ayanrand
Full Member
"Freedom! Forever!"
Posts: 192
|
Post by ayanrand on May 9, 2006 8:15:39 GMT -5
Papers 'mate? Australians to Get Compulsory Photo ID Smartcard yro.slashdot.org/yro/06/04/27/0240203.shtml"The Sydney morning herald reports that a new national ID card will be issued in Australia."From 2010 people will not be able to receive government health and welfare payments without a card. People may choose to have other information stored on the card, such as health and emergency contact details which, for example, ambulance officers could use.". Your papers please." |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on May 9, 2006 9:01:11 GMT -5
Papers 'mate? Australians to Get Compulsory Photo ID Smartcard yro.slashdot.org/yro/06/04/27/0240203.shtml"The Sydney morning herald reports that a new national ID card will be issued in Australia."From 2010 people will not be able to receive government health and welfare payments without a card. People may choose to have other information stored on the card, such as health and emergency contact details which, for example, ambulance officers could use.". Your papers please." "From 2010 people will not be able to receive government health and welfare payments without a card." HEALTH is part of the right to life... so I presume that means the gubmint will before that time allow for PRIVATE health insurance companies to provide their services to consumers? I ask this because I presume Australia is similar to up here in Canadeh: we have a public health care program that is "legally" required for all "citizens" ("residents"?) and I've tried to find out if I can go through a private company for my "health care". Apparently, NOPE. The BASIC health care MUST be only through the provincial program (you know, the one that is imposed upon free individuals and is based on a strcture no less socialist than anything envisioned/executed in Stalin's Russia? The extra care (e.g. hospital bed, ambulance, prescription medication X%, etc.) has always been available through private companies (e.g. "Blue Cross", etc.) but those companies are not allowed to offer the BASIC care. In other words, I can not choose to "opt out" of the "public" program (for, let's say, "sincere philopical beliefs"?) I am not allowed to purchase insurance services through a company of my free choosing. "The true north strong and FREE???" So maybe the same thing will happen here in Canadeh -- one can hope ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on May 10, 2006 9:18:57 GMT -5
In Alberteh, Hutterites are now legally determined t0 be "special", in the same way as a few American states have determined... but hey what about a Sincere Religious Belief that There Is No State?   Hutterites can refuse licence picswww.edmontonsun.com/News/Alberta/2006/05/10/1572565-sun.htmlCALGARY -- An Alberta judge has ruled that Hutterites can decline to have photos on their driver's licences. Justice Sal LoVecchio of Court of Queen's Bench said legislation that would have forced members of the sect to provide digital photos for their licences violates their freedom of religion. Hutterites believe the Second Commandment in the Bible prohibits them from willingly having their picture taken. They had been exempt from having photos on licences until 2003, when new legislation was introduced requiring all drivers to comply with the regulations. Greg Senda, lawyer for the Wilson Hutterite colony near Coaldale, said his clients are pleased. He said had they been forced to comply, they simply would have stopped driving, essentially destroying their way of life. As it is, only 37 people on the colony have driver's licences. "It renews their faith in the Canadian justice system," Senda said. Cathy Housdorff, a spokesman for Alberta Government Services, said the province is reviewing the decision and considering whether to appeal. The Hutterites are an Anabaptist Christian sect that fled from Russia to the United States in the late 1800s and finally to Canada in 1918. Most Hutterites now live in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta on communal farms. |
|
|
|
Post by Submarine Veteran on May 10, 2006 20:17:16 GMT -5
DownsizeDC. org is protesting the RealID act. Whatever happened with the New Hampshire senate vote to refuse to implement Real ID??? |
|
|
|
Post by sagas4 on May 11, 2006 0:58:40 GMT -5
It is claimed that Montana actually passed a resolution declaring that it will not participate in the "RealID" licensing standards period. Although I don't think you can believe anything posed on this link, it is Fox afterall. |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on May 11, 2006 12:17:01 GMT -5
Although I don't think you can believe anything posed on this link, it is Fox afterall. :rofl: "There is little doubt that national security interests are among the most vital federal interests..." ("interests" are not the same as "obligations" or "duties" now are they ) Oh yeah, to the statist quoted above: some of us do indeed "doubt" that ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on May 17, 2006 17:06:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Mar 5, 2007 11:46:26 GMT -5
Big Brother is watching you ... driving your carFrom John Tesh's " Intelligence for Life"... Police are actually trying something new to catch criminals -- secretly attaching GPS, or Global Positioning Devices, to the underside of cars. And yes, it's legal. -In one case, police were trying to catch a lawyer who was selling drugs to Hell's Angels. The gang was too dangerous to infiltrate so they tracked the lawyer by sticking a GPS system under his SUV. They caught him and he claimed they overstepped their bounds by planting the box without a warrant. But the judge ruled that the data from the GPS device could be used because the lawyer selling drugs had no expectation of privacy while driving on public roads. -Now, law enforcement has been using GPS technology for a while to track parolees. They attach a device to their ankle and can see where they go. But as the technology has become smaller and cheaper, more police nationwide are turning to GPS to monitor suspects. According to Time magazine, cops are reluctant to talk about their new secret weapon. But suppliers of GPS devices say they've sold them to officers in Utah, Arkansas, Illinois and Washington State. -Prosecutors used data from a GPS tracker to prove Scott Peterson frequented the area where police say he dumped the body of his wife, Laci. Of course, some say it's an invasion of privacy. A spokesperson for the Electronic Frontier Foundation says, quote, "It's one thing to be observed in public, it's another thing to be tracked." But until a judge says otherwise, if you're suspected of a crime, you could be tracked -- and you might not even know it. |
|
|
|
Post by sagas4 on Mar 5, 2007 14:44:11 GMT -5
If it's got a transmitter, it's got a signal. If it's got a signal you can find it . . . "You Can't stop the signal" . . .
Find it, then put it on a city or state road maintenance vehicle. They'll have fun chasing their own tail.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Mar 12, 2007 10:20:41 GMT -5
New passport rules frustrate last-minute travelersEffective today [23Jan2007?], the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) requires passports for all air travel between the U.S., Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Latin America. Today the New York Times reports on the problems the new rule has caused for would-be last-minute travellers from the U.S., especially business travellers, who find out they need to travel too late to obtain a passport by mail, and thus have to apply in person at a U.S. State Department Passport Office or through a commercial passport and visa expediting service. The numbers of last-minute applicants have exceeded the capacity of the Passport service, frsutrating travellers and causing some of them to lose potential business. This is exactly what the Identity Project predicted in comments filed with the DHS and the State Department when these new WHTI rules were proposed last year. In its assessment of the cost burden of the proposed rules, the DHS and the State Department considered only regular passport applications (supposedly six to eight weeks processing time, although we recently heard from someone who received their passport more than five months after they applied) and expedited two-week service by mail. They made no mention of what happens when a psasport is needed in less than two weeks. In our comments, we pointed out this omission, and gave a detailed breakdown of the escalating costs of obtaining a passport more quickly, as well as of the consequential costs of trips that would be impossible becuase a passport couldn't be obtained quickly enough. The DHS dismissed our comments out of hand, in a response to comments published in the _Federal Register_ in November along with the final rule that goes into effect today: -Comment: One commenter argued that the cost to obtain a passport is significantly underestimated because the time estimated to obtain a passport is too low. -Response: We appreciate this comment and the detail that accompanied the estimate provided in the comment. However, the commenter presented an estimate that was overly pessimistic and represented an absolute ''worst-case'' scenario that would rarely, if ever, be realized. The final WHTI cost assessment continued to ignore any of the implications of passports applied for in person or needed in less than two weeks. As today's story in the Times shows, the "worst-case scenario" we predicted has already been realized, even before the new rules have taken effect. It's time to end the DHS's extra-judicial and unconstitutional interference with internationally recognized human rights to freedom of travel. - - - *sigh*
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Mar 12, 2007 10:25:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Mar 12, 2007 14:46:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Mar 20, 2007 13:33:57 GMT -5
Still using that landline phone? Or the GPS-laden cell? video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8493098426180726284 (Google video) i.e. "the gubmint is intruding on individuals' rights but claiming they are doing it for a certain purpose ... but that is impossible, so they must be doing it for some other quite distinct purpose..." (whatelseisnew) |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Mar 20, 2007 17:03:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Apr 11, 2007 18:23:15 GMT -5
|
|
(