PledgeBank is now closed to new submissions. The site is available as an archive for you to browse, but you can no longer create or sign pledges. Find out more…

United States
I’ll do it, but only if you’ll help

NO2ID is now calling in pledges and donations for the legal defence fund. More info and updates at - Phil Booth, NO2ID

Pledge “refuse2”

"I will refuse to register for an ID card and will donate £10 to a legal defence fund but only if 15,000 other people will also make this same pledge."

— Simon Davies, Chairman, NO2ID

Deadline to sign up by: 8th January 2006
800 people signed up, 14200 more were needed

Country: United Kingdom

More details
Say NO to ID cards and the database state!

Polls have shown for some time that 3 - 4 million people across the UK strongly oppose the Government's plans to introduce ID cards and a National Identity Register. Were this many of us refuse to cooperate then the scheme would be doomed to failure.

If the Government do manage to force through the ID cards legislation, this pledge (and our previous one) will not only demonstrate the level of solidarity amongst opponents of the scheme - it will form the basis of a fighting fund* and support network for all those who refuse to comply.

When Phil Booth, NO2ID National Coordinator, made a similar pledge in the summer almost 10,000 refuseniks pledged in the first month alone (11,368 by the time the pledge closed). You can show the government how quickly public opposition is growing by helping us to at least double that figure before Parliament returns in the New Year. Sign up and convince three friends to do likewise - make sure they do! - then keep spreading the word.

NO2ID continues to campaign against the introduction of ID cards and the National Identity Register on all fronts, for more information on what you can do NOW, please visit

N.B. If you signed our original 'refuse' pledge then please don't sign this one! We're looking for more genuine refuseniks, rather than just to pump up the total in the fund.

*all monies pledged will be held in trust for use in defending those individuals who are prosecuted for resisting registration.

This pledge is now closed, as its deadline has passed.

See more pledges, and all about how PledgeBank works.

Things to do with this pledge

RSS feed of comments on this pledge

Comments on this pledge

  • This is a really worthy and important cause. I hope thousands of freedom-loving people will pledge their support.
  • Do you want double signers - ie those who already signed the original refuse pledge?
    Duncan Drury, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Want to get more people to sign this pledge? Why not get a banner ad for it, which you can put it on your web page or blog:

    It's free, and easy to do!
  • No, Duncan - we'd like 15,000 new refuseniks to sign this pledge. We'll inevitably get a few double signers, but the point is to increase the total number of people who have refused to comply with compulsory registration.

    Think of it as a petition... with balls! You wouldn't sign a petition twice, and there is little point pledging to refuse again when you have done so already. Far better to take the time to convince a friend or colleague to sign the pledge.

    Thanks for flagging this up, though :)
  • I object strongly to having the DNA sequences that define my individuality isolated from my person and stored on a computer that can be accessed by persons that are authorised by the whim of politicians. I have similar sentiments regarding the other unique patterns that are peculiar to me and which are imprinted upon my fingerprints and my irises. If the bill passes, we are condemning future generations to reduced liberty and allowing their every action to be observed, tracked and controlled for their entire lives, though they have perpetrated no crime. It is a disgusting concept and it is abhorrent to every thread of my being.
    Mike Hutchison, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Don't just sign this, let your MP know you will refuse to hand over your identity. If like mine, your MP is a Blairite nodding dog, then let them know anyway. Let the Lord Chancellor know, let the Home Secretary know, make everyone aware of the passion that is the right to a private life and the right to self-determination. I am a double-signer, because I take every opportunity to let others know what I think about this disgusting and immoral piece of legislation and the obscenity of a government behind it.
    Jennifer Hynes, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • This is very close to my heart. Sign the pledge.
  • Too many of us are sleepwalking into a police state
  • Orwell wrote in his book 1984: "Always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever." Since 1997 the Labour party has proposed ID cards, biometric passports, road charging, anti-terrorism laws, numerous censorship measures and new surveillance powers....
    Caesar, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • As a British Citizen overseas I am appalled that I'd have to come back to such a draconian state.
    K T, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Over at the original "refuse" pledge, Neil Harding has posted a comment in support of ID cards, which refers readers to his website, here:


    I have written a response here:

    ...and would greatly appreciate any comments or criticisms (whether posted here, or as comments added to the post at that website).

    Thanks in advance!
  • A 20ft effigy of Home Secretary Charles Clarke was the centre-piece of the Lewes bonfire celebrations in Sussex, which attracted over 65,000 people.

    Monday's edition of the Sussex-wide daily 'The Argus' had a front page picture of the effigy of Clarke, holding the scales of justice in one hand and an ID stamp in the other.

    The effigy of Charles Clarke was made by the Cliffe Bonfire Society, which, according to The Argus, "chose the minister as its public enemy number one because of the Government's proposals to introduce ID cards."
    Andy Player, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • This is just the latest step in Labour's (read Bush's) master plan. Hype the terror -self inflicted injury-, detain without trial, admit evidence gained under duress (torture) into a court of law, deny freedom of the press, and allow the police to murder without recourse to the law. Gotta love Tony's idea of Socialism.
    Buck, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • In this strange and dangerous time many freedom loving individuals have something in common with the wise and great Harold Pinter. That is we are all disgusted and sick to the stomach with the perverse criminals who continue the farce of political and economic leadership of the "Free World". This evil sham is steeped in the blood of millions of innocent people in the past decades and it's clear the chaos only gets worse at an even faster rate. The whole world is now locked into the Globalyst One World Government project, and the huge and coldly detached business organizations that drive this plan are adeptly pulling the strings of the puppet political leaders including the gruesome duo Bush and Bliar. The multi-national corporations who make money on all sides in time of war (all the time) including from healthcare, munitions, construction, media and of course oil and other energy sources, are the same corporations who will control the new ID card systems.
    Do we really want to put our whole life information details into the hands of the Military Industrial Complex, the same group of maniacs who have regularly displayed their expertise in the black arts of war, murder, torture, assassination, pillage, theft, lies and every other evil human activity. It's clear the ID card is just one more step in the long Globalyst procession towards Totalitarian Capitalist/Fascist World Government, and those who stand in the way will be crushed as recent events in Afghanistan and Iraq has cruelly shown, that is unless brave and steadfast resistance from the populace can be mustered.
  • Please sign my pldge at:

    I shall boycott all firms that are intending to support the use of ID cards on a day to day basis, starting with Tesco.
  • I would be happy to carry an Identity card as I feel it is a good step to keeping our country and communities safe my simple statement is "if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear" Stand up and be counted for a safer society fools.
    Roger, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Dear Roger, if we lock everyone up from birth there will be no crime, it's called "a police state". You'll also notice the complete success of it's implementation in Spain, all those people who didn't die on those trains. Also in Germany, when I served there in the 90's the IRA were completely unable to kill major Dillon-lee, and a bunch of squaddie wives thanks to ID. Don't make me laugh.
  • Roger,
    Please can you explain how carrying a card will protect our country and communities safe?

    There is no need for the use of terms such as "fools"
    Mike, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Sorry I was not aware that all crime was major crime!
    Of corse you will never stop all crime, but excuse me the sort of crime that affects most peoples day to day lifes is that of the yob culture, under age drinking, drugs etc and the fight agaist this would be greatly helped by the use of identity cards. also if someone has an accident and is unconsious the medicle details on the card could save that persons life. also on the subject of major crime, if you give the criminals and their associates one more hurdle to overcome in their quest to commit crime then it makes it harder for them. I'm not talking about a police state, but I am talking of a society where we are all accountable for our actions. So I say again "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"!!!!
    Roger, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • You can call me and other ID card rebels fools from your secure hide away, I doubt that you would insult any of us like this in person. You should wake up and realize that most so called terrorist actions are actually state sponsored operations carried out by government under cover intelligence agencies such as CIA, MI5, MI6, Mossad etc.

    You should do some research and study the geopolitics of the modern world,
    then you would find out some rather important realities that may change your
    neo-con conformist mindset. Hard evidence is available to prove the
    following realities for example.

    Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were carried out solely to demonstrate US.
    military power to the Russians.

    The Vietnam war was prolonged purposely for at least five years by the US.
    for economic/political reasons.

    The CIA intended to start a nuclear war at the time of the Cuban missile
    crisis, and was only prevented from doing so by John Kennedy.

    JFK was assassinated by a group set up by the CIA with Cosa Nostra assistance.

    90% of all Cocaine and Heroin shipments that enter the US. are controlled by
    the CIA.

    CIA and MI6 illegally manipulated the Shah of Iran into power.

    CIA and other US. agencies have illegally controlled many South American
    countries for decades, including Chile, Guatamala, Nicaragua, Colombia,
    Mexico etc.

    CIA and MI6 knowingly manipulated intelligence (lies) in order to allow the first and second wars against Saddam.

    The New York atrocity on 9/11 and the London bombings on 7/7 were knowingly
    manipulated to take place by government agencies including CIA, FBI and
    Mossad in order to allow valid pretexts for imperialist wars and to further the growth of a First World totalitarian empire, with the principal first steps being the militarization of police forces and the introduction of total surveillance systems (including ID cards).

    The same neo-con corporations that openly supply and contract for the worlds foremost intelligence agencies are the same corporations that will operate and control the proposed new ID card systems. The future plan is for tracker boxes to be fitted to all cars, a cashless society is to be set up and all transactions will only take place upon production of a valid ID card.

    In other words the CIA, FBI, MI5, MI6 etc. will all be privy to yours and every other persons personal business and physical movements.

    And what can all this data be used for, think about it, with the track record these people already have do you really think you can trust them?

    Go to for more information.
  • I have read nothing in your long winded answer that has sweet anything to do with ID cards, and as for my secure hideaway, you can tell me when and where, get all of you toghether and I will tell you to your faces that you are fools and more I am not Scared of you or anyone because I have nothing to hide. If you want to believe all the stupid crap you read then you are more of a fool than I first thought, and that i would tell you to your face
    Roger, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Dear Roger, how does this answer my charges that ID has done nothing to ensure the security of states where it has been imposed?
  • It doesn't! But because you look at a few major incidents and not the bigger picture, you don't have an arguement that id cards don't contribrute the the security of these states. the biggest threat to our everyday security does not come from international terrorists but from within our own communities (the everyday crime), I am more likely to be stabbed in a night club than be caught up in a terrorist act. study those figures and then come back to me with a real argument and I might bother to try and defend my stance untill then you are not worth the effort. good night and merry christmas
    Roger, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • My writing was longwinded, I was tapping away in shock that someone could be so unaware of reality. You mention “more of a fool than I first thought” and “all the stupid crap you read”. Perhaps you agree that Harold Pinter, one of the best respected playwrights in Britain is worth reading? Possibly you would be interested to listen to his views on Bliar and Bush, “The New American Century” and modern US. imperialism.

    You could also check the views of Michael Meacher, MP since 1970 and Cabinet Minister until 2002.

    Listen to Andreas Von Bulow a former German Defense Minister.

    Of course there are heaps of other testimonies from other prominent and well respected people, all running roughly along along the same lines.

    You could also try reading any of these:
    “Crossing the Rubicon” - Michael Ruppert
    “Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy” - Scott Ritter
    “9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions” - David Ray Griffin
    “9/11 Synthetic Terror, Made In The USA” - Webster Tarpley

    There are scores of other critically acclaimed books on the subject of state sponsored terrorism and government intelligence fraud.

    You seem to believe that none of this is relevant and nothing to do with ID card introduction. Actually these subjects are absolutely inseparable, as terrorism and the birth of a neo-conservative one world government (mostly controlled by the US. and the EU.) goes hand in hand with the formation of an Orwell-like totalitarian government. Also it is going to change societies just as in the book “1984” with the same emphasis on surveillance and a militarized police state. When you see this new world in ten or twenty years, it will be too late as your rights of privacy and free citizenship will be gone.
    Of course the role of the insiders employed by the Dictatorships to suppress their enslaved populations will have some worldly rewards, just as in Nazi Germany.
  • First off (and apologies in advance to those concerned), the large-scale conspiracy stuff should not be considered integral to the campaign against identity cards. I mean no offence to the advocates of such theories (I make no claim either way about such issues, as I know nothing about them), but it is important to realise that there are very good reasons for opposing the identity scheme without believing all of this. Thus those people who would be sceptical about such theories should not think that their advocates represent the core of our argument.

    Roger, you raise some interesting points and your viewpoint is far from uncommon. However, with respect, it is also mistaken.

    1) You say that ID cards will "greatly help" the fight against "the yob culture, under age drinking, drugs etc". Underage drinking: yes, quite possibly it will reduce this a little, but this can hardly be considered a major crime. As to the others... how exactly do you think ID cards are going to help counteract yob culture and prevent drug-related crime? Surely you have the burden of proof the wrong way around. If you (and the government) are advocating the introduction of a new scheme on the basis that it will have a positive impact on society, then surely it is for you to prove that it will, not for us to prove that it won't?

    2) "also if someone has an accident and is unconsious the medicle details on the card could save that persons life." Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that it has been expressly denied that medical details are going to stored in the NIR. Even if I'm wrong on this, they certainly won't actually be on the card itself, so in emergencies it's doubtful any such information could often be retrieved quickly enough to be of any use.

    3) Re major crime: "if you give the criminals and their associates one more hurdle to overcome in their quest to commit crime then it makes it harder for them". What types of crime are you talking about, exactly? The government has already conceded that the cards will make little difference to terrorism, and the types of benefit fraud which might be prevented by the cards accounts for only 5% (if I recall correctly) of Treasury losses to fraud - far less than the scheme itself will cost to set up and maintain. Which 'major crime' do you foresee as being impacted by the introduction of ID cards?

    4) "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear". Ouch. Many arguments are possible against this old chestnut, but here's just one: it will not just be "the government" which will gain powers under the scheme: e.g the police will. The police have a track record of rife institutionalised racism, for example... and the cards (not just the data on them, but the police powers which will accompany them) are clearly open to abuse. The mere fact that we may trust the government as a whole does not mean that specifical individuals will not abuse the information, or the powers they gain.
    Nic Shakeshaft, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Corrected links:

    You mention “more of a fool than I first thought” and “all the stupid crap you read”. Perhaps you would agree that Harold Pinter, one of the most respected playwrights in Britain is worth reading? You may be interested to listen to his views on Bliar/Bush, “The New American Century” and modern US. Imperialism.

    You could also check out the views of Michael Meacher, MP since 1970 and Cabinet Minister until 2002.

    Or listen to Andreas Von Bulow a former German Defense Minister.

    Of course there are heaps of other testimonies from other prominent people, all running roughly along the same lines.

    You could also try reading any of these:

    “Crossing the Rubicon” - Michael Ruppert

    “Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy” - Scott Ritter

    “9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions” - David Ray Griffin

    “9/11 Synthetic Terror, Made In The USA” - Webster Tarpley
  • Andrew
    your list of sugested reading just enhances my argument. the word PLAYWRIGHT says it all. this brings to mind one word for me DRAMA. You believe what you want, but I still support ID cards and would be happy to carry one.
    Roger, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Roger, care to answer any of my points above? As I said up there, disbelieving in the wider conspiracy stuff is insufficient reason to support ID cards, as there are plenty of other reasons not to...
    Nic Shakeshaft, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Roger: you admit yourself that "the biggest threat to our everyday security does not come from international terrorists but from within our own communities (the everyday crime), I am more likely to be stabbed in a night club than be caught up in a terrorist act."

    So with respect to you, I am at a loss to see how your nighclub attacker having an ID card would increase your local security and stop you being stabbed in the first place (or for that matter being mugged, robbed, car-jacked, held up in a bank, or subjected to any other type of "everyday" crime). Besides, much of this type of crime is completely spontaneous: drunken vandalism, fights after closing time, assaults in the street, you name it. The compulsory issuing of ID cards is not going to suddenly remove people's tendencies to get drunk, get angry or pull out a knife. Particularly as you'd have to catch the perpetrators in the first place, and they're hardly going to wave their ID cards at the surveillance camera as they run away.

    And ID cards will not stop organised crime. Otherwise any criminal with an up-to-date genuine photo driving licence or passport (which are currently the 2 principal means of ID in the UK) would have retired a long time ago. Yes, these documents are forgeable; but within a very short time of their issue, so will ID cards be. In terms of documentation, there is NOTHING that cannot be forged. A criminal needing a fake ID card need only steal or buy the equipment needed to process one, and he's in business. And if you think that organised criminals would not be able to arrange this, think again. It only takes a good computer programmer/hacker (or even an inside job), together with the theft of ONE set of card equipment (ONE!) to completely compromise the entire national system, as nobody could tell for certain what was real, what was fake, and what was illegally duplicated for ID theft purposes. Back to square one, after spending £19 billion and giving up our private lives to the government.

    And would the police / intelligence agencies have enough resources to absolutely and unequivocally track down and remove these "fake" people from the system, and seal up the holes (as well as continuing to deal with all the 98% of crimes which ID cards DON'T prevent)? Somehow I think not. Fingers in leaking dykes come to mind. Again, back to square one, and at what cost?

    The sorts of people who commit organised crime have deliberately evaded legal authority in the past, and they will continue to do so, even if ID cards were introduced. People of that ilk will always find a way around the system, because they refuse to co-operate with established laws. If ID cards are introduced, the only people whose activities will be dramatically curtailed and invaded by the authorities will be the law-abiding majority who do what they're told and turn up to register for one.

    The only sort of crime that might be tackled by an ID card would be certain types of fraud and administrative crime; but as I say, there is nothing that cannot be forged, and tagging the entire population and recording up to 51 types of personal information about them on a central database, just to stop a single variety of bureaucratic crime (if indeed such crime could be eliminated) is draconian and totally unnecessary. Much of this crime could be resolved by simply tightening up existing systems and educating people about how to protect their identities themselves. There is no need to compulsorily confiscate their identities in order to do it for them.

    (With respect, I hope this is enough "real" argument for you to bother to defend your stance now)
    Serena Jones, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • no not realy it is still a load of crap you are coming up with. the fear of being caught is the biggest factor in crime prevention an ID cards would help crime detection no end therefore helping to reduce crime. simple arguement, simple maths, ok longterm solution, but I never said it would happen over night. sorry mate you need to try harder
    Merry Christmas
    Roger, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Belated happy christmas to roger - and manhood to you for branding all of us good hard working citizens as fools. You are a sloof if in today's world you still believe somone who has lied to us in all his political career. Do you think even in your dreams that a stupid ID card will stop all those stupid crimes that you list? Get real my friend, according to your friend and maybe sponsor Tony Blair, the main aim of ID cards is to combat terrorism. I chuckle at that, because if you look at the English definition of terrorism, none bits those who send innocent young people impoverished by the neo-liberals laws in the UK, and all over the world to die in Iraq and all over the world. It is this state sponsored terrorism that drives young people to kill in despair. No one wants to die, that is a fact, but a lot of people are pushed to this kind of mental instability by the injustices of the world, where the lives of thousands of Iraq children are worthless - hence are killed for OIL.

    So lets get real here, hospital are shutting down, schools are being privatised, all infra-structure used for day to day basis by us the working class in beyond our financial reach, yet just like a fool you want us to pay some money for a card? Good luck to you. For all you know, someone might even mug you for that ID card, so that they could fake your details, and do not tell me that in today's world there is any secure information. It is evident even with the most powerful financial organisations like the banks who are losing millions to crooks. So, stop insulting people like us, who want a better society for all, including those you brand as crooks because they are just copying the world crooks in expensive suits who you so much admire.
    florence durrant, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Having done a little research into these views people have been posting regarding the ID Card scheme, I have found most of them to be unfounded. Those who have placed their distrust of the scheme based on the possibility of forging cards should refer to Similarly, those who belive there to be uncertainties in biometrics seem to be basing their belifs on OLD research. The reports that suggest that there is a high margin of error are often over 4 years old. Biometrics is now more sophicticated and almost infallable. I do not aim to dismiss people's beliefs regarding these cards, I simply wish people to review their comments and do a little research before trying to 'convert the masses'.
    Pete, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Pete, I do not think it is trying to "convert the masses" against these ID cards. For a start, one would expect these "so called masses", living in the UK in the 21st century to be intelligent enough to have their own views before being converted. Secondly, all these arguments which you refer to are just an expansion of the main argument "Do we really need biometric ID cards to identify ourselves of the legitimacy of our existance?" My personal view is 'No'. Hence all other arguments, for and against from my point of view are an expansion of my original answer to the question of ID cards.

    I conclude by saying that, like all things in life, there are fors and against, pros and cons, and what-ever I have read on the fors will never convience me that biometric ID cards will do the job that they are meant for.They may be sophisticated as you put it, but in my 46 years on earth, I am yet to come accross anything man-made which is infallible, for what man makes by hand and brain, man can also unmake by his hand and his brain.
    florence durrant, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • It's amazing to me that people add their support for ID cards and profess support for the leaders who wish to force this system into law. My view is not that politicians rarely tell lies and can be trusted, but that in fact that they never tell the whole truth.

    At the bidding of people I dislike and mistrust, I will have to troop along to some surgery or wherever I will be forced to attend, so that a stranger will take fingerprints, retina scans and photographs, and do unknown things with them. Later when the public has swallowed the first stage of the ID scheme - blood, DNA and hair samples will probably be added to the list of required data, with even more unknown consequences.

    All this from a government regime that illegally and immorally led the UK into yet more Imperialist wars where false imprisonment, torture, illegal use of banned weapons (depleted uranium, white phosphorus, cluster bombs etc.) goes on day after day unchecked. And for what - to crush Iraq back into primitive Islamic control, and to fragment the country as on the Yugoslav model.

    Democracy and Freedom - yeah right!

    Check out these examples of the truthfulness of our leaders:
    Bush lies about domestic spying
    Straw lies about MI6 torture activity
    Craig Murray publishes Uzbekistan torture documents
    MI6 had role in Greek kidnappings
    US domestic spying
    Rice orders UN spying before Iraq war
    Rice lies about extraordinary rendition
  • If someone steals my identity, being careful not to alert me to the fact, then applies for an ID card in my name before I do, her biometric details with then be attached to my identity: she will have the ultimate proof (eg the ID card) that she is me. So... when I am called to apply for my ID card, I will be deemed a fraud because my name is already attached to her biometric details.
    Can one of the people who seems to think ID cards are OK please explain to me how, then, I can prove I, not she, am the real me, given that she has the absolute proof ie the biometric ID card with MY name?
    These cards will cause big trouble, with people being left, in effect, without any official identity.
    caroline, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • what happens now?!
    I was encouraged to hear that the id card plans were rejected in the house of lords again, but it sounds like the govnmnt are gonna bulldoze it through anyway, which is surely a setback against democracy in itself. So what happens next? When the views of the lords are disallowed and the voices of a lot of 'the people' are ignored, is there any hope of id cards not becoming a reality? and what does it mean for our society and the world in general? Personally I think that the scheme is a ridiculous, unnecessary and quite a scary idea. I think it will be detrimental to this country and its citizens and I do not relish the day they may be introduced. But is there any chance now that they won't be introduced? I even heard that the contract had already been tendered, and it was a 'done deal' ages ago. Anyone have any ideas about this?
    B, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • It is interesting to take a step back and try to understand the drivers behind this draconian and neo-Marxist approach by government. I am not condoning this action - I am vehemently against it BTW but to fight it you need to understand it - As part of the the EU where harmonisation is the goal every time, we are being shoe-horned into the adversarial model of Law ie. Napoleonic law where you are Guilty before Proven Innocent i.e back to the Star Chamber that we got rid of 100's of years ago when we put in place Common Law. You will notice that an additional part of Draconian law to this is the ID card across Europe. How many poor working people can fight against the State declaring them guilty in order to prove their innocence? How do they have the money to prove their innocence? How can they keep their livelihoods going when incarcerated? How able governments are to sweep people away undemocratically through this neo-Marxist legal framework! Look at the way the press is contained in these EU countries? Watch out and remember Amnesty's motto. Try to see the bigger picture and focus your efforts accordingly. No to ID cards. No to neo-Marxism/neo-Con - these are the same thing as extremes meet with the same outcomes.
    marina, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Marina, Whilst I don't disagree with your "guilty until proven innocent", interpretation of ID cards (a trend started in the 80's when they took away the right to remain silent), I have to question your assumption that it's Eu driven. As I understand it the USA has set a deadline, after which it wants no foriegners on its shores not properly tagged and Big Brother-ed. I'm sure I heard on Newsnight that it was our Amerikan (sic) cousins who were setting the agenda and timetable for the European police state. Obviously Tony rolled over and had his tummy tickled, like a good poodle, at the merest hint of his master issueing a decree.
    Steve Thomas, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I am amused by the antics of Roger the keyboard hero, who spouts all the usual mantras like "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" while lacking the courage of his convictions to even give his last name, let alone an address or contact number. Using his own "logic", he obviously has something to hide.
    Geoff Brown, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • International Terrorism
    Does Not Exist

    By General Leonid Ivashov

    General Leonid Ivashov was the Chief of Staff of the Russian armed forces when the September 11, 2001, attacks took place. This military man, who lived the events from the inside, offers an analysis which is very different to that of his American colleagues. As he did during the Axis for Peace 2005 conference, he now explains that international terrorism does not exist and that the September 11 attacks were the result of a set-up. What we are seeing is a manipulation by the big powers; this terrorism would not exist without them. He affirms that, instead of faking a "world war on terror", the best way to reduce that kind of attacks is through respect for international law and peaceful cooperation among countries and their citizens.

    As the current international situation shows, terrorism emerges where contradiction aggravate, where there is a change of social relations or a change of regime, where there is political, economic or social instability, where there is moral decadence, where cynicism and nihilism triumph, where vice is legalized and where crime spreads.

    It is globalization what creates the conditions for the emergence of these extremely dangerous phenomena. It is in this context that the new world geo-strategic map is being designed, that the resources of the planet are being re-distributed, that borders are disappearing, that international law is being torn into pieces, that cultural identities are being erased, that spiritual life becomes impoverished...

    The analysis of the essence of the globalization process, the military and political doctrines of the United States and other countries, shows that terrorism contributes to a world dominance and the submissiveness of states to a global oligarchy. This means that terrorism is not something independent of world politics but simply an instrument, a means to install a unipolar world with a sole world headquarters, a pretext to erase national borders and to establish the rule of a new world elite. It is precisely this elite that constitutes the key element of world terrorism, its ideologist and its "godfather". The main target of the world elite is the historical, cultural, traditional and natural reality; the existing system of relations among states; the world national and state order of human civilization and national identity.

    Today's international terrorism is a phenomenon that combines the use of terror by state and non-state political structures as a means to attain their political objectives through people's intimidation, psychological and social destabilization, the elimination of resistance from power organizations and the creation of appropriate conditions for the manipulation of the countries' policies and the behavior of people.

    Terrorism is the weapon used in a new type of war. At the same time, international terrorism, in complicity with the media, becomes the manager of global processes. It is precisely the symbiosis between media and terror, which allows modifying international politics and the exiting reality.

    In this context, if we analyze what happened on September 11, 2001, in the United States, we can arrive at the following conclusions: 1. The organizers of those attacks were the political and business circles interested in destabilizing the world order and who had the means necessary to finance the operation. The political conception of this action matured there where tensions emerged in the administration of financial and other types of resources. We have to look for the reasons of the attacks in the coincidence of interests of the big capital at global and transnational levels, in the circles that were not satisfied with the rhythm of the globalization process or its direction.
    Unlike traditional wars, whose conception is determined by generals and politicians, the oligarchs and politicians submitted to the former were the ones who did it this time.

    2. Only secret services and their current chiefs ­ or those retired but still having influence inside the state organizations ­ have the ability to plan, organize and conduct an operation of such magnitude. Generally, secret services create, finance and control extremist organizations. Without the support of secret services, these organizations cannot exist ­ let alone carry out operations of such magnitude inside countries so well protected. Planning and carrying out an operation on this scale is extremely complex.

    3. Osama bin Laden and "Al Qaeda" cannot be the organizers nor the performers of the September 11 attacks. They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders. Thus, a team of professionals had to be created and the Arab kamikazes are just extras to mask the operation.
    The September 11 operation modified the course of events in the world in the direction chosen by transnational mafias and international oligarchs; that is, those who hope to control the planet's natural resources, the world information network and the financial flows. This operation also favored the US economic and political elite that also seeks world dominance.

    The use of the term "international terrorism" has the following goals:

    Hiding the real objectives of the forces deployed all over the world in the struggle for dominance and control;

    Turning the people's demands to a struggle of undefined goals against an invisible enemy;

    Destroying basic international norms and changing concepts such as: aggression, state terror, dictatorship or movement of national liberation;

    Depriving peoples of their legitimate right to fight against aggressions and to reject the work of foreign intelligence services;

    Establishing the principle of renunciation to national interests, transforming objectives in the military field by giving priority to the war on terror, violating the logic of military alliances to the detriment of a joint defense and to favor the anti-terrorist coalition;

    Solving economic problems through a tough military rule using the war on terror as a pretext. In order to fight in an efficient way against international terrorism it is necessary to take the following steps:

    To confirm before the UN General Assembly the principles of the UN Charter and international law as principles that all states are obliged to respect;

    To create a geo-strategic organization (perhaps inspired in the Cooperation Organization of Shanghai comprised of Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan) with a set of values different to that of the Atlantists; to design a strategy of development of states, a system of international security, another financial and economic model (which would mean that the world would again rest on two pillars);

    To associate (under the United Nations) the scientific elites in the design and promotion of the philosophical concepts of the Human Being of the 21st Century.

    To organize the interaction of all religious denominations in the world, on behalf of the stability of humanity's development, security and mutual support.

    General Leonid Ivashov

    General Leonid Ivashov is the vice-president of the Academy on geopolitical affairs. He was the chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union's ministry of Defense, secretary of the Council of defense ministers of the Community of independant states (CIS), chief of the Military cooperation department at the Russian federation's Ministry of defense and Joint chief of staff of the Russian armies.
  • When the government takes away our last shred of freedom, they will say - "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." The fact is, this measure will not make a significant difference to policing in the UK. The government is just keeping us in check. Tax returns are a clever device, "Give us all your personal information, and you will get some money!" It is outrageous. We have to fight it. If this ID card business ever happens, I will cut mine up - regardless of the consequences.
    James Page, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • At a time when we learn that a quater of a million illegal immigrants, who have been refused entry into this country, have just that not at least a yes vote for id cards.
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • What's a quarter million missing illegal immigrants here or there, when the government lets in 300,000 legal immigrants every year! The ID card will not be issued to non UK nationals and so will have little effect on combating illegal immigration.
    AJ, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I don't understand the connection or the point Alan is making?
    1/4 million illegal people are in the UK. If these people - or a significant percentage of them were terrorists, the UK would already be a war zone. The vast majority are just people who are looking for a better life. They are now here and their status means they end up doing the worst dirtiest jobs that no-one else wants to do. They are easy targets for being exploited because they are illegal. How shitty must their life be in their home countries that they come to the UK and prefer to do the nastiest jobs rather than return to their native countries?
    Mike, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • What a pity that Alan is so ignorant of what his own government is doing that he has to dream up a shallow story to protect the ID scheme. Alan, for your own information, there is no connection at all between the reasons behind the ID cards and illegal immigration. If we start connecting issues that are not connected then we lose site of our argument. Without sounding patronising, I would suggest that you read first and understand what ID cards are for, who is going to have an ID card and at what cost.

    Can I just say on this issue of illegal immigration that seems to bother you so much, you are certainly lacking in the knowledge of what is causing this immigration. Put yourself for a start in the shoes of someone in Iraq, Afghanstan, Zimbabwe and all these countries supported by England in causing havoc in the lives of their own people. Of course war does not only cause death but it also causes poverty to the innocent citizens. So, if you did not complain when Tony Blair sent armed immigrants to terrorise Iraqis, or any other country for that matter, do not complain when unarmed immigrants from those countries seek refuge from the person behind their nightmare. You certainly need to read about immigration, its causes and how it can be resolved before you write such a shallow allegation.
    florence durrant, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Sorry...I gave just 1 reason why we might consider ID cards. I did not site it as the main reason nor did I consider the reasons behind immigration...I just gave it as a reason.
    Consider the demonstrations in London outside the Danish Embassy. No matter what the reason for those demonstrations it was quite clear that there is a lot of hate for Britain by certain people.
    How far is it from hate to aggression?
    I have not yet made my mind up over ID cards yet but I am at least willing to listen to all sides of the debate and I am not blinkered. Some of the comments on here suggest that others might take an unblikered view instead of the hard line they are taking.
    There are many things to consider not just your own views and after all peoples views have been considered only then can a fair conclusion be had.
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I do appreciate where you are coming from Alan and may I say it is not about people's views that matter in such issues, it is facts and reality. Hang on here, the Danish Embassy - are you aware of the fact that it is not only in England that these incidents have taken place? For your own information, the whole Danish problem started in Islamic countries, and in no way is it a reflection of Muslim people fighting with those countries. It is not for me to judge anyone - but I think you need to understand more of what is happening and why rather than coming to such a view.

    As I said, my view does not matter at all, but if someone is going to contribute to an issue that is as serious as ID cards, surely one should do some homework first rather than just going by what someone else is saying. As far as I am concerned, through experience here, hate breeds hate, terrorism breeds terrorism. As someone who knows the consequences of ID cards, I know for a fact that they will in no where stop terrorism. The only way we in the UK and the world over can stop terrrorism is if we stop terrorising other people in their own countries. We in the 'civilised countries' are very good at this, either by sending our own soldiers to do the job for the government or imposing a dictator and arming that dictator against the people's wishes so as to keep control of those countries for the sole purpose of milking their resources.

    Finally, I am not critical of you as a person, but I am critical of your unfounded allegations against other people and your supposition that ID cards will resolve the problem. If you took your time to find out more of why we have these problems of immigration, torching the Danish embassy, terrorism and the like, you will be more understanding of the way we can resolve these problems.
    florence durrant, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Florence, my unfounded allegations against other people happen to have been reported and photographed extensively over the last three decades and in fact did happen.
    If you are referring to the Danish Embassy protest then you have certainly not watched the news recently.
    Whatever the reasons behind those protests there was hatred aimed at innocent people that was plain to see and the small minority of Muslims who did that were not concerned with the offence it caused to the vast majority of peaceful people.
    As a nation we have seen our fair share of terrorist attacks on innocent people for more than 30 years.
    None of us can be sure that ID cards would or would not help in the fight on terrorists but I am merely citing that as one reason they may be needed.
    Another reason I chose was illegal immigrants. Why they are here is not the issue that I raised. The fact is that they are here illegally and for those of us who choose to keep to the legal side of the street this smacks as unjust.
    Immigrants could benefit from them if they could show employers they were here legally and this would help to stop employers exploiting illegal immigrants.
    There are many reasons why ID cards should or should not be introduced but each time anyone dares to suggest a reason for cards they are attacked with all the bad things this country is doing to make the situation worse.
    If this country is so bad, why are so many people travelling across the free countries of Europe to get here?
    To combat terrorism, illegal immigration and other issues that may affect our freedom and safety then we have to look at all of the tools available to us and consider each one carefully.
    11 0f the 15 nations in the European Union use ID cards and maybe we could look to them and learn something about their uses. I don’t profess to know the answers but I will look at the full argument.
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Alan, that is why I said hate breeds hate. Personally, I have witnessed both sides of the coin and like you I do my best to be on the right side of humanity, that is by being a good hard working citizen. Unfortunately in humanity we find the good and the bad, that is a fact, we find the greedy and the kind. That has not come by by imposing any doctrine, but it is human nature.

    My contention on the issue of ID cards is not based on individual cases, ie the torching of the Danish Embassy or the killing of millions of other innocent people. It is purely based on the fact that it will not resolve the problem of terrorism. For a start, is there a country in this world which is free from terrorism? Maybe, but it certainly is not down to ID cards.

    These immigrants you refer to do not come to England because they love England. No, it is economic immigration, people whose lives in their own countries have been completely destroyed. What you see in the media Alan is a fraction of the story. Having just come back from Venezuela, I can tell you for a start why someone from warm, leafy and beutiful South America will come to cold England for. I saw people - ordinary people ravaging through rubbish in the bins for food, competing with wild dogs. These people live in barios - a word I had never heard in the past. These barios are on mountain sides and with torrential rains thousands have been swept to their deaths. This picture I saw replicates itself all over the world. Hence I say in my argument, unless we get rid of the causes of all this suffering and hatred, ID cards will not stop human beings hating each other and killing each other.

    In addition to this, have you thought of the amount of money the government will waste on these cards? Have you thought of how this data can be infiltrated by the wrong people and used by them to perpetrate more terrorism? Debates like these are not meant to be personal, but in many ways, they help people to look into these issues in a wider sphere. After all, we are all looking for a solution to the same problem
    florence durrant, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Florence,
    Unfortunately poverty is not restricted to the third world countries. I worked for a charity for many years in this country and I have witnessed poverty here in the UK.
    Taking all of the arguments aside as to why people choose to migrate here, the fact is that we do not have a bottomless economy to support economic migration.
    My anger at this migration is that most of these people are travelling across a free Europe with supposedly the same immigration laws as our own, to get to the UK.
    Now as to your point about getting rid of the causes of this poverty Gordon Brown has thrown down the gauntlet to all world leaders and is trying to rally support for his initiative.
    Whatever happens will not happen overnight and if one life can be saved through whatever means we deploy to safeguard a nation then the economics of it should not be a question.
    Of course there are always going to be evil people who will find ways to exploit any security measures in place but there is the question of other crimes besides terrorism.
    Benefit fraud and the misuse of our health services for instance. If ID cards could help to cut back on crime in other areas might the resources freed up be deployed in the war on terrorism?
    The vast majority of immigrants that are here have integrated themselves into the communities and live here peacefully. They have added to a very diverse culture and in most cases have been made welcome by the different communities .But they are being looked at with suspicion because of illegal immigrants and this should not be the case.
    Again Florence I have not made my mind up either way yet….I am just throwing up a few reasons why ID cards should be considered.
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Alan, I think people will start complaining that we are hogging this site. But I must say, you are one of the few people who are undecided on ID cards and yet we are in agreement in most of our arguments. Life is about making informed choices, hence am sure that after this discussion your decision will be well informed and made in all honesty whether you choose to have or not to have an ID card.

    Yes, it is true that Gordon Brown has no bottomless pit of money, hence one would expect the government to stop these wars in the Middle East that are wasting billions of tax payer's money and also the root causes of this hatred.
    Did you by any chance go to the G8 summit last July or did you follow that with the WTO in Hong Kong. If you did not, may I just advise you that what was agreed at the G8 regarding Third World or World Poverty for that matter was never followed up. The WTO agreement has made it near imposible for ordinary 3rd world farmers to make a break through in trading their produce.

    I am sure you know that poor people do not want hand outs. All they want is a fair game, where ordinary people are left in peace in their countries to develop their societies like normal intelligent individuals. They want their fertile soil to be used by local farmers growing what is best for export of that country - yet I am sure you know the recent cases of Eygpt and Korea, to name a few where these farmers are forced to grow particular genetically modified crops.

    Yes you are right to say that poverty is a world problem, so how can we resolve a world problem by handing out money to individuals. If one has a brain tumour, it takes removal of that tumour, followed by chemotherapy and maybe many years of recuperation. So if we are to get rid of the whole cause of terrorism, illegal immigrants, I am sure you will agree with me that getting rid of the cause of these problems is the longterm solution. Not just plying individuals with pain killers in the case of someone with a brain tumour. As poverty, wars and terrorism are man-made and were started centuries ago, we have to brace ourselves for a long slog as well to get rid of them, but only if done the right way.

    I think I will say goodbye to you and thanks for a lovely debate. Good luck with your card should you chose to have one.
    florence durrant, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Thank you Florence, it is a refreshing change to be able to discuss issues on such touchy subjects without the normal ranting of blinkered hardliners.
    I too have enjoyed this debate and wish you the best of luck with any future projects.
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Alan, although you raise some good issues that plague our country today, I and hopefully any logical person see no link between these problems and ID cards. In particular your point that huge numbers of illegal immigrants entering our country suggests a 'yes vote' for ID cards.

    If they are illegal, do you think there is any chance they would carry ID cards??!
    Are you suggesting that a use of ID cards could be used by police to stop and check the identity of any dodgy or foreign looking person walking our streets?
    Surely when considering such a draconian & authoritarian not to mention expensive measure such as ID cards, incredibly strong proof is necessary before we whould even consider such a thing. Sorry, but simply listing problems with our society provides no weight to an argument for ID cards. As someone previously mentioned, the case FOR ID cards must be proven, not vice versa.

    Personally I feel the government is clearly searching for any kind of reason to put forward for introduction of this scheme.

    I see absolutely NO REASON for us to carry or be issued ID cards, save as to provide a tool for the government to gain more control over the populace, the potential for abuse is huge.

    I for one will never bow down to this kind of tyranny.
    Seymour, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Yes I agree with you Seymour that the potential for abuse is huge, however, before any plan is implemented we have to consider all of it's points, good and bad, before we make a decision.
    This is one of those areas, I think, that is not black and white and has to be considered. There are some values in the reasons for ID cards and as you point out there is room for abuse.
    The balance has to be found. What will be safe? What level of information will be held? How will this help the individual as well as the authorities?
    We have to ask these questions about all sorts of changes that affect our lives so why not this one? Do we just throw it out because it smacks of civil liberties issues or do we try and turn it into something that will be useful to all?
    I do not profess to have all or any of the answers….but I am looking carefully at all of the arguments before I make any decision and I am willing to consider anything that will cut down crime and make our country safer for all.
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • A lot of people are willing to believe the UK government spin regarding the benefits of the proposed ID card. My view is that no government is trustworthy and certainly not with exhaustive data profiles for the entire UK population - biometric, medical, financial and so on. It may be safe to give increased authority to a benign and trustworthy administration, but not to one which has misused power, and is firmly fixed in the US Neo-Conservative command structure. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bliar and the other usual suspects all used lies and deception in order to initiate imperialist wars which are expected to continue for decades. Clash of culture wars which are seriously damaging not only to the unfortunate humanity living in the war zones, but also to the planet as a whole including the affluent West. The recent rises in gas and oil prices are largely a result of the 'War on Terror' and many predict much greater price hikes. Britain currently has record trade deficits and manufacturing industry has virtually vanished from the UK. High energy costs will bring the final death knell for the once widespread “Made in Britain” logo.

    On top of all their other incompetence the Labour government cannot be trusted to control the hugely complex ID scheme. Bliar is responsible for disorder and mayhem on a major scale; war crimes, political corruption, losing foreign industrial investment, lying to Parliament, sycophantic toadying to the insane Bush regime, to list a few. If the UK government was acting solely for the good of the British people it might be possible to trust them, but in reality they follow shadowy higher leadership. NATO, UN, World Bank, IMF, EU, are all globalist bodies that openly propose one world government as the next great goal for humanity, and the loss of the final traces of traditional state sovereignty and long held basic human rights are required consequences.

    The ID card will not help against civil unrest such as the ongoing Muslim anti-Danish demonstrations, because such unrest is largely globalist sponsored. The idea is to whip up anti-Muslim feeling even higher in an already significantly racist US/European population. This will help develop excuses for the criminal horrors in Iraq and Afghanistan. The elite also requires new pretexts in order to springboard the offensive into Iran and Syria (god help us). The Muslim civil unrest (France a few months ago, the Mohammed cartoons now) is the latest sign of a great rift that's purposely been aggravated between the Capitalist/Zionist block and the loose union of independent Arab/Moslem states. This rift has been constantly widened by meticulous manipulations of US and European administrations going back to the 1948 formation of Israel and before. Fanning the flames of unrest has accelerated since 9/11 and we now suffer US declarations in the form of the 'The Project for the New American Century', which baldly states that all oil/gas/mineral reserves, trade control issues, Cocaine and Heroin production operations etc. - that are not already controlled by the agents of 'Freedom and Democracy' should immediately come under globalist dominion - and imperialist wars must be instigated to achieve this.

    Of course the criminal activity of the UN, World Bank, IMF, WTO, World Health Organization, EU etc. go far beyond just controlling energy reserves, see: population reduction, genetically modified crops, poisonous vaccines/pharmaceuticals, illegal drug dealing, arms dealing, AIDS, the global sex trade, global trade control, world poverty etc. etc.

    The owners of the largest energy reserves, Arab Muslims in particular, are not too happy about PNAC, especially after the way US, UK and Israel has dealt with Palestine and other Middle East problems all the way since 1948. So a valid pretext to attack the few remaining independent Arab/Muslim countries owning energy reserves or pipeline routes, has been contrived by the US and UK. Clinton made no secret of US intentions to invade Iraq a second time, and Bush (with UK involvement) was preparing such a move even before 9/11.

    You probably wonder what all this has to do with British ID cards, well actually a great deal. With the upping of the anti by Bush and Bliar it's not difficult for people who can set aside social conditioning, to clearly see that the Democratic governments of the world are conducting a giant pretense similar to the board game 'Risk'. They constantly lie about virtually everything in order to justify the immoral military onslaughts and undercover manipulations used to enable control of world energy reserves. As the UK government is at the forefront of this union of Democratic/Fascist imperialists, can Bliar be trusted anymore than any other psychopathic megalomaniac?

    Even if the UK administration could stick to the truth and begin to act in a moral way, what about the higher levels of globalist power they follow. The corrupt EU for example, is squandering tax-payers money at unprecedented levels and forcing disastrous change on the fundamental fabric of Europe. What a daunting prospect that police forces, secret services and legions of faceless Eurocrats all over Euroland will have access to every UK citizens personal data on introduction of the ID card.

    Even though living conditions are better than ever for the fortunate minority in the comfortable First World, be assured that humanity is in big trouble and teetering closer to catastrophe, largely thanks to our overlords the neo-con globalist elite. The UK ID card will be just one more piece of the huge prison-planet system that is being constructed by these fanatics - it's naive to believe otherwise.
  • So Andrew if you are correct we might as well end it all now....or shall I go down the pub one more time........
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • If you live in Yeovil, you'd better make sure you have clean fingers.
    They won't let you in the pubs there unless you submit to having your index finger scanned and your picture taken.
    Mike, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Yes I know Alan, it's all doom and gloom, but in my view the points are correct. There is not much ordinary people can do to stop the globalists, but we can all say no to the ID card and they certainly won't like that.

    If Bush attacks Iran in March, that may well kick off nuclear terrorism and then all our drinking up time may be limited.
  • A further comment re. this pledge, directed at Simon Davies I suppose - surely its a mistake to have put a time limit on this pledge, as the numbers look kind of pathetic (801 out of 15000 is not impressive!) I am now unable to sign & I don't feel this proves any positive points about the campaign. Why not just let it continue indefinitely which would surely provide a better representation of the numbers of people abhor the concept of these ID cards?

    If however I have somehow missed the point and there is still some way people can make this pledge, please point it out.
    Seymour, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. ID cards are the first step towards a totalitarian state. If we 12,000 or so are truly committed they can't put us all in gaol. Let's make this another poll tax.

    Joe Smith
    Joe Smith, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • To anyone advocating the introduction of Identity cards,
    I am 51 years old do not drive i.e do not have a licence,have never left the country i.e do not hold a current passport,have been my wifes official carer for some time i.e am in reciept of benefit until one of us dies,so what happens to me ? They will not be able to 'update' me automatically so I must wait for them to make the cards compulsory. NOONE has EVER MADE me do anything I did not want to do.
    For over 30 years I have been trying to tell friends,family about the coming totalitarian state,predicting legal enforcement of 'voluntary' rules some sensible like seatbelts, drink driving etc some not such as protests,group gatherings not in the interest of the government of the day. I have told 'potheads'they would never legalise cannabis in our lifetime told fellow miners they'd never win ,told Tory supporters Maggie had gone one step too far and predicted the day we would all be forced to carry an identity card in other words I have never been blind to what was coming, for all this I have been called every name you can think of,now today on the 13th of February 2006 it is the final hour of our so called freedom, it will happen, the vote has been cast in favour of the jackboot. I am so sad at the indifference of my fellow men and women which has allowed this to come about, however I am raging inside and I will have to be tied down tattooed and/or chipped before I carry 'proof' of who I am.I am Paul Machin do not call me a liar your uniforms and batons mean nothing.
    Paul Machin, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I think that one aspect of this government's proposed legislation, not only in the matter of ID cards but other aspects as well, is that they always make claims that they have the support of the public. These claims are entirely unsubstantiated but may be the reason so many of the backbenchers, (who seem to be a spineless species), are caving in to Clarke and his chums on the front benches. The claims have about as much truth in them as the claims that Tony Blair made about the supposedly real & present danger that allowed him to go along with the Americans when they wanted to get their boots on Iraqi soil.
    The method is the same with the present attempt to force the ID card legislation through Parliament. It doesn't matter how economical with the truth they are. All that matters is that they get their own way and make up excuses afterwards.
    I agree with one of your correspondents when he says he would even vote Conservative to get rid of this lot - but that was what we did to get rid of the last lot, wasn't it!
    Geoffrey David Grey, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I have nothing to fear from ID cards - I have nothing to hide and I am not a criminal. Many other countries have ID cards and I have lived in countries where they are compulsory and it has never affected my personal freedoms in any way. Every one of us already carries ID that can track every moment of our lives from passports and driving licences to credit cards and store loyalty cards. The anti-ID brigade are victims of a knee-jerk reaction rather than reasoned thought.
    Unsurprisingly I won't be signing your pledge
    Warwick Pearmund, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I also have the emotional reaction, that id cards are wrong in principle. But there seems to be too much time spent on the emotions. Surely the overwhelming argument is that for a fraction of the cost of the id system, lets say in round numbers £5Bn, we could solve the alleged problems with properly thought out targeting, like more police, and still have money left over for other more deserving causes, like new hospitals, or doctors, or getting the 25% of school leavers who don't have a GCSE in Maths and English (can you imagine, 25%!) better teachers.
    Does everyone realise the database called the CSA costs more to run, than it collects from absent parents. This is partly because of the usual government shambles, but mostly because the system does not have anything like universal support. It is pretty plain the id system does not have universal support, and will therefore be a huge waste of money and resources we could have better spent on things that do have universal support, have far wider impact, like Education.
    JG, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • We still have time to fight against this Corporate Nazi Totalitarian Regime.

    The bill has now gone to the Lords - lets give a fight and keep fighting.

    Remember who really rules - real power - only power - only it has to be used for once! If you think you are safe being silent and submitting to all of this you are the first to get it!

    Will you willingly become a slave?

    Will you be branded a number like Jews were by Nazis!?

    Are you ready for the chip and our DNA to on on a central database and sold to biotechnology companies ready for them to genetically engineer human DNA into the food you eat? Well some of this already happens - the NHS even sell samples to biotechnology companies and have done for some years without anyone permission - they call this selling information. Since DNA is a code they get away with it.

    Things you can come to expect are the chip, no rights, no freedom, no choice, no life - when we lose privacy, freedom and our rights we cease to be humans.

    Yes, it was Home Secretary Charles Clarke that said biometric identity cards are useless at fighting crime and preventing terrorism.

    The simple reason why it that because almost all terror is state sponsored. And endorsed by EU and UN banking institutions.

    Down with the Nazi Totalitarian State!

    Down with state sponsored fear/terror and all intelligence agency industrialised propaganda campaigns.

    Down with the corporate government! Show them that we rule them and they only exist to serve us. This can then be called a Democracy - where we call the shots.

    We want freedom, rights and privacy.

    People power still rules, the world is this way because we allow the world to be the way it is.

    Wake up - self educate yourself - ignore and counteract all state opinions embedded in your brain. Feel free - let knowledge liberate you.

    We will never give in.

    We already won but this Regime keeps pushing further with their agenda.

    Are you prepared to allow everything we have fought for hundreds of years be wasted and in vain? What a waste of tens of millions of lives that is! If you submit and allow this to happen you are not a human! Do you wish we had lost WW2? You may as well do if you support ID cards, the Jewish people were forced to have ID cards so they could be reduced to a number, tracked traced and persecuted 24/7.

    If you think the torture in Iraq is not widespread you know nothing! If you think you won't get a taste of it after you have submitted and surrendered all of your free will willingly then you are a fool. In the USA tens of thousands are being tortured or have been as you read this now, in secret military bases used to interrogate innocent people.

    The largest corporation around the globe says ID cards actually increase fraud and ID theft!

    But you are a slave and only believe the propaganda from corporate-government that forms your opinions? Alongside banking institutions! Support and investments.


    How do you think Intelligence Officers go to any country covertly? The same as some criminals and terrorists do that is how. So it is right to say the MI5/MI6/SIS know what they are talking about then it comes to homeland security, I would say so and I am not alone.

    Ex-MI5 Chief Calls ID Cards "Useless"






    NWO Activist, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • The US is run by a crime syndicate - Senator Cynthia McKinney, 06 Feb 2006

    Bliar is probably pretty pleased with his latest job done for the New World Order. He should remember however that 'there is many a slip twixt cup and lip'. The wretched ID system seems to be on it's way to becoming law, but the NWO will not wish to give up their favorite tools; state sponsored terrorism and imperialist war. When the sleeping British public experience the expensive, time consuming and intrusive ID card first hand, and they also notice that war, terrorism and crime does not decrease, Bliar's successors may find it rather difficult to enforce the despotic ID card scheme.

    Congresswoman Says America Run By Criminal Syndicate
    McKinney: American citizens could be put in forced labor camps

    Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison | February 14 2006

    Cynthia McKinney, the only House Representative to stand up to the Bush White House crime syndicate, has gone further than ever before in her efforts to warn people about what the Neo-Cons' ultimate goals actually entail for freedom in America.

    During a recent radio interview on the Alex Jones Show, McKinney illustrated the nature of a corrupt occupational government, stating that the administration was "stolen in 2000 and stolen again in 2004." McKinney said that it was doing the government a favor to describe them as a "criminal syndicate."

    "It appears to me that our country is literally being hollowed out....our economy is being hollowed out," said McKinney.

    McKinney shared Alex Jones' fears and those previously voiced by Republican Congressman Ron Paul, that Americans may be arrested and taken to forced labor camps in light of recent developments confirming Kellogg Brown and Root have secured a government contract to build the camps.

    Regarding 9/11, McKinney lent credibility to the 9/11 truth scholars who recently came forth with empirical evidence proving that the official story is a fallacy.

    "It's clear that something was terribly amiss on that day with our people who were in charge....they didn't even follow standard operating procedure," said McKinney and the Congresswoman agreed that US authorities stood down on 9/11.

    Covering the subject of worldwide human trafficking and sex slavery, a practice embraced by Dyncorp and lobbied for by Halliburton subsidiary representatives, McKinney responded by saying, "they steal elections with the same ease that they steal women and little girls."

    McKinney made headlines two years ago when she directly confronted Donald Rumsfeld about the US government's collaboration with companies that engage in human trafficking and the four wargames held on September 11.

    McKinney highlighted the MK Ultra program as a past example of where the US government had experimented with turning US soldiers into killing machines and expressed her sadness that some troops were apparently under a similar influence in light of the alarming incidents at Fort Bragg.

    McKinney is spearheading a movement to have all records pertaining to the death of Martin Luther King released. McKinney said that King was clearly murdered.

    "A jury said in 1999 that it was a US government conspiracy, including the highest individuals at the highest levels of the United States government. I have no reason to disbelieve them."

    "If they would do that then to Martin Luther King Jnr. at a stage now where we have a law that defines enemy combatants, we all could be enemy combatants just by dissenting from what this administration does and they could do the same thing to us."

    McKinney scorned the federal government for their actions following Hurricane Katrina.

    "The American people were once again abandoned, they were abandoned by their own government and Secretary Michael Chertoff has gotten off scott free on this."

    "They needed food and water and instead they were sent men with guns and Blackwater mercenaries were hired to patrol the streets of New Orleans. This is criminal! How can we have mercenaries patrolling the streets of America?"

    "You had an administration that was AWOL and they had the nerve to bring other folks up on criminal charges for even being conscientious objectors."
  • Warwick Pearmund:

    With respect, it appears that you are considering only half of the issue. You have asked yourself whether there are any reasons why the ID scheme *should not* be introduced (the alleged human rights issues, and so on), decided that you are not convinced by the arguments, and concluded that you support the introduction of ID cards. In my view, you have missed a vital part of the question; namely, whether there are any reasons why the scheme *should* be introduced.

    Regardless of your views about the civil rights argument (and I can't argue with you on this, as you are of course perfectly entitled to your opinion), you cannot deny that the scheme would, if introduced, require a vast amount of public money to set up and maintain (which could instead be used to bolster the failing education or health services, for example). This expense can surely only be justified if it can be shown that there are clearly achievable benefits expected - and the balance of independent opinion seems to be that there are none: the financial gains from the reduction in benefit fraud are far outweighed by the cost of the scheme itself, any impact on identity fraud can last only as long as it takes criminals to crack the system (and there can surely be no doubt that they will, sooner or later), and the suggestion that the scheme is a necessary counter-terrorism measure is frankly laughable. I could go on, but these points have been made elsewhere in far more detail than I could manage.

    So if you're not convinced by the arguments *opposing* the scheme, fair enough... but that's no reason to be convinced by the arguments in favour.
    Nic Shakeshaft, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Having some experience of the UK immigration process I am able to inform Alan that we catch illegal immigrants and failed asylum seekers all the time, their applications to remain in the UK are assessed, and if refused they appeal, then if they don’t like the result of that appeal they will appeal again until this avenue is exhausted. Then they will make a claim under human rights legislation and several appeals and spurious legal challenges down the line they might be removable. Each one of these cases costs the British taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds and at best ends in a free flight home for a lawyer’s meal ticket. It currently takes years to remove most FAS and illegal entrants who have no legal right to stay in the UK, even if they are put on a flight all they have to do is kick up a bit of a stink and they will be taken off the plane and removal directions cancelled.

    The thickness of most of the files that cross my desk can be measured in inches due to the number of appeals these individuals are entitled to, it is farcical and grossly disingenuous to suggest that an ID card will somehow speed up or bypass the legal process or even lend any weight to a prosecution. How do you think the European Court of Human Rights will react to a refusal based on not having an ID card – I expect that the ruling will be overturned, this will set a president and suddenly the UK ID card will not only be ineffective but legally redundant too.

    I believe what we have with ID cards is another example of Tony Blair blindly going ahead with a deeply flawed plan because he has travelled down a path so far that it is now too late to turn back, just like Iraq, we are getting ID cards so our Prime Minister saves face. We have an oligarch desperately trying to salvage his place in history buy going out on a victory regardless of whether it is what the country wants or needs, the matter of government is just a PR exercise to this clown.

    To Roger, I know it’s unpleasant to think that the people that you voted in to run your life might be lying to you but you really should open your eyes and stop believing what you’re told to believe because at the moment you just sound like one of a herd of cattle, joining the queue for your brand. I’m not asking you to believe any conspiracies, but just to think independently as an intelligent rational human being about the events that have taken place since George W Bush took power, the timing of these events and to recognise who has benefited from the fallout, I suspect you will find a number of rich powerful white men slapping each other on the back. Just think for yourself, the answers are all around you.
  • Mark - your crystal clear comment is 100% correct!
  • I will never carry one, the controlfreaks incharge know too much as it is.
    Cal, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Mark...I did not say that ID cards would enable us to quickly and easilly send all illegal immigrants home. I suggested that they could be helpful in stopping things such as benefit fraud, illegal employees and employed and other areas of crime.
    As an ex soldier and goverment employee I have had to carry an ID card most of my life so it is not an alien feeling to me.
    I realise that a national ID card is a huge step to take and if we go down that road then we have to be sure that it will be worth it in the long term.
    I do not see it as a black and white issue so until the shaded areas become clear to me I still have an open mind.
    alan, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • It wasn't a dig Alan and I salute your open mindedness to the situation. However, I do believe this is a black and white issue. There is no point in an ID card. Leaving aside the privacy issues we have photo driving licences, we will soon have biometric details embedded in our passports (apart from the cost I'm not opposed to making passports more secure), we have national insurance numbers and bank accounts. There is no need for an all encompassing form of ID unless it is for the sole purpose of keeping tabs on the only people that will bother getting one, the law abiding, tax paying British citizen to whom the threat of a criminal record or a stint in prison is sufficient to make them play ball.

    The case has not been made that ID cards are a financially viable way to solve the problems of benefit fraud. The actual cost of benefit fraud is miniscule compared with the cost of implementing ID cards. It is those claiming benefits legitimately that cost the taxpayer the most money. Is an ID card going to prevent people having children they can’t afford in order to claim child benefit and a council house? Is it going to prevent the practice of massaging unemployment figures by offering applicants incapacity benefits instead of job seekers allowance? Is it going to stop unscrupulous lottery winners claiming legal aid? Will it put an end to pensioners who have worked all their lives, many of whom have fought for our sovereignty and freedom paying extortionate council tax whilst those who won’t work get council tax benefit and receive up to £56.20 per week for doing nothing.

    You know the answer to all of the above. Why implement such a costly and monumentally pointless scheme when it will not put a stop to any of the injustices or security issues our society and the world faces today. How many people could we vaccinate against malaria and other treatable diseases and afflictions like diarrhoea, which kills millions in the third world, these treatments cost pennies not billions. Maybe, just maybe instead of bombing random middle eastern countries and keeping 80% of the world in poverty through EU and US subsidises, whilst making vain attempts to protect ourselves against the rest of the world’s justified hatred, maybe we should use that money to pluck the root of fundamentalism from the festering hole of poverty, injustice and despair and instead of being universally hated, some of that 80% might just say “hey, the British government fought for a level playing field on trade with Europe and the US, lobbied against sweat shop conditions and for a global minimum wage, pressured the US, China and Australia to sign up to the Kyoto accord, paid for the drugs that saved my child.” I know it sounds naive, I’m just pointing out that there are better and less costly methods to make Briton and the world a safer place.

    ID cards are not the answer.
  • Monday, February 27th, 2006

    Total Information Awareness Lives On Inside the National Security Agency

    In 2003, lawmakers voted to shut down Total Information Awareness - a program that developed technologies to predict terrorist attacks by mining government databases and the personal records of people in the United States.
    Months earlier New York Times columnist William Safire had warned about the dangers of the program. In a column headlined "You Are A Suspect" Safire wrote:

    "If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you:
    "Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend -- all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as 'a virtual, centralized grand database.'

    "To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial sources, add every piece of information that government has about you -- passport application, driver's license and bridge toll records, judicial and divorce records, complaints from nosy neighbors to the F.B.I., your lifetime paper trail plus the latest hidden camera surveillance -- and you have the supersnoop's dream: a "Total Information Awareness" about every U.S. citizen.

    "This is not some far-out Orwellian scenario. It is what will happen to your personal freedom in the next few weeks if John Poindexter gets the unprecedented power he seeks."

    Following public outcry, the program was halted primarily because of privacy concerns, but also because its main advocate was John Poindexter, known for his involvement with the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s.

    It now appears that the project "was stopped in name only" and that TIA is in fact continuing. The National Journal reports that TIA was moved from the Pentagon's research-and-development agency - known by its acronym DARPA - to another group, which builds technologies primarily for the NSA. The names of key projects were changed, apparently to conceal their identities, but their funding remained intact, often under the same contracts.

    We are joined by Shane Harris, the reporter for the National Journal who wrote the story "TIA Lives On".

    AMY GOODMAN: The issue resurfaced earlier this month when, during a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon asked John Negroponte, the head of Domestic Security; Robert Mueller, the head of the FBI; and General Michael Hayden, the former head of the NSA, about the project.

    clip begins-------

    Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon questioning John Negroponte, the head of Domestic Security, Robert Mueller, the head of the FBI and General Michael Hayden, the former head of the NSA, about the project.

    SEN. RON WYDEN: Is it correct that when John Poindexter's program, Operation Total Information Awareness, was closed, that several of Mr. Poindexter's projects were moved to various intelligence agencies?

    JOHN NEGROPONTE: I don't know the answer to that question.

    SEN. RON WYDEN: Do any of the other panel members know this? The press has reported intelligence officials saying that those programs run by Mr. Poindexter -- I and others on this panel led the effort to close it. We want to know if Mr. Poindexter's programs are going on somewhere else. Can anyone answer that? Mr. Mueller?

    ROBERT MUELLER: I have no knowledge of that, sir.

    SEN. RON WYDEN: Any other panel members?

    GEN. MICHAEL HAYDEN: Senator, I would like to answer you in closed session.

    clip ends--------

    AMY GOODMAN: That was Michael Hayden, the former head of the NSA, saying he would like to answer in closed session, being questioned by Oregon's Senator Ron Wyden. As we turn now to Washington to Shane Harris, he is the reporter who broke the story for the National Journal. It’s called "TIA lives On." We welcome to Democracy Now! Shane.

    SHANE HARRIS: Hi, thanks for having me.

    AMY GOODMAN: Well, why don't you just start off by telling us how you learned about what is happening here, where TIA is now living?

    SHANE HARRIS: Right. Well, I have been following TIA and some other related kind of data mining work for a number of years. When TIA started up in 2002, it was a fairly big story for folks who were covering intelligence and homeland security, and when it went away, there was always sort of a general awareness, if you will, that there were some components of the project that had lived on, but no one was really willing to say where they had gone. That information actually was, according to informed sources that I have, was classified, and I recently just came into possession of some documents that really helped spell out where these projects went, when they moved, and what the names were changed to. So, sort of confirming what people generally knew, but in a very specific context this way.

    AMY GOODMAN: So, tell us exactly how TIA originated, where it was, and now how it has been broken up, and the different areas within the NSA it is.

    SHANE HARRIS: Right. Well, TIA was sort of the brainchild of two people: John Poindexter, whom you mentioned in your introduction, of course, was Reagan's National Security Adviser; he and a colleague, a man named Brian Sharkey, brought this idea for a system of systems that would bring together data mining tools and analysis tools to help the government predict and preempt terrorist attacks, this really right after the 9/11 attacks. The Pentagon was pretty keen on this idea. Both Poindexter and Sharkey had worked on similar projects for the Pentagon before, as contractors and as officials.

    And in early 2002, the Pentagon created at DARPA something called the Information Awareness Office and put Poindexter in charge of it, and this office really was meant to build TIA and to look into things like data mining, pattern recognition, software that can translate something from Arabic into English text automatically and kind of tie all these together in a sort of big prototype, which was called at the time “TIA,” and that office was in charge of it.

    When news broke that this had been going on for several months, the controversy was sort of fanned, not only by the privacy concerns that are raised by something like this, but also by Poindexter, at least being the titular head and the brainchild of all this, and the program was then shut down, essentially, in name only. In the 2004 Defense Authorization Act, this being the bill that authorizes the government to spend money on defense programs, TIA and most of its components were specifically eliminated under DARPA, and there was sort of a loophole that was left open that funding could continue for certain projects out of the National Foreign Intelligence Program, which is the black budget of the intelligence community.

    At that point the project sort of went behind that black curtain, and no one was really sure where they had gone, but what my reporting now has confirmed is that really quickly after Congress shut down TIA at DARPA, a new sponsor came forward, this new sponsor being this Research and Development Office that’s actually housed at NSA headquarters, not far from outside of Washington here, and picked up the projects, changed their names to conceal their identities, kept the same contractors that were working under TIA in place, kept the same language, the same specifications, and really just continued the work, and presumably has expanded significantly from where it was three years ago.

    AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Shane Harris of National Journal. I wanted to read from a William Safire column from a couple of years ago. The conservative columnist in The New York Times writes, "If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you: Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every website you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as a ‘virtual centralized grand database.’

    “To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial sources, add every piece of information that government has about you — passport application, driver's license and bridge toll records, judicial and divorce records, complaints from nosy neighbors to the F.B.I., your lifetime paper trail plus the latest hidden camera surveillance — and you have the supersnoop's dream: a ‘Total Information Awareness’ about every U.S. citizen.

    “This is not some far-out Orwellian scenario. It’s what will happen to your personal freedom in the next few weeks if John Poindexter gets the unprecedented power he seeks."

    Those are the words of the conservative columnist who had once worked for Richard Nixon, William Safire. Shane Harris of the National Journal, given what you understand of the components of this, though the public understands TIA was done away with, the components of this that live on?

    SHANE HARRIS: What components are living on? Yeah, essentially there are two main pieces, the first being the most important. It was something called the Information Awareness Prototype System, which is, essentially, a long name for the heart of TIA. It was the hardware, if you will, the architecture that was going to tie together what Bill Safire is really describing there in his piece, this thing that would sit at the center and collect them all. That piece lives on. It was renamed "Basketball," a rather innocuous-seeming name. My reporting could find no indication of why "Basketball" was chosen as the name for this. That continued at the NSA research office under the direction of a SAIC Corporation, which is an intelligence and defense contractor, which was working on the original prototype system.

    The second piece that I found that continued was something called Genoa II. This was not TIA, per se; it was a connected program trying to build analysis tools, software, all kinds of different things that would eventually feed into TIA. So it was really sort of a key component in tandem with it. That was continued under the name Topsail, also at the same place where Basketball went. Research continued on that with, as well, some of the same contractors, and apparently new contractors were brought in, as well.

    So what you have here is sort of the heart or core architecture of TIA and one of the biggest, most important application or tool pieces. When you put these two together, you really would have the bulk of what TIA was, before Congress effectively killed it or thought they had killed it.

    AMY GOODMAN: Shane Harris, 18 Democratic Congress members are calling for a special counsel to investigate eavesdropping by the NSA. How does this whole issue of Americans being spied on that is currently raging -- there will be a hearing on tomorrow -- relate to Total Information Awareness?

    SHANE HARRIS: Right. That is sort of the key question now. TIA, as it was -- as it existed under DARPA when Poindexter was in charge, was running at the same time as the NSA eavesdropping program that the President has authorized to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants. So officials at both agencies were aware of each other's work. That much, we know. Whether or not NSA actually took some of the experimental tools -- the searching retrieval, the data mining tools that TIA was developing -- took those and applied that to the information, the data that it was getting from U.S. citizens from their phone calls and their e-mails, that remains uncertain.

    But certainly, what is known is at the time, the people who were running the NSA program, who have ultimately built the technology that’s at the core of the NSA program, were very much aware of what was going on under TIA. In fact, what was going on under Total Information Awareness was not classified. There were -- Poindexter had given speeches about this. There were conferences where DARPA had invited contractors to come in and learn about TIA and sort of pitch their ideas and compete for contract work under the program.

    Whether or not, though, those tools were taken and applied, not sure. I interviewed Poindexter's number two from TIA, a guy named Dr. Robert Popp, and asked him specifically did NSA analysts or anyone else at NSA take these TIA tools and use them as part of this domestic surveillance program. And his response was, he said he could tell me that under Total Information Awareness, under that program, which he and Poindexter were in charge of, he knew that they had not taken those tools and used them in the domestic surveillance. However, what they did on their own time, he could not speak to that. He wasn't sure.

    AMY GOODMAN: And what has come of John Poindexter?

    SHANE HARRIS: John Poindexter now lives outside Washington and is a private consultant. I did contact him for this story. He was unwilling to comment about former TIA programs on the record for this.

    AMY GOODMAN: You mentioned SAIC, that was also involved with running the media in Iraq, though they lost that contract and it went to the Melbourne, Florida based company, Harris Corporation. Is Harris involved with this?

    SHANE HARRIS: I have not seen any documents on Harris Corporation's involvement, but SAIC was probably the most significant contractor in the whole TIA program. And it’s important to note that at the time that TIA was started up, the wholly owned subsidiary of SAIC that was the main contractor for the program was a company called Hicks & Associates. Hicks & Associates is headed by a number of former defense and intelligence officials, and one of the top executives there was a guy named Brian Sharkey, Brian Sharkey being the friend of John Poindexter who helped pitch this idea to the Pentagon after 9/11. And so, this is a fairly closed community of people and of experts with officials in the Defense Department and at contractors, primarily SAIC in this case.

    AMY GOODMAN: And is there any word among those in Congress, in the House or the Senate, that they are going to be looking into this, since, of course, the general perception of the public is that TIA is over, Total Information Awareness was over in all its forms?

    SHANE HARRIS: Right. Well, the story broke on Friday, so I personally haven't heard anything for what Congress plans, but certainly Senator Wyden -- you played the clip from the hearing from a few weeks back -- appears to be, by his line of questioning, interested in exactly what happened to these programs and, of course, you played the part where General Michael Hayden said that he would respond to the questions in closed sessions, and all I can presume is that he answered Senator Wyden's question about whether programs live on in the affirmative.

    AMY GOODMAN: Shane Harris, I want to thank you very much for joining us from the National Journal. He broke the story on Total Information Awareness living on. We will link to it at Thank you.

    SHANE HARRIS: Thank you.
  • Andrew Jones:

    That was a very interesting post (although I can't say any of it surprises me...), and I can certainly see the relevance to the UK's NIR. However, could I suggest that this might have been better provided as a link to another page (with only excerpts here), rather than printed here in full-text? The narrow width of the column means that your post takes up nearly 14 pages, which makes it quite awkward to scroll up to previous posts!

    Thanks, and sorry for moaning! Very interesting post.

  • Alan,

    The difference between these cards and the ones you carried as a member of the military is the National Identity Register. The NIR is the central database which, as well as linking to every other database with information on you, will log every single time your card is produced and checked. Such a system is wide open to abuse.

    It's a database that does away with the notion of "need to know" and may well lead to such things as insurance companies having access to your medical records without your knowledge or consent.

    You only have to look at the sorry track record of government IT contracts (CSA, air traffic control, passport office, NHS) to see where this is going to lead. Massive cost over-runs, major security holes and all the rest. As usual, the crooks will find a way round the system while the long-suffering taxpayer gets shafted.
    Geoff Brown, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Bush's Mysterious 'New Programs'

    Consortium News | February 23, 2006
    By Nat Parry

    Not that George W. Bush needs much encouragement, but Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales a new target for the administration's domestic operations -- Fifth Columnists, supposedly disloyal Americans who sympathize and collaborate with the enemy.

    "The administration has not only the right, but the duty, in my opinion, to pursue Fifth Column movements," Graham, R-S.C., told Gonzales during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Feb. 6.

    "I stand by this president's ability, inherent to being commander in chief, to find out about Fifth Column movements, and I don't think you need a warrant to do that," Graham added, volunteering to work with the administration to draft guidelines for how best to neutralize this alleged threat.

    "Senator," a smiling Gonzales responded, "the president already said we'd be happy to listen to your ideas."

    Recent developments suggest that the Bush administration may already be contemplating what to do with Americans who are deemed insufficiently loyal or who disseminate information that may be considered helpful to the enemy. Top U.S. officials have cited the need to challenge news that undercuts Bush's actions as a key front in defeating the terrorists, who are aided by "news informers," in the words of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

    Detention centers

    Plus, there was that curious development in January when the Army Corps of Engineers awarded Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root a $385 million contract to construct detention centers somewhere in the United States, to deal with "an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs," KBR said.

    Later, the New York Times reported that "KBR would build the centers for the Homeland Security Department for an unexpected influx of immigrants, to house people in the event of a natural disaster or for new programs that require additional detention space."

    Like most news stories on the KBR contract, the Times focused on concerns about Halliburton's reputation for bilking U.S. taxpayers by overcharging for sub-par services. "It's hard to believe that the administration has decided to entrust Halliburton with even more taxpayer dollars," remarked Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif.

    Less attention centered on the phrase "rapid development of new programs" and what kind of programs would require a major expansion of detention centers, each capable of holding 5,000 people. Jamie Zuieback, a spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, declined to elaborate on what these "new programs" might be.

    read full text:

    British international law professor Philippe Sands, author of “Lawless World,” reveals President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair secretly agreed in January 2003 to invade Iraq in mid-March 2003 regardless of the outcome of diplomatic efforts.

    New evidence has emerged that President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed in January 2003 to attack Iraq regardless of whether diplomatic efforts succeeded. The revelation comes in a newly updated version of the book “Lawless World” by British international law professor Philippe Sands. According to the book, Blair offered Bush his full support of the war during a meeting at the White House in January 2003. Sands says his account is based on a summary of the meeting prepared by one of the participants. According to the book, Bush is recorded as saying that "the start date for the military campaign was now penciled in for 10 March. That was when the bombing would begin. The military timetable meant that an early resolution was needed."

    Bush also reportedly said the "diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning". In addition the book reveals President Bush told Blair that the United Stated was considering flying U2 spy planes disguised as United Nations planes over Iraq in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein. If Iraq fired on the planes, it would help justify a US led invasion.

    Philippe Sands, the author of 'Lawless World' is a professor of international law at University College London.
    Andrew Jones, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • I am 100% against ID cards and the identity register. Believe me when I say I actually feel horrified at the thought of them - No matter what happens I will refuse an ID card and will leave the UK for good if need be. I have the right to live a free life without being tracked, as every human should be able to and if this is what the UK of the 21st century is going to be like then I will pack my bags and leave.
    Chris Wallbanks, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • ROGER Wrote: "the fear of being caught is the biggest factor in crime prevention an ID cards would help crime detection no end therefore helping to reduce crime. simple arguement, simple maths, ok longterm solution, but I never said it would happen over night."

    If you think that ID cards are a deterent for people who are criminals and fear getting caught, think again.

    look at all the draconian measures that have been introduced on britain's roads over the last 20 years, yet 1 in 10 cars is still on the road illegally, technically speaking, mine included, but i am not afraid of being caught even by the new ANPR technolgoy because I know that there are that many people who are sick to death with paying out hand over fist that many millions are breaking the law. Because of this, I know that even if the system flags up my number plate, it cannot cope if I just say get stuffed, I am not paying the tax and I am not paying the fine, there are no prison places left because of all your rediculous draconian legislation so; what are you going to do about it?

    You see that even with photo driving licences, numerous changes to the V5 and speed cameras to name but a few, criminals like me just do not give a toss and carry on regardless.

    I don't want an ID card, but I am certainly not scared of them and they will not make me change my ways, why should they?

    If they start using facial recognition in the CCTV systems then the only thing that will happen is the sale of hoodies, hats and scarves will go through the roof.
    Jake Long, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Our corrupt friend Jake is spot on, the only people who will bow to the threat of a fine and a criminal record are tax paying, law abiding citizens. People who have reputations, jobs and families to protect, in other words people with something to lose. So if it's not going to prevent or help solve crime (can you really see the police coming around your house in lab overalls looking for DNA after you've been broken into), it's not going to stop benefit fraud and it certainly won't put a stop to all the undeserving individuals legitimately claiming benefits. It will not stop terrorism, the notion that a card will stop fanatics blowing up the public is preposterous. So perhaps we should be asking why Tony wants us to have one so badly. Maybe his beliefs (and they are just beliefs as he is unable to come up with a single credible argument for the need for ID cards) have transcend the insignificant issue of whether it is right or wrong to impose this affront to the electorate’s privacy and moved onto the seemingly unimportant but politically crucial issue of win or lose.

    Visit for a T shirt that tells George W that you know who the real bad guy is.
  • If I had "Nothing to fear Nothing to hide", then I would post a website that tells everyone my Name, D.O.B., Address, Bank account details, PIN, where I work, when I work, where I go on hoiday, all the medical procedures I have undergone, my sexuality, all my partners, what websites I visit, where I go out drinking, the names of the people I associate with, my driving licence details, my personal alcohol licence details etc etc

    However, I do not want people to know all these things, I will not accept an ID card or Meta Database, which holds all of my personal information in one place and which once compromised, will give criminals all of these details.
    Allan Jackson, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • If the state has nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear. I feel somewhat bemused about the secret loans with ilicit payoff by Mr Blair while he assures me that I must come clean about everything.

    Of course the millionairs will still be able to hide their identity, their gifts and bribes. People who enter the country ilegaly to be exploited ilegaly will be in exactly the same situation as now - paperless and at the mercy of their corupt employers.

    All this does is bring us closer to a police state with civilians under close scrutiny. If civilians are the enemy then the state has something to fear.
    jim noble, 15 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
  • Thank you all for your support, sorry that the deadline has expired - lots more people are wanting to pledge since the Bill passed. We'll be providing another way for people to declare their refusal to register, soon.

    Now the ID cards Bill is and Act, we shall be mailing all those who signed our 3 pledges (refuse, refuse2 & resist) with details of how to donate to the defence fund. There is of course no obligation to pay up on an 'unsuccessful' pledge - but many have already told us that they will.

    Finding a friendly law firm who can administer it and hold monies in trust (without charge) has proven a little more difficult than we had hoped!

    Thank you for your patience.

    Phil Booth
    National Coordinator, NO2ID
This pledge is closed for new comments.

Current signatories (Green text = they've done it)

Simon Davies, the Pledge Creator, joined by:

  • Simon Richards
  • Heather Wright
  • Michael Cole
  • Clare Shepherd
  • Mark Porciani
  • Mr. Spikey
  • Kev Williams
  • Fleur Gooch
  • Dan Burwood
  • Robert Klarmann
  • Mr L J Kelly
  • Simon Gardiner
  • Helen Low
  • Simon Rice
  • Matt Birkinshaw
  • Steven Jenkins
  • Tanya Haslehurst
  • Shirley Parfitt
  • Ed Lyons
  • Derek Knight
  • Allan Tallett
  • Mike Hutchison
  • Amy Collins
  • John Pigott
  • Jon Deane
  • John Scardifield
  • Sally Scardifield
  • David James Dreghorn
  • Tez Burke
  • Ann Clark
  • Ian Kirk
  • John Daniels
  • Graham Reid
  • Robert Ford
  • Keeley Symonds
  • Gervase Markham
  • simon alford
  • John Carter
  • George Peattie
  • chris knowles
  • martin O'Loughlin
  • Michael Kellett
  • Jennifer Hynes
  • nick mitchell
  • Andy Taylor
  • Robert Trow
  • Chris Foran
  • Glyn Evans
  • Fiona Elliott
  • Colin C. Venters
  • Catherine Smart
  • Rich Woods
  • Owen Whitfield
  • David Harris
  • Frances Knight
  • Tom Bloomfield
  • Ronnie Greig
  • James Milton
  • Miriam Binder
  • Diana Brown
  • Derek Bennett
  • Michael Brindle
  • Laurence Wood
  • mark thatcher
  • David Coleman
  • Simon Starr
  • Jim O'Neill
  • Dennis L Stephens
  • Ben Bailey
  • Jim Bisset
  • susie rob
  • Alan Bocutt
  • Dave Sellers
  • Russell Long
  • Janet Alty
  • Andy Morgan
  • Hugh Christian-Carter
  • james thellusson
  • Richard Scowen
  • Jon Fanti
  • Paul Bristow
  • Brook Calverley
  • Andrew Hudson
  • Jennifer Gallagher
  • Thomas McCarthy-Ward
  • Cllr JohnBramham
  • Terry Johnson
  • Dan Boswell
  • Gareth Kerkin
  • George Crabb
  • richard cookson
  • Samantha Lewis
  • Andrew Stewart
  • Mathew Cox
  • jake waudby
  • Richard Ashall
  • Justin Wheeler
  • Nick Kent
  • Graham Bennett
  • Jo Lee
  • Peter Skinner
  • Michael Smith
  • Tamsin Irving
  • Paul Kingsnorth
  • Paul Hammond
  • Ben Sherry
  • owen johnston
  • Duncan Marr
  • layla tully
  • Thomas Lalevée
  • Paul Mansfield
  • I Alexander
  • Drew Mann
  • A Quidam
  • Vijay Chopra
  • Jeorme Pearce
  • Rosemary Francis
  • Dr. Judith J Perry
  • Stuart Burn
  • Mitchell Ankers
  • Paul Southworth
  • Stefan L Hoyle
  • Keith Jackman
  • Andrew Boyd
  • Matthew Herbert
  • Helen Rivans
  • Rafe Fitzpatrick
  • Umberto Albarella
  • Moira Stirland
  • Gemma Schofield
  • Rev. John David Parker
  • Natalie Leer
  • Michael Scott
  • Martha Rose
  • Sam Dent
  • Nick Gotts
  • Beatrice Leal
  • Helen Gittos
  • david thornbury
  • Paul Birkin
  • Gregg Beaman
  • kat hicks
  • Kate Oakley
  • Tony Woodcock
  • Jenny Porter
  • Charlie Woodworth
  • John Baker
  • Luke Steele
  • Charles Randles
  • Al Brayne
  • Peter Mitchell
  • Jane Gibbons
  • Philip Ward
  • Jacob Henry Packham
  • Linda Garrard
  • Richard Senior
  • Ralph Kettell
  • Neil Scott
  • emma lamarque
  • Rabih Makki
  • William Campbell
  • John Broughton
  • Gillian Gadsby
  • David Glen
  • Dave Stratford
  • Darren Eddy
  • jeff brown
  • Charlie Nash
  • David Stephenson
  • Andrew Sinclair
  • Donna Hume
  • Luke Jones
  • Louise Castro
  • Mark Towning
  • Tom Davies
  • Amy Ward
  • Gail Edwards
  • Phillip Scride
  • D J Davidson
  • Tim Gulson
  • Oliver Coles
  • Greg Turner
  • Debbie
  • Kerin Cosford
  • deperpyl price
  • dave hewitt
  • andrew bowmna
  • John Varley
  • Crow
  • Robert Kensit
  • Paul Raven
  • Christian Cooper
  • Sara Phillips
  • Ben O'Steen
  • Tim Holland
  • Karen H Philbin
  • David Hare
  • Javan Baker
  • Rosemary Davies
  • evelyn eagles
  • Alex Scroggie
  • Steven Robb
  • Robert Merrison
  • kim cummins
  • Al Henderson
  • Matthew Carter
  • Rachelle Arlin Credo
  • Steve Lee
  • Gareth Wilkins
  • Michelle Kekezza Louise Reece
  • Timothy Loudon
  • Richard Searle
  • Ryan Kelluy
  • Mark Salisbury
  • Gary Mullan
  • Amber Jean Nash
  • daniel trimmer
  • anne rogers
  • Molly Pickles
  • Barry Gardner
  • Cllr Adrian Holmes
  • David K. Gullen
  • Tom Stanford
  • Lorna Scott Fox
  • Tim Taylor
  • Richard Paterson
  • John Dare
  • Benjamin inbar
  • Robert Curry
  • Emily Paxton
  • Alexis Anderson
  • Tom Richards
  • Mac Gill
  • Lawrence Tallis
  • Emma Bennett
  • Paul Goodison
  • Tristan Beck
  • Daniel Douglas
  • andrew york
  • Gemma Sayers
  • Chris Bonner
  • Phil
  • Neil Morris
  • stephenbuchan
  • Charlie Howe
  • Kevin Robinson
  • Charles Glass
  • Bernadette de Villiers
  • Mal Jones
  • Neil Stewart
  • Cookie
  • Ben Davies
  • Paul Wells
  • Sue Baumgardt
  • David Griffiths
  • Alex Lockwood
  • william fisher
  • Frances Fisher
  • Bill Woodhouse
  • Michael Drain
  • Sarah Hamshere
  • Fiona Maouche
  • David Shewry
  • Jennie Pratt
  • Catriona Frusciante
  • Chloe Hewitt
  • Mike Summers
  • Steven Harris
  • sue greenall
  • Sarah Canham
  • Gail A. Thornton
  • Russ J Graham
  • Mike Gogan
  • Phil senior
  • Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
  • Gary Pendlebury
  • Helen Christov
  • David Robbie
  • Charles Burgoyne
  • Ross Mowbray
  • Cyril Halls
  • Khalid Mahmood, Councillor
  • Dawn Rayner
  • Catherine McCabe
  • David Conway
  • Peter D Law-Jones
  • Christine Airey
  • Mike Airey
  • Simon Tarling ( rj )
  • bryan wyatt
  • Mary Cooper
  • Stuart Murray
  • Lawrence Rust
  • Oliver Phillips
  • Katherine McMahon
  • Philip Swan
  • Jessie Fenn
  • Chris Jones
  • Jane Holgate
  • Anthony Auguste
  • Sean Cashman Furber
  • andrew hobson
  • Denise Fenn
  • Susan Jordan
  • Jessica Richards
  • Allaeddin Twebti
  • Mr Andrew Michael Edwards
  • Adam Colley
  • Nicola Moore
  • C May
  • Stuart Reeve
  • Oliver Pescott
  • Paul Marchant
  • Johannes Hargreaves
  • Mrs Linda J Finch
  • William Edmondson
  • Angela McGrane
  • Tethys
  • Adrian Carswell
  • Nicholas Yates
  • Howard Kennedy
  • Sophia Coney
  • Neil Fuller
  • Aly Cato
  • Parvin Karim
  • Thomas Stacey
  • Daniel Hoey
  • Peter Mattsson
  • Chris Heatley
  • Sally Stanton
  • Fern Sage
  • Adam Draper
  • Andy Peters
  • William Nock
  • Cath Senker
  • Keith Standring
  • Richard Thanki
  • Lasse Gunnerud
  • Chris Ward
  • John Frankland
  • Piers Locke
  • Becky Leyland
  • Anthony Wiegold
  • Thomas Jeavons
  • Gaenor Bruce
  • Ronan Manly
  • John Syrett Franglen
  • Alan Lewis
  • Owen Merrick
  • Darren Ward
  • Joel Milner
  • Peter Booth
  • Abdul Salam
  • Benjamin Watson
  • Dave Stratford
  • Laura Hughes
  • James William DOUGLAS
  • David Hayton
  • David Williams
  • Paul Robins
  • Leonora Phillips
  • Andrew Phillips
  • Allan Pilkington
  • Nicholas Wilson
  • Martin Grimshaw
  • Leslie Barson
  • Fenwick Walker
  • Iain Lippitt
  • S.R. Velez-Moss
  • Roy Hall
  • Katy Pilkington
  • Ben Singer
  • Alan M Benzie
  • Judith Bland
  • Charlotte Dean
  • Susan Warren
  • carlos jose fabregas
  • Chris Murchison
  • Graham Forsyth
  • Chris Brody
  • neil wallworth
  • Caroline Watson
  • Mandy Clegg
  • Richard Thomas
  • Amanda Reeves
  • Graham Jones
  • chris gillham
  • Tahlia
  • Frank Squire
  • David Bramhall
  • Owen Williams
  • Anthony Short
  • Paul Fox
  • Shuri Morgan-Radford
  • Lorna Campbell
  • Alistair McDonald
  • simon coxall
  • Julie Roberts
  • Bob Boyd
  • Beth Currie
  • Gemma Scotcher
  • Jan Jesson
  • barry cook
  • Giselle Yeadon
  • David Payne
  • avtar singh
  • Frank Moreton
  • Melissa Breakspear
  • Calum Mackay
  • Simon Lynn
  • Wajahat Hussain
  • Mathew Staples
  • Simon Williams
  • Laura Younger
  • Julian Clemas-Howard
  • roger wilkinson
  • Richard jeffs
  • Nick Heppenstall
  • Jason Smith
  • jason gardiner
  • Raymond Howells.
  • Mark Chisholm
  • Craig Savage
  • Stephen Anthony Braithwaite
  • Bryan Evans
  • Paul Caselton
  • Sam Sloan
  • Simon Spoor
  • Michael Foxwell
  • Mark Bailey
  • Steve Skelton
  • Bev Woolmer
  • Stephen Sawiak
  • Kev Johnson
  • C Husbands
  • r.toms
  • Stephen Hill
  • Georgina Lansbury-Spray
  • Fergus Maitland
  • Terri Clements
  • chris johnston
  • Martin Russell
  • Bob Davies
  • Danny Edmunds
  • Stephanie Weston
  • Gary Foxcroft
  • Chris Harrison
  • Nick Garnett
  • Greg Wallace
  • Bobby C
  • Edward Saxton
  • David Fincham
  • kieren down
  • Graham Head
  • David Vellam
  • Graham Connor
  • Charles Crammond
  • Steve Barbera
  • Matthew Smith
  • Jem Taylor
  • Kate Gilby
  • carolyn travi
  • Daryl Morgan-Radford
  • Adam Pegley
  • Benjamin White
  • Ashley Dé
  • Ghazanfar "The Free Thinker" Ali
  • Oliver Chambers
  • Carl Sutton
  • Ewan Macdonald
  • Kate
  • Benjamin Naylor
  • Danny Burke
  • Jason Fearnley
  • Daniel Hewson
  • Nicola Collenette
  • Fiona McLean
  • Greig Hepson
  • Tristram Defries
  • Michael Hiddleston
  • Aditi Vira
  • Mark Rice
  • Chris Wilson
  • Liz Smale
  • Iqbal Mohammad
  • ian graham
  • Kaitlyn Harper-Smith
  • Kay Gedge
  • Helen Summers
  • Alan Harper-Smith
  • Malcolm McLachlan
  • Dave Phillips
  • Carolyn Jackson
  • Ewan Delany
  • Robert Parnham
  • Peter Hawkins
  • Ruth Young
  • Ray Harrowing
  • Keith Ward
  • mercy maponga
  • Yunus Yakoub Islam
  • sarah howard
  • Wayne Tritton
  • mark sadler
  • Gavin Dormand
  • David Bessant
  • Robert Glass
  • Richard Camilleri
  • marc sowden
  • Alan Michael Horne
  • Kosotie
  • andrew lysley
  • Simon Cooper
  • Greg Lovett
  • Dan Norona
  • Dylys Steele
  • Jan Flaherty
  • Bob Brecher
  • Huw Taylor
  • Felix Velarde
  • Hannah Gordon
  • Jeanette Harper
  • Doug Elsey
  • Mykal Riley
  • Jenny Hill
  • Simon Hughes MP
  • simon Harby
  • me
  • David Hooper
  • Jessica Burdett
  • Don Seal
  • Rashid kaapiet
  • Theresa White
  • Sho Botham
  • Josh Botham
  • Adrian Clapham
  • Neil Towler
  • Rebecca Spencer
  • John Devereux
  • Joe Abel
  • geraint grinter
  • Jim Kinnibrugh
  • Bethan Santi
  • Malcolm Couldridge
  • surrinder chera
  • Daisy
  • tara delaney
  • Farhad Saidieh
  • Adam Bushell
  • Sarah J Balfour
  • Stuart Jordan
  • Jonathan Scott
  • Matthew Waddington
  • Louis King
  • Vicky Stephens
  • Alex Farley
  • Peter Underwood
  • E. Martin
  • Helen Rogers
  • Laura Evans
  • Joanna Eckersley
  • Paul Le Boutillier
  • Bryn Parrott
  • Mary Sweeney
  • Gavin Park
  • Jack Woodwards
  • Luke Addison
  • Wendy McLoughlin
  • Wendy McLoughlin
  • Bev Allen
  • Genny Bove
  • Neville Riley
  • Patrick Dowson
  • Kirsten Hermolle
  • Matthew Taylor MP
  • Rupert Edwards
  • Carol Brockhurst
  • peter abraham
  • Michael Marsland
  • Andy Adcroft
  • Howard Clive Robinson
  • David Burke
  • Katherine Inzani
  • Michael Rumble
  • Geoff Childs
  • John Sargent
  • John Hackett
  • sian sullivan
  • Caro Swan
  • sam potts
  • Andrew Campbell
  • Marion Prideaux
  • Stewart Graham
  • Catherine Robinson
  • James Sims
  • sarah smith
  • Pav Akhtar, NUS Black Students' Officer
  • Mike Dales
  • Paul Mooney
  • Andrew Jones
  • Stephen Chipperfield
  • Angela Harbutt
  • Leanne Wood AM
  • priya shah
  • Adam Moore
  • Edmund Craske
  • Ian Lawton
  • Alyssa Milburn
  • Nick Hunt
  • bianca vidal
  • Kristian Garnett
  • Roger Hartley
  • Catriona Foster
  • Malcolm Coghill
  • Ruth Elliott
  • John Mulrenan
  • Garreth Rogers
  • Elizabeth Jamesson
  • Rachel McGowan
  • carol laidlaw
  • Cat Gedman
  • Andy Masters
  • Duncan Coutts
  • Philip Palmer
  • Natania Goldrich
  • Michael Dees
  • Rose Stanley
  • Siobhan O'Connor
  • shaun
  • s jay
  • Kim Kazee
  • Loz Thomas
  • Brenda Smith
  • Andrew J Linden
  • Charlie Marsham
  • Brian Wade
  • Andy Varley
  • Jason Reese
  • Tim Neale
  • martin dawson
  • Joanne Grant
  • Benjamin D. Chambers
  • Bethan Maeve Jenkins
  • Richard Bingham
  • ChezC
  • Kneale Faragher
  • lorely burt mp
  • trevor moyle
  • Daryl Lloyd
  • Nia Bowen
  • Kurt Bannister
  • jonathan patterson
  • Christian Thompson
  • s f jones
  • Jonathan Lawson
  • Mark Cooper
  • ballsballs
  • Steve O'Gorman
  • Andrew Armitage
  • James Greenhalgh
  • Alex Dobson
  • Cheryl Killen
  • aaron fallon
  • Disco_Destroyer
  • thom
  • Dean Southwick
  • Chris N
  • Ian Crawford
  • Matthew Edwards
  • A Morgan
  • Harmony Hutchby
  • Jackie
  • raina
  • Michael Mullaney
  • Stuart Jenkins
  • Luke S Wilkins
  • carly neill
  • Geoffrey Grey
  • Michael Grange
  • Sam Roberts
  • Oliver Johnson
  • Julia Kennedy
  • OverPoke
  • David Wall
  • terry sullivan
  • Bundy Riley
  • Thomas Carr
  • Paul Munro
  • Michael Foster
  • Jamaica Bastiras
  • Dan Barratt
  • Councillor Andrew Reeves
  • Phyllis Brockhurst
  • Nick Edwards
  • Daniel Rosser
  • corinne
  • Paul Schofield
  • Max Hogg
  • Simon Boice
  • Linda Laurenson
  • Nick Harvey MP
  • Peter Lapinskas
  • Iain M Rowe
  • James Eyre
  • caroline goring
  • Ian Morgan
  • Elaine North
  • Stephen Barnett
  • Lathe Biosas
  • Jonathan Kennedy
  • David Bridger
  • Jon Dixon
  • Patrick Ryan
  • rosie
  • Scott Donaldson
  • Joyce Ross
  • 76 people who did not want to give their names

View signup rate graph