The very premise of Aadhar is flawed.

The very premise of Aadhar is flawed.

Its a certification that those who claim to think on behalf of India or its underprivileged understand it so differently from the beneficiaries they think of.

In a nutshell, Aadhar will not bring about any of the benefits that are intended for its intended beneficiaries. Because that will be solving a problem of governance by adding another layer that is imaginary and unnecessary.

To call it "technological leadership" is as removed from reality as calling a reader a writer of the book. At best it will mean that we can take a technology and ram it down the throat of the poor while other nations with stronger democratic roots and respect for citizens have not been able to do so for reasons of building consensus.

"Aadhar" is like dropping a car by helicopter in a village where there is no road and hope every villager can reach wherever they may want to go.

For anyone willing to think, Aadhar is a reflection of the huge disconnect that India has from both the world of the under privileged and the rest of the world.

Please think through before supporting UID/ Aadhaar, so you do not regret your decision.

James Madison

Emphasising the need for separation of powers, James Madison bluntly observed in his essay, Federalist 51. "Because men are not angels," they need government to prevent them, by force when necessary, from invading the lives, property, and liberty of their fellow citizens. He also noted that the same non-angelic men can wield the government’s coercive machinery to use it tyrannically—even in a democracy.

"I don't agree to Nandan Nilekeni and his madcap (UID) scheme which he is trying to promote," Senior BJP Leader Jaswant Singh, Sept 2012

Search This Blog

Loading...

Sunday, January 1, 2012

2163 - The biometrics bag no longer contains the cat by David Moss


Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 11:18:05 -0000
Subject: The biometrics bag no longer contains the cat

A public servant, Brodie Clark was suspended on 2 November 2011 from his job as Head of the UK Border Force – 20,000 officers whose job it is to secure the border.

He was suspended principally for halting biometric fingerprint checks at the border when there was a danger of crowds of incoming travellers getting out of control.

The Home Affairs Committee have taken evidence from everyone connected with this suspension.

In a six-minute passage of his evidence, between 12:18 and 12:24, Brodie Clark explained just how useful biometric fingerprint checks are: they are the least reliable of the nine checks made, the ninth and bottom priority, he approved of halting the checks, if any check has to be dropped it is "very sensible" to drop the fingerprint checks.

Link to Home Affairs Committee evidence session:

The HTML below can be embedded in a web page. It works in the UK. It may or may not work abroad:

Not the testimony the biometrics lobby wanted.

Politicians have told us for 10 years since 9/11 that our safety depends on biometrics. The media believe them. The public believe them.

But what do politicians, the media and the public know about the technology? Nothing.

Unlike the politicians, the media and the public, Brodie Clark's staff actually have to use this technology, they have first hand experience. And they're clearly not impressed.

What with the planned public expenditure cuts in the UK, the idea is to make several thousand members of the Border Force redundant and replace them with automated biometrics checks. So much for securing the border.

Brodie Clark's testimony is a new year's present to UK taxpayers. It may help to stop the Executive from wasting any more of our money on defective biometrics technology. And it may force them to concentrate on sensible measures to defend the border.

The taxpayers in other countries may also appreciate his testimony. Please bring it to the attention of your readers and of other campaigners.

Best wishes
David Moss
( David Moss - UK Say No to ID <bcsl@blueyonder.co.uk> )

----------