The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Very interesting story I saw on BBC last night, I'll post their story from the website here.
Compulsory ID card scheme on course for Parliament
The controversial plan is set for the next session of Parliament, introducing the possibility of mandatory identity cards containing biometric information and tied to a central database
Compulsory biometric ID cards and a central database of all UK citizens could be created by 2010 under controversial legislation unveiled by the government in the Queen's speech on Wednesday.
As predicted, Home Secretary David Blunkett fought off opposition from some cabinet ministers opposed to the ID card scheme to get the draft "Identity Cards Bill" tabled for the next session of Parliament.
Underpinning the ID cards will be a central database storing information on all UK citizens, which can be used by public agencies including the police and NHS to check someone's identity.
The ID card will contain a piece of biometric information, most likely an iris or fingerprint scan, and will be combined with passports and driving licences, which will have a biometric element by 2008, according to the draft Bill.
The compulsory nature of the card, which will cost £35, will be decided in two phases. The government will have the power to mandate that an ID card is produced to use certain public services -- an element retained from Blunkett's original "entitlement" card plans.
More worrying for privacy campaigners is that the government will have the power after five years to make the carrying or production of ID cards compulsory.
As outlined previously by the Home Office it is estimated the basic system will cost £180m to set-up, finally rising to some £3bn.
David Blunkett said in a statement that ID cards will help "tackle the challenges of the 21st century" including terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration.
"The draft Identity Cards Bill is about taking the difficult decisions now needed to prepare Britain for the future. It will set out our plans for an incremental approach to the introduction of a compulsory national identity cards scheme," he said.
Security company Ubizen, which worked on Belgium's electronic ID card scheme, said a biometric card will not tackle terrorism and crime. Bart Vansevenant, director of security strategy at Ubizen, argued the card could not stop international terrorists, who would probably enter the UK on a foreign passport anyway.
"You will not solve terrorism or immigration by introducing biometrics to a card. Why put biometrics on an ID card? It costs you a hell of a lot of money and there are equipment, support and administration problems," he said.
Vansevenant also questioned the need for a central database, as police and border control officers would be able to verify the biometric on the card to the person carrying it using an eye or fingerprint scanner. He said a central database will be a tempting target for hackers and that there should at best only be the need for a "blacklist" database of criminals and suspects to check biometric scans against.
Source: [URL]http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/legal/0,39020651,39118140,00.htm[/URL]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Opinions? Mine is, that this is paving the way for the Mark of the Beast, the fact that the Goverment want to make it compulsory by the end of the decade, is just the same logic as everyone being forced to take the Mark.
This ISN'T the Mark of the Beast, but this is tagging people, which will be similar to the Mark of the Beast.
Your thoughts?
Compulsory ID card scheme on course for Parliament
The controversial plan is set for the next session of Parliament, introducing the possibility of mandatory identity cards containing biometric information and tied to a central database
Compulsory biometric ID cards and a central database of all UK citizens could be created by 2010 under controversial legislation unveiled by the government in the Queen's speech on Wednesday.
As predicted, Home Secretary David Blunkett fought off opposition from some cabinet ministers opposed to the ID card scheme to get the draft "Identity Cards Bill" tabled for the next session of Parliament.
Underpinning the ID cards will be a central database storing information on all UK citizens, which can be used by public agencies including the police and NHS to check someone's identity.
The ID card will contain a piece of biometric information, most likely an iris or fingerprint scan, and will be combined with passports and driving licences, which will have a biometric element by 2008, according to the draft Bill.
The compulsory nature of the card, which will cost £35, will be decided in two phases. The government will have the power to mandate that an ID card is produced to use certain public services -- an element retained from Blunkett's original "entitlement" card plans.
More worrying for privacy campaigners is that the government will have the power after five years to make the carrying or production of ID cards compulsory.
As outlined previously by the Home Office it is estimated the basic system will cost £180m to set-up, finally rising to some £3bn.
David Blunkett said in a statement that ID cards will help "tackle the challenges of the 21st century" including terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration.
"The draft Identity Cards Bill is about taking the difficult decisions now needed to prepare Britain for the future. It will set out our plans for an incremental approach to the introduction of a compulsory national identity cards scheme," he said.
Security company Ubizen, which worked on Belgium's electronic ID card scheme, said a biometric card will not tackle terrorism and crime. Bart Vansevenant, director of security strategy at Ubizen, argued the card could not stop international terrorists, who would probably enter the UK on a foreign passport anyway.
"You will not solve terrorism or immigration by introducing biometrics to a card. Why put biometrics on an ID card? It costs you a hell of a lot of money and there are equipment, support and administration problems," he said.
Vansevenant also questioned the need for a central database, as police and border control officers would be able to verify the biometric on the card to the person carrying it using an eye or fingerprint scanner. He said a central database will be a tempting target for hackers and that there should at best only be the need for a "blacklist" database of criminals and suspects to check biometric scans against.
Source: [URL]http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/legal/0,39020651,39118140,00.htm[/URL]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Opinions? Mine is, that this is paving the way for the Mark of the Beast, the fact that the Goverment want to make it compulsory by the end of the decade, is just the same logic as everyone being forced to take the Mark.
This ISN'T the Mark of the Beast, but this is tagging people, which will be similar to the Mark of the Beast.
Your thoughts?
Page:
It'd need some numbers added on it though.
"Robocop Chip v203x3"
Or better still, "Robocop Chip v66.6"
"Robocop Chip v203x3"
Or better still, "Robocop Chip v66.6"
Azul wrote:
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Azul wrote:
> Geffdof wrote:
> fine detail
>
> Now please, correct me if I'm wrong here.
>
> But I'm fairly sure the Bible doesn't say, "In the future,
> the British government will issue pieces of plastic with photos on
> called 'Identity Cards'. It is an idea of David Blunkett. David
> Blunkett is the devil. Therefore, they are evil. IT WILL BE THE MARK
> OF THE BEAST!!!!111"
>
> Um... no.
>
> "And he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell,
> except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the
> number of his name." Revelation 13:17
>
> "Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was
> given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded
> because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God,
> and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not
> received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came
> to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years."
> Revelation 20:4
>
> Ahahahah.
>
> What the f**k has that got to do with anything?!
>
> Oh, sorry.
>
> The moment David Blunkett announces we've to sellotape these ID cards
> to our foreheads is the moment I apologise to you.
The Mark of the Beast will most probably be a chip injected into your forehead or right hand.
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Azul wrote:
> Geffdof wrote:
> fine detail
>
> Now please, correct me if I'm wrong here.
>
> But I'm fairly sure the Bible doesn't say, "In the future,
> the British government will issue pieces of plastic with photos on
> called 'Identity Cards'. It is an idea of David Blunkett. David
> Blunkett is the devil. Therefore, they are evil. IT WILL BE THE MARK
> OF THE BEAST!!!!111"
>
> Um... no.
>
> "And he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell,
> except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the
> number of his name." Revelation 13:17
>
> "Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was
> given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded
> because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God,
> and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not
> received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came
> to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years."
> Revelation 20:4
>
> Ahahahah.
>
> What the f**k has that got to do with anything?!
>
> Oh, sorry.
>
> The moment David Blunkett announces we've to sellotape these ID cards
> to our foreheads is the moment I apologise to you.
The Mark of the Beast will most probably be a chip injected into your forehead or right hand.
Yeah, do you have a birth certificate? You do!? F**k me, it's the end of days!
Edgy wrote:
> You are willing to die because of a small chip?
I see the Troll's point, but he's doing it for the wrong reasons. He doesn't want this because it's some religious doohick, we're against it because it's a basic human choice whether we want bits of metal and silicon impanted in us or not. The only thing that would make me change my mind is if they renamed the chip "The Robocop Chip". Then I'll happily be half-man, half-machine.
> You are willing to die because of a small chip?
I see the Troll's point, but he's doing it for the wrong reasons. He doesn't want this because it's some religious doohick, we're against it because it's a basic human choice whether we want bits of metal and silicon impanted in us or not. The only thing that would make me change my mind is if they renamed the chip "The Robocop Chip". Then I'll happily be half-man, half-machine.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Azul wrote:
> Geffdof wrote:
> fine detail
>
> Now please, correct me if I'm wrong here.
>
> But I'm fairly sure the Bible doesn't say, "In the future,
> the British government will issue pieces of plastic with photos on
> called 'Identity Cards'. It is an idea of David Blunkett. David
> Blunkett is the devil. Therefore, they are evil. IT WILL BE THE MARK
> OF THE BEAST!!!!111"
>
> Um... no.
>
> "And he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell,
> except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the
> number of his name." Revelation 13:17
>
> "Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was
> given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded
> because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God,
> and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not
> received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came
> to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years."
> Revelation 20:4
Ahahahah.
What the f**k has that got to do with anything?!
Oh, sorry.
The moment David Blunkett announces we've to sellotape these ID cards to our foreheads is the moment I apologise to you.
> Azul wrote:
> Geffdof wrote:
> fine detail
>
> Now please, correct me if I'm wrong here.
>
> But I'm fairly sure the Bible doesn't say, "In the future,
> the British government will issue pieces of plastic with photos on
> called 'Identity Cards'. It is an idea of David Blunkett. David
> Blunkett is the devil. Therefore, they are evil. IT WILL BE THE MARK
> OF THE BEAST!!!!111"
>
> Um... no.
>
> "And he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell,
> except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the
> number of his name." Revelation 13:17
>
> "Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was
> given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded
> because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God,
> and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not
> received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came
> to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years."
> Revelation 20:4
Ahahahah.
What the f**k has that got to do with anything?!
Oh, sorry.
The moment David Blunkett announces we've to sellotape these ID cards to our foreheads is the moment I apologise to you.
Forest Fan, do you have a National Insurance number?
If so, your name already has a number on a computer system - infact it could probably be displayed in binary too - therefore having two sets of numbers.
If so, your name already has a number on a computer system - infact it could probably be displayed in binary too - therefore having two sets of numbers.
Edgy wrote:
> You are willing to die because of a small chip?
>
> Dogs are often tagged with chips, should they be given the choice?
>
> And if so, how are you going to explain it to them?
The chip idea in itself isn't evil, but the fact that it will have either 666 or the name of the Anti-Christ is.
> You are willing to die because of a small chip?
>
> Dogs are often tagged with chips, should they be given the choice?
>
> And if so, how are you going to explain it to them?
The chip idea in itself isn't evil, but the fact that it will have either 666 or the name of the Anti-Christ is.
Azul wrote:
> Geffdof wrote:
> fine detail
>
> Now please, correct me if I'm wrong here.
>
> But I'm fairly sure the Bible doesn't say, "In the future,
> the British government will issue pieces of plastic with photos on
> called 'Identity Cards'. It is an idea of David Blunkett. David
> Blunkett is the devil. Therefore, they are evil. IT WILL BE THE MARK
> OF THE BEAST!!!!111"
>
> Um... no.
"And he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name." Revelation 13:17
"Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years." Revelation 20:4
> Geffdof wrote:
> fine detail
>
> Now please, correct me if I'm wrong here.
>
> But I'm fairly sure the Bible doesn't say, "In the future,
> the British government will issue pieces of plastic with photos on
> called 'Identity Cards'. It is an idea of David Blunkett. David
> Blunkett is the devil. Therefore, they are evil. IT WILL BE THE MARK
> OF THE BEAST!!!!111"
>
> Um... no.
"And he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name." Revelation 13:17
"Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years." Revelation 20:4
And I can't go to Barbados!? Damn.
You are willing to die because of a small chip?
Dogs are often tagged with chips, should they be given the choice?
And if so, how are you going to explain it to them?
Dogs are often tagged with chips, should they be given the choice?
And if so, how are you going to explain it to them?
Page: