Digital ID's for everyone

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So, by default and id2020's publishing or expressiom of "YES, that there is a plan or intent for Digital IDs for everyone on the planet"
.

Yes, that's what their website says.

However, what it means and what you think it means are two different things.
You make many other claims that aren't supported by the one statement. They aren't even connected to that statement.

For example, you keep saying that this digital id will take the form of a tattoo that is implanted at a non existent vaccine a child receives at birth.
That statement and that website indicate no such thing.

You are ignoring the points we've made against your conspiracy theory and are now clinging to this one statement while also ignoring our points about it and your misinterpretation of that statement.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

but THE ACTUAL TOPIC OF THE THREAD is.

Q. Digital ID's for everyone?

We are on the conspiracy forums, it's about the conspiracy version of digital ID, specifically your personal theory on it. It's a step into a world of biblical prophecies, where Bill Gates is a comic-book villain and there's a never ending diabolical plan to control human beings via technological implants and marks

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

"YES, that there is a plan or intent for Digital IDs for everyone on the planet"

Is there is a project which wants to create some sort of universal digital ID for people? yes

Is there a project prophesized by the Bible that seek to forcibly vaccinate people with tracking devices? no

You keep trying to ask the first in order to take steps to imply the latter (or your personal variant of it)

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Is there is a project which wants to create some sort of universal digital ID for people? yes {Dohnjoe}

It took a while (long while), but at last we can for once agree now, yes indeed there is a project (id2020) and it's direct partners/subsidiarys/associations/projects to create DigitalIDs for everyone.
Next, we have to consider

i). How - this will practically be acheived.

For that, all really that we can reference is this 'actual evidence of workings' and projects (including proof of concept and pilot schemes - from the id2020 group and its partners. (not the skygods/aliens/ufos that so many seek so desperately to reference). Also while it's foundation uses technology,

It does 'not' use any RFID, nor microchips, this is a clear falsehood pushed for fake drama and misdirection. Simple QRCodes/QDTs btw, are not 'chips'.

www.id2020.org/digital-identity
Early Projects (among many):
https://www.irespond.org/
https://everest.org/ (fiscal transacational use)
Mypass : https://medium.com/id2020/welcome-the-city-of-austin-to-the-id2020-alliance-76b0ebe6776

ii) Who - The www.id2020.org group is simply massive, not just in terms of funding, partners and association but also the many various pilot projects in existance. It's main partners are all either technology or vaccine based groups.

ii) What - this universal DigitalID will look like, and how it will function when realised with new innovative persistant technology is it's foundation.

iii) When - They've already stated 1.5bn by 2030, the rest to presume is after this, however with COVID19, the opportunity to increase or speed this target timeline may well increase.

iv) Where - Developing world initially (for the 1,100,000,000+), but the theme is Universal, so by nature is a global project. Already pilot scheme are in Pakistan https://www.biometricupdate.com/201909/id2020-and-partners-launch-program-to-provide-digital-id-with-vaccines

v) Why - There are many, many reason for this project, some good, some debatable.

CT1 : While the concept of a 'push towards a new DigitalID for everyone on the planet' might be considered a conspiracy to some, it's now more difficult to prove that it's not. It's a very clear objective. Thus: True (solved).

CT2 : After this, the deeper, more speculative theory is about the form of this new unique DigitalID. All indications is that is going to be a peice of digitised data, then, combined with a unique data string pair. (like a line of code, or unique numeral identifier, much like a serial number). Then blockchain (Azure) cloud-based encrypted

'This single universal digital key (per person), will work (as shown already) and best as a presented, when requested as a fairly simple 'data mark'.

CT3 : 'On balance will this DigitalID, be a force for good, or bad'

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

CT3 : 'On balance will this DigitalID, be a force for good, or bad'

Well, what is your answer? and what is the conspiracy exactly?

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Well, what is your answer? and what is the conspiracy exactly?

The conspiracy is multi-fold, 3-part.

i) Very, very, very few people are even slightly "aware" of the (<10-15yr) program to push DigitalIDs to everyone on the planet, the very topic is met with talk of conspiracy. Well.... that is until it's understood.

ii) The actual "form" of this new unique DigitalID hasn't been considered.

Indeed there is an actual full agenda of misdirection present. It's been seen here, and (in/due to) the media i.e. constant referencing to microchips, sci-fi even aliens, trump and skygods, the last one may interesting 'theory wise', but without any evidence nor real importance, unlike the program itself.

The already demonstrated DigitalIDs methodology in itself do not use microchips, never has, really don't need to.

iii). The DigitalID for everyone in the various programs are constantly refered to as "good" technology. Only good end results are shown. At no time are any consequences even hinted to. Only good things are to be expected.

In reality when we look at the examples of any significant recent mass identifers of people in a wholesale manner, there are many issues.

The biggest new story in last 10yrs was with US data use, in last 5yrs it was HongKong, China, the entre Arab Spring event (they all started out as technological "great/good aids to assist democracy"), check that now. Last year it was FRS, SanFran (the innovator area of such systems) actually banned it city-wide.

Currently it's the COVID tracing apps, which is in itself very 'soft'. Yet the EU has already rejected Apple/Googles (very simple API) on privacy grounds. Even if it ran, it can't ever be reliable, nor persistant. This will be shelved within the year anyway. Next most immediate, will be western states push back of Huawei(China's) next 'good' generation of networks.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

The conspiracy is multi-fold, 3-part.

i) Very, very, very few people are even slightly "aware" of the (<10-15yr) program to push DigitalIDs to everyone on the planet, the very topic is met with talk of conspiracy. Well.... that is until it's understood.

ii) The actual "form" of this new unique DigitalID hasn't been considered.

Indeed there is an actual full agenda of misdirection present. It's been seen here, and (in/due to) the media i.e. constant referencing to microchips, sci-fi even aliens, trump and skygods, the last one may interesting 'theory wise', but without any evidence nor real importance, unlike the program itself.
The already demonstrated DigitalIDs methodology in itself do not use microchips, never has, really don't need to.
iii). The DigitalID for everyone in the various programs are constantly refered to as "good" technology. Only good end results are shown. At no time are any consequences even hinted to. Only good things are to be expected.

In reality when we look at the examples of any significant recent mass identifers of people in a wholesale manner, there are many issues.

The biggest new story in last 10yrs was with US data use, in last 5yrs it was HongKong, China, the entre Arab Spring event (they all started out as technological "great/good aids to assist democracy"), check that now. Last year it was FRS, SanFran (the innovator area of such systems) actually banned it city-wide.

Currently it's the COVID tracing apps, which is in itself very 'soft'. Yet the EU has already rejected Apple/Googles (very simple API) on privacy grounds. Even if it ran, it can't ever be reliable, nor persistant. This will be shelved within the year anyway. Next most immediate, will be western states push back of Huawei(China's) next 'good' generation of networks.

This is just an Alex Jones style page of waffle

Can you please just tell us what the conspiracy is, with specifics.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

....Alex Jones....

This is a perfect example of the exact point made in ii). (above)

This is what is known as 'childish deflection and misdirection'.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Can you please just tell us what the conspiracy is, with specifics.

Sure can, please, see the detailed specifics below in case you missed it.

The conspiracy of Digital ID's for everybody, is multi-fold (3-part)

i) Very, very, very few people are even slightly "aware" (awareness) of the (<10-15yr) program to push DigitalIDs to everyone on the planet, the very topic is met with talk of conspiracy. Well.... that is until it's understood.

ii) The actual "form" (form or type) of this new unique DigitalID hasn't been considered.

Indeed there is an actual full agenda of misdirection present (see above from JoeDoe). It's been seen here, and (in/due to) the media i.e. constant referencing to microchips, sci-fi even aliens, trump, Alex Jones, and skygods, the last one may interesting 'theory wise', but without any evidence nor real importance, unlike the program itself.

The already demonstrated DigitalIDs methodology in itself do not use microchips, never has, really don't need to.

iii). The DigitalID for everyone in the various programs are constantly refered to as "good" (assumption of goodness) technology. Only good end results are shown. At no time are any consequences even hinted to. Only good things are to be expected.

In reality when we look at the examples of any significant recent mass identifers of people in a wholesale manner, there are many issues.

The biggest new story in last 10yrs was with US data use, in last 5yrs it was HongKong, China, the entre Arab Spring event (they all started out as technological "great/good aids to assist democracy"), check that now. Last year it was FRS, SanFran (the innovator area of such systems) actually banned it city-wide.

Currently it's the COVID tracing apps, which is in itself very 'soft'. Yet the EU has already rejected Apple/Googles (very simple API) on privacy grounds. Even if it ran, it can't ever be reliable, nor persistant. This will be shelved within the year anyway. Next most immediate, will be western states push back of Huawei(China's) next 'good' generation of networks.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

It took a while (long while), but at last we can for once agree now, yes indeed there is a project (id2020) and it's direct partners/subsidiarys/associations/projects to create DigitalIDs for everyone.

That's not exactly what we agree with as you are attaching some very heavy and silly implications to this statement.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

'This single universal digital key (per person), will work (as shown already) and best as a presented, when requested as a fairly simple 'data mark'.

And this is something you keep insisting and trying to connect to various statements when it isn't true.
For example, no where on ID2020's website does it say anything of the sort.
Not once does it mention a "data mark". It does not mention any of the technologies you try to insinuate that it's involved with. It does not talk about or imply any of the things you claim about it's use beyond being an id.

And again, you are ignoring what the website actually does say.
It's a digital(ie. not physical) biometric (ie. uses biometrics) lifelong (the digital id will last for life, not a physical thing that will last for that long) for of id to ensure consistency of medical treatments

Again, you are insisting on the idea of it being a "mark" because you believe in biblical prophesy which isn't even correct according to yourself.
If this is not the case, then simply state that you don't believe the bible made this prophesy. Otherwise, we will continue to assume this is true.

I don't understand however why you keep trying to avoid this fact. You keep dancing around the subject and even try to cover up where you get some of your information. (for example when you didn't post a direct link to your source "Saved Magazine".)
If you have to keep doing this, why do you still think your conspiracy theory is true?

King Mob wrote: »

That's not exactly what we agree with as you are attaching some very heavy and silly implications to this statement.

So you are suggesting a conspiracy whereby the is2020.org statement to that effect is untrue, have you asked them why the even said such a thing, on both their main site, and one of their main live projects?

King Mob wrote: »

And this is something you keep insisting and trying to connect to various statements when it isn't true. For example, no where on ID2020's website does it say anything of the sort. Not once does it mention a "data mark". It does not mention any of the technologies you try to insinuate that it's involved with. It does not talk about or imply any of the things you claim about it's use beyond being an id. And again, you are ignoring what the website actually does say. It's a digital(ie. not physical) biometric (ie. uses biometrics) lifelong (the digital id will last for life, not a physical thing that will last for that long) for of id to ensure consistency of medical treatments Again, you are insisting on the idea of it being a "mark" because you believe in biblical prophesy which isn't even correct according to yourself. If this is not the case, then simply state that you don't believe the bible made this prophesy. Otherwise, we will continue to assume this is true. I don't understand however why you keep trying to avoid this fact. You keep dancing around the subject and even try to cover up where you get some of your information. (for example when you didn't post a direct link to your source "Saved Magazine".) If you have to keep doing this, why do you still think your conspiracy theory is true?

Let's be honest now, this 'really' is a load of waffle (nevermind the loaded misdirection, as already highlighted).

Can you please just tell us what your point is (let's start one singular point, at a time) to avoid such word-waffle from ever recurring.

Ask one question (that means one question mark at the end of one sentance), and yes, get one reply to it.
Any misdirection however (ufos etc) won't be responded to.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So you are suggesting a conspiracy whereby the is2020.org statement to that effect is untrue

That's not what I'm saying. You are once again misrepresenting me.

I don't think Id2020's statement is false.
I believe your interpretation of it is false. I believe the made disparate connections you make to that statement are false.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Let's be honest now, this 'really' is a load of waffle (nevermind the loaded misdirection, as already highlighted).

Can you please just tell us what your point is (let's start one singular point, at a time) to avoid such word-waffle from ever recurring.

I thought my point was very clear.
You are attributing many things to people that aren't true, making connections that aren't actually there and you're making claims that aren't true.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Ask one question (that means one question mark at the end of one sentance), and yes, get one reply to it.
Any misdirection however (ufos etc) won't be responded to.

It's not misdirection. I'm specifically addressing the root of your conspiracy theory. You're trying to pass it off as "misdirection" because you don't want to be direct and honest about the root of your conspiracy theory.
I think this is because you know that it would turn many people off your ideas.

What I don't understand is why you still maintain your belief when you have to be so deceptive about it.

Again, if this isn't the case, all you need do is state that you don't believe the bible made a prophesy.

I suppose my question is: "why did you remove all the paragraph breaks in my quote?"

King Mob wrote: »

That's not what I'm saying.

Either you understand the meaning of the singular concept which form the topic of this forum, or you don't.
....Or you're in the wrong thread, or misbehaving.

King Mob wrote: »

I don't think Id2020's statement is false.
I believe your interpretation of it is false.

Read the statement, read their website then read their projects (the only basis of 'evidence at hand')
That's all there is available or/and to consider for the time being.

Not your own desperate and repeated proven comedic misdirection:
ufos/books/tvshows/ufos/scifi/moon/clouds/alexjones etc etc,
you are actually attributing silly connections and making silly claims or associations that simply are not true.

I believe both your interpretation or words, and your non-understanding, or even lack of self-education of the pool of evidence of id2020.org work.
Are the basis, foundation and projection of your deliberate twin falsehoods. This is all very sinister and deceptive.

again.... one question at a time.
Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?

Their own current live iRespond project:

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Either you understand the meaning of the singular concept which form the topic of this forum, or you don't.
....Or you're in the wrong thread, or misbehaving.

Read the statement, read their website then read their projects (the only basis of 'evidence at hand')

But you see, I have read the statement and it doesn't match with your other claims. Like how their statement and website says nothing about their ID being a mark of any kind.

I've also read what you claim to be "their" projects. You have said many things that aren't true. Like for instance that one group was approached by Bill Gates when that never happened.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Not your own desperate and repeated proven comedic misdirection:
ufos/books/tvshows/ufos/scifi/moon/clouds/alexjones etc etc,
you are actually attributing silly connections and making silly claims or associations that simply are not true.

Ok, so if you are saying that it is misdirection, then does this mean that you don't believe the biblical prophesy and that your previous posts claiming that you did believe were wrong?

You keep saying it's misdirection, but you can't explain why. You are labeling it "misdirection" in a very silly attempt to avoid the issue. It's not fooling anyone.
It's a bit strange that you think it might.

Again, it would be easily cleared up if you would just directly address it.
But you won't.
We all know why.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

again.... one question at a time.
Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?

And I've answered this several times very directly.
What you take this statement to mean doesn't match up with reality.

For example, you believe that this statement refers to the idea of a physical mark of some kind.
To that, my answer is no.

You also believe that this "concerted push" is some form of global conspiracy for the purpose of controlling people.
To that, my answer is also no.

Again, you are not accurately representing and interpreting that statement, so I can't really answer with a simple yes or no.

King Mob wrote: »

But you see, I have read the statement and it doesn't match with your other claims. Like how their statement and website says nothing about their ID being a mark of any kind.

The statement is exactly as it reads. You're simply in denial.

The majority of their projects use a QRCode/tag (a mark) for Digital ID.

King Mob wrote: »

Like for instance that one group was approached by Bill Gates when that never happened.

You're trying to dissassociate Bill Gates from the Bill Gates Foundation? Very sad and embarissing for you.
https://news.rice.edu/2019/12/18/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record/

“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, ‘Hey, we have a real problem — knowing who’s vaccinated,’” said McHugh

King Mob wrote: »

Ok, so if you are saying that it is misdirection, then does this mean that you don't believe the biblical prophesy...

Yes it is misdirection, much like your stuff about clouds/alexjones/aliens/moon...

Whatever it says eleswhere isn't 'evidence based', so a meaningless distraction.

id2020.org and it's projects are the only evidence at hand to consider.

Why not just stick with the facts and stick with the evidence?

A sinister sci-fi agenda perhaps...

King Mob wrote: »

What you take this statement to mean doesn't match up with reality.

This is meaninless twaddle.

The statement is made of words, to form a sentence 'of meaning' (and not my meaning) but it's own natural meaning, and re-referenced by their own projects.

You can't process a simple sentance that id2020 have published?

King Mob wrote: »

For example, you believe that this statement refers to the idea of a physical mark of some kind. To that, my answer is no.

What twisted interpretation is this?

They demonstrate this used in their many projects is as a QRcode visual mark or pattern. Any digital data string can be used for this. If this isn't a mark of any kind, get your eyes fixed, pronto!

King Mob wrote: »

You also believe that this "concerted push" is some form of global conspiracy for the purpose of *controlling* people. To that, my answer is also no.

Nobody said anything about control, only you.

But why not anyway, show an example of a concerted push for a global DigitalID didn't have a level of control. You can't as it hasn't been done before at this scale. We can look at other smaller examples the 1m locked up in China however, that have to scan QR Codes to enter thier homes. Or the many forced to use their face to unlock their phone there also.

King Mob wrote: »

"Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" Isn't really a sentence.

Deliberate avoidance of a simply abbreviated question, very sad.

King Mob wrote: »

"Will they supply Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" No.

Well 1.1bn to start with by 2030 (or before) is their exact manifesto.
Their other project clearly states for 'everyone on the planet'.

King Mob wrote: »

"Will they *force* Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" No.

Again, this is your misdirection and fake news.

That was never in question here.

A 'push towards' is 'not' a 'forced into' action.

King Mob wrote: »

"There is .... push Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" No.

Yes, 1.1bn to start with by 2030 (or before) is their manifesto.
Their other project states for 'everyone on the planet'.
It's clearly a global exercise.

King Mob wrote: »

"Do they believe that there should be a push to supply Digital ID for everybody? Y/N?" Yes, but not for your definition for "digital ID".

So, YES, you say there is a "push to provide a Digital ID to everyone".

www.id2020.org/digital-identity
And by their definition (by their works and examples), not mine

We can only look at the 'evidence of workings' of 'their' own, many projects:

Early Projects (among many):
https://www.irespond.org/
https://everest.org/ (fiscal transacational use)
Mypass : https://medium.com/id2020/welcome-th...ce-76b0ebe6776
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/id2020-alliance-launches-digital-id-program-with-government-of-bangladesh-and-gavi-announces-new-partners-at-annual-summit-300921926.html

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

The statement is exactly as it reads. You're simply in denial.

The majority of their projects use a QRCode/tag (a mark) for Digital ID.

But you haven't show that it is their projects. You've made connections there that don't exist.
And then when you extrapolate further, a QR code becomes a physical tattoo, which again, is not stated anywhere in the ID 2020 site or statement.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

You're trying to dissassociate Bill Gates from the Bill Gates Foundation? Very sad and embarissing for you.

Nope. You are again misrepresenting me because you can't honestly address the point.
You claim that they were approached by Bill Gates and funded by him.
This is not what that article said.
You did not accurately report what was in the article.
I believe this is because you got the information not from the article, but from places like "Saved Magazine".

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Yes it is misdirection, much like your stuff about clouds/alexjones/aliens/moon...

I never mentioned any of those things. Why are you misrepresenting me?

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Whatever it says eleswhere isn't 'evidence based', so a meaningless distraction.

Ok. So to confirm you are now stating that the bible's prophesy isn't true and it doesn't at all factor into the beliefs you have about this ID issue.
Again, if you ignore this point, I will continue with the assumption that you do believe that it's a biblical prophesy.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

This is meaninless twaddle.

The statement is made of words, to form a sentence 'of meaning' (and not my meaning) but it's own natural meaning, and re-referenced by their own projects.

You can't process a simple sentance that id2020 have published?

Yes, but you're the one who's changing it's meaning to mean something it doesn't.

Again, you are saying that they are admitting to this "push" as if it's ongoing.
Yet it says "now is the time" which, using the natural meaning of the term, implies this push is yet to happen and they are urging people to do it.
You often leave that part out of the quote for obvious reasons.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

What twisted interpretation is this?

They demonstrate this used in their many projects is as a QRcode visual mark or pattern. Any digital data string can be used for this. If this isn't a mark of any kind, get your eyes fixed, pronto!

No, you claim that it's used in their projects, but you haven't shown this.
You make connections that aren't there and often don't tell the truth about what's in articles.

Secondly, it's not really a "mark" if it's on your phone.
Thirdly, the QR code is always refered to as the method of accessing the digital id. It's not the id itself. That's the distinction you are misunderstanding.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Nobody said anything about control, only you.

But why not anyway, show an example of a concerted push for a global DigitalID didn't have a level of control. You can't as it hasn't been done before at this scale. We can look at other smaller examples the 1m locked up in China however, that have to scan QR Codes to enter thier homes. Or the many forced to use their face to unlock their phone there also.

Lol...:rolleyes:

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Deliberate avoidance of a simply abbreviated question, very sad.

But I directly answered your question in many ways in clear terms.

It's a bit strange for you to be moaning about ignored questions though...

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Again, this is your misdirection and fake news.

We're getting very Trumpian here...

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So, YES, you say there is a "push to provide a Digital ID to everyone".

Again, you're misrepresenting me. I made a full statement there, and to say that I agree with you on the matter is dishonest.

Not only that, it kind of shows your previous statement that I did not answer your question to be a bit of a lie...

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Early Projects (among many):
https://www.irespond.org/

And just to highlight some the points I made about you and the links you post:
https://www.irespond.org/our-solution/

The Biometric Private Key
The iRespond digital identity solution relies on the latest biometrics, currently focusing on iris scans, which have been proven to be the most accurate, unique and reliable means to biometrically identify individuals.

Unlike other iris-scanning techniques, iRespond deconstructs the iris into a unique template that can’t be forged or duplicated. The template in turn is paired with a 12-digit string of randomly generated numbers forming a unique numeric ID (UNiD).

Here's a happy little picture of them using the technology:

King Mob wrote: »

Here's a happy little picture of them using [one optional part] the technology:

This is just one of x16 biometric 'measurements'. Any/all available personal data such as mobile numbers, addresses are also seeked. In itself it's meaningless. All this compiled data collection requires digitisation.

Even then, this part is one 'part' of the 'pair'.

The other *neccessary* item to make the secure blockchain DigitalID 'PAIR' is the 'UnID' (much like a serial number). This is the basis of the technology, which produces the end-user technology, the Azure blockchain digital token, in most cases is presented visually or scanable as a QRCode for service access.

This is the case in Kenya where another project uses the QRCode mark for digital fiscal wallets in another pilot called gravity.earth (gravity cloud platform). The QRcode is used along with a 'voice 1:1 biometric", and uses the 'UniD' PAIR to complete the final authentication (eye scans are not used at any stage).

Everest (https://everest.org/) use a face (photo), and all/any paper/card documentation, and requests for age, address, gender, option of further biometrics ALL as one part, before being compiled and 'digitised' to code. Then the UniD is added to make the PAIR, for final creation for their own EverID (DigitalID), which is actually a full transactional (digital wallet) tracking platform in itself.

In another case in over in Texas the 'My.Pass' the only biometrics taken from their target homeless group are i) fingerprinting and ii) complete facial scans. Also added is personal data such as paper/cards ID, or mobile numbers, before digitisation. Then the 'UniD' PAIR is added to create, again the new DigitalID (eye scans are not used at any stage).

Many other pilot projects exist, you should read up.
There is even direct work with the state of Bangladesh to create DigitalIDs at birth or vaccine point.

Meanwhile all you additional previous claims have been debunked, as per previous page.
Do educate yourself on the various programs and pilot technologies, next time.

You agreed with the id2020.org statement (below) surrounding the push for Digital ID for everybody, then later backtracked, and claimed it wasn't their own statement of intent https://id2020.org/digital-identity (bottom of page)

???Strange.

Answer the question, Y/N?
Stop your clear scared misdirection (trump, skygods etc).

Q. Is there "a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone?"

Also suggested in their iRespond:

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Here's a happy little picture of them using [one optional part] the technology:

So not only are you misrepresenting my statement and adding in meaning I did not write nor intend you are directly misprepresenting the information contained in your own link.

That isn't "one optional part of the technology."
It is the technology.

The Biometric Private Key
The iRespond digital identity solution relies on the latest biometrics, currently focusing on iris scans,

"Relies on" does not me "an optional part of"...

There's also this statement that you've contradicted many many times and yet consistantly failed to quote it along with the other quotes you pulled from that site:

which have been proven to be the most accurate, unique and reliable means to biometrically identify individuals.

Do you disagree with this statement?

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

You agreed with the id2020.org statement (below) surrounding the push for Digital ID for everybody, then later backtracked, and claimed it wasn't their own statement of intent https://id2020.org/digital-identity (bottom of page)

Again, misrepresentation despite me being very clear.
I'm not disagreeing with what ID2020. I never had. I have not backtracked on anything.
What my actual position is: you are misrepresenting what that statement means.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Answer the question, Y/N?
Stop your clear scared misdirection (trump, skygods etc).

Q. Is there "a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone?"

Again, I've answered this question many times.
For what you incorrectly believe this statement means, my answer is no.

For that the statement actually means, my answer is "that's what ID2020 believes."

Again, you demanding answers when you refuse to answer ones directly is very hypocritical and funny.

King Mob wrote: »

That isn't "one optional part of the technology." It is the technology.

So Very Incorrect and misinformed.

It's only a (current) measurement 'method', as a 'part item' in one project example.

Various other methods (x16 biometrics) can also easily be used in place of an iris if desired. It can even rely on the digitisation of paper documents.
This is proven already.

In Texas they use only Face and fingerprint scans (nothing else for the biometric data collection stage), they also do use document digitisation. Before the process of creating a DigitalID commences (UnID, Blockchain etc) Mypass : https://medium.com/id2020/welcome-th...ce-76b0ebe6776

In Kenya they use 'Voice metrics' as the biometric measurement item, for digitisation. https://everest.org/ (fiscal transacational use) Indeed they can also the digitisation of any/all available documents and 3rd party data. Before the process of creating a DigitalID commences.

Without the UniD as part as the PAIR there simply is 'no DigitalID created' which can meet or be usable on their protocol. The data collection part can really be anything, even name and dob can work as starting source. Hence why the very basis of their platform is ideal, to start the ID process, for someone without any posessions, in a remote field, with no electric, no facilities outside of a single mobile phone.

Without the UnID part it cannot function.
Without e.g. Iris can, it CAN function (any other digitised data can be used).

..Before finally the data PAIRING can avail of Azure cloud upload and blockchain, to create the final usable secure encrypted digital key.

In most of their cases, this final key (DigitalID) is presented as QR Codes.
Read the links, watch the promo videos showing the QR code held up on a smartphone, download the PDF all available from the links above, before mindlessly commenting again.

King Mob wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with what ID2020. I never had.

Fine. This is 'their' (not mine) statement of intent.
Drink it up, soak it in.

There is a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone
www.id2020.org/digital-identity

One of 'their' (again, not mine) many projects clarifies this further.

Digital IDs for everyone on the planet.
https://www.irespond.org/our-solution/

The next question is how this will work and what form it will take.
The only evidence to consider is ('their') works and ('their') projects.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Sure can, please, see the detailed specifics below in case you missed it.

Nope it was complete waffle and whataboutery. Explain what the conspiracy is simply..

For example; "In 1969 man didn't land on the moon, the US faked it, it was shot in a studio."

It's quite straightforward and easy to do. Moon landing hoaxers and flat earthers can do it, I am fairly sure you can manage..

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Nope it was complete waffle and whataboutery. Explain what the conspiracy is simply..

For example; "In 1969 man didn't land on the moon, the US faked it, it was shot in a studio."

It's quite straightforward and easy to do. Moon landing hoaxers and flat earthers can do it, I am fairly sure you can manage..

He explained for two weeks and you still asking him what is all about?

Gates funded a Vaccine digital marker tattoo study. Which means he liked the idea!
Microsoft ( is Gates company) he's one founder of the company and they've signed up to vaccine ID implementation.
Gates is involved in both, then he's not just focused on one way to ID people.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Explain what the conspiracy is simply..

This is simple, do try to keep up, and read the previous page post (#397) which explains it clearly in precise detail, even for simples.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113328764&postcount=397

If you wish to have any credibity whatsoever (unlikely due to the agenda or practice of active diversion and deflection), you'll quit the flat-earth (FYI: the earth is a round sphere) type nonsense also, like... lol! and also, wft?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113328764&postcount=397

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So Very Incorrect and misinformed.

You keep saying I'm incorrect and misinformed, then you ignore all the points I make including the ones where i point out where you make incorrect statements.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

It's only a (current) measurement 'method', as a 'part item' in one project example.

But as your link says:

[Iris recognition has] been proven to be the most accurate, unique and reliable means to biometrically identify individuals.

Since this is the case, then why would they be persuing other methods?
Why would they want to use a physical mark which would not be more accurate unique or reliable?

Again, you are assuming that the UNiD Has to be some kind of physical mark, but none of your links or sources actually say that.
It's simply a number assigned to you in a database. That's all. The QR codes etc are just another way of identifying that number.
But as the links your posted yourself say, the most accurate, secure and reliable way to identify some one is with an iris scan.
It also had the benefit of hitting all the other points you claim they want. Unlike a physical mark on a phone or a body, it's permanent and not easily removable or lost. It's impossible to fake or hack. It's actually biometric. And it's actually birth to death.

Again, this is all based on the information provided in your links.
Have you not read them?

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Fine. This is 'their' (not mine) statement of intent.
Drink it up, soak it in.

There is a unique convergence of trends to provide an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone
www.id2020.org/digital-identity

Yes, and as I said, you are misrepresenting what that statement means. Possible on purpose, possibly not.
For example, the natural language of the statement seems to say that the push hasn't happened yet and these guys just think the push is a good idea.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

One of 'their' (again, not mine) many projects clarifies this further.

Digital IDs for everyone on the planet.
https://www.irespond.org/our-solution/

Yup.
And that project uses iris scans, something which you rejected as impossible at the start of the thread and dismissed as silly.
It's a project that does not involve a mark on the persons body.
It's a project that does not involve controlling what people buy or sell.
It's a project that is not forced on anyone.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

The only evidence to consider is ('their') works and ('their') projects.

Lol "their works"?
That sounds awfully biblical....

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Gates funded a Vaccine digital marker tattoo study. Which means he liked the idea!

That's not true though...

King Mob wrote: »

That's not true though...

He did not fund the study the poster linked to

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

He did not fund the study the poster linked to

No. The poster claimed that, but the link that he believed said this actually said no such thing.

The only other reference to this was a picture of a google search that pointed to "Saved Magazine" which is a conservative christian conspiracy magazine that promotes ideas like chemtrails.
Thus it is not trustworthy.

Did you not check up on that claim?

King Mob wrote: »

No. The poster claimed that, but the link that he believed said this actually said no such thing.

The only other reference to this was a picture of a google search that pointed to "Saved Magazine" which is a conservative christian conspiracy magazine that promotes ideas like chemtrails.
Thus it is not trustworthy.

Did you not check up on that claim?

Yes he funded a study into digital marking. Look below the picture in black (quantum dots) they mention Bill Gates foundation backed it. I have only looked at two claims made by the poster. It not a topic i have done lot of research, so i leave it with you guys.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/invisible-ink-could-reveal-whether-kids-have-been-vaccinated/

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Yes he funded a study into digital marking. Look below the picture in black (quantum dots) they mention Bill Gates foundation backed it. I have only looked at two claims made by the poster. It not a topic i have done lot of research, so i leave it with you guys.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/invisible-ink-could-reveal-whether-kids-have-been-vaccinated/

Yes, and Bill Gate's foundation is not Bill Gates.