Police state America wants more than your papers

MassPrivateI

Do we live in a police state?

What other state forces non-criminals to submit to fingerprinting in order to obtain permission to drive?

Or merely to exist?

The state of Texas does. So do the states of California, Georgia and Colorado. Soon, the entire UnitedState (singular usage, in the interests of editorial accuracy)  is likely to require it. Indeed, already does – under the auspices of the REAL ID Act, passed back in ’05 by the Heimatsicherheitsdeinst.

Real ID is a REAL nightmare, click here to read more.

That’s Homeland Security, in English.

But it amounts to the same thing.  

Like Clover overtaking a garden, this business is spreading across the land. It’s been pruned here and there – for the moment – but the general trend is depressingly clear. Within a decade, at most, it will probably be impossible – legally – for any person in this country to avoid being fingerprinted. Perhaps also retina scanned and DNA swabbed, for good measure.

Under the USA Patriot Act (gag me – and hopefully gag you, too) the state of Michigan (and other states) requires over-the-road truckers not merely to be fingerprinted but also that they submit to a background check once every four years, if they wish to be able to transport “hazardous” materials.
That is, to be able to work. See here.

It’s all being done for your safety, what a load of B.S.

The state will – does – claim that forcing people to queue up like cons and submit to being “inked” is merely (here it comes) for their own good. To protectthem against identity fraud and so on. But what has this to do with driving?

Oh. I forget. We do not have a right to drive. That is, to freely travel. We are allowed the conditional privilege to operate motor vehicles which we’re similarly allowed to possess – for awhile – providedwe abide by various conditions (and continue to pay the requisite fees). If we wish to travel by motor vehicle, we must accept the state’s terms and conditions. That is the reasoning.

It’s B.S. and vicious reasoning.

Vicious, because being (legally) unable to travel freely is a denial of a very basic human right. How is it possible that anyone not entirely asleep at the switch can entertain the idea that he’s a free man if he’s not free to come and go as he pleases, without the state’s permission?

B.S. because being able to travel via motor vehicle has become a de facto necessity, courtesy of the state. And even if one elects not to drive, one cannot function in this society without a driver’s license. Without an ID – which is what a (cough) “driver’s license” has effectively become. Can you open a bank account without a government-issued ID? Obtain employment (other than as a migrant tomato picker)? Rent an apartment? Buy cold medicine?

You are aware, of course, what will likely happen to you if you get caught walking without ID?
So, this idea that one can opt-out of being fingerprinted by electing not to get the state’s permission to drive is preposterous. It is akin to demanding that people either submit to fingerprinting in order to use a computer (or a telephone) or give up using computers or telephones. No, it’s worse than that. Because it is feasible – though difficult – to live without a computer or a phone. It is not feasible to live without a government ID . . . if you wish to avoid living in a state facility (i.e., jail or prison).

Where, of course, you will be issued – and must accept – ID.

And why – and when – did it become the government’s business to “protect” anyone’s identity? Wouldn’t we be better protected if government didn’t force us all to carry ID tags like two-legged cattle? Isn’t it government that has made identity theft not only possible but a ubiquitous problem by forcing everyone on the feed lot to have a number that is tied to everything we are and do? If it were possible to exist and function without one number in particular – the infamous Social Security number (which, some heretics may recall, was “never to be used for purposes of identification”) we’re now forced to present at almost every turn – it would be a whole lot harder to steal anyone’s identity.

In any case, we’re not little children . . . are we? If we’re not – if we’re adults – free men and women – our “ID” is no one’s business but ours.

The novelist Robert Heinlein once wrote that a sensible man who values his liberty knows it’s time to move on whenever authorities begin demanding that people carry ID. Just like Soviet Russia & Nazi Germany did!

One wonders what he’d think about societies that demand citizens submit to fingerprinting in order to be allowed to drive.

http://ericpetersautos.com/2014/07/29/just-papers-please/

Law enforcement agencies are demanding that Twitter turn over more user info than ever:

US law enforcement and intelligence agencies are hitting Twitter with more information requests about its users than ever before, and in most cases the social network is handing over some data, according to a new report released by the company on Thursday. Twitter notes that many of the government demands, which are typically related to criminal investigations, are originating fromCalifornia, New York, and Virginia. They’re coming from federal, state, and local law enforcement and intelligence officials, a Twitter spokesman says.

Like several other tech companies, Twitter releases transparency reports disclosing information about the government requests for user data it has received. According to the latest report, between January 1 and June 30, Twitter received just over 2,000 requests for information covering about 3,100 Twitter accounts from authorities in 54 countries, with about 1,250 of those requests coming from US agencies. That’s a sharp increase from the previous six months, when there were about 1,400 requests, around 830 of those from the US. According to the Twitter spokesman, US authorities have placed more information requests over the last six months than the company has ever received in a similar timeframe.

While Twitter granted zero requests to some countries that requested information recently, such as Turkey, Venezuela, and Pakistan, the social network handed over at least some information in 72 percent of the cases when US authorities requested it.

While the social network can report a tally of law enforcement-related requests, the social network is barred by the US government from publishing the specific number of national security-related requests—such as national security letters and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court orders—it has received. Twitter notes that it met with the FBI and the Justice Department earlier this year to push for more transparency.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/07/twitter-receives-record-number-information-requests-us-government

Facebook is justifying spying on its members because its for advertising:

In a letter to the FTC, advocates wrote: We are writing to express deep alarm about the announcement on June 12, 2014, that Facebook is planning to collect the web browsing activities of Internet users fortargeted advertising. Facebook already installs cookies and pixel tags on users’ computers to track browsing activity on Facebook.com and Facebook apps. If Facebook is permitted to expand its data collection practices, those cookies and pixel tags will also track users’ browsing activity on any website that includes a few lines of Facebook code.”

The group demands that the FTC “act immediately to notify the company that it must suspend its proposed change in business practices to determine whether it complies with current US and EU law and publish your findings so that your investigations can be subject to a public assessment and review.”

In June, Facebook decided they will monitor browsing history from 3rd party sources to use in a new marketing scheme targeting their members.

In order to deliver “improved” adverts to potential customers, Facebook will utilize access to “sing cookies saved in user browser history and data collected from all those Facebook Like buttons embedded on sites.”

Facebook offers this scenario to explain their new “internet-based advertising” plan: “Let’s say that you’re thinking about buying a new TV, and you start researching TVs on the web and in mobile apps. We may show you ads for deals on a TV to help you get the best price or other brands to consider. And because we think you’re interested in electronics, we may show you ads for other electronics in the future, like speakers or a game console to go with your new TV.”

Advertisers can access types of users from Facebook to targets adverts to specific demographics.
Although the actual identity of the user remains confidential, marketing firms can choose “attributes” such as:

• Location
• Gender
• Ethnic affinity
• Primary language
• Where the user recently moved
• Where the user’s family is located
• Employment
Groups likely to be targeted include:
• Baby boomers
• Gamers
• Fans of specific sports teams
• People who take cruises
• Heavy users of tech devices

Facebook is spying on what users purchase online by using their browsing history correlated with real world purchases.
http://www.occupycorporatism.com/home/facebook-conducting-surveillance-users-justified-advertising/

http://massprivatei.blogspot.com/2014/08/police-state-wants-more-than-your-papers.html