally hiring these aliens. Councilwoman Peggy Neely said in an April 20, 2002 Republic article that "hiring immigrants for occasional day work is not unlawful." Unfortunately for Neely, I don't believe the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agrees with her.

At a recent Phoenix zoning hearing, some 40 residents and business owners near the current day labor center attended. Thirty-two signed up to speak against expanding that center's hours. Area residents provided dozens of photos showing hundreds of illegal immigrants still loitering around the neighborhood.

Residents complained of increased loitering, littering, illegal soliciting, harassment, begging, drug dealing, prostitution, public urination, intoxication, trespassing and off-hours operations. The zoning board, as usual, ignored the residents and voted 6-0 in favor of the proponents - all city employees or open-border advocates, not one of whom lives near the labor center.

Let's get another thing clear: This is not about race or racism. If the hiring hall were for illegal Canadians, Britons or Asians, we would oppose it just as strongly - not just because it's illegal, but also because it's part of the attractive nuisance Phoenix has created that entices illegal aliens up here.

State and local officials declare ad nauseum that illegal immigration is a federal problem. For sure, the feds need to secure our borders with the military - just like three-fourths of Americans want, but cities like Phoenix and states like Arizona have created an unbelievable billion-dollar-a-year welfare state at taxpayers' expense that lures illegal immigrants here.

The fact that there are few jobs for legal residents on the lowest rung of the skills ladder, much less for unskilled laborers who can't even speak English, doesn't seem to phase the Phoenix City Council. Every taxpayer in Phoenix is paying for this nonsense, so that a few greedy people can save a few bucks.

If the Macehualli Work Center has gotten 150 to 200 people a day off the street, it's been at the expense of luring hundreds more to the area who are still harassing area residents, littering, loitering, begging and trespassing.

Where would the money come from to deport illegal immigrants pursuant to law? The approximate $1 billion illegal immigrants cost the state (and there's no telling what they cost the city) every year would cover it. President Eisenhower deported 1 million illegal immigrants in 1954, so there is a system in place that can and sometimes does work.

Recently a TV reporter repeatedly said, "but these people are here working." Is working an excuse to break our laws? "They come here to work" is not even totally true. Americans for Immigration Control reports that 25 percent of federal prisoners are immigrants. Bill O'Reilly reports one-third of illegal immigrants are on welfare; and "Public Costs of Immigration" says that immigrants are 50 percent more likely to get welfare than natives - with a whopping 70 percent being more likely to get food stamps, at a cost of $3.7 billion a year.

So, a fair number of illegal immigrants come here to commit crimes and a larger number to get welfare. Day labor center advocates admit that only one-third of the people at the center get jobs in a day, while a recent article in another paper quoted a Phoenix illegal alien testifying in court that he was up north because "only about 15 percent of the people" at Macehualli get jobs.

A Feb. 16 Republic article reported "unemployment" is 100 percent at some work centers in California, so day laborers peddle drugs for street gangs for pocket change. Proponents say the center needs to attract more employers - in other words, the city needs to coerce more employers to lay off citizens and legal immigrants, then hire illegal aliens?

Day labor centers are bad news for taxpayers, the community, nearby residents, legitimate temp agencies, property owners in the area, and traffic. Did I mention they're illegal, too?


For 35 years, McKee has been a champion of abused and neglected children, animal welfare, senior citizens, indigents (all legal), preserving Arizona history, the environment and insight meditation. She is the state director for the upcoming Protect Arizona NOW Committee.

[SuperScout]

1. Obviously, coupled with a national ID card must come truly operative immigration laws; hopefully, neither of us is naive enough to think that just a non-counterfeitable ID card will automatically cause expulsion of wetbacks. Both the ID card and the strict enforcement of immigration laws will solve the problem of wetbacks.

2. The national ID card could replace driver's license, which are easily counterfeited, ergo, having the donor info would be valid.

3. Why would local governments object to having a valid ID system in place in order to vote? This is one of the biggest sources of voter fraud, i.e., the absence of a decent ID system, and a national ID card would only serve to clean up local, and state, and national elections. Nobody is mandating federal control over local or state elections; I'm just advocating more legal voters, cleaner elections. Only people I hear complaining about having photo ID's are the Democrats.

I build houses and if any of the subcontractors I use even thought about hiring a wetback, he'd be history so fast that even a statue's head would spin. There's an incredible silent partnership in my area that supports strict labor practices; once a sub has been found to use (and usually misuse wetbacks), he is blacklisted from further work. I know what a drag on local, county an state governments there is because of wetbacks that I would support sealing the borders for 2 years until we sort out who belongs here and who doesn't. If it hurts some businesses, sin loy bon noy - it is a price that our society has to pay in order to secure this country for once and for all.

And for all those liberal, touchy-feely cities (nearby Austin's one of them) who refuse to act to help deport the wetbacks, I'd cut off every dime of federal funding until the bleeding hearts either stopped beating, or changed their minds. It's a proven fact that wetbacks cost more than they add to our economy. Period.

[Seascamp]

I find it more than a bit disingenuous that our US Liberals would be squawking about this. Bar none, the most heavily multiple-documented, total button down, supposedly ?free democracies? in this world do in fact espouse the ?Liberal? cause. Doubt it? Well just try to sneeze anywhere in Scandinavia without a Government issued pic I.D. sneeze permit or Holland or Germany or Belgium, or, or, or. And in a few of those places to the East, a church going permit with pic I.D. is necessary and a 3rd party does list exactly who is in attendance. I wanted to attend services and just presented my passport and told the ?monitors? to "f**k off, I have no freaking permit and no intention of getting one, aarrgg". Hell of a Sunday morning attitude, eh.

One-quarter step to the left of Liberal and it gets even better in terms identifying who?s who in the zoo. I was in the PRC in January and there about every third Chinaman everywhere is a document checker/ du dah, oh du dah day paperwork stamper. And of course for a small personal remuneration they?ll take something less than the second coming to do their thing. Bunch of sticky-fingered thieves as far as I observed and was concerned. But they all had on the Party Badge so I guess there must be some form of corruption dispensation and enablement that beams down from the omni-present Red Star. That would make Boxer and Co. real proud to see how the people?s paper checkers really operate, make their pink little hearts just go thumpity thump-thump.

I?ll sign up for Col. Scout?s reasoning just because the world keeps instructing me over and over again and in very direct ways about the reality of things and things. Plus the Col., isn?t all that much off the mark, if any at all.
So what exactly makes us think all these squawking Liberals have no intention of following their global bros. and will not enforce multiple federal level I.D. systems if they could grab the helm?

Scamp