Thread: Britian requires ID cards for foreigners

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 07,00.html -

Law





Times Online January 26, 2007


ID cards for foreigners under new immigration rules
David Byers and agencies



Foreigners from outside Europe who live in Britain will be forced to carry identity cards or face a £1,000 fine and deportation in an attempt to stamp out illegal immigration and organised crime, the Government announced today.



The Government's new Borders Bill will compel all foreign nationals from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) who live in Britain to carry a "biometric immigration document" in a bid to clamp down on illegal immigration and crime, Liam Byrne, the Immigration Minister, revealed.

The move has led to criticism from civil rights campaigners - but the Government says it is vital to keep track of migration levels and stop people disappearing into a criminal underworld.

The new Bill also provides a £100million package of measures to boost border control.

These include the roll-out of a hi-tech computer system to every airport worldwide to check the fingerprints of everyone attempting to get a visa to enter the UK.

The database would be linked to the police national computer in the UK, meaning anyone with a criminal conviction, or anyone who had previously been deported from the UK, could not board their flight to re-enter Britain.

All foreign airports and ports with flights to the UK will contain such a database by January next year, with one third already having had it installed.

The Bill will also allow for immigration officers to be given the power of arrest for the first time, a new uniform, and the power to detain and prosecute suspected organisers of people-trafficking.

It will also make the deportation of some foreign prisoners automatic once their sentence ends - but prisoners will technically still be able to hold up the move by logging a claim to remain under the Human Rights Act.

Civil rights protesters immediately attacked the proposal for all UK residents who are not members of the EEA - which is all EU member states plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland - to be forced to carry identity cards, containing their biometric data, with stiff penalties for those who fail to.

Phil Booth, national co-ordinator of NO2ID, which campaigns against the introduction of identity cards, described the move as "a devastating mistake," while Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights group Liberty, said the cards could prove "racially divisive" if they resulted in immigration spot-checks on Britain's streets.

But Liam Byrne, the Immigration Minister, defended the move, saying. "At the moment, there are up to 60 different documents which someone can show to prove their entitlement to be in Britain. That is much too complicated."

He added that the Government intended to "increase the sanctions" for businesses which break the rules and employ people illegally.

But he added: "I think the very least I can do is make life easier for those businesses by giving them a failsafe, easy method to check whether people are here legally and whether they are who they say they are."

The moves are a key part of the Home Office's attempts to get to grips with the asylum and immigration system after David Roberts, head of removals at the Immigration and Nationality Directorate, last year told a House of Commons committee that he did not have the "faintest idea" how many illegal immigrants there were in the UK. Some have put the number at about 400,000.

Damian Green, the Conservative shadow immigration minister, said the Home Office in its current form was incapable of making the immigration system effective.

"This is the Government's sixth immigration Bill in 10 years. The previous five have not worked, so there is no reason to believe that John Reid's tough rhetoric will translate into effective action this time," he said.

The Bill will be debated in the Commons for the first time on February 5.

We will have a birds eye view of things to come by watching this program in action. Europe took the deep plung into elitists' control by creating the European Union and now is taking on ID card much like our Real ID that is coming to the US if protest don't stop it.

This will be something worth following in the coming months.

It's difficult to imagine an ID that can't be forged, and an identity system without loopholes.

Forgery has never been the issue. Intrusion is the issue. People in this country used to be almost pathologically averse to being tagged with a uniform ID, primarily because their Protestant roots connected such an ID with John's warnings in his Revelation. But since FDR managed to saddle most Americans with the SSN charagma, resitance has been minimal and decreasing. People had the wool pulled over their eyes by the New York shyster who sold himself as the nation's savior, and a hungry and weary Depression-era populace bought his bill of goods. Since that point the screws have been steadily tightening. In my early adulthood, it was still easy to get a credit card or open a bank account without an SSN. Employers were already terrified that the IRS bogeyman would get them if they hired you without one, but most states would readily defend those who had no SSNs in the event that it became a real issue. You could also access your credit record with the provision of your address, DOB and mother's maiden name. Now you can't even get a drivers license without an SSN. Isn't it difficult to believe that Congress was promised by FDR upon the passage of the Social Security Act that the number would never be used for anything other than administration of the Social Security program, or that the SSN card was required to carry the disclaimer, NOT TO BE USED FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES? This is the danger of incrementalism, and it's why we must always consider the worst case scenario when we surrender rights or give a little extra power to the federal Beast. It's also why you should never trust the promises of a damned politician.

The modern world is definately living on the edge. We have to be very careful before plunging into something, that once implemented, probably won't be reversed.


Was'nt it Ben Franklin that said, "Anyone who give up freedom for security, deserves none"


I think that's how it goes.

Originally Posted by CCUSA

The modern world is definately living on the edge. We have to be very careful before plunging into something, that once implemented, probably won't be reversed.


Was'nt it Ben Franklin that said, "Anyone who give up freedom for security, deserves none"


I think that's how it goes.

There are several variants, but the one most frequently cited as the original is:

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

It's true what you said about the SSN: I remember when we suddenly had to get them for children, infants even. I can remember when you only applied for one as you got ready to enter the workforce. I understand people's concern about the 'mark of the beast' but sometimes I wonder if that role is served more by the FICO (or the new Vantage) score. And, aren't there moves afoot to merge all sorts of data about a person? There are database services that screen renters, for example. My youngest son got denied an apartment by one due to a deferred felony from high school, that was supposedly not a conviction (it will vanish in May upon dismissal, or so they tell us, as he has stayed out of trouble and done well in society).

Originally Posted by BetsyRoss

It's true what you said about the SSN: I remember when we suddenly had to get them for children, infants even. I can remember when you only applied for one as you got ready to enter the workforce. I understand people's concern about the 'mark of the beast' but sometimes I wonder if that role is served more by the FICO (or the new Vantage) score. And, aren't there moves afoot to merge all sorts of data about a person? There are database services that screen renters, for example. My youngest son got denied an apartment by one due to a deferred felony from high school, that was supposedly not a conviction (it will vanish in May upon dismissal, or so they tell us, as he has stayed out of trouble and done well in society).

The word used and translated as "mark" in the Revelation is charagma, which was the identification placard that was required to be worn or carried by a slave or indentured servant under the Roman system. The SSN is in fact a charagma in the classic sense of the term. What's more, the word translated as "receive" is actually doosin from didomi, which does not typically mean "receive," but rather "bring forth, bestow, or deliver up" (Strong's Greek/Hebrew Definitions). So the warning is about a charagma associated with a number that a person will have to "bring forth" in order to engage in commerce. Sound familiar?

That's fascinating, and what about the mark being on the hand or the forehead (forgive my memory at this time of the day). The SSN has become the primary key to all our data. When I call up about one of my accounts, and can't remember or don't have handy the account number, they can pull me up by SSN. The credit score and report are keyed to it.

Originally Posted by BetsyRoss

That's fascinating, and what about the mark being on the hand or the forehead (forgive my memory at this time of the day). The SSN has become the primary key to all our data. When I call up about one of my accounts, and can't remember or don't have handy the account number, they can pull me up by SSN. The credit score and report are keyed to it.

Hand or forehead: When you see an ad for a card (like a credit card) where is it held? In the palm of the hand. As a matter of fact, all current ID and credit cards (except for the passport, which must be large enough to carry multiple transit stamps and visas) are designed to fit in the palm of the hand. If you don't have the card with you, you simply provide the memorized number (in the forehead, which the Greeks understoof to be the location of memory). In the hand or in the forehead. It makes perfect sense.

All credit cards are now predicated on the SSN, and many of the cards themselves are named after historical charagmas. As the secular Roman Empire faltered and the monarchical system of the Holy Roman Empire flourished, the charagmas issued by the monarchs or lords to their subjects and chattel that served the purpose of authorizing travel and commerce, as did the original charagmas, took on new names. In the early Franco-centric HRE, the charagma was called a "white card" or Carte Blanche. The original Roman charagmas had been cards made of white wood (usually linden) overlaid with wax which was scratched through with a stylus to form the words that were exposed in the light wood underneath. Later travel papers were called visas. In the slave era, the cards that were provided by masters for their slaves were called "master cards." Is this all starting to become clear?