From the Publisher's Desk
October 2007
"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."
- Ayn Rand - WMail Issue #36.
Will you're DNA be required in order to travel?
The article. "Lower house of French parliament approves immigration bill"
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/09/20/europe/EU-GEN-France-Immigration.php
is very scary indeed. It is but a short step to 'mandatory' providing of DNA for one government
'privilege' or another. PT Shamrock's believes that this is in store
for all in the west sooner rather than later.
It hasn't been that long since passports were first required in most
instances for travel, circa 1914. The term 'passport' most probably
originates not from sea ports, but from medieval documents required to
pass through the gate ('porte') of city walls. In medieval Europe,
such documents could be issued to any traveler by local authorities
and generally contained a list of towns and cities through which the
holder was permitted to pass. This system continued in France, for
example, until the 1860s. During this time, passports were often not
required for travel to seaports, which were considered open trading
points, but were required to travel from them to inland cities. Early
passports often, but not always, contained a physical description of
the holder, with photographs being added only in the early decades of
the 20th century, as photography became cheaper and more widespread.
Before World War I, passports were not widely used for international
travel, and in most areas, few people had one. According to the
website for Passport Canada, "The rising popularity of rail travel in
the mid-19th century led to an explosion of tourism throughout Europe
and caused a complete breakdown in the European passport and visa
system. In answer to this crisis, France abolished passports and
visas in 1861. Other European countries followed suit, and by 1914,
passport requirements had been eliminated practically everywhere in
Europe."[1] Crossing a border was usually very easy, and no supporting
documentation or declarations were required. However, internal
passports were commonly required for travel within a handful of
countries, including the Ottoman Empire and tsarist Russia, where they
were commonly held documents.
During World War I, European governments had a greater interest in
preventing people with useful skills or potential manpower from
leaving, and keeping out spies or other security threats, so passports
were increasingly demanded at border crossings. After the war, the
new controls were not removed and became standard procedure, although
not without controversy. British tourists of the 1920s complained
about the new annoyances, and especially about the attached
photographs and physical descriptions, which led to a "nasty
dehumanization" in the words of one traveler.
Source -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passport
Back to DNA; it is our humble opinion that in the near future the
short step from DNA for immigrants applying to join relatives; to
tourist being required to provide their DNA before or upon arrival; then further demands for DNA in order to receive some
benefit from your government, is most likely forthcoming, sooner rather than later.
This has been government modus operandi for decades now and we don't
see any difference here. The names may change, the reasons
for such demands may differ, but the bottom line is your ass and
privacy is on the line.
At the end of the day your DNA is the ultimate identifier and the
Terrocrats know it. The bottom line is what are you going to do about it?
See you next issue!
PT Shamrock
To access our past missives just click here.
Click here to subscribe to our FREE privacy newsletter, PTBuzz. |
