Gringo Posted February 18, 2008 Author Share Posted February 18, 2008 Well now that's all cleared up, let's get back to the scaremongering HOME OFFICE'S SECRET CHANGE OF PLAN Though some say Gordon Brown is putting off the ID scheme until after the next general election, the evidence tells a different story. Plans are racing onwards, and there has been a violent swerve in the policy. Officials across government are plotting how to bully and dupe people onto the ID database as quickly as they can. This is a radically different plan from those already published. Out go fingerprints (for some), exposing the lie that "biometrics will secure your personal information". And out goes the pretence that this is all being driven by "necessary" changes to the passport. They are working on "various forms of coercion" for particular groups of workers, young people and students, people who need to open a bank account and anyone wanting to drive. (A campaign of intimidation has already started: employers are being frightened into demanding Home Office approved forms of ID from all job applicants, under threats of massive fines if they employ an illegal immigrant inadvertently.) You don't have to take our word for it, you can read these leaked plans yourself, with NO2ID's explanatory notes: Link to leaked Home Office document Those building the scheme are preparing this new strategy for the Government to rubber-stamp. If the ministers are actually in charge, then it is not apparent. The Government should: * Halt immediately all work on ID cards and the National Identity Register, and issue no further contracts; * Publish in full the several independent reviews of the scheme that it has ordered but suppressed: the Office of Government Commerce Gateway Reviews, KPMG's review of costings and the report of Sir James Crosby's investigation of "identity management" on behalf of Gordon Brown; * Scrap the non-statutory 'Citizen Information Project' – quietly merged with the ID programme after the Act was passed – so that it is not possible for the scheme to continue "under another label". * Repeal the Identity Cards Act 2006, which was passed under false pretences and is too dangerous to stay on the statute books. You have been lied to. The scheme is not voluntary. It is not proceeding according to published plans. Don't be fooled, fight back... Make the NO2ID Pledge. Get informed – show the leaked document to your family and friends... Join the resistance. Join NO2ID. link to leaked document Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 That's like printing an article from Bernard Matthews in saying why Turkey's like being killed at Christmas Come on Gringo if you are relying on that organisation for impartial reporting the Sangria barrel must be very empty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 18, 2008 Author Share Posted February 18, 2008 Who said they're impartial? I suppose in a debate about smoking you wouldn't consider any arguments put forward by ASH or cancer research as they are not impartial! They are presenting the one side of the argument that the govt don't. You could always read the document and respond to the govt's references to how coercion will be used to make people carry cards in contrast to previous govt promises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 18, 2008 Moderator Share Posted February 18, 2008 The home office is using and recommending that coercion be used. It was supposed to be voluntary. In this big debate, there are "for" and "against" - one source or the other has to be used. I'd have thought home office documents should support and explain why it's such a "good" thing. But they don't. That's be casue it isn't and they therefore can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 23, 2008 Author Share Posted February 23, 2008 Home Office minister Tony McNulty told BBC that a national database was not a "silver bullet" and that it would raise practical as well as civil liberties issues. "How to maintain the security of a database with 4.5m people on it is one thing," he said. "Doing that for 60m people is another." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahamaad Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 Home Office minister Tony McNulty told BBC that a national database was not a "silver bullet" and that it would raise practical as well as civil liberties issues. "How to maintain the security of a database with 4.5m people on it is one thing," he said. "Doing that for 60m people is another." I think with so many high profile examples of lost data, this has serious implications for any government plans on storing of data and may well have pissed on their plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 TBF Ali they aint the only ones that have "lost" data recently. A couple of banks may well have misplaced data that contained a lot more details :wink: The police are saying that the Ipswich prostitute murder investigation could have been solved in 1 day if DNA dbase had been in place, thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 The police are saying that the Ipswich prostitute murder investigation could have been solved in 1 day if DNA dbase had been in place, thoughts? I don't think it was that case Drat, as they already had Wright's DNA from an earlier crime he had commited. But anyway I'm against a national database. Leaving aside the frankly scary thought of this government running such a scheme, it would just be far too easy to plant an innocent person's DNA at the scene of a crime. You might have a perfectly good alibi, but that's not going to lessen the embarrassment of the flying squad turning up to arrest you at work because some criminal has left a discarded cigarette butt or a strand of your hair at the scene of a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 23, 2008 Author Share Posted February 23, 2008 The police are saying that the Ipswich prostitute murder investigation could have been solved in 1 day if DNA dbase had been in place, thoughts? I don't think it was that case Drat, as they already had Wright's DNA from an earlier crime he had commited.Correct Risso, I think the police were referring to the Sally Anne Bowman case, where the DNA only turned up following a later arrest. However the convicted person had previous convictions dating back to times when DNA technology wasn't around and so he wasn't on the database. So the bowman case would have been solved if the database contained DNA from all convicted criminals, not just those convicted since sampling started. It does not prove the case that the whole country should be sampled and added to the database, as the home office minister says they can't guarantee security of a national database. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 TBF Ali they aint the only ones that have "lost" data recently. A couple of banks may well have misplaced data that contained a lot more details :wink: The police are saying that the Ipswich prostitute murder investigation could have been solved in 1 day if DNA dbase had been in place, thoughts? Some police are saying that. Some police think that prosecutions should carry on with DNA being the ONLY evidence and that this is or should be enough to convict. A quote from a government bod on a universal database: But the Home Office said a mandatory database "would raise significant practical and ethical issues". That almost made me choke on my shreddies this morning. Ethical? I thought they'd removed that page from the dictionary? :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 The police are saying that the Ipswich prostitute murder investigation could have been solved in 1 day if DNA dbase had been in place, thoughts? I don't think it was that case Drat, as they already had Wright's DNA from an earlier crime he had commited. But anyway I'm against a national database. Leaving aside the frankly scary thought of this government running such a scheme, it would just be far too easy to plant an innocent person's DNA at the scene of a crime. You might have a perfectly good alibi, but that's not going to lessen the embarrassment of the flying squad turning up to arrest you at work because some criminal has left a discarded cigarette butt or a strand of your hair at the scene of a crime.But to be fair Mart your scenario could happen now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 .......... That almost made me choke on my shreddies this morning. Ethical? I thought they'd removed that page from the dictionary? :?Yawnnnnn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 ....... It does not prove the case that the whole country should be sampled and added to the database, as the home office minister says they can't guarantee security of a national database.Hmmm now did they say they could guarantee the security? Maybe I can let my mate know who deals with security software - see there's money in it for everyone if you know where to look :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 .......... That almost made me choke on my shreddies this morning. Ethical? I thought they'd removed that page from the dictionary? :?Yawnnnnn Is that a response? Oh dear. I posted a perfectly sensible response and thought I would then lighten it by pointing out what I saw as a standard and easy answer (one which would have been shot down if it was used AGAINST a database that the government wanted) - I didn't expect it to be quoted selectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 The police are saying that the Ipswich prostitute murder investigation could have been solved in 1 day if DNA dbase had been in place, thoughts? Terrible idea, the police and government want total surveillance capability over the population imo and this is just another tool in the box. The Home Office have said they don't support this but I think that's only because they know how badly their ability to maintain data security is percieved by the public - and with good reason. The police have managed for this long without resorting to a national DNA database and should continue to do so imo. The benefits of catching a handful of criminals do not outweigh the infringment of personal liberty. That said I expect it will happen and probably by stealth. I think I've also figured out why you're such a fan of all these databases; will IBM be selling govt all the kit to store the information? If so I guess you have a commercial interest in all of these things going ahead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 A perfectly sensible response? Yeah of course you did Snowy, you should be more careful then eating food near a computer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 The police are saying that the Ipswich prostitute murder investigation could have been solved in 1 day if DNA dbase had been in place, thoughts? Terrible idea, the police and government want total surveillance capability over the population imo and this is just another tool in the box. The Home Office have said they don't support this but I think that's only because they know how badly their ability to maintain data security is percieved by the public - and with good reason. The police have managed for this long without resorting to a national DNA database and should continue to do so imo. The benefits of catching a handful of criminals do not outweigh the infringment of personal liberty. That said I expect it will happen and probably by stealth. I think I've also figured out why you're such a fan of all these databases; will IBM be selling govt all the kit to store the information? If so I guess you have a commercial interest in all of these things going ahead?:-) I was a "fan" before big blue came along AWOL You say police managed long without resorting to this method, are you then suggesting we return to the days of the bobby blowing his whistle saying stop and the evil crook saying it's a fait cop guv'nor :-) Surely any method that helps solving of crime is worthy of consideration and introduction? Again this infringement of civil liberty is used as some sort of catch all defence but fails to show where and what civil liberty actually is being eroded. Should finger prints not be recorded now? Should DNA not be a permissible form of evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 A perfectly sensible response? Yeah of course you did Snowy, you should be more careful then eating food near a computer Would you mind pointing out what was wrong with what I said rather than replying with a yawn. Some police are saying that. Some police think that prosecutions should carry on with DNA being the ONLY evidence and that this is or should be enough to convict. I think, perhaps, if someone doesn't like the content of my posts that either the content should be responded to or it should be left alone rather than descending in to patronising implications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 Snowy - No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 No, you wouldn't mind or No, you can't be arsed or No, you can't or No, you'd rather make some sort of judgmental comment about me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts