REAL ID ACT:
"Effective May 11, 2008, Federal agencies cannot accept drivers' licenses or identification cards for official purposes, as defined herein, from States that have not been determined by DHS to be in compliance with the REAL ID Act unless a State has requested and obtained an extension of the compliance date from DHS. States seeking extensions must submit a request for an extension to DHS." Driver's licenses from states that have not agreed to Real ID mandates from the Department of Homeland Security, or which have not requested a deadline extension, can no longer be used to access "federal facilities. "An extension until December 2009 to begin planning and implementation has been granted to Virginia (DMV Commissioner D. B. Smit, January 29, 2008). There is, however, pending legislation Virginia SENATE BILL NO. 492 - that includes these words: "Virginia shall not comply with the unfunded mandates of the Real ID Act". VIRGINIA - State Information on Real ID Montana's governor has dubbed Real ID - - a "major threat" to the privacy and constitutional rights of state residents The data on your license or ID card will be able to be called-up by any federal or state agency, anywhere. And your information will be put in either a chip or unencrypted barcode on the back, making it easy for anyone to skim your personal information. "REAL ID isn't about national security. It isn't about illegal immigration. It isn't about identity fraud, or even cold medicine. It's about Washington politics. Federal bureaucrats want to coerce states like Virginia into building a multi-billion dollar system for identifying, tracking, and controlling law-abiding citizens." - Cato Institute, Rejecting National ID by Jim Harper (This article appeared in the American Spectator on February 7, 2008.)
• Administration Hints at Compromise on Standoff Over Driver's Licenses, AP - Saturday, March 22, 2008 A Contrast in Presidents:
Presidential Directives & Executive Orders Since Roosevelt: What We Choose To Ignore (video): A brief summary of presidential directives, executive orders, and congressionaly approved bills that were signed into law over the last 40 years. The Coming North American Union (NAU): 
• The Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America is a White House-led initiative among the United States and the two nations it borders – Canada and Mexico. "The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP),now housed in the NAFTA office of the U.S. Department of Commerce, was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing." (Quote taken from their Web site) Following the March 23, 2005, launch of the SPP, each nation established Security and Prosperity working groups to fulfill the vision of the North American Heads of State. Lou Dobbs (video): North American Union Orwellian Brave New World The North American Competitiveness Council (NACC) "under the title 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America: Progress,' was convened for the first time June 15, 2006, by Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce, with "virtually no mention in the mainstream media, reported by Jerome Corsi.
The Council is an "apparently extra-constitutional advisory group organized by the Department of Commerce (DOC) under the auspices" of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), Corsi wrote. • QUIETLY, QUIETLY BUILDING THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION - Those who do not get their news from the Internet remain in the dark about one of the biggest unfolding events of the present decade: the globalist social engineering of a North American Union. • Council on Foreign Relations:
Robert Pastor, a member of the CFR, intends to give away U.S. sovereignty to a newly forming North American Union exactly as he gave away the Panama Canal to Panama during Jimmy Carter’s presidency. Robert Pastor argued in a 2004 article in CFR’s Foreign Affairs, entitled “North America’s Second Decade,” that the United States would benefit by giving up U.S. national Sovereignty. “Countries are benefited,” he wrote, “when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete.”- Other members include Dick Chaney, Fred Thompson, Condeleezza Rice, Colin Powell, George Soros, Jimmy Carter, and many others. (More) What others have said . . . link "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams, 'Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials,' December 1770 If anything on this page is in error and not factual, other than the political satire, I will remove it. If there are credible arguments proving otherwise, I will include them. D. Shaw, March 17, 2008 |
