Thread: Lou Dobbs sounds off on REAL ID today

Originally Posted by PhredE

I'll admit that I am one that is sitting on fence with respect to Real ID - and probably still am. However, at the same time, I'm seeing both sides argued very well here and that helps me understand the argument(s) from both sides. W and Jonathan, et. al. are making good points about the issue.

Question: Is it really true that the only explicit mandate for states to achieve compliance with Fed. Real ID standards is to have a 'machine readable' license? If so, that mechanism might - or might not - be able to contain/or embed biometric information. Well, I have a decent enough understanding of the technology involved to know that yes, indeed, technically speaking, the ability to do so is readily available for the most part. The question really, is: to do it, or not do to it, and what to store? and the real whopper to that is - what will be made known to the public???

Another tertiary point I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is that only a handful of states that have questioned or refused to comply with Real ID have done so on the basis of privacy concerns. The majority of those resisting the policy raise the "it's an unfunded mandate" argument - so prevalent in government. ...FYI, not taking a side, just offering a reminder....

Many of the state legislators I know are concerned about the broader ramifications of Real ID, but the cost is a political expedient expression of opposition.

Nobody wants to engage the public from an educational angle because so few people have actually done the digging and the research on this topic and the corporate media is NOT telling the story for us.

Just look at the secrecy and press exclusion going on around the Security and Prosperity Partnership which has never been fully discussed or authorized by Congress.

Real ID looks good on the surface as presented to lawmakers, it is when you dig into the information that has been gleaned slowly from the bowels of the Pentagon that a greater understanding of the goals can be achieved.

Again, all prior generations of Americans refused these kinds of tactics and powers for the US Government. Some allowances were made during times of war. Upon initial detection by the public and Congress, the first run at Real ID (TIA) was cast down.

Real ID contains a technology developed by DARPA that was supposed to be used in warfare that is now being directed at the US population called

Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID).... to develop automated biometric identification technologies to detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances

W


W

The Constitution was written so that the people had the power, not the government. The government works for us, not the other way around. They are in their positions to legislate with the will of the people, not against it. Anytime a government tells you that you "have" to do something against the Constitution, then that government has stopped being a Democracy, and instead is Socialist. This government had ignored the will of the people for a long time. It matters not to them if the majority are against illegal immigration. They are going to allow it anyway, even if they have to sacrifice your freedom of speech to do it. We need to stop thinking this government is going to solve our problems. This governemt is who caused all our problems and the American people have let them get away with it for too long. We have to stop doing that, and saying no to the REAL ID Act is a good step.

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Originally Posted by PhredE

I'll admit that I am one that is sitting on fence with respect to Real ID - and probably still am. However, at the same time, I'm seeing both sides argued very well here and that helps me understand the argument(s) from both sides. W and Jonathan, et. al. are making good points about the issue.

Question: Is it really true that the only explicit mandate for states to achieve compliance with Fed. Real ID standards is to have a 'machine readable' license? If so, that mechanism might - or might not - be able to contain/or embed biometric information. Well, I have a decent enough understanding of the technology involved to know that yes, indeed, technically speaking, the ability to do so is readily available for the most part. The question really, is: to do it, or not do to it, and what to store? and the real whopper to that is - what will be made known to the public???

Another tertiary point I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is that only a handful of states that have questioned or refused to comply with Real ID have done so on the basis of privacy concerns. The majority of those resisting the policy raise the "it's an unfunded mandate" argument - so prevalent in government. ...FYI, not taking a side, just offering a reminder....

Many of the state legislators I know are concerned about the broader ramifications of Real ID, but the cost is a political expedient expression of opposition.

Nobody wants to engage the public from an educational angle because so few people have actually done the digging and the research on this topic and the corporate media is NOT telling the story for us.

Just look at the secrecy and press exclusion going on around the Security and Prosperity Partnership which has never been fully discussed or authorized by Congress.

Real ID looks good on the surface as presented to lawmakers, it is when you dig into the information that has been gleaned slowly from the bowels of the Pentagon that a greater understanding of the goals can be achieved.

Again, all prior generations of Americans refused these kinds of tactics and powers for the US Government. Some allowances were made during times of war. Upon initial detection by the public and Congress, the first run at Real ID (TIA) was cast down.

Real ID contains a technology developed by DARPA that was supposed to be used in warfare that is now being directed at the US population called

Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID).... to develop automated biometric identification technologies to detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances

W


W

William:

What are the "CREDIBLE" sources/articles for the arguments that you keep making?? It seems to me that the majority of the arguments against the REAL ID are about things that "might" happen in the future----not "actual" facts/information regarding the REAL ID proposals that are currently going to be implemented.

Also, have you read any of the recent articles about illegals who have begun to use acid/burning/cutting to alter/destroy their fingerprints???

Originally Posted by Dolly3275

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Originally Posted by PhredE

I'll admit that I am one that is sitting on fence with respect to Real ID - and probably still am. However, at the same time, I'm seeing both sides argued very well here and that helps me understand the argument(s) from both sides. W and Jonathan, et. al. are making good points about the issue.

Question: Is it really true that the only explicit mandate for states to achieve compliance with Fed. Real ID standards is to have a 'machine readable' license? If so, that mechanism might - or might not - be able to contain/or embed biometric information. Well, I have a decent enough understanding of the technology involved to know that yes, indeed, technically speaking, the ability to do so is readily available for the most part. The question really, is: to do it, or not do to it, and what to store? and the real whopper to that is - what will be made known to the public???

Another tertiary point I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is that only a handful of states that have questioned or refused to comply with Real ID have done so on the basis of privacy concerns. The majority of those resisting the policy raise the "it's an unfunded mandate" argument - so prevalent in government. ...FYI, not taking a side, just offering a reminder....

Many of the state legislators I know are concerned about the broader ramifications of Real ID, but the cost is a political expedient expression of opposition.

Nobody wants to engage the public from an educational angle because so few people have actually done the digging and the research on this topic and the corporate media is NOT telling the story for us.

Just look at the secrecy and press exclusion going on around the Security and Prosperity Partnership which has never been fully discussed or authorized by Congress.

Real ID looks good on the surface as presented to lawmakers, it is when you dig into the information that has been gleaned slowly from the bowels of the Pentagon that a greater understanding of the goals can be achieved.

Again, all prior generations of Americans refused these kinds of tactics and powers for the US Government. Some allowances were made during times of war. Upon initial detection by the public and Congress, the first run at Real ID (TIA) was cast down.

Real ID contains a technology developed by DARPA that was supposed to be used in warfare that is now being directed at the US population called

Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID).... to develop automated biometric identification technologies to detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances

W


W

William:

What are the "CREDIBLE" sources/articles for the arguments that you keep making?? It seems to me that the majority of the arguments against the REAL ID are about things that "might" happen in the future----not "actual" facts/information regarding the REAL ID proposals that are currently going to be implemented.

Also, have you read any of the recent articles about illegals who have begun to use acid/burning/cutting to alter/destroy their fingerprints???

Dolly,

I have been following this issue with intensity for almost ten years now. I've taken quite a bit of time tonight to fill you in on the details, but please don't ask me to do the research for you.

It would be best if you and Jonathan actually did some research on this before taking strong stands this way or that on the subject of Real ID.

This is an elite highly advanced technology coming out of the deepest parts of our government's military industrial complex.

You need to have a basic understanding of the technology, what it was designed to do, and what some people want to do with it in America.

I will be glad to share more information from my years of study if you will both go and put in a few hours of research before we continue.

I do not mean to sound rude, but you are both offering positions that could easily be taken by anyone that has read a few general public news articles on the subject.

That's OK by me, but I think you would both benefit from the deeper dig on this one.

W

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Originally Posted by Dolly3275

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Originally Posted by PhredE

I'll admit that I am one that is sitting on fence with respect to Real ID - and probably still am. However, at the same time, I'm seeing both sides argued very well here and that helps me understand the argument(s) from both sides. W and Jonathan, et. al. are making good points about the issue.

Question: Is it really true that the only explicit mandate for states to achieve compliance with Fed. Real ID standards is to have a 'machine readable' license? If so, that mechanism might - or might not - be able to contain/or embed biometric information. Well, I have a decent enough understanding of the technology involved to know that yes, indeed, technically speaking, the ability to do so is readily available for the most part. The question really, is: to do it, or not do to it, and what to store? and the real whopper to that is - what will be made known to the public???

Another tertiary point I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is that only a handful of states that have questioned or refused to comply with Real ID have done so on the basis of privacy concerns. The majority of those resisting the policy raise the "it's an unfunded mandate" argument - so prevalent in government. ...FYI, not taking a side, just offering a reminder....

Many of the state legislators I know are concerned about the broader ramifications of Real ID, but the cost is a political expedient expression of opposition.

Nobody wants to engage the public from an educational angle because so few people have actually done the digging and the research on this topic and the corporate media is NOT telling the story for us.

Just look at the secrecy and press exclusion going on around the Security and Prosperity Partnership which has never been fully discussed or authorized by Congress.

Real ID looks good on the surface as presented to lawmakers, it is when you dig into the information that has been gleaned slowly from the bowels of the Pentagon that a greater understanding of the goals can be achieved.

Again, all prior generations of Americans refused these kinds of tactics and powers for the US Government. Some allowances were made during times of war. Upon initial detection by the public and Congress, the first run at Real ID (TIA) was cast down.

Real ID contains a technology developed by DARPA that was supposed to be used in warfare that is now being directed at the US population called

Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID).... to develop automated biometric identification technologies to detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances

W


W

William:

What are the "CREDIBLE" sources/articles for the arguments that you keep making?? It seems to me that the majority of the arguments against the REAL ID are about things that "might" happen in the future----not "actual" facts/information regarding the REAL ID proposals that are currently going to be implemented.

Also, have you read any of the recent articles about illegals who have begun to use acid/burning/cutting to alter/destroy their fingerprints???

Dolly,

I have been following this issue with intensity for almost ten years now. I've taken quite a bit of time tonight to fill you in on the details, but please don't ask me to do the research for you.

It would be best if you and Jonathan actually did some research on this before taking strong stands this way or that on the subject of Real ID.

This is an elite highly advanced technology coming out of the deepest parts of our government's military industrial complex.

You need to have a basic understanding of the technology, what it was designed to do, and what some people want to do with it in America.

I will be glad to share more information from my years of study if you will both go and put in a few hours of research before we continue.

I do not mean to sound rude, but you are both offering positions that could easily be taken by anyone that has read a few general public news articles on the subject.

That's OK by me, but I think you would both benefit from the deeper dig on this one.

W

William:

I have been following this issue...........Not for 10 years, but at least a few years.

NOTHING I have read----from "CREDIBLE" sources indicates any type of chip, retina technologies, etc.

Almost everything written against the REAL ID is based on "what might happen"-----not the actual facts.

Originally Posted by Dolly3275

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Originally Posted by Dolly3275

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

Originally Posted by PhredE

I'll admit that I am one that is sitting on fence with respect to Real ID - and probably still am. However, at the same time, I'm seeing both sides argued very well here and that helps me understand the argument(s) from both sides. W and Jonathan, et. al. are making good points about the issue.

Question: Is it really true that the only explicit mandate for states to achieve compliance with Fed. Real ID standards is to have a 'machine readable' license? If so, that mechanism might - or might not - be able to contain/or embed biometric information. Well, I have a decent enough understanding of the technology involved to know that yes, indeed, technically speaking, the ability to do so is readily available for the most part. The question really, is: to do it, or not do to it, and what to store? and the real whopper to that is - what will be made known to the public???

Another tertiary point I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is that only a handful of states that have questioned or refused to comply with Real ID have done so on the basis of privacy concerns. The majority of those resisting the policy raise the "it's an unfunded mandate" argument - so prevalent in government. ...FYI, not taking a side, just offering a reminder....

Many of the state legislators I know are concerned about the broader ramifications of Real ID, but the cost is a political expedient expression of opposition.

Nobody wants to engage the public from an educational angle because so few people have actually done the digging and the research on this topic and the corporate media is NOT telling the story for us.

Just look at the secrecy and press exclusion going on around the Security and Prosperity Partnership which has never been fully discussed or authorized by Congress.

Real ID looks good on the surface as presented to lawmakers, it is when you dig into the information that has been gleaned slowly from the bowels of the Pentagon that a greater understanding of the goals can be achieved.

Again, all prior generations of Americans refused these kinds of tactics and powers for the US Government. Some allowances were made during times of war. Upon initial detection by the public and Congress, the first run at Real ID (TIA) was cast down.

Real ID contains a technology developed by DARPA that was supposed to be used in warfare that is now being directed at the US population called

Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID).... to develop automated biometric identification technologies to detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances

W


W

William:

What are the "CREDIBLE" sources/articles for the arguments that you keep making?? It seems to me that the majority of the arguments against the REAL ID are about things that "might" happen in the future----not "actual" facts/information regarding the REAL ID proposals that are currently going to be implemented.

Also, have you read any of the recent articles about illegals who have begun to use acid/burning/cutting to alter/destroy their fingerprints???

Dolly,

I have been following this issue with intensity for almost ten years now. I've taken quite a bit of time tonight to fill you in on the details, but please don't ask me to do the research for you.

It would be best if you and Jonathan actually did some research on this before taking strong stands this way or that on the subject of Real ID.

This is an elite highly advanced technology coming out of the deepest parts of our government's military industrial complex.

You need to have a basic understanding of the technology, what it was designed to do, and what some people want to do with it in America.

I will be glad to share more information from my years of study if you will both go and put in a few hours of research before we continue.

I do not mean to sound rude, but you are both offering positions that could easily be taken by anyone that has read a few general public news articles on the subject.

That's OK by me, but I think you would both benefit from the deeper dig on this one.

W

William:

I have been following this issue...........Not for 10 years, but at least a few years.

NOTHING I have read----from "CREDIBLE" sources indicates any type of chip, retina technologies, etc.

Almost everything written against the REAL ID is based on "what might happen"-----not the actual facts.

I'm not talking about chips or retina technologies.

Are you accusing me of not being a credible source myself or of taking information from non credible sources?

Here, go get started...

http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweek ... 223nj1.htm

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/poindexter.html

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A9649C8B63

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00188:

http://www.darpa.mil/

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/facia ... nition.htm



W

[quote=ALIPAC][quote=Dolly3275][quote=ALIPAC][quote=Dolly3275][quote=ALIPAC][quote="PhredE":2gaygfs8]I'll admit that I am one that is sitting on fence with respect to Real ID - and probably still am. However, at the same time, I'm seeing both sides argued very well here and that helps me understand the argument(s) from both sides. W and Jonathan, et. al. are making good points about the issue.

Question: Is it really true that the only explicit mandate for states to achieve compliance with Fed. Real ID standards is to have a 'machine readable' license? If so, that mechanism might - or might not - be able to contain/or embed biometric information. Well, I have a decent enough understanding of the technology involved to know that yes, indeed, technically speaking, the ability to do so is readily available for the most part. The question really, is: to do it, or not do to it, and what to store? and the real whopper to that is - what will be made known to the public???

Another tertiary point I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is that only a handful of states that have questioned or refused to comply with Real ID have done so on the basis of privacy concerns. The majority of those resisting the policy raise the "it's an unfunded mandate" argument - so prevalent in government. ...FYI, not taking a side, just offering a reminder.... [/quote]

Many of the state legislators I know are concerned about the broader ramifications of Real ID, but the cost is a political expedient expression of opposition.

Nobody wants to engage the public from an educational angle because so few people have actually done the digging and the research on this topic and the corporate media is NOT telling the story for us.

Just look at the secrecy and press exclusion going on around the Security and Prosperity Partnership which has never been fully discussed or authorized by Congress.

Real ID looks good on the surface as presented to lawmakers, it is when you dig into the information that has been gleaned slowly from the bowels of the Pentagon that a greater understanding of the goals can be achieved.

Again, all prior generations of Americans refused these kinds of tactics and powers for the US Government. Some allowances were made during times of war. Upon initial detection by the public and Congress, the first run at Real ID (TIA) was cast down.

Real ID contains a technology developed by DARPA that was supposed to be used in warfare that is now being directed at the US population called

Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID).... to develop automated biometric identification technologies to detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances

W


W[/quote]

William:

What are the "CREDIBLE" sources/articles for the arguments that you keep making?? It seems to me that the majority of the arguments against the REAL ID are about things that "might" happen in the future----not "actual" facts/information regarding the REAL ID proposals that are currently going to be implemented.

Also, have you read any of the recent articles about illegals who have begun to use acid/burning/cutting to alter/destroy their fingerprints???[/quote]

Dolly,

I have been following this issue with intensity for almost ten years now. I've taken quite a bit of time tonight to fill you in on the details, but please don't ask me to do the research for you.

It would be best if you and Jonathan actually did some research on this before taking strong stands this way or that on the subject of Real ID.

This is an elite highly advanced technology coming out of the deepest parts of our government's military industrial complex.

You need to have a basic understanding of the technology, what it was designed to do, and what some people want to do with it in America.

I will be glad to share more information from my years of study if you will both go and put in a few hours of research before we continue.

I do not mean to sound rude, but you are both offering positions that could easily be taken by anyone that has read a few general public news articles on the subject.

That's OK by me, but I think you would both benefit from the deeper dig on this one.

W[/quote]

William:

I have been following this issue...........Not for 10 years, but at least a few years.

NOTHING I have read----from "CREDIBLE" sources indicates any type of chip, retina technologies, etc.

Almost everything written against the REAL ID is based on "what might happen"-----not the actual facts.[/quote]

I'm not talking about chips or retina technologies.

Are you accusing me of not being a credible source myself or of taking information from non credible sources?

Here, go get started...

[url="http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0223nj1.htm"]http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweek ... 223nj1.htm[/url]

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/poindexter.html

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A9649C8B63

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00188:

http://www.darpa.mil/

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/facia ... nition.htm



W[/quote:2gaygfs8]

No, I am not accusing you of anything. I said........anything that I have read against the REAL ID was not from credible, reliable, verifiable sources-----and that the information presented was based on "what might happen"-----not the actual facts/policy currently ready to be implemented.

[quote=ALIPAC][quote=Dolly3275][quote=ALIPAC][quote=Dolly3275][quote=ALIPAC][quote="PhredE":2e2o37jh]I'll admit that I am one that is sitting on fence with respect to Real ID - and probably still am. However, at the same time, I'm seeing both sides argued very well here and that helps me understand the argument(s) from both sides. W and Jonathan, et. al. are making good points about the issue.

Question: Is it really true that the only explicit mandate for states to achieve compliance with Fed. Real ID standards is to have a 'machine readable' license? If so, that mechanism might - or might not - be able to contain/or embed biometric information. Well, I have a decent enough understanding of the technology involved to know that yes, indeed, technically speaking, the ability to do so is readily available for the most part. The question really, is: to do it, or not do to it, and what to store? and the real whopper to that is - what will be made known to the public???

Another tertiary point I'd like to bring to everyone's attention is that only a handful of states that have questioned or refused to comply with Real ID have done so on the basis of privacy concerns. The majority of those resisting the policy raise the "it's an unfunded mandate" argument - so prevalent in government. ...FYI, not taking a side, just offering a reminder.... [/quote]

Many of the state legislators I know are concerned about the broader ramifications of Real ID, but the cost is a political expedient expression of opposition.

Nobody wants to engage the public from an educational angle because so few people have actually done the digging and the research on this topic and the corporate media is NOT telling the story for us.

Just look at the secrecy and press exclusion going on around the Security and Prosperity Partnership which has never been fully discussed or authorized by Congress.

Real ID looks good on the surface as presented to lawmakers, it is when you dig into the information that has been gleaned slowly from the bowels of the Pentagon that a greater understanding of the goals can be achieved.

Again, all prior generations of Americans refused these kinds of tactics and powers for the US Government. Some allowances were made during times of war. Upon initial detection by the public and Congress, the first run at Real ID (TIA) was cast down.

Real ID contains a technology developed by DARPA that was supposed to be used in warfare that is now being directed at the US population called

Human Identification at a Distance (HumanID).... to develop automated biometric identification technologies to detect, recognize and identify humans at great distances

W


W[/quote]

William:

What are the "CREDIBLE" sources/articles for the arguments that you keep making?? It seems to me that the majority of the arguments against the REAL ID are about things that "might" happen in the future----not "actual" facts/information regarding the REAL ID proposals that are currently going to be implemented.

Also, have you read any of the recent articles about illegals who have begun to use acid/burning/cutting to alter/destroy their fingerprints???[/quote]

Dolly,

I have been following this issue with intensity for almost ten years now. I've taken quite a bit of time tonight to fill you in on the details, but please don't ask me to do the research for you.

It would be best if you and Jonathan actually did some research on this before taking strong stands this way or that on the subject of Real ID.

This is an elite highly advanced technology coming out of the deepest parts of our government's military industrial complex.

You need to have a basic understanding of the technology, what it was designed to do, and what some people want to do with it in America.

I will be glad to share more information from my years of study if you will both go and put in a few hours of research before we continue.

I do not mean to sound rude, but you are both offering positions that could easily be taken by anyone that has read a few general public news articles on the subject.

That's OK by me, but I think you would both benefit from the deeper dig on this one.

W[/quote]

William:

I have been following this issue...........Not for 10 years, but at least a few years.

NOTHING I have read----from "CREDIBLE" sources indicates any type of chip, retina technologies, etc.

Almost everything written against the REAL ID is based on "what might happen"-----not the actual facts.[/quote]

I'm not talking about chips or retina technologies.

Are you accusing me of not being a credible source myself or of taking information from non credible sources?

Here, go get started...

[url="http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0223nj1.htm"]http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweek ... 223nj1.htm[/url]

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/poindexter.html

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A9649C8B63

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00188:

http://www.darpa.mil/

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/facia ... nition.htm



W[/quote:2e2o37jh]

William:

Thanks for the links/articles.

I realize that the technology is out there for the government to track us in many ways, but I am missing in these articles where it says that any of this will be part of the REAL ID.

From what I understand about the REAL ID----they are going to use bar codes and a hologram image-----so that this ID cannot be fraudulently copied/reproduced by illegals and/or potential terrorists.

I think only people coming into this country need this type of real id so we can track when they enter and leave this country. We can also tell where they are if they overstay. It will also let us know if they have a valid work permint or visa. You usually know, without much investigation, the illegals that are in your community. If they self deport, for lack of work or freebies, they can get a real id to re-enter this country But it will only work if we secure our ports and borders. Sure, some will get thru, but not as many. I don't think we ALL need to be put on this type of ID. I also don't trust the government. If you give them an inch they will take 100 miles.

Originally Posted by TexasBorn

Dolly, you are right. I have tracked down someone myself just as you described. There is nothing in the National ID card that isn't already being done. I personally don't have a problem with it at all. This Big Brother fear is factually unfounded in my opinion.

If it's no different or ' better ' then why change it ?

Anyone who would give up liberty for security deserves neither .[ Forgot who said this] .