INTERPOL chief calls for global electronic e-ID identity card system
Electronic ID cards have made alarming progress towards becoming universal, globally around the world.
Already, over 2.2 billion people, or 33% of the world’s population, have been issued with ‘smart’ ID cards. Of those, over 900 million have biometric facial and fingerprint systems. On present plans, over 85% of the world’s population will have smart ID cards by 2012. Most of the remaining population won’t have escaped - largely, they are already enrolled in earlier generation ID systems, often in repressive states, such as Burma.
Understandably, campaigns against the introduction of ID cards have tended to play up the problems with ID systems, presenting them as being unworkable and creating unmanageable problems with privacy invasion, fraud, unauthorised database access, organised crime, reliability of biometric recognition, etc.. As a result, a substantial number of people believe mandatory ID cards ‘just won’t happen’.
However, now the head of INTERPOL (the "International FBI") has emphasized the need for a globally verifiable electronic identity card (e-ID) system for migrant workers at an international forum on citizen ID projects, e-passports, and border control management which falls in step with the agenda of the New World Order, which has been promoting a global ID to fit in with their plans for a global economy and one world government.
Speaking at the fourth Annual EMEA ID WORLD summit, INTERPOL Secretary General Ronald K. Noble, a known supporter and possible member of the New World Order, said that regulating migration levels and managing borders presented security challenges for countries and for the world that INTERPOL was ideally-placed to help address.
"At a time when global migration is reaching record levels, there is a need for governments to put in place systems at the national level that would permit the identity of migrants and their documents to be verified internationally via INTERPOL," said Secretary General Noble.
"The vast majority of migrants are law-abiding citizens who would like to have their identities verified in more than one country using the same identity document. If countries were to issue work and residence permits in an e-ID format that satisfied common standards internationally, then both the migrant workers and the countries themselves would benefit because efficiencies would improve, security at the national and global level would improve and corruption would be reduced."
"INTERPOL currently helps member countries screen travel documents of international air travelers approximately one-half a billion times a year. It would be a natural extension of this service to assist member countries in determining whether bearers of a globally verified identity card were in possession of a valid identity document or are wanted internationally for arrest via INTERPOL at the time that they applied for a work or residence permit,” added the INTERPOL Chief.
What Secretary Noble failed to mention, was that he was pitching INTERPOL to become the new "Global F.B.I.", as a worldwide police force and investigative bureau.
The ID WORLD forum heard that such a card required developing a mechanism whereby the biometric identity features of migrants, such as fingerprints and DNA, would be checked systematically against global databases. Once an individual has been assigned a unique index number, it is possible to accurately retrieve data across numerous databases and build a picture of that individual's life that was not authorised in the original consent for data collection.
The aim of ID cards is to create a detailed digital record of everywhere you go, everything you do. Their goal is to continuously track the movements of every person, place and thing of revelance.
It’s time to look at what ID systems are really intended to do, not the public justification. Since governments probably always knew that ID cards wouldn’t stop terrorism, organised crime, ID theft, fraud, etc., there has to be some other reason for their introduction - and it appears to be a reason that governments don‘t want to own up to, in public.
There has been hardly any meaningful debate about one of the biggest issues of our time. Most ordinary people don’t like the idea, but project goes ahead anyway.
What stands out from this survey, unreliable as it may be, is that advanced electronic ID card systems are coming to some of the poorest nations in the world, some in chaos, civil war, starvation, the smallest and the largest.
They are coming to nations with vastly divergent cultures, to nations that are almost completely pre-industrialised and underdeveloped, and coming first to almost all Islamic nations. The few nations that will not have advanced electronic population registration will be in a tiny minority. This is all to happen by the end of 2012.
For example, on 25 June 2009, India announced that it was pressing ahead with universal biometric ID cards, to be completed by 2011 - to register nearly 1.2 billion people within just 18 months.
One of the few places that definitely isn't introducing smart ID cards is Myanmar (Burma), because they are getting along fine with their present ID card - apparently it is efficient enough for the repression they have in hand. The UN tried to convince them to upgrade their cards, but they wouldn't do it.
There are grey areas, for example, in some states there are biometric ID cards for voter registration, which aren't officially national ID cards, but nonetheless have registered the population, e.g. in Mozambique and Zambia. ‘Election cards’ tend to become national ID cards, immediately after the election, as in Haiti. (How did introducing ID cards get linked to ‘bringing in democracy‘?)
USA would probably come in the grey area, due to the uncertainty (deliberately not clarified) about the REAL ID Act, Canada, due to proposals for biometric ‘enhanced drivers licenses’, Australia, due to the uncertain status of the ‘Access Card’.
Any uncertainty gets put into perspective by the ‘big picture’, that ID cards are coming, almost everywhere.
The simultaneous introduction of very similar ID card systems in so many nations seems like more than a coincidence. If this was purely a matter of nations taking their own initiative to upgrade systems, it would happen over a longer timetable, as nations periodically updated systems, once every couple of decades. Does this timetable indicate unseen international pressure applied to nations, to adopt ID cards?
In the process of researching the list, something interesting came out - the plans to introduce a national ID card system in Uganda were announced in a memorandum of understanding sent to the IMF ('Letter of Intent, Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies, and Technical Memorandum of Understanding'). The impression is, the IMF were involved in the decision long before the people of Uganda were consulted about their national ID card scheme.
Has the IMF required nations to adopt biometric ID cards, on the pretext of financial regulation, preventing fraud and money laundering? It would be interesting to know.
Again and again, in the public description of the alleged benefits of biometric ID systems, the reasons given include the benefit to the banking system, in preventing fraud, and allowing the poor to have access to the banking system. Several nations (e.g. India) have mentioned the need to confirm that aid gets to intended recipients, and not lost in fraud - again, something which a body such as the IMF might see as a justifiable reason to promote or require biometric ID. Other people would see this as a mere pretext for ‘policy laundering’.
In a different example of Western promotion, the EU has financially sponsored the introduction of biometric ID cards in the D.R. of Congo, allegedly to help promote peace, by tracking down ex-soldiers and ex-fighters. A similar logic has been applied to a biometric scheme in Somalia.
Grotesquely, biometric ID cards are coming to Rwanda. ID cards were a major tool in the genocide in Rwanda. Imagine how much more effective the genocide could have been with a computerised population register, and an ID system with biometrics, to prevent fraud or evasion. Rwanda is an horrific illustration of how lethal ID cards can be, in a nation in civil war, and raises uncomfortable questions about Western involvement, as does Congo.
United States, Britain and the EU
The worldwide introduction of ID cards is merely the visible witness of an invisible process. Policies that profoundly affect our lives and take away our freedoms are worked out in secret international deals.
In July 2005, during its six month rotation as Presidency of the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom introduced a proposal for biometric ID cards for the EU, despite there being no power to do so under the treaties of the EU at that time. Legalities being no obstacle, this subsequently evolved into binding EU policy, in the Hague programme on justice and security.
However, policies introducing ID cards, evolved in secret, go far beyond identification and security, as described by Tony Bunyan of Statewatch, in an article in The Guardian. ID cards are only one tool, enabling a much larger scheme, to track and record the lives of every individual; Bunyan calls this the digital tsunami: "Every object the individual uses, every transaction they make and almost everywhere they go will create a detailed digital record. This will generate a wealth of information for public security organisations", leading to behaviour being predicted and assessed by "machines" (their term) which will issue orders to officers on the spot. The proposal presages the mass gathering of personal data on travel, bank details, mobile phone locations, health records, internet usage, criminal records however minor, fingerprints and digital pictures that can be data-mined and applied to different scenario – boarding a plane, behaviour on the Tube or taking part in a protest.
But this isn’t just coming to Europe, as Bunyan explains, because USA and Europe will share similar policies and practices, in an agenda of policy harmonisation : -
… it is proposed that by 2014 the EU needs to create a "Euro-Atlantic area of cooperation with the USA in the field of freedom, security and justice". This would go far beyond current co-operation and mean that policies affecting the liberties and rights of everyone in Europe would not be determined in London or Brussels but in secret EU-US meetings.
Soon, they will be able to read the serial number in your national ID card and governments are going to sell ID confirmation, to cross-reference the serial number on your ID card with your name and address. Stores spend a lot of money acquiring data, so knowing customers’ names and addresses, with certainty, has really got to be worth something. Customers will no longer be able to hide their identities, or give false names on loyalty cards.
By enabling ubiquitous tracking and profiling, could ID systems herald a corporate culture of conformity, enforced by redundancy for those who don’t fit the right profile?
Does this really sound like democracy, as we used to know it? Or is it beginning to sound more like what you would expect from the New World Order, globalization and control?
Political philosopher and emeritus professor of Princeton University, Sheldon S. Wolin, has warned of the danger of “Inverted totalitarianism,” as he calls it , which “lies in wielding total power without appearing to, without establishing concentration camps, or enforcing ideological uniformity, or forcibly suppressing dissident elements so long as they remain ineffectual.” “...democracy can be managed without appearing to be suppressed.”
What reason have they to be so paranoid about us? Why do all we have to be watched? What’s wrong with their heads, that they need to place us all under suspicion and treat us all like criminals? Why are they so misanthropic? Why are ordinary people so dangerous and threatening?
What kind of mind and personality would want such a thing? Wouldn’t you have to be disturbed to want this? The worldwide ID database and surveillance project has only progressed this far because of lack of public awareness.
Exposing the mind-set of the people implementing this scheme.
Though I am talking about the globally verifiable electronic identity card (e-ID) system, we must begin by fighting the New World Order as a whole. The NWO is an enemy of democracy, freedom, the middle class and the poor.
It‘s time to raise this issue, at every opportunity, to get people thinking about the direction of public policy. Public awareness is vital. We have to draw attention to what’s going on.
I believe that once the public recognises this, they won't like it - it’s just they don’t know or they don't know what to do, because no-one is offering any alternative.
Some groups have been looking for more effective alternatives. For example, CASPIAN has been fighting corporate data-gathering via consumer protests and boycotts. It’s a strategy that has been successful - international corporate giants fear consumers and hate bad publicity. Legislators are more inclined to listen to someone successfully hurting their corporate sponsors. In capitalism, sometimes we have more power as consumers than as voters.
Don’t use cards, use cash. Try not to leave a digital record. Tell your family, friends and everyone you know about this.
Its time to take a stand!
How do you feel about a globally verifiable electronic identity card (e-ID) system? Do you believe they are going to use it for the good of society or as a means of control?
Written By: Nathan Allonby & Tom Retterbush