Passports

[RogerS]

Applications for new passports are going to need/are needing an interview to prove who you are.

However, what's been kept really quiet is that from 2009, renewals (that's 4 million of us a year) will also require you to take a day off work and go and be interviewed at your nearest office where you get asked question such as where did you go to school, what's the name of your mortgage provider.

For me, that's a round trip to Birmingham, thank you very much.

:evil:

 

[engineer one]

yes roger, but more important is did you notice the statement that said, that if you refuse to provide the information for the so called ID card, you will be refused the right to a passport anyway???

paul :wink:

Modedit Newbie_Neil

 

[engineer one]

preseumably only those with the word AL in their title :lol: :?

paul :wink:

oh yes and of course it is not another tax :twisted: :roll:

 

[Freetochat]

Given the change to biometrics in order to safeguard peoples identity with regards to passports, visas and travel security. How will that be achieved without visiting for interview, proving your identity and bio details? :roll:

 

[Nick W]

Am I right in thinking that, at the moment at least, it is only the USA that will require the use of biometric passports to get entry? If so why shouldn't I be able to forego my right of entry to the USA in return for a non-biometric passport?

 

[Freetochat]

Am I right in thinking that, at the moment at least, it is only the USA that will require the use of biometric passports to get entry? If so why shouldn't I be able to forego my right of entry to the USA in return for a non-biometric passport?

The US may have been the first to get the system online, but Europe is also introducing the passports. Not just the UK.

 

[engineer one]

sdly this lot will never let you opt out of their plans, and more importantly the yanks have this view that if by chance you were to overfly their world you might have to land and thus would need the biometrics.


paul :wink:

Modedit Newbie_Neil

 

[innesm]

I believe a requirement for biometric details is a Big Upcoming Thing all over the planet, and it's not just the US that will require them.
I can't see why, if the point of a passport is to identify you, improvements in the fidelity of that identification should neccessarily be a problem. What's wrong with biometric details on passports? A photograph is a crude example of biometric data (I think).

 

[engineer one]

i think it comes back to what security we need about our personal details
and who can access them???

as we all in the uk know, the great nhs computer system will never work, but more worryingly it is the number of people who will be able to access ALL your data. i think the same goes with biometrics, since it will then build a bigger worldwide data base, and frankly it will NEVER stop id fraud.

there ain't no such thing as a completely secure computer system.

paul :wink:

 

[ByronBlack]

We are heading for a world government, it's all inevitable, best learn how to survive on your own and form a rebellion, whos with me????

 

[innesm]

and frankly it will NEVER stop id fraud.

In the same way that all locks are pickable and all money is counterfeitable, all IDs are no doubt fakeable. However that doesnt stop people from thinking up ways to make it harder to pick locks, counterfeit money, and fake IDs. Painting things in black and white is unhelpful.
There was a time when people left their doors unlocked when they went out, and money was much more counterfeitable than it is now. The changes are a response to increased crime and counterfeiting efforts. Whether you think improving ID security is worth it depends on whether you think there are threats that warrant it.

On the issue of access controls on personal data - that's something that needs to be legislated for, to prevent the worrying scenario of inappropriate access to personal data. I believe other european countries have implemented joined-up databases of their populations' info but done it well, limiting who can access the data and what data they are allowed to look at. It is a worry that politicians can be a bit clueless about such fine details, and I have heard that the plans for the UK are flawed in this regard.
And then of course the rules then need to be enforced properly, in the same way that access to bank accounts is enforced, even though the details are all on computer. I doubt many people hide all their money in the mattress, just because 'all computer systems are hackable' and thus using a 21st century bank account is too risky. Same will go for govt databases. Them's my thoughts anyway.

 

[Scrit]

We are heading for a world government, it's all inevitable, best learn how to survive on your own and form a rebellion, whos with me????

I am, but then I though that overall Timothy Leary was a good thing (except for some of the drugs).........

It does make me wonder when a modern Bader Meinhof group will emerge, though :?

Scrit

 

[engineer one]

i guess i am just old enough to remember that one of the ways that hitler found the jews was because the data base existed.
with all the data in place, then specific groups who have the information can make of it what they will, whether they are right wing or left wing.
once the data is there it is not safe from someone somewhere manipulating it.

my 2p as well :roll:

paul :wink:

 

[innesm]

i guess i am just old enough to remember that one of the ways that hitler found the jews was because the data base existed.

In Rwanda, the massacre of the Tutsis was drummed up via radio stations and much of it was carried out with machetes.

...ban radio and machetes?

 

[engineer one]

as you say it is a never ending circle.
but when being pressurised by politicos whose record with major computer projects is not particularly good, you are right to pose the questions.

and in rwanda, the rule of law had broken down. here we are talking about within the rule of law.

i am however with scrit feeling that all these computer systems employ low paid staff to do the processing and even write the programmes, and thus are able to subvert it for their own benefit as did the meinhof gang.
:roll:
paul :wink:

 

[innesm]

and in rwanda, the rule of law had broken down. here we are talking about within the rule of law.

The Rwandan massacre was with the collusion of the government, so I dont see a distinction between that and the holocaust.
Anyway I doubt there was 'a database of jews', since the holocaust spanned multiple occupied countries. I suspect records would have been gathered by the Nazis while they were in power.

The key to stopping such things happening is preventing the perpetrators getting into power, not stopping any potential tool they might use from being implemented (eg radio, television, motorways, electricity, telecoms, hospitals, railways, an army, a police force, etc are all dangerous tools in the hands of the wrong people).

 

[Scrit]

The point about the Jews in The Netherlands is well made - of the 140,000 Jews that had lived in the Netherlands prior to 1940, only 30,000 survived the war. The Dutch system was on the whole very efficient and this system was "assisted" by the disbelief of both the Dutch public as a whole and the Dutch Jews themselves that the Germans could act in such a way. Does "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear", seemingly the mantra of the chattering classes (or so it would seem), not now ring hollow in the light of these past events?

Anyway I doubt there was 'a database of jews', since the holocaust spanned multiple occupied countries. I suspect records would have been gathered by the Nazis while they were in power.

If you live in the Netherlands you are required to register with the Gemeente (council) and that registration includes the names of your parents and your religion. Not registering a religion can get you fined (I know, I was fined for calling myself a "Sun Worshipper" and sundry other infractions - Dutch Justuiities don't have much of a sense of humour, it seems) and the system was put in place well before WWII - and they still have the same system today.


Scrit

Modedit Newbie_Neil

 

[Freetochat]

The passport computer system is already being used, and if you have a passport, you will be on there. The same goes for driving licences, motoring convictions, insurance cover and now MOT's. All houses and licence holders are on a database for TV licensing, and those who do not have a TV licence are recorded as well. And don't forget the census, voter's register and privately owned credit reference agencies. I do not underestimate security or unlawful use of data, but these conspiracy and fear theories is absolute groundless. The information is already out there, but new passports might just provide us as a country with a little more security in an increasingly mobile world population.

 

[Nick W]

I wonder if TPTB will have the face to continue to print

... allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance...

in the new passports.

There comes a point where the restrictions imposed to try to limit the activities of a minority become too much for the majority. I think we are on verge of crossing that point.

On employing cheap staff, whether they are ill-intentioned or not, the resulting systems will be of lower quality than they otherwise might. You get what you pay for.

 

[engineer one]

whilst information is out there, it is more difficult to gather it into one place, and collate it. when it is in one place, there will be no security.

what most people who are under a "certain age" forget that in many european countries pre war there was a large contingent of sympathisers.
quislings in norway for instance, even those in in the uk, starting with the mosley family. papers show that there was a list of the great and the good who were going to be marched off into the woods.

as the old saying goes "just because you are paranoid does not mean you are not being followed"

paul :wink:

Modedit Newbie_Neil