Psychoanalyzing the Public...for Possible Government Intervention....

This is a discussion on Psychoanalyzing the Public...for Possible Government Intervention.... within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Psychoanalyzing the Public ~ by Beverly K. Eakman It had to happen. A taxpayer-funded study by the National Institute of Mental Health and the National ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30

Thread: Psychoanalyzing the Public...for Possible Government Intervention....

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,776

    Exclamation Psychoanalyzing the Public...for Possible Government Intervention....

    Psychoanalyzing the Public ~ by Beverly K. Eakman

    It had to happen. A taxpayer-funded study by the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Science Foundation (NIMH-NSF) announced last August that adherents to conventional moral principles and limited government are mentally disturbed.

    NIMH-NSF scholars from the Universities of Maryland, California at Berkeley, and Stanford attribute notions about morality and individualism to "dogmatism" and "uncertainty avoidance." Social conservatives, in particular, were said to suffer from "mental rigidity," a condition that, researchers assert, is probably hard-wired, condemning traditionalists to a lifelong, cognitive hell, with all the associated indicators for mental illness: "decreased cognitive function, lowered self-esteem, fear, anger, pessimism, disgust, and contempt."

    Most journalists and political watchdog groups chuckled over the NIMH-NSF's study, "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition" -- especially conservatives themselves. Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) was a bit more testy, though, when he called it "left-wing rhetoric ... dressed up as a scientific study" and said taxpayers shouldn't be paying for such nonsense. But allegations of mental illness have become the trump card in the cultural usurpers' arsenal of strategies to ostracize traditionalists. Professional change agents then do their best to mold public opinion to fit their own employers' totalitarian designs, thereby reducing the number of supposedly mentally challenged traditionalists. And molding opinion requires learning what the public already thinks and how best to beguile people into accepting a new morality.

    Data Mining

    For years, market research firms have aggressively collected value and lifestyle (VALS) data on children and adults from any source capable of generating quick feedback -- popular magazines; Internet, telephone, and household surveys; news polls; school health questionnaires; behavioral screening instruments; census forms; market and consumer research; and even academic tests. Some are polling instruments, pure and simple; others incorporate VALS data to a lesser extent. Either way, the common goal is to find out what makes certain groups and individuals tick -- and then to see if they can be made to tick differently.

    The Terrorism (formerly "Total") Information Awareness (TIA) program, designed by the Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to track down terrorists, homegrown and foreign, is taking advantage of the latest technology. Spokesmen at the Department of Defense now admit they are amassing behavioral dossiers on American citizens. DARPA is combing multiple databases, cross-matching computerized sources of information such as magazine subscriptions; political, religious and other charitable giving; medical records from insurance and physicians' databases; and even clothing sizes. Meanwhile, the federally funded, $12 million Matrix database project has been quietly amassing information in the offices of a private company (Seisint Inc.) in Boca Raton, Florida, paralleling the contentious TIA project. And DARPA's planned "Lifelog program" will track and "trace the `threads' of an individual's life."

    No single response on a survey or questionnaire is likely to make or break anyone. It is the totality of the responses -- the identifiable trends -- that produces a behavioral profile. Cross-matching responses with other computerized records about a group or individual is what is meant by the term "data mining." A dossier is an individual case file built around the "mined" information.

    Long-term tracking and monitoring usually are based on individualized variables among the mined data points, such as what political party you affiliate with or which magazines you subscribe to. The U.S. government obtains such information with the help of database companies like ChoicePoint Inc., which resell personal data to the U.S. government. Federal and state governments pay some $50 million a year to examine ChoicePoint's many databases.

    This tracking, coupled to survey and other computerized records, is what enables probability experts to predict via a mathematical model what you will do in politically charged situations five years or so down the road. In a computerized world where most major systems are compatible for information sharing, if somebody wants a name matched with a response, all they have to do is grease the palm of a person who can access the coded identifiers on the questionnaire or survey. Thus the brave new world of data-trafficking and information brokers -- businesses that buy, sell, and occasionally doctor information.

    All that was ever needed to turn databank information into a political weapon was some national crisis or emergency. That crisis came on September 11, 2001. Virtually no legislation since that time has emerged to put serious brakes on the tremendous upswing in data-trafficking over the past two decades. Indeed, since 9-11 our leaders have craved even more!

    Predicting Behavior

    The technique of fusing social, economic, demographic and psychological information is termed psychographic surveying. The method became a staple of marketing firms and advertisers in the mid-1980s, once cross-matching computerized data became practicable. Webster's New World Communication and Media Dictionary defines the method as "the study of social class based upon the demographics ... income, race, color, religion, and personality traits." These characteristics, says the dictionary, "can be measured to predict behavior."

    Today, experts have become so adept at phrasing their questions that the "target subjects," as we ordinary people are called, generally are unaware just how much they are divulging. The result is a behavioral baseline -- retained in databases for posterity.

    All that remains is the spin some entity wishes to inflict on the data collected. That's what behavioral researchers did with their NIMH-NSF study. Although the researchers' conclusions may be outra-geous, their data doubtless contain kernels of truth. Spin is all about interpretation, how various data points are juxtaposed to reflect whatever substantiates the position of those funding the study.

    If you are the National Education Association, for example, and you want to get AIDS education mandated for grade--schoolers, you must create the illusion that most parents actually want their pre-adolescents involved in such a class. Your first step is market research, just as if you were determining receptivity for a new line of soft drinks, or for a day-care center in a particular section of town. Putting the question to people directly is often less productive than surreptitiously gathering data about your target audience. The down-side is that the latter takes more time and requires high-paid analysts (usually behavioral scientists -- psychologists and sociologists -- with specialties in statistics and computer science).

    Any marketing campaign, of course, is only as good as the data and analysis behind it. Therefore, accurate, hard data and unflawed analysis must exist somewhere no matter how distorted the publicized conclusions or how misleading the spin advertisers put on them. That is why survey questions typically are phrased several different ways, and with no obvious right or wrong answers -- to nail down the true views of the respondent. Pinpointing attitudes, including temperament and disposition, arc key to predicting -- and controlling -- the future.

    Marginalizing the Opposition

    There aren't many stigmas anymore. Or so we are told. But nothing gets a person quarantined from mainstream thought faster than a suggestion that he or she is mentally ill. Thus the term "homophobic." It's a virtual conversation stopper. Ditto for "intolerant," "inhibited," "rigid" and "dogmatic." No one knows better than leftist strategists that anyone linked with a code out of the premier psychiatrists' bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, is guilty by association. Thus, individuals who opposed the Episcopal Church's consecration of homosexual Gene Robinson as a bishop in New Hampshire never had a prayer of swaying the radical church leadership. The opposition was simply designated "homophobic."

    Which brings us back to the scientific finding by NIMH-NSF researchers -- that conservatives carry markers for mental illness. This wide-brush smear is a sure-fire way to defuse any controversial issue -- abortion rights, racial preferences, banning the Ten Commandments, etc.

    Once a suggestion of mental illness is planted, activists can move on to the final exam phase of the operation: determining the extent to which they have impacted public perceptions.

    Using the homosexual issue again as our example, consider the Bravo Channel's TV hit Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Some excellent psychographic surveying went into selling a TV show featuring homosexuals in such a way that it would be accepted by a mass audience, including those who may not like homosexuals. This strategy has been used before in the 1970s and '80s. Archie Bunker of All in the Family renown tested perceptions about bigotry among a population still largely resistant to busing and feminist goals. Maude's abortion assessed the circumstances under which the general public might accept taking the life of an unborn child. So, high ratings for Bravo Channel's Queer Eye, or good sales for a "Gay Billy" doll, a take-off on the familiar "Barbie" and "Ken," will earn "A"s for homosexual activists. Mediocre ratings and sales would mean that either the early data gathering or its analysis was flawed.

    Schools and Mental Health Fraud

    Comparing the proverbial school test and dolls to scandalous television fare may seem something of a stretch. But, in fact, advertising executives took their cue from behaviorist educators like the late Ralph Tyler.

    Tyler was the former commissioner of education under the old Department of Health, Education and Welfare. More significantly, he was past president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and its multi-million-dollar spin-off, the Educational testing Service, the source for most of this nation's school tests.

    It was Tyler who pioneered the psychological test questions that have become staples of educational testing. He created almost single-handedly the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), America's nationwide test, as well as some eight state assessments, under separate contract. The NAEP, in which random samples of 4th, 8th and 12th graders are tested, has since served as the model for nearly all state assessments, for which pupils are tested on alternate years, such as 5th, 9th and 11th grades.

    Tyler and his colleague Richard Wolf (Teachers College, Columbia University), were openly advocating surreptitious methods of data collection and student identification as early as 1969. In their co--edited work Crucial Issues in testing, they responded to this 1967 passage from Bernard Berelson in the Journal for Educational Measurement:

    ... there are recent indications that the involvement of public funds evokes a special public concern for privacy ... greatly heightened by the advent of computer technology.... The danger lies in the gradual erosion of the individual's right to decide to whom he wishes to disclose personal information.

    Tyler and Wolf came out supporting "the permissibility of deception" in school testing based on "the rights of an institution to obtain information necessary to achieve its goals." Potential abuses notwithstanding, Wolf asserted, there "are occasions in which the test constructor [finds it necessary] to outwit the subject so that he cannot guess what information he is revealing. From the [test] constructor's point of view this is necessary since he wishes to ascertain information that the individual might not ... furnish if it were sought directly. A number of personality tests fall into this category...: .

    However, Wolf did admit that:

    ... if the results of a testing situation in which deception was employed are used in making a decision which the individual considers adverse, such as denial of admission to a particular program or institution, there are serious legal and ethical questions. Entrapment is an explicitly illegal procedure in the United States. To what extent the use of deception in testing can be considered a form of entrapment has yet to be determined.

    One attorney after another subsequently took a negative legal view of personality/opinion testing in schools, especially under the cover of academics. But the entrapment problem was never tested in a court of law, and Tyler and Wolf's determination prevailed. The federally funded Council of Chief State School Officers was saddled with ensuring that all local, state and regional education databases were compatible with federal ones -- in preparation for the enormous national database known as the SPEEDE/ExPRESS (Standardization of Postsecondary Education Electronic Data Exchange/Exchange of Permanent Records Electronically for Students and Schools), which stemmed from two earlier attempts. Information from these systems can be automatically transmitted to university admissions officers and potential employers.

    The term "assessment" is used for a reason: It is not a test. It has as its primary or secondary goal to determine levels of resistance to, and acceptance of, certain ideas, persons or events. The first version of Pennsylvania's test for Essential Learning and Literacy Skills (TELLS), for example, stated outright in a Foreword by behavioral research aide Norman Wallen that it "measures gullibility or one's ability to see through attempts to mislead." Then, almost as an afterthought, he added that it "also appears to measure knowledge to some extent." Wallen also mentioned, significantly, that students taking TELLS must have "at least a passing acquaintance with the Judeo-Christian tradition" for test questions "to function as an indicator of gullibility."

    Is this tortured view of an academic test what President George W. Bush had in mind when he called for mandatory testing under the No Child Left Behind Act? Probably not. But Senator Ted Kennedy (D--Mass.) and his ilk may have had different ideas, which is likely why he signed on.

    Most of the time, political "fishing expeditions" are at least subtle. Occasionally, a blatant one will surface. For example, one question on the civics section of the NAEP wants to know the "percentage of 9th-grade U.S. students who think economy-related actions 'probably' or 'should definitely be' the government's responsibility."

    Freedom at Risk

    In the process of improving computer compatibility and questioning techniques, a bonfire of insanities is being lit under our freedom of conscience, using mental health as the ostensible handle. Today, we know what will happen to anyone caught uttering a comment even remotely perceived as critical of hot-button issues like affirmative action, welfare, illegitimacy or immigration (think of Trent Lott and baseball star John Rocker). What need is there for logical debate or a reasoned exchange of ideas, after all, with the mentally unbalanced?

    Of course, the same strategies could be applied in reverse; the leftists' opposite number just hasn't quite caught onto the game yet.

    That's where the Law of Unintended Consequences kicks in for Americans already on the wrong side of a behavioral dossier. With the passage of data-collection initiatives that are international in scope, like the National Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, the federal government may join with any other agency or bureau, including international entities, to compare your personal information. International organizations, of course, are not subject to U.S. laws. As with the United Nations' International Criminal Court (ICC), over-zealous and pretentious coalitions in far-flung countries can use data-collection as a cover to interfere with and impede the legitimate actions and beliefs of private American citizens.

    By cross-matching VALS data with medical, credit card, title, motor vehicle, court and thousands of other computerized records, and then applying a mathematical model to the results, the National Education Sciences Reform Act categorically admits that almost any factual information about a person can he linked to the individual's "emotional, attitudinal, or behavioral condition."

    That is psychological profiling -- with a foot in the door for world-government advocates.

    For now, the critical question is only whether somebody wants your name. But should you run for school board, become an activist, or seek a job involving leadership and influence, then the "whether" becomes "when." Even the best and brightest already are finding they've been screened out of their university of choice, or diverted from a career path, based on personal and political beliefs. Increasingly, a young person's fate is sealed by forces far more threatening than a grade-point average. A cottage industry of mental health apparatchiks, under the cover of sniffing out violent kids, learning problems, dysfunctional families and terrorists, is making judgments that go beyond knowledge--assessment and into the realm of worldviews and values.

    Today, political correctness is running so completely amok that one's views are punished almost before a person has a chance to give them voice. Just look around. Already, if a child is difficult to teach; if he's a nuisance to somebody important; if he's a class clown or quirky; it' he makes politically indiscreet remarks -- his parents are intimidated into seeking counseling and psychiatric drugs (for the child's own good and that of society, of course). Mind-controlling drugs are well-known to break down resistance and augment suggestibility.

    With judges forcing accused criminals to undergo forced psychiatric evaluations and to take medications prior to trial, the handwriting is on the wall for the rest of us. At the very least, one's reputation and position will be irrevocably tarnished by a mental illness accusation.

    Can forced placement in a psychiatric facility be far behind? Most will insist that it can't happen here. But who, even 20 years ago, would have imagined courts forcibly removing the Ten Commandments from public places, including schools, or public school students being forced to read homosexual literature?

    The National Institute of Mental Health/ National Science Foundation finding that traditionalists are mentally disturbed is not an aberration; it is instead symptomatic of how -- under the false flags of political correctness, tolerance, etc. -- once-mainstream thoughts are now being dismissed as abnormal, hateful and dangerous.
    Last edited by ExSoldier; June 23rd, 2007 at 12:08 PM. Reason: format
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,837
    Its all a bunch of crap.

    Nowadays, just the simple act of being able to tell right from wrong could get one labeled as an extremist.

    On the other hand, those that know the difference are about the only thing standing in the way of the liberals. Naturally, those that are resisitant to change, whether it is stupid or not, are the sworn enemy of the liberal.

    No matter though...
    I will continue to laugh and be entertained by the so called "studies" that always serve to further their political agenda.

    When I read that the studies were from
    NIMH-NSF scholars from the Universities of Maryland, California at Berkeley, and Stanford attribute notions about morality and individualism to "dogmatism" and "uncertainty avoidance."
    I had to admit to some skeptism about the study bearing any resemblance to reality.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,776

    Wink No resemblance to "reality" doesn't mean it's NOT "real."

    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Its all a bunch of crap. When I read that the studies were from I had to admit to some skeptism about the study bearing any resemblance to reality.
    Sure it is, but don't think that factor alone will stave off disaster for US. After VA Tech, the pols are looking for traction and things like this....and that bill endorsed by the NRA....could spell real trouble in the near term.
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  5. #4
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,837
    Agreed.

    What it does do is serve to warn us how far the Globalists will go to attempt to get total control. As it stands now, if someone just monitored the mail that one receives it would be a fairly accurate assessment of the life style of that person. Add debit,credit card purchases to that list, Internet use and discussion and the ability to track every purchase made and it makes the capability of "grouping" people into various category's. The real danger there is when someone decides what group is a danger to them.

    Kinda like a certain segment of high ranking officials in Nazi Germany woke up one day and decided that anyone that was Jewish was a threat to the nation.

    We aren't far from that now. All it takes is for the right people to substitute "Jewish" to whatever they deem to stand in their way, whether it be Christian,gun owner,conservative, or whatever its just a matter of time. Like usual, its all about CONTROL.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  6. #5
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 25,650'
    Posts
    12,209

    Angry Brightening Up a Quiet Night's Reading.....

    When one reads the above, and then remembers one of your most recent threads here (http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...ad.php?t=26939), Ex, the world starts to look at little darker. A lot darker.

    While the prior thread dealt with gun control, incrementalism, behavior and a host of other topics, this one kind of wraps up parts of it in ribbons and bows.

    While I sometimes doubt the ability of the government to function at the level of sophistication needed, analytically and otherwise, the above implies that the breach is being filled by a host of willing parties that have their own agendas, for good or bad. I also recognize that many government agencies have phenomenal data gathering and analytics of their own, but I had never really considered what the effect would be if those skills and data mines were ever fully integrated.

    Insurance companies makes my blood run cold considering their data mines, not even considering what that data, when combined with other private data, could be "profiled" "into" by some lesser good........

    I'm going to think just once now before I respond to some telephone opinion poll!

    I'm not much of a conspiracy guy, but this sures adds to it. Do you know Beverly K. Eakman and have you read any other works by her?

    Edited to Add: Just read several other essays by her - worth reading more!

  7. #6
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,837
    Speaking of insurance, my wife got a new company at the school she teaches at and she put me on her life insurance...so that if she dies, then I get rich...or something like that.

    So I fill out the paper work and hand it to her so she can take it back and give it to the Insurance rep and she hands me this little box and says that it is part of the paperwork.

    It was a DNA sampling kit.

    Whats up with that ? Are they doing it because they can or what excuse will they use to justify it ?
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,776

    Wink Okay the next step after DNA

    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Speaking of insurance, my wife got a new company at the school she teaches at and she put me on her life insurance...so that if she dies, then I get rich...or something like that.

    So I fill out the paper work and hand it to her so she can take it back and give it to the Insurance rep and she hands me this little box and says that it is part of the paperwork.

    It was a DNA sampling kit.

    Whats up with that ? Are they doing it because they can or what excuse will they use to justify it ?
    Check this out. Did you know that one of the provisions of the Patriot Act established a NATIONAL ID card? That little magnetic stripe can hold all your info: Mental health records, permits, gun ownership, bank data, everything. Why do you think all the states have been instructed by the Federal Gov't to bring the state drivers licenses into one uniform document nationwide? Now what? Well the ID card can be easily stolen and duped. So the next step is.....are you ready?

    Yup....THE CHIP. They don't even need your permission. Damn thing is so small, it can be injected into a muscle during normal baby vaccinations. Or during a flu shot season. Your muscle generates electricity that powers the chip. When you die, it dies. Go read your PM's.
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  9. #8
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,837
    I am totally against a national ID.

    For over 200 years we have not needed one. Now, major advances in technology are being used as the excuse that we cant live without it. Identity theft will be the major push used to make everyone get it.

    But here's the thing...
    It wont be forced on us...people will want it because it so convenient.
    It will be easy for them. You'll always have "money". You'll always have your ID.

    The flip side is that every single activity can an will be recorded. Every single movement will be known. Call in sick to work and go hunting instead...it can be found out. Got a heart problem and want to get a different type of insurance? They'll know about it. Are you are Ford or a Chevy man? Your past purchase records will tell. Subscribe to religious of gun magazines? How many guns and what type of ammo are you buying? What kindo of unhealthy fatty foods are you eating? How much gas did you consume? Did you vote Dem,Rep,or Socialist Party? Are you talking badly about your government on the Internet?

    There will be many that say we "need" it...while the thugs that are in real power gleefully sit and watch and smile at the fact that a few evil men will enjoy more POWER than anyone in the world has ever had in the history of the entire world. They will have more information about any and every human being than any dictator has ever had.

    In my way of thinking , thats not a good thing.

    Therefore I say to heck with a national I.D. because its just another step.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  10. #9
    Member Array armoredman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    484
    Several states have already refused to impliment Real ID. Lesse how that shakes out.

    As for the "study", remember how many "mental hospitals" there were in the old Soviet Union. No one listens to someone labled "mentally ill", they are pitied, ignored, marginalized, and rendered impotent.
    If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array Blackeagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    2,147
    Quote Originally Posted by ExSoldier View Post
    Check this out. Did you know that one of the provisions of the Patriot Act established a NATIONAL ID card?
    It's not in the Patriot Act. The REAL ID requirements were part of the "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005" (now that's a mouthful).

  12. #11
    Member Array Spectre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by ExSoldier View Post
    Yup....THE CHIP. They don't even need your permission. Damn thing is so small, it can be injected into a muscle during normal baby vaccinations. Or during a flu shot season. Your muscle generates electricity that powers the chip. When you die, it dies. Go read your PM's.
    There is no such thing as a chip powered by muscle. There is RFID, the poster boy for the tinfoil hat club, but there's a problem: it has to have an external electromagnetic power source, whose practical range is measured in inches.

    RFID chips are extremely easy to detect and defeat...hit it with a large enough EM pulse and it fries.

    Your posts are just more Truther BS and it really has no basis in reality or a place on this board.

    Tell me this: do you believe that airliners took down the World Trade Center, or was it...something else altogether?

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,776

    Question Pretty rude and unnecessary comment

    Quote Originally Posted by Spectre View Post
    Your posts are just more Truther BS and it really has no basis in reality or a place on this board.

    Tell me this: do you believe that airliners took down the World Trade Center, or was it...something else altogether?
    It was airliners and AQ for certain. I appreciate your input but that's a pretty rude way to put things and you are wandering dangerously close to a violation of board rules on being antagonistic. I have heard no other negative comments here on this thread and a lot of good info has been exchanged and isn't that what it's all about? The fact of the matter...(regardless of the RFID chip etc) that recently legislation has advanced that put our gun rights on thin ice. Some of it is not directly related to firearms yet will have massive effects nonetheless. This has been a well mannered thread....until you chimed in here. What's up with your attitude?
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,776

    Update:

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackeagle View Post
    It's not in the Patriot Act. The REAL ID requirements were part of the "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005" (now that's a mouthful).
    Here it is...scroll down for my enhancements in BOLD

    http://www.epic.org/privacy/id_cards/

    National ID Cards and REAL ID Act

    History | REAL ID Act | News Items | Resources | Reports | State Legislation Rejecting REAL ID | Previous Top News

    View EPIC Comments on REAL ID Draft Regulations (May 8, 2007)

    RECENT CAMPAIGN


    Stop REAL ID: Reject National Identification

    Latest News/Events

    House Approves $50M in REAL ID Grants. By a vote of 268-150, the House today passed a Homeland Security funding bill that included $50M in grant money to states to implement REAL ID. This is a small fraction of the estimated cost of the national identification system. The Department of Homeland Security has estimated that REAL ID will cost $23.1 billion over 10 years. The House approves the funding as Tennessee joins 15 other states in rejecting REAL ID. There are also bills in both the U.S. House and Senate that would repeal the national identification scheme. For more information, see EPIC's Spotlight on Surveillance for March. (June 15)

    Fifteen States Have Passed Anti-REAL ID Legislation. As the deadline for compliance draws closer, more states are opting out of the controversial REAL ID national identification system. The states that have passed anti-REAL ID legislation are: Arkansas (pdf), Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, and Washington.

    The resistance to REAL ID is growing. In May, more than 60 organizations and 215 blogs joined a campaign to submit comments against REAL ID. There are bills in both the U.S. House and Senate that would repeal the national identification scheme. EPIC and 24 experts in privacy and technology submitted detailed comments (pdf) explaining the many privacy and security threats raised by the REAL ID Act. For more information, see EPIC's Spotlight on Surveillance for March. (June 5)

    Congress Debates Bills That Broaden Uses of REAL ID. The House (pdf) and Senate (pdf) are debating immigration bills that include provisions broadening the uses of REAL ID cards and licenses, which do not exist. Both bills create a national employment eligibility verification system, which would use REAL ID cards for identification and eligibility verification. The Senate bill forbids the use of non-REAL ID cards in the verfication system after 2013. Both bills permit the DHS Secretary to prohibit the use of certain documents for employment verification. This would give the DHS Secretary the power to mandate the use of a national ID card, such as the REAL ID card, as the sole acceptable document for employment eligibility verification in the United States. EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg is expected to testify at a Congressional hearing on the House bill next week. For more on the bills, see EPIC's Spotlight on Surveillance for May. (May 31)

    Georgia and Nevada Join Revolt Against REAL ID. Georgia and Nevada have become the ninth and tenth states to pass legislation against REAL ID. The Georgia bill allows the governor to delay implementation "until the Department of Homeland Security has issued regulations that the Governor finds will adequately protect the interests of the citizens of Georgia." Nevada passed a joint resolution urging Congress to repeal the fundamentally flawed national identification scheme. Eight other states have passed anti-REAL ID legislation. Washington and Montana chose to opt-out completely. Colorado and Idaho refuse to spend any money on REAL ID implementation. Arkansas, Hawaii, Maine, and North Dakota are calling for its repeal. There are bills in both the U.S. House and Senate that would repeal REAL ID. (May 16)

    DHS Receives More Than 12,000 Comments on REAL ID Draft Regulations. The Department of Homeland Security announced that it has received more than 12,000 comments on its draft implementation regulations for the REAL ID Act. The public comment process was marked with problems. Many people complained that they were unable file comments through the Web site and fax number that DHS provided in its federal rulemaking. One day before the comments were due, DHS finally set up an e-mail address to which people could send comments. REAL ID faces considerable opposition by the public, the States and in Congress. More than 60 organizations and 215 blogs joined a campaign to submit comments against REAL ID. Washington and Montana passed legislation to opt-out completely. Colorado and Idaho will not spend any money on REAL ID implementation. Arkansas, Hawaii, Maine, and North Dakota are calling for its repeal. Both houses of Congress are debating legislation that would repeal the ill-conceived law. At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday about REAL ID, Chairman Patrick Leahy said, "The days of Congress rubber-stamping any and every idea cooked up by this administration are over." Sen. Leahy has co-sponsored a bill to repeal REAL ID. (May 9)
    History of National Identification Cards

    National ID cards have long been advocated as a means to enhance national security, unmask potential terrorists, and guard against illegal immigrants. They are in use in many countries around the world including most European countries, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. Currently, the United States and the United Kingdom have continued to debate the merits of adopting national ID cards. The types of card, their functions, and privacy safeguards vary widely.

    Americans have rejected the idea of a national ID card. When the Social Security Number (SSN) was created in 1936, it was meant to be used only as an account number associated with the administration of the Social Security system. Though use of the SSN has expanded considerably, it is not a universal identifier and efforts to make it one have been consistently rejected. In 1971, the Social Security Administration task force on the SSN rejected the extension of the Social Security Number to the status of an ID card. In 1973, the Health, Education and Welfare Secretary's Advisory Committee on Automated Personal Data Systems concluded that a national identifier was not desirable. In 1976, the Federal Advisory Committee on False Identification rejected the idea of an identifier.

    In 1977, the Carter Administration reiterated that the SSN was not to become an identifier, and in 1981 the Reagan Administration stated that it was "explicitly opposed" to the creation of a national ID card. The Clinton administration advocated a "Health Security Card" in 1993 and assured the public that the card, issued to every American, would have "full protection for privacy and confidentiality." Still, the idea was rejected and the health security card was never created. In 1999 Congress repealed a controversial provision in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 which gave authorization to include Social Security Numbers on driver's licenses.

    In response to the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001, there has been renewed interest in the creation of national ID cards. Soon after the attacks, Larry Ellison, head of California-based software company Oracle Corporation, called for the development of a national identification system and offered to donate the technology to make this possible. He proposed ID cards with embedded digitized thumbprints and photographs of all legal residents in the U.S. There was much public debate about the issue, and Congressional hearings were held. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich testified that he "would not institute a national ID card because you do get into civil liberties issues." When it created the Department of Homeland Security, Congress made clear in the enabling legislation that the agency could not create a national ID system. In September 2004, then-DHS Secretary Tom Ridge reiterated, "[t]he legislation that created the Department of Homeland Security was very specific on the question of a national ID card. They said there will be no national ID card."

    The public continues to debate the issue, and there have been many other proposals for the creation of a national identification system, some through the standardization of state driver's licenses. The debate remains in the international spotlight -- several nations are considering implementing such systems. The U.S. Congress has passed the REAL ID Act of 2005, which mandates federal requirements for driver's licenses. Critics argue that it would make driver's licenses into de facto national IDs. EPIC and others have called for the repeal of this ill-conceived national identification law.

    The REAL ID Act of 2005

    Summary

    The REAL ID Act of 2005 creates a de facto national identification card. Ostensibly voluntary, it would become mandatory as those without the card would face suspicion and increased scrutiny. It is a law imposing federal technological standards and verification procedures on state driver's licenses and identification cards, many of which are beyond the current capacity of the federal government, and mandating state compliance by May 2008. In fact, REAL ID turns state DMV workers into federal immigration officials, as they must verify the citizenship status of all those who want a REAL ID-approved state driver's license or identification cards. State DMVs would far move away from their core mission -- to license drivers.

    REAL ID was appended to a bill providing tsunami relief and military appropriations, and passed with little debate and no hearings. The REAL ID Act repealed provisions in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, which contained "carefully crafted language -- bipartisan language -- to establish standards for States issuing driver's licenses," according to Sen. Richard Durbin. After more than two years, the Department of Homeland Security issued draft regulations for state compliance on March 1, 2007.

    The National Conference of State Legislatures estimates that that the cost to the states will be more than $11 billion over five years. This is more than 100 times the $100 million cost that Congress initially estimated. For 2006, $40 million was allocated for start-up costs. No more funding has been allocated, and it is likely that the cost will be shouldered by the public. The Department of Homeland Security has estimated that REAL ID will cost $23.1 billion over 10 years.

    EPIC and 24 experts in privacy and technology have submitted detailed comments (pdf) explaining the many privacy and security threats raised by the REAL ID Act. The fundamentally flawed national identification system is unworkable and the REAL ID Act must be repealed. In particular, the group admonishes DHS for its failure to include adequate privacy and security safeguards for this massive national identification database. DHS's own Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee has refused (pdf) to endorse the agency's plan. "The Committee feels it is important that the following comments do not constitute an endorsement of REAL ID or the regulations as workable or appropriate."

    How will the REAL ID Act affect state driver's licenses and identification cards (DL/ID)?

    If the Department of Homeland Security Secretary doesn't grant a state an extension to meet the certification requirements, then by May 11, 2008 (three years after passage of the REAL ID Act), states must meet the following standards to be accepted for federal use (entrance into a courthouse, onto a plane; receiving federal benefits, such as Social Security or Medicare). After more than two years, the Department of Homeland Security issued draft regulations on March 1, 2007, explaining how the states can meet these standards. The EPIC analysis of the potential privacy and security implications follows the enumeration of the each set of standards.

    The Department of Homeland Security draft regulations would (1) impose more difficult standards for acceptable identification documents that could limit the ability of individuals to get a state drivers license; (2) compel data verification procedures that the Federal government itself is not capable of following; (3) mandate minimum data elements required on the face of and in the machine readable zone of the card; (4) require changes to the design of licenses and identification cards (5) expand schedules and procedures for retention and distribution of identification documents and other personal data; and (6) dictate security standards for the card, state motor vehicle facilities, and the personal data and documents collected in state motor vehicle databases. These regulations create a de facto national identification system.

    Minimum document requirements, 202(b):

    "To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall include, at a minimum, the following information and features on each driver's license and identification card issued to a person by the State:

    (1) The person's full legal name.

    (2) The person's date of birth.

    (3) The person's gender.

    (4) The person's driver's license or identification card number.

    (5) A digital photograph of the person.

    (6) The person's address of principle residence.

    (7) The person's signature.

    (8) Physical security features designed to prevent tampering, counterfeiting, or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes.

    (9) A common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements."

    EPIC analysis:

    The residential address requirements set out in the draft regulations endanger the ability of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and other crimes to hide from their abusers. Currently, many States allow domestic violence victims and others to protect the confidentiality of their residential addresses. States have created formal Address Confidentiality Programs and States have also provided general measures of residential address privacy. The proposed regulations override these substantial protections, and the overrides must be removed from the final regulations. The government must not make it easier for abusers to find their victims. For more information, see EPIC's REAL ID and Domestic Violence page.

    Under the draft regulations, the REAL ID card would include a 2D barcode as its machine readable technology. To protect privacy and improve security, this machine readable technology must either include encryption, which is recommended (pdf) by the DHS Privacy Office, or access must be limited in some other form. Leaving the machine readable zone open would allow unfettered third-party access to the data and leave 245 million license and cardholders nationwide at risk for individual tracking. In its Privacy Impact Assessment of the draft regulations, the Privacy Office supported encryption "because 2D bar code readers are extremely common, the data could be captured from the driver's licenses and identification cards and accessed by unauthorized third parties by simply reading the 2D bar code on the credential" if the data is left unencrypted.

    DHS contemplates using the REAL ID system as part of its Federal border security program and requested comments on how States could incorporate long-range radio frequency identification ("RFID") technology into the REAL ID card so that it could be used as part of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. Many groups have urged against the use of RFID technology in identification documents. There are significant privacy and security risks associated with the use of RFID-enabled identification cards, particularly if individuals are not able to control the disclosure of identifying information. The Department of State recognized these security and privacy threats and changed its E-Passport proposal because of them; the Department of Homeland Security has just abandoned a plan to include RFID chips in border identification documents because the pilot test was a failure; and both the Department of Homeland Security's Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee and the Government Accountability Office recently cautioned against the use of RFID technology in identification documents.

    This wireless technology has significant security risks, including those of surreptitious gathering of personal data by unauthorized individuals and clandestine tracking of cardholders. EPIC has consistently recommended the use of contact technology, such as the stripes on the backs of credit cards, in identification documents. Contact cards are more secure; they do not contain the risk of data theft through wireless transmission and allow cardholders to have control over who sees their data. See EPIC's RFID page for more information on the dangers of using RFID in identification documents.

    Minimum driver's license and identification card issuance standards, general, 202(c)(1):

    "(1) In general. -- To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall require, at a minimum, presentation and verification of the following information before issuing a driver's license or identification card to a person:

    (A) A photo identity document, except that a non-photo identity document is acceptable if it includes both the person's full legal name and date of birth.

    (B) Documentation showing the person's date of birth.

    (C) Proof of the person's social security account number or verification that the person is not eligible for a social security account number.

    (D) Documentation showing the person's name and address of principal residence."

    Minimum driver's license and identification card issuance standards, special requirements 202(c)(2):

    "(2) Special requirements. --

    (A) In general. -- To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall comply with the minimum standards of this paragraph.

    (B) Evidence of lawful status. -- A State shall require, before issuing a driver's license or identification card to a person, valid documentary evidence that the person --

    (i) is a citizen or national of the United States;

    (ii) is an alien lawfully admitted for permanent or temporary residence in the United States;

    (iii) has conditional permanent resident status in the United States;

    (iv) has an approved application for asylum in the United States or has entered into the United States in refugee status;

    (v) has a valid, unexpired nonimmigrant visa or nonimmigrant visa status for entry into the United States;

    (vi) has a pending application for asylum in the United States;

    (vii) has a pending or approved application for temporary protected status in the United States;

    (viii) has approved deferred action status; or

    (ix) has a pending application for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States or conditional permanent resident status in the United States."

    Verification of documents, 202(c)(3):

    "(3) Verification of documents. -- To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall implement the following procedures:

    (A) Before issuing a driver's license or identification card to a person, the State shall verify, with the issuing agency, the issuance, validity, and completeness of each document required to be presented by the person under paragraph (1) or (2).

    (B) The State shall not accept any foreign document, other than an official passport, to satisfy a requirement of paragraph (1) or (2).

    (C) <<NOTE: Deadline. Memorandum.>> Not later than September 11, 2005, the State shall enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of Homeland Security to routinely utilize the automated system known as Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, as provided for by section 404 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (110 Stat. 3009-664), to verify the legal presence status of a person, other than a United States citizen, applying for a driver's license or identification card.

    EPIC analysis:

    The data verification procedures mandated by the draft regulations are based on faulty premises: DHS relies on non-existing, unavailable or incomplete databases and the mistaken belief that DMV workers can or should be turned into Federal immigration officers. Each assumption creates more problems in the Department of Homeland Security's attempt to create a fundamentally flawed national identification system. Under REAL ID, the states must verify applicant documents and data with the issuing agency. DHS states that, "[f]or individual States to verify information and documentation provided by applicants, each State must have electronic access to multiple databases and systems . . . . Secure and timely access to trusted data sources is a prerequisite for effective verification of applicant data." Yet, beyond the national identification system created by the State-to-State data exchange, two of four verification systems required are not available on a nationwide basis and third does not even exist. The State Department system to verify passports and some reports of births has not even been created, but DHS bases its mandates on the assumption that the system "is eventually developed."

    Under the regulations, State DMV employees would need to authenticate license and identification card applicants' source documents, which means the employees would be required to physically inspect the documents and "verify[] that the source document presented under these regulations is genuine and has not been altered." State DMV employees would be required to verify these documents (listed above), including Federal immigration documents, though they have no training to do so. DHS contemplates this problem and seeks to solve it by requiring that DMV employees handling source documents undergo 12 hours of "fraudulent document recognition" training. A review of the Social Security Administration found that staff had difficulty recognizing counterfeit documents, though it is their primary job to verify these documents before issuing SSN. For example, the Government Accountability Office review (pdf) reported difficulty with detection of fraudulent birth certificates. In one case, a fake in-state birth certificate was detected, but "SSA staff acknowledged that if a counterfeit out-of-state birth certificate had been used, SSA would likely have issued the SSN because of staff unfamiliarity with the specific features of numerous state birth certificates." It is questionable how well State DMV employees would be able to spot fraudulent documents, especially documents as rarely seen as consular reports of birth abroad, with merely 12 hours of training when it is difficult for counterfeit documents to be spotted by federal employees whose primary job is verification of source documents. Also, if a State DMV employee determines that an applicant's source documents are fraudulent, where could the applicant turn? No redress procedure has been created.

    Other requirements, 202(d):

    "(d) Other Requirements. -- To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall adopt the following practices in the issuance of drivers' licenses and identification cards:

    (1) Employ technology to capture digital images of identity source documents so that the images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format.

    (2) Retain paper copies of source documents for a minimum of 7 years or images of source documents presented for a minimum of 10 years.

    (3) Subject each person applying for a driver's license or identification card to mandatory facial image capture.

    (4) Establish an effective procedure to confirm or verify a renewing applicant's information.

    (5) Confirm with the Social Security Administration a social security account number presented by a person using the full social security account number. In the event that a social security account number is already registered to or associated with another person to which any State has issued a driver's license or identification card, the State shall resolve the discrepancy and take appropriate action.

    (6) Refuse to issue a driver's license or identification card to a person holding a driver's license issued by another State without confirmation that the person is terminating or has terminated the driver's license.

    (7) Ensure the physical security of locations where drivers' licenses and identification cards are produced and the security of document materials and papers from which drivers' licenses and identification cards are produced.

    (8) Subject all persons authorized to manufacture or produce drivers' licenses and identification card security clearance requirements.

    (9) Establish fraudulent document recognition training programs for appropriate employees engaged in the issuance of drivers' licenses and identification cards.

    (10) Limit the period of validity of all driver's licenses and identification cards that are not temporary to a period that does not exceed 8 years.

    (11) In any case in which the State issues a driver's license or identification card that does not satisfy the requirements of this section, ensure that such license or identification card --

    (A) clearly states on its face that it may not be accepted by any Federal agency for federal identification or any other official purpose; and

    (B) uses a unique design or color indicator to alert Federal agency and other law enforcement personnel that it may not be accepted for any such purpose.

    (12) Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State.

    (13) Maintain a State motor vehicle database that contains, at a minimum -

    (A) all data fields printed on drivers' licenses and identification cards issued by the State; and

    (B) motor vehicle drivers' histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions, and points on licenses."

    EPIC analysis:

    Under REAL ID, the government would have easy access to an incredible amount of personal data stored in one national database (or, according to the DHS description, 56 State and Territory databases, each of which can access all of the others). The agency makes two claims about the expanded data retention under REAL ID that we dispute: (1) "Most States already include this [extensive, personal] information in a machine readable technology," and (2) "neither the Real ID Act nor these proposed regulations gives the Federal Government any greater access to information than it had before." Each claim is false: DHS is mandating the increase of both the type of documents that need to be retained and the length of data retention, and the agency will give both State and Federal governments greater access to the personal data.

    With the REAL ID national identification system, DHS imposes new requirements on State motor vehicle agencies. Each of the 56 interconnected databases must contain all data fields printed on driver's licenses and ID cards, and driver's histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions, and points on licenses. The States are compelled to begin maintaining paper copies or digital images of important identity documents, such as birth certificates or naturalized citizenship papers, for seven to 10 years. This is a significant expansion of the personal data previously reviewed or stored by State motor vehicle agencies.

    Currently these identification documents are kept in a variety of places -- the Social Security system, the immigration system, local courthouses -- and it takes considerable effort to gather them all together. Under REAL ID, all of these identification documents -- concerning, among other things, births, marriages, deaths, immigration, social services -- are consolidated into one national database, accessible to at least tens of thousands of government employees nationwide, which would give the Federal and State governments greater access than before.

    Security expert Bruce Schneier, EPIC and others have explained that it decreases security to have one ID card for many purposes, as there will be a substantial amount of harm when the card is compromised. There is also the threat that REAL ID is ostensibly trying to protect against: forged identification cards. Investing so much trust into one card means that criminals will only have to forge one identification card. "No matter how unforgeable we make it, it will be forged. We can raise the price of forgery, but we can't make it impossible. Real IDs will be forged," Schneier said. A national database full of identification documents, images and data would entice many kinds of criminals, including terrorists who seek to steal the identity of a "trusted" individual.

    A national identification system would divide the United States into two groups: (1) "trusted good guys" who have the national ID card, and (2) "untrusted bad guys" who do not. But, Schneier has pointed out that there is a third category that appears -- bad guys who fit the good guy profile. Upon the release of the draft regulations, Schneier said, "The REAL ID regulations do not solve problems of the national ID card, which will fail when used by someone intent on subverting that system. Evildoers will be able steal the identity -- and profile -- of an honest person, doing an end-run around the REAL ID system." This national identification system inherently contains significant threats to individual privacy and national security.

    The 56 State and Territory databases would become one large database under REAL ID. And one presumes that each DMV would have access to these databases at the very least to confirm that the applicant does not have a REAL ID license or ID card in another state. If a criminal could break the security of any one of the tens of thousands of entrance points, then the criminal would have access to the personal data, including Social Security numbers, of every single person in the United State with a REAL ID license or ID card. This would put hundreds of millions of people at risk for identity theft.

    The Department of Homeland Security contemplates a universal design for compliant and non-compliant REAL ID cards. A universal design, especially for a card including citizenship status, would cause irreparable harm, as it would foster suspicion of those who do not wish to carry the REAL ID card. Uniform design for a national identification card would also create an enormous security risk.

    The agency is considering a uniform REAL ID card design, asking for comments on "[w]hether DHS should standardize the unique design or color required for non-REAL ID under the REAL ID Act for ease of nationwide recognition, and whether DHS should also implement a standardized design or color for REAL ID licenses." Mandating distinct designs or colors for both REAL ID and regular licenses and identification cards and requiring non-REAL ID driver's licenses or ID cards to have explicit "invalid for federal purposes" designations turns this "voluntary" card into a mandatory national ID card. It would divide the country into two -- people with the REAL ID card and those without -- and anyone with a different license or ID card would be instantly suspicious. Significant delay, complication and possibly harassment or discrimination would fall upon those who choose not to carry a REAL ID card.

    In the agency's economic analysis of the draft regulations, reducing ID theft is listed as one of the potential ancillary benefits of the national identification system. However, the agency says that the potential benefit would depend on a vast expansion of REAL ID uses from the three official purposes required in the draft regulations; DHS suggests what is needed is "incidental and required use of REAL ID documents in everyday transactions." DHS envisions that employers, social service agencies (including Medicare, Medicaid and student financial aid), firearm sellers and licensors, and election workers will all use this national identification system. The official and unofficial uses of REAL ID must not be broadened. Such expansion would harm national security. Using a single card for many identification purposes would be the same as using one key for every lock.
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  15. #14
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,100
    Spectre
    There is no real need to start getting all personal about it.
    It is fine for you to have a personal opinion concerning the worth (to you) of any DefensiveCarry forum thread and "simply and politely" state that opinion and then move on to another thread.
    It's possible to do that without taking swipes at another forum member.
    For sure not every member will find the same degree of value in every forum topic but, please show some basic human respect for the member posting the thread. Thanks!
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectre View Post
    There is no such thing as a chip powered by muscle. There is RFID, the poster boy for the tinfoil hat club, but there's a problem: it has to have an external electromagnetic power source, whose practical range is measured in inches.

    RFID chips are extremely easy to detect and defeat...hit it with a large enough EM pulse and it fries.

    Your posts are just more Truther BS and it really has no basis in reality or a place on this board.

    Tell me this: do you believe that airliners took down the World Trade Center, or was it...something else altogether?
    Actually I have to jump in here now...and yes...I'll provide links...and try not to violate rules. RFID is no longer just measured in mere inches. We're talking yards now...MULTIPLE yards. In both 2005 and 2006 researches at both Cambridge and University of Tel Aviv were able to pull data from RFID devices at distances greater than 100 ft.
    http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/13/pf/r...ex.htm?cnn=yes

    and this would be skimming RFID WITH ENCRYPTION!:
    http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/a...iew/1415/1/39/

    I've been keeping an eye on this stuff for a while, part curiosity(the annoying engineer in me), and part worrywart. {/tinfoilhatOff}

    As to the powered by muscle comments...it's irrelevant anyway. There are different types of RFID tags; both active, battery powered tags, and passive tags. Passive tags take incoming power(that EM you were talking about) from other sources (like the tag READERS) wirelessly, do their thing, and then broadcast back to the reader, all happening withing millionths of seconds. It all depends on the type of tag, the frequency it's set for, whether or not it's surrounded by metal, how big the antenna is, how much power the reader puts out, etc...

    oh yeah...and the regular warehousing type folks (walmart, etc...) use the UHF passive tags which do have an effective range around 30-40 feet.
    Last edited by packinnova; June 24th, 2007 at 08:36 PM. Reason: forgot one
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the **** out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Divine Intervention???
    By oneshot in forum Bob & Terry's Place
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: January 10th, 2010, 09:48 PM
  2. the dangers of intervention
    By seawolf1956 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: April 20th, 2009, 11:28 AM
  3. Intervention Rule?
    By madmike in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: April 20th, 2007, 08:50 PM
  4. How Many Of Y'all See THIS As The First Step To UN Intervention....HERE?
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: June 25th, 2006, 11:25 PM
  5. Intervention v. Non-Intervention
    By Miggy in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: October 20th, 2005, 10:46 PM

Search tags for this page

homosexual

Click on a term to search for related topics.