Category Archives: Resistance

Ohio says no to Real ID citing concerns about biometric collection, facial recognition

frt cctv

Kaye Beach

Dec. 16, 2013

Ohio is the first state to reject the federal Real ID Act solely on the basis of the biometric (facial recognition) collection.

(Read Biometrics 101 -Your Body is Your Id)

When people really understand that the mass collection of biometrics on ordinary people turns all of us into suspects and transforms our rights into privileges, sensible people will reject it.

State officials balked at the “one driver-one license” rule and at being required to store and share copies of personal documents, such as birth certificates, said Joe Andrews, spokesman for the Ohio Department of Public Safety…The objection is that it’s not acceptable in many circles in Ohio to do facial recognition on everyone who comes in to get a license,” http://www.dispatch.com//content/stories/local/2013/12/06/state-pulls-plans-to-comply-with-federal-id-law.html

Ohio had been set and ready to go with Real ID but when residents and legislators got a whiff of what Real ID with its facial biometric requirement was really about, they weren’t so happy.

 After Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine
quietly added a facial recognition capability to the
Ohio Law Enforcement Gateway
, which gives government officials unified access to databases for their browsing pleasure, state residents became a tad creeped out that they’d been conscripted into an ongoing police line-up. Link

The actuality of harm to our rights inherent in mandatory biometric ID is beginning to become apparent.  Compared to a few years ago, it is now much easier for the people and their legislators to see what this technology is and how it is being used and they are taking issue with it.

Recently Missouri legislators completed an investigation into privacy violations of Missouri residents and found that the state’s Department of Revenue has  continued implementation of the federal Real ID Act in spite of state law prohibiting it.

Mo. House Committee Releases Report Accusing DOR Of Breaking 2009 Anti-REAL ID Law

 “The Department of Revenue adopted a system of scanning and retention of source documents,” Cox said.  “They acquired and they spent considerable money in obtaining biometric information on citizens, they adopted the central issuance of driver’s licenses, and finally adopted what’s sometimes referred to as Level Three security, which is also a feature of (the) REAL ID Act, according to the Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano.”

But the federal government says it still intends to force the Real ID Act on the states.

National Conference of State Legislatures (NSCL)
Oct. 2013

REAL ID Enforcement on Its Way

In a recent meeting with NCSL, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) confirmed it is on schedule to announce, later this year, a timeline for the phased-in enforcement of the federal REAL ID Act.

There will likely be four to six phases, with each phase focusing on the use of  REAL ID-compliant IDs in different settings, such as to board commercial aircraft.

Each phase will consist of three steps: 1) signage regarding the upcoming enforcement, 2) verbal warnings of enforcement and 3) hard
enforcement.

Full enforcement of REAL ID is expected to begin
in two to three years.  Approximately 21 states are expected to already be in full compliance when DHS releases the timeline this year.

http://www.ncsl.org/documents/transportation/TRN-Oct2013.pdf

While the stealth national/international biometric ID has remained largely hidden from mass awareness, that is going to change.  More and more citizens and legislators will become aware of the reality of mandatory biometric ID being forced upon the American people and we can expect that this reality will create a new wave of battles.   It won’t be a moment too soon though because the fact is that all states are collecting digital facial images suitable for use with facial recognition technology which means you can kiss your privacy, autonomy and religious freedom goodbye unless its stopped.

I am engaged in my own battle against mandatory biometric ID right now.  I want to know if I have the right NOT to be enrolled into this system of biometric identification and financial control.  Many would benefit from a favorable ruling in my lawsuit and I am asking for your support to help me win my case.

Please help me stop mandatory biometric enrollment by making as generous a contribution to my legal fund as you are able to today.

If you wish to donate to my legal defense fund, you may do so online  through Paypal.com
By US mail, you can send a check or money order to;
Kaye Beach
P.O. Box 722381
Norman, Oklahoma, 73070

(Please make the check out to “Kaye Beach”. You may write “legal defense fund” in the memo section of your check or money order)
Thank you and God Bless,

Louisiana Senators Want to Cave to Real ID – Push Back LA!

states oppose real id 2012 ncsl

Kaye Beach

May 15, 2013

In 2008 – Louisiana Prohibits Implemantation of the Federal REAL ID Act    HB 715 “The Legislature of Louisiana does hereby direct the Department of Public Safety and Corrections, including the office of motor vehicles, not to implement the provisions of the REAL ID Act . . .”

Now some uncharacteristically weak-kneed Louisiana Senators want to overturn the state’s hard won anti-real ID law.

la power coalition

What this journalist neglected to report in the following article is that  the freedom loving citizens of the great state of Louisiana are not very happy with this capitulation to DHS’s “Big Sis”  Sec. Napolitano and they were there today to register their displeasure.

Members of the Louisiana Power Coalition showed up at the committe hearing today and made thier voices heard.  If you or someone you know lives in LA and prefer to remain Real ID free, contact the Louisiana Power Coalition and find out what you can do to help stop Real ID in LA!

If you want to watch the SENATE TRANSPORTATION, HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE  procedings here is the link to the video The bill is SB 395 and it is this amendment to that bill that they are discussing the discussion begins at about 7 minutes.  Three members of  Louisiana Power Coalition speaks out at abot 28 minutes.

By the way, Senator Adley is mistaken.  Diane Long for the Louisiana Power Coalition was accurate in het statement that the photos currently collected for driver’s licenses in LA is indeed,  a biometric. 

As explained by Mark Lerner, co founder of the Constitutional Alliance and the leading expert on the Real ID Act and biometrics in the US;

It is not widely known that all states in the United States are “capturing” a digital facial image/photograph that is facial recognition compatible.   Real ID compliant and non-Real ID compliant states use the same standard for the digital facial image/photograph capture.  Every state works with AAMVA (American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators).  AAMVA has adopted the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) standard that is required by the Real ID Act (page 68, footnote 17, Notice of Proposed Rule Making, Real ID Act 2005).  In addition, the vendors who have been awarded state driver’s license contracts have adopted the same standard as called for in the Real ID Act 2005.

La. Senate panel backs bill that would use state-issued driver’s license as national ID card

BATON ROUGE, Louisiana — Louisiana driver’s licenses would be used to comply with federal law requiring each state to create a national identification card for air travel, including domestic flights, under a proposal inserted Wednesday into a House bill by the Senate Transportation Committee.

Senators added that language into a separate measure by Rep. Johnny Guinn, R-Jennings. If approved by lawmakers, the provision would reverse a state stance since 2008 rejecting the added security requirement as too intrusive.

Officials with the state motor vehicles department said that if the state doesn’t comply with the federal Real ID law, residents would need passports to fly starting in October.

“Whether we like it or not, we’re stuck with it,” said Sen. Robert Adley, R-Benton, committee chairman. “It’s better to deal with it like this.”

. . .

Under the proposal, federally compliant driver’s licenses would be stamped with a Department of Homeland Security gold star emblem and would require that residents present additional documentation, such as a birth certificate or a Social Security card, to state motor vehicle officials when applying for a license or a renewal.

That information would be entered into a national database.

Read more

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/f03cae496103400689de3e0f02cebb71/LA-XGR–Real-ID-Louisiana

Integris Health Hospital Employee Balks at Patient Biometric Scans

palm vein

Kaye Beach
April 24, 2013

Almost no one would disagree that our government aided by its corporate partners, has become increasingly intrusive and data hungry. At every turn it seems we are being measured, monitored, tracked or surveyed in some way.  (If you are one of those who doesn’t care if you are constantly scrutinized by governments and corporations,  you can stop reading now.  I have no advice to offer you for your broken survival instinct.)

The level of surveillance of a population that will be achieved is predicated on four simple elements; 1) Money  2) Man power (or technology)  3) Political will  4) public acceptance of the surveillance.

For ordinary citizens who are alarmed about the implications of living in a pervasive surveillance state, element four, public acceptance, is the arena where we live or die and we know it. This is why I want to share with you one example of an ordinary citizen who has taken a stand in that arena.

Until yesterday, Maggie was a full time employee of INTEGRIS Hospital in Grove Oklahoma working in the patient registration department but the addition of a new biometric patient identification system at INTEGRIS has caused her to do some soul searching.

The use of biometrics in health care will likely increase in the  coming years as the industry shifts toward electronic medical records and other health information technologies as required under both the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 http://leg2.state.va.us/dls/h&sdocs.nsf/By+Year/HD102010/$file/HD10.pdf

(Backgrounder-Find out what Health Care Reform is really about here)

Biometrics just means measurement of the body and refers to technology that is used to take these measurements and convert them to digital code for the purpose of identification.  When it comes to tracking, tracing, surveillance and control of the population, biometric identification is the ultimate tool for control and so we should be especially wary about the collecting of our biometric data.

Maggie is wary and has taken a stand against it.  She is suffering the consequences of doing so.

patientsecure 1

PatientSecure Palm Vein Biometric Identification System

Back in Dec. of 2012 INTEGRIS began installing and started training using the PatientSecure Palm Vein Biometric Identification System in the registration departments.  PatientSecure uses infrared light to scan and map the veins in the right palm of patients for identification purposes.  When PatientSecure was introduced there was no requirement for employees to enroll patients but according to Maggie, they were encouraged to do so.  Before long, pressure by INTEGRIS to enroll all patients into the PatientSecure system mounted as did Maggie’s concerns about the system.

Her objections to performing the biometric enrolment are twofold.

1) Maggie believes that the information given to patients about the benefits of PatientSecure is misleading.

2) Biometrically enrolling patients is a violation of her religious convictions.

I think it is important to point out that while biometric ID is often pitched as the way to irrefutably prove that you are who you say you are but that is not true.  Biometrics do not prove your identity.  Think about it.  The biometric data collected is attributed to the identity documents that a person provides.  If those identity documents are fraudulent, the addition of biometrics only reinforces the fraudulent identity.  In other words, garbage in, garbage out.

benefits patientsecure

Maggie writes, “We were told to inform patients that enrollment in the system would help prevent identify theft and insurance fraud on their accounts.”  Maggie doesn’t think that PatientSecure lives up to it’s own hype.

She is not alone.

PateintSecure – Inflated Claims

Experts in biometric systems have also pointed out that PatientSecure does not prevent identity fraud or theft.

Speaking specifically about Florida’s Baptist Health center’s new patient identification system, (which is PatientSecure, the same system used by Oklahoma’s INTEGRIS) a biometric technology professional points out that the system does not “stop identify theft” as claimed because the system can be easily circumvented at the time of enrollment.

To state the problem simply, PatientSecure uses a type of verification that “will not prevent a duplicate record from being created and opens the door for patients to enroll under multiple identities and commit fraud.”

(Source: M2sysy, ‘Biometric Patient Identification Technology Should Prevent Medical Identity Theft at the Point of Enrollment’ Dec. 18, 2012 http://blog.m2sys.com/comments-on-recent-biometric-news-stories/biometric-patient-identification-technology-should-prevent-medical-identity-theft-at-the-point-of-enrollment/)

A recent article posted at idRADAR, a privacy and identity security specific organization, makes a good point about the overselling of PatientSecure as a tool to prevent identity fraud;

“The palm scanner from PatientSecure has been adopted at numerous hospitals across the country.

As a tool to tackle medical identity theft and the theft of insurance benefits, palm scanner advocates argue that they’re a boost but an inquiring mind can see a number of other issues. What happens if someone has already stolen your medical data and their palm is the one scanned into the system? What would this mean if you had an emergency? Would you be denied care?”

(Source: idRADAR, ‘High Fives or Thumbs Down?’ Jan. 10, 2013 https://idradar.com/news-stories/technology/High-Fives-or-Thumbs-Down%3F)

PatientSecure suggests telling patients that “The next time you come in, you just give us your date of birth, we scan you hand and your record comes right up.” (Source: PatientSecure User Manual For INTEGRIS Health Sep 13, 2012)

But in reality, it doesn’t necessarily work so smoothly.  Maggie says that “. . .patients who had previously enrolled would often not properly pull up an account when presenting their palm for scan.”  

Informed Consent or Coercive Consent?

Another big concern here is that INTEGRIS does not gain formal consent from patients and employees are not instructed to tell patients, up-front, that the palm scan is optional.

If you are a patient at INTEGRIS your first introduction to PatientSecure will probably go something like this at the registration desk.

Registrar: “I am now going to link you to your medical record. Please make a “5” with your hand and place it on the hand guide with your middle finger between the finger dividers. Move your hand forward till it stops.” 

Then you may be told that, “This is our new system to keep you safe by linking you to your medical record and take the best care of you. It will also speed up your registration process.”

And that, “By linking you to your medical record no one can impersonate you.  You are protected against identity theft and we can even identify you in an emergency situation” (Source: PatientSecure User Manual For INTEGRIS Health Sep 13, 2012)

You will probably NOT be told that having your hand scanned for PatientSecure is completely optional.

Joel Reidenberg, a data privacy expert and professor at Fordham University Law School recently chided the vice president of NYU medical center for this exact policy omission when using PatientSecure.

. . . unless patients at N.Y.U. seem uncomfortable with the process, Ms. McClellan said, medical registration staff members don’t inform them that they can opt out of photos and scans.

“We don’t have formal consent,” Ms. McClellan said

Professor Reidenberg states that, “If they are not informing patients it is optional then effectively it is coerced consent.”

(Source: The NY Times, ‘When a Palm Reader Knows More Than Your Life Line,’ Nov. 10, 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/11/technology/biometric-data-gathering-sets-off-a-privacy-debate.html?_r=1&)

It is coercive because getting medical care is one of those essential human needs and few are going to do anything that might hinder their access to care.

“I reluctantly stuck my hand on the machine. If I demurred, I thought, perhaps I’d be denied medical care”

(Source: The NY Times, ‘When a Palm Reader Knows More Than Your Life Line,’ Nov. 10, 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/11/technology/biometric-data-gathering-sets-off-a-privacy-debate.html?_r=1&)                                        

Patients must be informed that providing their biometric data is OPTIONAL!  Formal consent is the most ethical way to handle this.

Taking a stand

In the early weeks of INTEGRIS’ use of PatientSecure, Maggie wrestled with her conscience about doing the scans on patients and since it was not required, she avoided doing them. Maggie also felt certain that it was only a matter of time before she would be called to account for the low number of patients she had palm scanned.

Maggie tells me that “After reflecting and praying, I felt compelled to no longer participate in the convincing and enrolling of patients into the biometrics palm vein system.  Not only did I feel that I was misleading the patients regarding the benefits of enrolling, I felt that my participation was a violation of my religious and spiritual beliefs.”

At this point Maggie spoke with her boss about her religious objections concerning the biometric scans and asked that she be exempted from enrolling patients in the PatientSecure biometric system. She was asked to produce some documentation regarding her religious beliefs and Maggie complied by provided a letter from Christian Pastor attesting to the sincerity of her religious convictions.

Consequences

Yesterday Maggie got some bad news.

She was asked to meet with her employer and was given a letter informing her that INTEGRIS could not accommodate her request to be exempted from the requirement of biometrically enrolling patients.  Instead INTEGRIS offered Maggie only one possible alternative.  She could be reassigned to another position and while the pay stayed the same as her current position the job would require a substantial commute with no travel differential allotted.

Now Maggie has to decide whether or not she will accept this position.  She is told she may try to find another position with INTEGRIS on her own but otherwise she will be terminated.

Maggie believes that her request for a religious accommodation is a reasonable one.  From her perspective the proffered alternative position seems more like punishment due to the drastic difference in travel time and also the hours and duties.

She notes, “It is also still not a “required” job function to use the palm scanners.  There are multiple people in my department that have never participated in the use of the palm scanners even though they register patients.  It has never been presented to us as official policy that we must use the palm scanners or that their use is a required function of our job.”

Some of us are wise to the dangers of collecting and sharing this data and we are beginning to see a few people, such as Maggie, that refuse to serve as unquestioning collectors and conduits of others’ personal and private information to the government and their corporate partners.

We will never know the stories of the countless people across this country every day that like Maggie, refuse to just go along with what they know to be dangerous and wrong.  But they are out there and each act of courage, each stand matters because they add up.

If we think what we do doesn’t matter, that resistance is futile, then we have already lost.  We can’t afford that.  Too much depends on the courage of each and every one of us.

Maggie is an example of what that courage looks like.

Resistance is the best tool we have in our arsenal to beat back Big Brother.


Missouri compliance with REAL ID has Lt. Gov., CCW permit holders up in arms

States that Stand Against REAL ID - Really?

States that Stand Against REAL ID – Really?

Kaye Beach

March 10, 2013

Residents of Missouri are in an uproar following the discovery that their state is apparently continuing to implement the REAL ID Act requirements in Missouri despite the fact that the state passed a law prohibiting the implementation of Real ID.

Though Missouri isn’t one of the 19 states certified by the Department of Homeland Security as REAL ID compliant, its steps towards compliance is raising privacy concerns by handgun carry permit holders and state lawmakers.

Source:  Real ID Act raises privacy concerns for Mo. handgun carry permit holders, March 6, 2013, Examiner.com

Opponents of The Real ID Act of 2005 span the political spectrum and not least among these opponents has always been those who value their right to keep and bear arms.  This may be one of the first visible eruptions at the inevitable intersection of Real ID and gun rights.  It will not be the last.

According to Lt. Governor Peter Kinder, Eric Griffin went to his Department of Motor Vehicles fee office after he passed the application process for a concealed carry gun permit. Griffin refused to let DMV employees scan some of his documentation and he was subsequently denied a permit.

Source:  Real ID Act raises privacy concerns for Mo. handgun carry permit holders, March 6, 2013, Examiner.com

From the Missouri Watchdog, March 6, 2013;

“What is going on is improper and is a new and illegal impediment to citizens’ rights to obtain a concealed-carry permit,” said Stoddard County prosecutor Russell Oliver, who is acting as the private attorney for plaintiff Eric Griffin.

The state statute governing the actions of the Department of Revenue forbids it from disclosing such personal information as photographs, driver’s license numbers, names and addresses without express consent.

In investigating the matter, Oliver said, he discovered that a third-party company — Morphotrust — licenses the equipment. On its website, the company says it’s a partner with all states and many federal agencies in providing “identity solutions” “to simplify, protect and secure the lives of the American people.”

Oliver said he’s not sure how long the Morphotrust scanning machines have been in place or how far-reaching they are in Missouri license fee offices. Stoddard County is in the southeast corner of the state.

“This is new, at least it’s new to us,” said Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, who joined Oliver at the Capitol in announcing the lawsuit.

. . .Oliver and Kinder said the DOR may be collecting the information to comply with the federal Real ID Act of 2005, but they said the state opted out of that law and instead implemented its own in response.

Read more

Guthrie man still “smarting” from police detainment after refusing new “smart meter”

lost battle og&e 2Kaye Beach

Feb.20, 2013

By Andrew Griffin at the Red Dirt Report;

Guthrie man still “smarting” from police detainment after refusing new “smart meter”

OKLAHOMA CITY —  While most customers of Oklahoma City-based utility OG&E fully accept the installation of the new “smart meters,” which are to replace the old analog meters, there are some holdouts who are resisting the forced installation of these devices.

While we do not have the individual’s name, we learned today, via a blog post at OK-SAFE (in cooperation with Axxiom for Liberty), Inc., that a gentleman in Guthrie, Okla. “has been fighting the installation of the spy-meter for a while now, and was surprised by today’s show of force by OG&E.”

OG&E’s repeated attempts to replace the old meter with the controversial “smart meter” were all for naught and because this man was the last holdout in this particular Guthrie neighborhood, the Guthrie Police Department sent three officers to the man’s house to protect the OG&E installer, while allegedly detaining the man, echoing a story out of Naperville, Illinois last month where two women were arrested for “interfering with the installation process.”

. . .This encounter was confirmed by Karen Kurtz, a spokesperson for OG&E.

“We did have police out at that gentleman’s residence,” Kurtz said. “It wasn’t a show of force at all. His was the last remaining smart meter installation in that area.”

Once the police had detained the man, the smart meter was installed.

Read more http://www.reddirtreport.com/Story.aspx/25162

Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS): Homeland Security, NLETS and the IACP Target Your Biometric Driver’s License Photo

target dl 1

Kaye Beach

Dec. 29, 2012

In the modern surveillance state it’s all about the biometrics, especially facial recognition which allows for at-a-distance identification and investigation of individuals without their knowledge or consent-no warrant required!

Very few realize that upon issuance of a state driver’s license, a state identification card, or any other form of government issued photo ID, we are having our facial biometrics captured by high resolution photography.  The analog cameras in every state have been replaced with high resolution digital cameras that capture, map, digitize, and database our facial features for use with facial recognition technology.

The federal REAL ID Act was passed in 2005.  The first (and most important!) benchmark of REAL ID is capture and retention of the driver’s license applicant’s facial image.

A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

The following is from an article published in Nov. of this year by the Police Chief, the official magazine of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP);

(“Image” means biometric image which is quite different than a simple photograph)

“In 2006, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate gave the International Justice and Public Safety Network (Nlets) funds to implement driver’s license image sharing between the states. Nlets is a nonprofit organization owned by the 50 states that has connections to every federal, state, local, and military law enforcement agency in the United States. If an agency’s technical capabilities allow, officers can query state driver’s license databases from a mobile or a desktop device and obtain an image in a manner of seconds.”

A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words, From The Police Chief, vol. LXXIX, no. , November 2012. Copyright held by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, 515 North Washington Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 USA

Your state department of public safety or DMV driver’s license database provides your biometric data which tethers your body to other unique biographical data such as your social security number, age, address and more.  As a tool for surveillance and control, your faceprint is invaluable.

 “Today, more than 25 states have implemented this technology and are providing law enforcement images. In the next year, at least 12 more states will implement this technology.” A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

Now,  law enforcement can, simply by taking your picture, identify and investigate you as you go about your business in public without you even being aware that this is happening.

“For some time now, officers have been able to retrieve images through a mobile device while on the street to help identify individuals.” A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

The truth is that they cannot do this everywhere, yet.  While the technology is in place there is still the issue of access to be dealt with.  This is a legal and not a technical matter.  As we know, if the government has the technical ability to do something, they believe that they should be able to do it.  In other words, the law must conform to the capability of the technology and not the other way around.  Policy, once (somewhat) grounded in principle is now rooted in practice so now if they can do it, they will do it and they are doing it.

Undercover cops secretly use smartphones, face recognition to spy on crowds

This kind of surveillance is damaging.   Psychologically, pervasive surveillance, or even the possibility of it, is universally understood to change the behavior of those subjected to it.  It induces conformity of behavior and of thought as well.  As the range of surveillance grows, our ability to simply be, to exercise our free will, shrinks.

“Nlets will not consider photo sharing a success until it is implemented in all 50 states” link

Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS)

“Nlets and DHS S&T have been working to expand the use of images in public safety. A new DHS/Nlets project called Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS)” A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

NLETS formerly the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications Service is now THE INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY NETWORK

NLETS

“links together every state, local, and federal and International law enforcement (INTERPOL), justice and public safety agency for the purpose of exchanging critical information.”  http://www.nlets.org/

As this law enforcement writer notes,

“when we engage in innovative law enforcement technology solutions, we need to take extra care to adequately address the security and privacy of personally identifiable information.”  

And who does the writer fear, is not adequately addressing the security and privacy of our personally identifiable information?  Good old NLETS.

Read; When the Cops are Worried About Your Privacy-You Should Worry Too!

NLETS role has always been to serve the state’s law enforcement needs, but that role, as noted by NLETS, is changing.

From Hot Trends and Innovations at Nlets 2012 Slide # 42

While Nlets is 45 years old this year, we have always taken the “child” role, with the States being the “parent”

–In recent years, the child is becoming the parent in many aspects.

Why? For one thing NLETS is now being funded and thus, directed by the federal government.

nlets grant funders Hot trends innovations ppt 2012Slide # 47

Slide # 17

From Hot Trends and Innovations at Nlets 2012

PROJECT SPONSOR

Department of Homeland Security

When lines of authority are blurred, power naturally defaults to the highest level.  The states are not ‘partners’ with the federal government in matters that require state authority over their jurisdiction.

From the Legal Information Institute;

Jurisdiction-The term jurisdiction is really synonymous with the word “power”

Jurisdiction is the territory within which a court or government agency may properly exercise its power

State and local policing is a jurisdictional matter and the states and local governments have conceded their authority in this.  Informational jurisdiction is no exception and in fact leads physical control.

What is revealed in this IACP Nov. 2012 article is that the Department of Homeland Security has funded an international non-governmental organization, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), to manage the operational issues of the endeavor; Targeted Interstate Photo Sharing (TIPS).

“The DHS S&T has funded the IACP Technology Center to provide a practitioner group to advise Nlets on operational issues. These experienced practitioners will provide input on how this technology can be used in the field.”

What that means is that we are in trouble. 

The IACP is an international, non-governmental organization accredited by the United Nations and has been instrumental in bringing about profound changes to our nation politically, technologically and culturally.  There has been a great paradigm shift in our nation since 9-11 that spans all agencies of government.  This shift affects every aspect of our lives and has practically decimated the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.  US citizens, regardless of their political persuasion, are united in astonishment as they witness the slash and burn abrogation of one cherished right after another.

There is no sector of our society left untouched by the new paradigm and each has its own specialists attending to the transformation in their particular realm.  In the realm of policing, it is the IACP who is in charge of nurturing and tending this transformation.

Here is just one example;

Intelligence Led Policing and Fusion Centers: How the IACP Helped the USA to Cross the Rubicon

I hate to share information like this without providing you with any solutions.  I have been working diligently for years to find a way for us to protect our biometric data which is the key to our government’s efforts to create the most effective and efficient surveillance society ever experienced on this earth.

Although I have found no solution in legislation, no real willingness by enough of our elected representatives to do what they took an oath to do; to protect our liberty I do still recommend that you contact your state representative and tell them if you have concerns about open access to your data contained in the state Dept. of Public Safety database.  Tell them that you expect them to protect your personal information from being freely shared and used on a whim to track and spy on you.  They need to hear concerns from their constituents.

It is clear that we cannot stop the government from sharing this information in ways that will hurt our ability to control our own lives.   If we want to protect ourselves we must remove our biometrics from the system by either not giving it to them in the first place or taking legal action to remove it.

That is what I am trying to do, remove my biometric data from the system.  There is just no good reason for it being collected in the first place and no one ever informed me or you of what was being taken from us when we applied for our state driver’s license and they certainly never warned us about the repercussions of trusting them with our most personal information.

Read more about my lawsuit

My Real ID Reckoning

Latest update and request for support

Stop Biometric ID!  Kaye Beach needs your support for lawsuit

Schools-Social Laboratories for Human Surveillance

Kaye Beach

Oct. 10, 2012

The latest story about Texas school children being tagged and tracked with active RFID tracking devices  (the passive variety is considered “a little less Big Brotherish.”) has caused some controversy.  We are told that this is no big deal, that the RFID tracking simply allows the school to more efficiently do what it already does-take attendance and keep track of students whose safety and well-being is entrusted to the school by parents. But there is much more going on here and the issue deserves to be examined in a broader context.

Here is an excellent article by David Rosen of AlterNet that pulls together a variety of news relating to the tracking and surveillance of students.  If you are even slightly uncomfortable about the implementation of these high tech schemes being unleashed on our children, you should read every word of this article which provides some much needed context to the individual stories that trickle down to us from time to time.

These children are the leaders of tomorrow and their experiences at school help serve to fix the values that they will carry with them into adulthood and they are being immersed in an environment saturated with sensors designed to supervise, control and correct them.  (Here are some other objections to student RFID tracking)

Rosen’s article covers RFID and GPS tracking, electronic monitoring devices being used on kids to combat obesity in New York, electronic monitoring of calories consumed in school cafeterias,  networked CCTV systems that are directly  accessible to police and disturbing abuse of student privacy through CCTV cameras,  school computers that use cameras to remotely spy on students in their own homes, federal funding of school surveillance and more.

I would like to add one thing to  Rosen’s litany; biometric identification such as finger scanning to make lunch lines more efficient 

Rosen writes;

Few parents or children are fully aware of the scope of the tracking and surveillance now going on in American schools. Three simple questions need to be addressed: What is happening to all the personal data captured about the students? How long it is being retained? And are school administrators providing it to law enforcement authorities or commercial vendors?

Here is the AlterNet article.

Kids Tagged With RFID Chips? The Creepy New Technology Schools Use to Track Everything Kids Do — And the Profit Motive Behind It

Texas Students Face Repercussions for Refusing RFID Tracking

Kaye Beach

Oct. 9, 2012

Are you OK with tracking kids via active RFID chips at school?  Some kids and parents in Texas are NOT OK with it and they are holding their ground. (article below)

Here are some of the objections parents and students might have against wearing and RFID tracking device (from Position Paper on the Use of RFID in Schools dated August 21, 2012 signed by a wide variety of civil liberties advocates);
• Dehumanizing uses: While there is an expectation of supervision and guidance in schools, monitoring the detailed behaviors of individuals can be demeaning. For example, RFID reading devices in school restrooms could monitor how long a student or teacher spends in a bathroom stall.
• Violation of free speech and association. RFID tracking software can monitor associations of RFID tags, which could dissuade individuals from exercising their rights to freedom of thought, speech and association. For example, students might avoid seeking counsel when they know their RFID tags will document their presence at locations like counselor and School Resource Officer (SRO) offices.
• Violation of conscience and religious freedom. Many individuals object to RFID systems on the basis of their deeply held philosophical or religious beliefs. Schools are required to make accommodations for students on the basis of these beliefs.
• Unauthorized use. While RFID systems may be developed for use in a school, the RFID tags may be read covertly anywhere by anyone with the right reading device. Since RFID reading devices work by silent, invisible radio waves and the reading devices can be hidden, unauthorized or covert uses can be nearly impossible to detect. In addition, information collected on systems could be shared or compromised without individuals’ knowledge or consent. For example, a student’s location could be monitored from a distance by a jealous
girlfriend or boyfriend, stalker, or pedophile. Individuals run this tracking risk any place they carry or wear a school-issued RFID tagged item—even miles from the campus.

Read more of the Position Paper on the Use of RFID in Schools

Texas School District Reportedly Threatening Students Who Refuse Tracking ID, Can’t Vote For Homecoming

Posted Oct. 8, 2012 at the Huffington Post

Weeks after Northside Independent School District in San Antonio rolled out its new “smart” IDs that tracks students’ geographic locations, the community is still at odds with the program.

The “Student Locator Project,” which is slated to eventually reach 112 Texas schools and close to 100,000 students, is in trial stages in two Northside district schools. In an effort to reduce truancy, the district has issued new student IDs with an embedded radio-frequency identification (RFID) chip that tracks the location of a student at all times.

The program officially launched October 1 at John Jay High School and Anson Jones Middle School. Without the badges — required to be worn around the neck — students cannot access common areas like the cafeteria or library, and cannot purchase tickets to extracurricular activities. WND reports that the district has threatened to suspend, fine or involuntarily transfer students who fail to comply and officials have noted that “there will be consequences for refusal to wear an ID card as we begin to move forward with full implementation.”

Read more

List of Injuries and Usurpations by Amanda Teegarden, OK-SAFE

Kaye Beach

July 10, 2012

At the Rally for Healthcare Independence held at the Oklahoma State Capitol on July 7, 2012, Amanda Teegarden, Exec. Director of OK-SAFE Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise, listed some of the injuries and usurpation committed by our elected officials.  These are all worth a closer look and I have taken the liberty of adding links that reinforce or expand on the points she made.

Listen to Amanda Teegarden’s speech;

Transcript of speech;

1.  “We have experienced the refusal by our elected officials to hear and advance legislation requested by “We the People” of their own home districts. Instead, these same officials have chosen to ridicule the people of their districts, manipulate the legislative process, make false statements about time constraints, ignore their own House rules, all the while justifying their actions.”

2. “Our officials have continued to grow government by the establishment of an ever increasing number of authorities, boards, commissions and trusts.  These are called the ABC’s.  These unelected bodies consist of people appointed from a small pool of  political insiders.  These entities meet in private and make rules that govern the rest of us, favor their friends with contracts, they are accountable to no one and do not represent or serve the people of Oklahoma.   These unelected bodies can solicit and receive federal grants, award contracts, issue bonds and incur debt that the rest of us have to guarantee.”

(ABC’s Click on the picture below if you would like to take a gander at the mind boggling number of Agencies, Boards and Commissions that exist in our state to manage just about every facet of our lives.)

3. “Our Elected officials, while claiming to be for limited government and reduced taxation, have worked to increase the size and scope of state government by implementation of something called Public-Private Partnerships. This corrupt ménage-a-trois is the model for the so-called New Economy – it marries Government with Industry and Academia. This European model is exclusionary in practice and is funded by the backs of the people in the form increased government spending and taxes, bonds, and tax credits for the government partners.
4.“Our Elected officials have increased the financial burden of the people of Oklahoma by approving ever-increasing state budgets – now at a whopping $6.8 billion for 2012.”
5. ‘Our Elected officials have levied taxes in a stealth manner – calling them fees instead. One such fee increased by 300% in one fell swoop. Officials justified this action by stating that “the fee had not been increased in a while”’

6. “Our Elected officials have continued to grow government by the establishment of an ever increasing number of A, B, Cs – Authorities, Boards, Commissions, and Trusts.
-These unelected bodies consist of people appointed from a small pool of political insiders. These entities meet in private, make rules that govern the rest of us, favor their friends with contracts. They are accountable to no one, and do not represent or serve the People of Oklahoma.
- These unelected bodies can solicit and receive federal grants, award contracts, issue bonds, and incur debt that the rest of us have to guarantee.
- One such entity is the Oklahoma Health Information Exchange Trust, or OHIET. Have you ever heard of the OHIET? They’re busy laying the foundation for “ObamaCare” in the state of OK, using Stimulus money and federal grants to do so, awarding contracts to companies their members have vested interests in.
-Authorities, Boards, Commissions, and Trusts are the unelected “fourth branch of government” – advancing the interests of the rich and powerful, not the people of Oklahoma.”
7. “Agents and Agencies of our State Government are busy Reinventing that traditional institution – transforming the state of Oklahoma from a representative Republic -a government of, for, and by the people – toward a “Governance” model. The state and its agencies are to be managed by a “technocratic elite” for the use and benefit of certain corporations and the progressives in both parties.
-This reinvention is being spearheaded by at least one recently instituted cabinet position – namely the Office of the Chief Information Officer. This agency is busy consolidating and concentrating power into the hands of a very few agents. Welcome to Government 2.0! Welcome to Technocracy! Governance by “Experts”!
8. “This state has entered into information-sharing compacts that allow the transmittal of highly personal information about you – your health, school, and work, your life and lifestyle choices, how many fruits and vegetables you eat and whether or not you exercise. This information is being shared across jurisdictions, across state lines, with the federal government, and with others unknown to us. All without the people’s informed consent.”

The assaults on Liberty continue with:
9. The stealth implementation of the REAL ID Act, creating a de-facto national – no, international -identification card, one that requires:
- The collection of personally identifiable biometric information
- Facial recognition quality photos on our drivers licenses and IDs
- And by refusing to pass the legislation that would have prohibited RFID tags in the OK drivers licenses!
10. “The forced installation of Smart Meters on our homes, in furtherance of the global Smart Grid
-These meters serve to monitor every activity inside our homes.
11. Oklahoma State officials have now allowed DRONEs to fly over Oklahoma – for surveillance of its own people. This is an inappropriate use of the military’s war fighting surveillance technologies. We are not the enemy! Those same officials are praising the deployment of drones on U.S. soil as evidence of ‘job creation'”
12. “Our Elected officials just this year put a cap on the use of freshwater in this state. Called the Water for 2060 Act, this law says that “the public policy of this state is to establish and work toward a goal of consuming no more fresh water in the year 2060 than is consumed statewide in the year 2012”; How are we to live, grow and prosper with such an egregious and arbitrary cap on freshwater usage?”
13. “Finally, our elected officials have been implementing, while denying that they are doing so, all the provisions of “ObamaCare” in the state of Oklahoma.”

They have allowed for the creation and advancement of an electronic health record on every single person, whether they wanted one or not.
- This electronic health record begins at birth with an electronic birth certificate, tracks us through school, into our work, and makes record of our lifestyle choices – virtually our every activity. This record continues until we’re dead, making “health care reform” truly cradle-to-grave.
- Health care reform allows for “human subject research” without the knowledge or the informed consent of the person.
- These electronic health records link the patient, the provider and the payer together – in a nationwide – correction! In a global health information network.
- Our Elected officials have continued to work to establish an “ObamaCare” insurance exchange in Oklahoma. These insurance exchanges completely redesign the insurance industry market and insert a middle man into the traditional business model. The end result will be increased costs for all of us.
- Our Elected officials have claimed that they can establish a “state-based exchange”, one that is different from the federal government’s version. What they are not telling the people is that there is only one way an exchange will work – and that is the federal way. Oklahoma has been laying the groundwork for this for years – is it likely they’ll abandon that now?
- Despite the people saying NO to the exchanges, there are still those who continue to press for their establishment in this state.

(Health Care Reform Defined)

14. The burdens on the people of Oklahoma are already great – we can carry no more. Whether by Compact or by Tax we must not implement ObamaCare!”

Protect Online Privacy – Stop CISPA!

Kaye Beach

April 26, 2012

Action on this terrible bill is drawing near.  Please read and follow the link below to take action!  In addition, a call to your congressional representative would be helpful.

If you do not know who your congressman is, click here

Tom Cole 202-225-6165

John Sullivan 202-225-2211

Frank Lukas 202-225-5565

Dan Boren 202-225-2701

James Lankford 202-225-2132

Protect Online Privacy – Stop CISPA!

By Dave Nalle – April 24, 2012

On Thursday the House of Representatives is expected to begin debate on the Cybersecurity Information Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), leading to a vote next week. This is yet another bill similar to SOPA which is designed to limit privacy and individual liberty on the internet. Now is the time to take action to let them know you don’t want the government accessing and sharing your email and personal data.

CISPA would massively reduce the privacy and security of your online communications and personal data. It would give government agencies and many private companies access to your personal communications and financial information and would allow government security agencies like the National Security Agency unprecedented power to access your data including medical records, private emails and financial information – all without a warrant, oversight by any court or due process of law.

Read more and send a message to your Representative