Real id, the constitution and the mark of the beast

[buckthesystem]

I came across this, and it is almost exactly what I have concluded recently, except for the part where it says "...legitimate security concerns exist in this age of terrorism..." (as I think the "terrorism" threat is greatly exaggerated, and I believe that there is no way that real id was created "because of terrorism" either. I believe that "terrorism" has just been used to scare people into accepting things like "real id"). Anyway, please read it and tell me what you think.

______________________________________

http://www.newswithviews.com/guest_opinion/guest128.htm

"REAL ID, The Constitution And The Mark Of The Beast"

By Representative Sam E. Rohrer

August 24, 2008

NewsWithViews.com

History offers many examples of societies which have sought to increase security by sacrificing freedom. America itself provides many pertinent instances. However, our founding fathers have not left us without wisdom on this issue. Ben Franklin has famously stated, "People willing to trade freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." REAL ID undoubtedly exemplifies a scenario in which a difficult tension exists between freedom and security. By commandeering every state's driver's license issuing process, REAL ID threatens the results warned by Franklin - loss of both freedom and security. It has become the biometric enrollment phase of a plan to implement a terribly invasive tracking system, largely without public knowledge or approval. REAL ID is merely the current face of a far larger, international government and private economic effort to collect, store, and distribute the sensitive biometric data of citizens to use for the twin purposes of government tracking and economic control. At issue are much more than standardized or non-duplicative driver's licenses. This effort extends worldwide, threatening every person alive today. Although very legitimate security concerns exist in this age of terrorism, this Act extends far beyond terrorism prevention or protection of the innocent. Keeping that broad picture in mind, let us move to some background behind the face of REAL ID implementation in America.

The REAL ID Act passed Congress in 2005 buried in a "must-pass" war funding and tsunami relief bill. The little debate in the House and total absence of debate in the Senate ensured that many Congressmen did not realize the full implications of REAL ID. Importantly, the desire by government and economic interests to implement a national tracking and ID system did not start with the REAL ID Act in 2005. Under the guise of security, it has been attempted numerous times in the past, even during Ronald Reagan's administration. When former Attorney General William French Smith proposed to implement what he called a "perfectly harmless" national ID system as well as when a second cabinet member proposed to "tattoo a number on each American's forearm," Ronald Reagan responded, "My God, that's the mark of the beast," signaling an abrupt end to the national ID debate during the Reagan years.

The significant opposition to a national ID system in the past extends to the REAL ID issue today. This conviction has united both Democrats and Republicans as well as such normally opposed groups as the ACLU and the ACLJ. Whether the concern is privacy, religious rights, states' rights, or cost of implementation, REAL ID has galvanized broad and deep resistance, currently including an estimated six hundred groups. Today, over twenty legislatures have passed resolutions or legislation variously opposing implementation of the REAL ID Act. Eleven of those legislatures have gone further by passing laws specifically prohibiting compliance with REAL ID.

What does REAL ID do? REAL ID attempts to mandate a standardized process and format for all state drivers' licenses to achieve increased security. Most importantly in this standardized process, REAL ID mandates a certain picture quality. A footnote issued by the Department of Homeland Security establishes this quality as compliant with the ICAO Document 9303 biometric format. The global body setting this format, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), is a specialized agency created under the United Nations. Biometric data can be produced from a simple digital photograph of this quality by running the picture of a person's face through a software program which measures and analyzes the unique, personally identifiable characteristics of that face. The process results in a unique numeric code which identifies a person according to facial measurements. You read that correctly. A unique number or "code" is developed from an algorithmic formula which converts a digital biometric sample to biometric "face print" data. Under REAL ID biometric facial recognition technology, you become a number literally worn on your face - a number which is read by computer, tracked by surveillance camera, and distributed worldwide. Clearly, this international standard provides global compatibility of American citizens' biometric data collected through REAL ID.

Having this background, we should observe that many Americans still do not know why the provisions of the REAL ID Act must be rejected and aggressively opposed because they do not understand the full implications of REAL ID. Many wrongly assume that the legitimate need for security trumps all other considerations. However, REAL ID is not primarily about a secure driver's license or terrorism prevention. The full and dangerous implications of REAL ID may be fleshed out through a discussion of why each American must vigorously oppose this Act's most basic tenets. It poses dangers in the following three areas:

1 - REAL ID violates Constitutional rights.

2 - REAL ID compromises national and state sovereignty.

3 - REAL ID threatens the safety of all Americans.

I- First, let us note that compliance with REAL ID would violate our constitutionally protected freedoms.

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion

REAL ID violates freedom of religion for some citizens by forcing inclusion into a system which requires a picture - and more - just to access public services. The Amish and some Mennonites provide examples of religious groups who view the mere taking of photographs as idolatry. REAL ID conditions their freedoms, such as entering a federal building, upon a provision which violates their religious beliefs. Because this "government" identification system limits travel and access to certain public places, and could even become a debit card, other more mainline religious groups view REAL ID as the advent of the "mark of the beast."

Particularly because this technology assigns a unique number to represent each person's biometric face print, these concerns are hardly unfounded.

A Powerpoint presentation from L-1 Identity Solutions, the major biometrics company in the U.S. today, bolsters this claim. A slide in that presentation includes a graph which charts future likely applications for biometrics. Phase 1 of this "blueprint" for biometric implementation utilizes the authority of Federal agencies to impose such requirements as REAL ID. Phase 2 utilizes bureaucratic leveraging on regulated industries to implement biometrics. Phase 3 anticipates mass implementation on the citizens at large for such everyday activities as buying and selling. As an example, under Phase 2 DHS is attempting to force airlines to pick up the costs of collecting biometrics from foreigners at airports. In Texas under Phase 3, a company is experimenting with using the driver's license as a debit card. Whether one is personally alarmed at some or all of these concerns, REAL ID would prohibit the free exercise of religion for many people.

Amendment IV

[O'Dannyboy]

Once again I completely disagree. A numbered picture of a person in a database is not a mark. Secondly I don't find another type of ID card any different than my drivers license. Personally I would feel better about the voting process if everyone else went through the same process I had to go through. I believe a "uniform" method of identifying and "documenting" citizens is an absolute necessity. I, for one, do not feel being identified in a government database is a violation of my rights or privacy.

We should not confuse the mark as being anything mysterious or ambiguous. The mark will surely be something thats obvious as in ON the forehead or back of the hand as it says in the Bible. It will not be an ID card carried in your wallet.

As I have said, some people are on a crusade against ALL forms of identification, be they drivers licenses, student IDs or library cards. The truth of the matter is that a persons word is not good enough, especially these days. Without identification there would be people going from poling station to poling station using a different name at each and 17 year old girls buying alcohol because children are maturing at a faster rate than ever thanks to hormones in our beef products.

[mizzdy]

Great article!

A footnote issued by the Department of Homeland Security establishes this quality as compliant with the ICAO Document 9303 biometric format. The global body setting this format, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), is a specialized agency created under the United Nations. Biometric data can be produced from a simple digital photograph of this quality by running the picture of a person's face through a software program which measures and analyzes the unique, personally identifiable characteristics of that face. The process results in a unique numeric code which identifies a person according to facial measurements.

There's that dreaded UN again! Rev.13:16-17 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in the right hand, or in their forehead: And that no man might buy and sell, save he that had the mark, or the man of the beast, or the number of his name.

[Guest john(a)baptist]

I personally think that the concept of Real ID is an invitation to do harm by ones own government. If a government were simply interested in "identifying" those entering government building and other such public places, then why allow it to go as far as this program is reaching.

ODannyBoy, I wish I had the trust in my government that you have. The fact is that we cannot give up everything we have to another, with the expectation that they will honor their committment. We would be allowing the fox to guarantee the security of the henhouse.

Remember that our government is the keeper of our military, which it has turned on it's people. The keeper of our social security, which it has spent uncontrollably, endangering my generations retirement. The keeper of our Home Land Security, which it uses to search our grandmothers and pregnant wives, while overlooking those of obvious suspect so as not to be "politically incorrect." The keeper of our treasure, which it gives away faster that they can rake it in. The keeper of our sovereign land and title, which it now sells to China, Japan (owner of e many of our own federal buildings - making them landlords of our government), and makes it a crime to detain or hold criminally anyone who comes across our borders without permission. The keeper of our constitution, which it compromises, violates and redefines daily to reduce our freedom and moral values.

Do not get me wrong. I love this country and have served it faithfully in and out of uniform. But I will never trust it as long as it is a servant of special interest - of which these biometric companies are complicit, refuses to hear the voice of the people it serves, entitles itself to our land and our earnings, and dictates our responsibilities.

[O'Dannyboy]

I personally think that the concept of Real ID is an invitation to do harm by ones own government. If a government were simply interested in "identifying" those entering government building and other such public places, then why allow it to go as far as this program is reaching.

ODannyBoy, I wish I had the trust in my government that you have. The fact is that we cannot give up everything we have to another, with the expectation that they will honor their committment. We would be allowing the fox to guarantee the security of the henhouse.

Remember that our government is the keeper of our military, which it has turned on it's people. The keeper of our social security, which it has spent uncontrollably, endangering my generations retirement. The keeper of our Home Land Security, which it uses to search our grandmothers and pregnant wives, while overlooking those of obvious suspect so as not to be "politically incorrect." The keeper of our treasure, which it gives away faster that they can rake it in. The keeper of our sovereign land and title, which it now sells to China, Japan (owner of e many of our own federal buildings - making them landlords of our government), and makes it a crime to detain or hold criminally anyone who comes across our borders without permission. The keeper of our constitution, which it compromises, violates and redefines daily to reduce our freedom and moral values.

Do not get me wrong. I love this country and have served it faithfully in and out of uniform. But I will never trust it as long as it is a servant of special interest - of which these biometric companies are complicit, refuses to hear the voice of the people it serves, entitles itself to our land and our earnings, and dictates our responsibilities.

I understand the concern about the biometrics. The last thing we need is big brother being able to track us and the temptation to abuse/misuse that information. I for one am not opposed to carrying an ID card as long as it is not used to track me. I do however believe that proper identification is needed to properly identify U.S. citizens from the imposters. I simply to not like the idea that "foreign nationals" or "undocumented workers" are voting because our current forms of ID are so easily forged.

[buckthesystem]

Once again I completely disagree. A numbered picture of a person in a database is not a mark. Secondly I don't find another type of ID card any different than my drivers license. Personally I would feel better about the voting process if everyone else went through the same process I had to go through. I believe a "uniform" method of identifying and "documenting" citizens is an absolute necessity. I, for one, do not feel being identified in a government database is a violation of my rights or privacy.

We should not confuse the mark as being anything mysterious or ambiguous. The mark will surely be something thats obvious as in ON the forehead or back of the hand as it says in the Bible. It will not be an ID card carried in your wallet.

As I have said, some people are on a crusade against ALL forms of ID, be they drivers licenses, student IDs or library cards. The truth of the matter is that a persons word is not good enough, especially these days. Without identification there would be people going from poling station to poling station using a different name at each and 17 year old girls buying alcohol because children are maturing at a faster rate than ever thanks to hormones in our beef products.

One thing the Bible does is warn of deception, you seem to have fallen for this deception quite badly. We will be deceived into taking the MOB. Sure, as a lot of people have said the MOB will be "voluntary", sure it will be "voluntary" in the fact that if you don't "cooperate" then you might starve to death (as well as not being able to travel anywhere, enter federal buildings - which you've paid for btw or national parks and any other things that we don't know about yet.

I think id systems (eventually they will all be formed in one) are the MOB because they (1) Impose conditions on the bearer (2) Mandate that simply by accepting/carrying the "id" you are swearing allegience to the "beast" (government, i.e. you belong to government not God) and (3) You have been deceived into believing all sorts of erroneous ideas in order to think that the MOB is "necessary".

Getting back to where you said "some people are on a crusade against all forms of ID...." Well yes I find it hard to accept that there is suddenly a need for the government to identify everyone. I've survived so far without any form of ID, so why all of a sudden should there be a necessity for it now? Nothing has substantially changed during the last five years or so.

Another erroneous belief that I hear a lot today is "forms of ID such as DLs, Library cards, credit cards etc." The truth is that a DL is not a "form of id", it is a piece of paper stating that you have been assessed as competent to drive a motor vehicle on the road, a library card is not a form of id, it is a card enabling you to borrow books from the library, and a credit card is a card saying that the company issuing the card agrees to lend you the money to purchase something from a shop and that you must pay that money back to the company.

As for your assertion that "......... going from poling station to poling station using a different name at each" Has there been a particular problem with this in the past? And "...... 17 year old girls buying alcohol ....." How do you expect that "real id" will solve this, if 17 year old girls want alcohol they can get it without having to buy it themselves.

[other one]

417027"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. 29"My Father, who has given themto Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

NASB

Buck, deceiving someone to take the mark of the beast is not scriptural. Even when discussing this coming deception coming on this world and that it will be so well laid out that it would deceive even the elect "if it were possible"

If it were possible the Bible would not use that phrase "If it were possible"

There are many reasons why we should not trust governments with too much power. The US is a nation all it own because of the abuse of power in the 1700's by England's king. Our founding fathers warned us of letting central government have too much power and in this manor much of your thinking is aligned with mine.

However this mark of the beast stuff is just not right. You can not be tricked into taking the mark of the beast if you are a real Christian who has made Jesus Christ your Lord. No one can snatch you out of his hand. The day will come (and I personally don't think its far away) when each of us will have a choice of taking the mark or dieing, but it won't be from deceit......

[buckthesystem]

417027"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. 29"My Father, who has given themto Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

NASB

Buck, deceiving someone to take the mark of the beast is not scriptural. Even when discussing this coming deception coming on this world and that it will be so well laid out that it would deceive even the elect "if it were possible"

If it were possible the Bible would not use that phrase "If it were possible"

There are many reasons why we should not trust governments with too much power. The US is a nation all it own because of the abuse of power in the 1700's by England's king. Our founding fathers warned us of letting central government have too much power and in this manor much of your thinking is aligned with mine.

However this mark of the beast stuff is just not right. You can not be tricked into taking the mark of the beast if you are a real Christian who has made Jesus Christ your Lord. No one can snatch you out of his hand. The day will come (and I personally don't think its far away) when each of us will have a choice of taking the mark or dieing, but it won't be from deceit......

Other one you could well be totally right, after all what I said is only an idea, an opinion based on what I have read over the last five years or so, but opinions can be wrong and then changed.

The Bible does talk of the upcoming deception. I believe (just opinion) that this deception has already occurred (or started to occur). People have been deceived enmasse to believe that there is a "terrible terrorist threat" everywhere and the only way to avoid being blown up by one of these dreaded "terrorists" is to surrender everything you have to the (so far) national government (which will eventually be a one world government) and let them control every aspect of your life and control and dole out all the natural resources of the world - coal, oil, rock, water etc., even air - and let them put all your physical property in a pool and "redistribute" 50% of it as they see fit (of course keeping the other 50% as a one world tax, for their trouble).

People are well on the way to being deceived into believing that "there is danger round every corner" and the only way to survive this is to "do what they're told by nanny state" and pay massive "fines" for not wearing seat belts and bike helmets and surrender any weapons or sharp objects that they might hurt themselves on to a "trustworthy body" like a one-world police force (for proof of this you only need to look at - say - how kids used to be able to ride bikes without shoes and helmets, but today ...... ).

1 Thess. 5.3: "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape".

In my opinion "if it were possible" just refers to the fact that, of course, all of us will not be fooled (who was it who said "you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time?)

Don't you think that by taking a token issued to us by the government, we are swearing allegience to the "beast" and saying that we no longer belong to God? What do you reckon about that?

In the next few years nobody will face dying if they will not take the real id card, but (if things go right for the government) in 20 or 30 years I think people will be faced with "take real id or die slowly by starvation". Though of course by then hardly anybody will be questioning that idea.

[O'Dannyboy]

The upcoming "deception" will not be over forms of ID. The people will be deceived into thinking that the Anti-Christ is the Messiah. Those who take the mark of the beast will do so willingly and there will be no question as to whose mark you are taking. Your calling "government" the beast does not sound scriptural especially when a government cannot enter the temple and declare itself God. I am not being deceived I promise you.

[other one]

417027"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. 29"My Father, who has given themto Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.

NASB

Buck, deceiving someone to take the mark of the beast is not scriptural. Even when discussing this coming deception coming on this world and that it will be so well laid out that it would deceive even the elect "if it were possible"

If it were possible the Bible would not use that phrase "If it were possible"

There are many reasons why we should not trust governments with too much power. The US is a nation all it own because of the abuse of power in the 1700's by England's king. Our founding fathers warned us of letting central government have too much power and in this manor much of your thinking is aligned with mine.

However this mark of the beast stuff is just not right. You can not be tricked into taking the mark of the beast if you are a real Christian who has made Jesus Christ your Lord. No one can snatch you out of his hand. The day will come (and I personally don't think its far away) when each of us will have a choice of taking the mark or dieing, but it won't be from deceit......

Other one you could well be totally right, after all what I said is only an idea, an opinion based on what I have read over the last five years or so, but opinions can be wrong and then changed.

The Bible does talk of the upcoming deception. I believe (just opinion) that this deception has already occurred (or started to occur). People have been deceived enmasse to believe that there is a "terrible terrorist threat" everywhere and the only way to avoid being blown up by one of these dreaded "terrorists" is to surrender everything you have to the (so far) national government (which will eventually be a one world government) and let them control every aspect of your life and control and dole out all the natural resources of the world - coal, oil, rock, water etc., even air - and let them put all your physical property in a pool and "redistribute" 50% of it as they see fit (of course keeping the other 50% as a one world tax, for their trouble).

People are well on the way to being deceived into believing that "there is danger round every corner" and the only way to survive this is to "do what they're told by nanny state" and pay massive "fines" for not wearing seat belts and bike helmets and surrender any weapons or sharp objects that they might hurt themselves on to a "trustworthy body" like a one-world police force (for proof of this you only need to look at - say - how kids used to be able to ride bikes without shoes and helmets, but today ...... ).

1 Thess. 5.3: "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape".

In my opinion "if it were possible" just refers to the fact that, of course, all of us will not be fooled (who was it who said "you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time?)

Don't you think that by taking a token issued to us by the government, we are swearing allegience to the "beast" and saying that we no longer belong to God? What do you reckon about that?

In the next few years nobody will face dying if they will not take the real id card, but (if things go right for the government) in 20 or 30 years I think people will be faced with "take real id or die slowly by starvation". Though of course by then hardly anybody will be questioning that idea.

Buck, we don't have near 20 years remaining for that to happen.....