Say NO to Digital ID U.K.

[norman]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=micghoFaCbA

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=io-ZYVeYjqk

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=IKf8t4MoueM

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=waTSgPf_cBs

[Tintin]

Dynamic Pricing models tied to Digital ID: another aspect to make folks aware of should this centralised tokenisation ever happen; it's being trialled by the way:

Your Tesco Loaf Just Doubled in Price—Because Your Phone Said So
Author: Claire Wills Harrison
Source: Conscientious Currency (on Substack)
Date: November 3rd, 2025

(Tintin note: 'DSL' translates to Digital Shelf Labels)

Supermarkets are swapping paper price tags for digital shelf labels that change prices in seconds. Tesco, Aldi, Lidl, Asda—already live. Pair these ‘dynamic shelves’ with the coming digital ID and the same loaf of bread can cost YOU £3.20 while your neighbour pays £1.89. Worse, you may get nothing at all if your carbon score is red-flagged.

Dynamic pricing is a strategy where the cost of a product or service fluctuates based on real-time factors such as demand, time of day, weather, or consumer behaviour and “attributes”. This type of pricing is commonly used in industries like travel and ridesharing, and it allows businesses to maximise profits by adjusting prices to “match market conditions”. Airline tickets rise during peak travel seasons - food delivery fees spike during dinner hours. Dynamic pricing clearly raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and affordability.

Linked to dynamic pricing are digital shelf labels (DSLs). These are electronic price tags used in retail stores to display product information and pricing. Unlike traditional paper labels, DSLs are updated instantly via a centralised system, enabling retailers to change prices across thousands of items in seconds.

The ability of DSLs to implement real-time pricing changes should be sparking massive debate over potential misuse—such as surge pricing during high-demand periods or personalised pricing based on customer data. People should also be screaming about how DSLs intersect with digital ID systems by enabling personalised pricing and purchase restrictions based on identity-linked data. However, it seems to be very quiet out there on this…..

Below I have listed how DSLs have the very real potential to restrict purchases:

Identity-Linked Pricing: If DSLs are integrated with digital ID systems, retailers could tailor prices based on individual consumer profiles. For example, loyalty status, income level, or past purchase behaviour could influence what price a person sees—raising ethical concerns about fairness and transparency.

Behaviour-Based Restrictions: A digital ID could be linked to health, carbon footprint, or financial data. This could theoretically allow systems to restrict purchases of certain items (e.g., sugary foods, red meat, or alcohol) if a person exceeds a predefined quota or violates a policy.

Real-Time Enforcement: DSLs update instantly. Combined with digital ID verification at checkout, this would enable real-time enforcement of restrictions—such as denying a purchase or applying a penalty price based on the buyer’s profile or behaviour.

Loss of Anonymity in Shopping: Traditional shopping allows for anonymous purchases when using cash. A digital ID-linked system would eliminate that, tracking every item bought and when.

Algorithmic Discrimination: If pricing or access is determined by opaque algorithms, consumers will face price discrimination without recourse or understanding why they’re being charged more or denied a product.

Surge Pricing Normalisation: DSLs will normalise dynamic pricing in physical stores. When tied to digital ID, this could mean higher prices for individuals deemed “less efficient” consumers, those deemed to live in “affluent areas” or those who are deemed “high risk” due to their social media activity critical of central and supra national agendas and policies.

Loyalty Programs as a Trojan Horse: DSLs already support loyalty-based discounts. If digital ID becomes a prerequisite for loyalty programs, it will become a de facto requirement for fair pricing.

Policy-Driven Purchase Limits: In a future where governments or corporations use digital ID to enforce sustainability or health goals, DSLs will likely be the mechanism that enforce these limits at the point of sale.

In short, while DSLs are marketed as tools for efficiency and waste reduction, their integration with digital ID systems will create a powerful infrastructure for behavioural control and economic discrimination.

This article from Food & Drink explores how supermarkets like Sainsbury’s and Co-op are trialling DSLs right now. In addition, in April 2025 Tesco announced a pilot of DSLs from VusionGroup and Hanshow reinforcing the shift toward dynamic pricing. The move from Tesco followed similar rollouts by discounters Aldi and Lidl, who have already equipped their UK stores with DSLs. Asda is also testing DSLs in high-footfall locations. These pilots are not just about operational efficiency—they’re a strategic precursor to widespread dynamic pricing linked to digital ID. DSLs in Tesco stores even highlight Clubcard prices in colour, suggesting a deeper integration with customer data and loyalty programs.

DSLs represent imminent danger to consumers. Once linked to digital IDs, retailers will tailor prices based on individual profiles leading to what I call identity-linked pricing, where two shoppers see different prices for the same item. The addition of real-time enforcement of purchase restrictions, such as denying access to certain products if a consumer exceeds a quota or violates a policy, is deeply troubling.

DSLs should simply be regarded as more of the digital infrastructure of control being built and rolled out. And if digital ID becomes a prerequisite for accessing discounts or even entering stores, this will of course herald and normalise a new surveillance-based age of commerce. The risk is that pricing and access will become algorithmically determined, with little transparency and no recourse for consumers.

We are witnessing the emergence of a landscape shaped by the convergence of state and corporate power. It is rolling out before our eyes. Supra-national initiatives such as UN Agenda 2030 advance a model of ‘public-private governance’—a framework in which government institutions and private sector organisations position themselves as a ruling class, presiding over what they regard as the proletariat (from Latin proletarius, meaning ‘one who produces offspring’; in ancient Rome, the term referred to the lowest class of citizens).

In this arrangement, the ‘private’ component of governance is, by design, unelected and shielded from accountability. Because that is the point: under the servitude model being implemented, the global population is not meant to have recourse or redress.

However, as consumers, we do hold power—more than we’re often led to believe. And the most effective way to challenge this emerging corporate overreach is to hit them where it hurts: their profits. Refusing to shop at stores that implement DSLs, as inconvenient as it may be, sends a clear message. Instead, we should redirect our spending toward local businesses, independent retailers, and farm shops whenever possible, using cash to pay. Supporting community-based commerce not only weakens corporate dominance, it also strengthens local resilience.

Beyond purchasing choices, we can also make our voices heard. Writing directly to retailers to express concern or opposition to surveillance technologies is a powerful act—especially when combined with Data Subject Access Requests, (DSAR’s), which force companies to disclose what personal data they hold and how it’s used. These legal tools exist for a reason, and when used collectively, they can create friction in systems designed to operate without scrutiny.

[norman]

The possible good news in it is that until now ( or very soon) it has been impossible to get a big enough section of the population to use boycott as a war tactic. The impossibility could dissolve away when this reality sinks in. Cashflow crisis can quickly change corporate minds.

However, I'm sure the corporate managers and their A.I. have already been thinking about that. Their relationship with the government and banking branches of the enemy is hidden or at best very fuzzy. If they have conspiratorially arranged joint tactics to support each other against us, that will be an obvious weakness in their position if some of us with legal eagle eyes and determination get on the case from that angle.

[norman]

The BritCard Psyop: What Is True Digital ID in the UK?
Iain Davis - Oct 16, 2025

https://iaindavis.substack.com/p/the...s-true-digital




The proposed rollout of the so-called BritCard is a bait-and-switch psychological operation (psyop). The evident purpose is to frame the debate about digital ID in the UK by fundamentally misrepresenting what digital ID is.

People often say “if you don’t have anything to hide what’s the problem?” There is no rational argument for allowing people you don’t know and have never met to have any power to control your life. The “nothing to hide” mantra is based on the historically illiterate assumption that you will never have anything to fear from authority. To offer this argument as a reason to adopt digital ID is so naive we might call it stupid.

Of course, the likes of Trilateralist Starmer and Larry Ellison’s buddy Tony Blair will be delighted if we agree to a BritCard or a similar single, government issued identity app. But the whole point of arguing for and against the adoption of the mythical BritCard is to lead people to believe that if they reject the BritCard they will have defeated digital ID. And that is simply not true.

If you elect the next government because it promises not to introduce BritCard you will have done less than nothing to stop the rollout of digital ID in the UK, nor its imposition on you. It is already here. The digital prison walls have been built. Now the sole remaining task of our would-be gaolers is to entice us inside and lock the doors behind us.

BritCard is obviously a ruse. As Kit Knightly from the Off-Guardian rightly observed, if the BritCard smartphone app is “mandatory” then smartphones will also have to be “mandatory.” Do you really think successive UK governments would have invested so much in digital ID infrastructure only to risk the whole project pivoting on the take-up of a single smartphone app that the population can reject with ease? Of course not. So what is UK digital ID?

Most of us have been using UK digital ID practically every day for years. For example, both your driving license and your passport, if they were issued in the last decade, are digital ID products that have Machine Readable Zones (MDZs) embedded in them. MDZ’s can be scanned and the private data contained therein extracted by compliant systems and entered on to relevant databases where it can be searched, interrogated, cross referenced and manipulated.

In the case of the UK driving license, for instance, the photograph of your face is a biometric—biological identifiers—recorded and entered onto the various public and private databases via Identity Document Validation Technologies (IDVT). This is why official photo requirements are so specific. Clause 95 of the proposed Crime and Policing Bill, which is progressing unhindered through the lobbies, could well see 55 million UK driver’s faces entered onto the “biggest biometric database ever created in the UK.” Rejecting BritCard won’t stop this data seizure.

When you file a tax return online, have your face scanned at the automated tills or in an airport, and especially when your “verify” yourself online, or with a government or bank official, you are and have been constructing your “digital twin.” This ongoing rollout of UK digital ID is a process undertaken by both the public and the private sectors.

By way of example, let’s consider how Elon Musk’s ‘X’ harvests your data to create your “digital twin.” Musk’s X is not alone in doing so, pretty much all social media companies use the same sort of systems and similar networks of “verification partners.”

Musk contracts with the Israeli company AU10TIX, which is a subsidiary of the Israeli intelligence-founded ICTS. AU10TIX explains how your UK digital ID functions:

Digital ID functions as a Digital Twin of your identity. [. . .] Digital IDs continuously validate your identity using biometrics, [. . .] your Digital ID evolves with risk signals, fraud prevention insights, and changing credentials—ensuring it remains accurate and trustworthy. [. . .] A true Digital ID isn’t just tied to one institution. It’s reusable across banks, government services, airlines, and online platforms.

People who are not “verified” on X have not submitted their facial recognition image, unless they used it in their profile. Therefore, for those users, X has yet to harvest their facial recognition biometrics. This is why, since 2023, Musk wants X-users to “verify” themselves using their biometrics—facial recognition image. This ties your physical, real self to your digital twin. And there is a great deal that flows from that.

With all this infrastructure already in place, you might wonder why the government needs us to give it any more data or additional permissions to access it. Why not just use what it already has at its disposal?

The problem for the government and it partners is that all this data sits in “disparate data sets.” It is spread out across different databases that use different formats and structures. It hasn’t been “fused” and is not a “coherent” single data set that can be used to fully control us, yet.

As noted by AU10TIX, as we use our digital ID products, the system evolves with us. The use of the products constantly updates our so-called “risk signals.” How those risk signals are judged and by whom then becomes the question. Nevertheless, as the Israeli intelligence cut-out highlights, “true Digital ID” is used by “banks, government services, airlines, [. . .] online platforms,” and more.

Therefore, to achieve “true Digital ID,” the harvested data needs to be “interoperable.” It has to be fused and become coherent so that AI can analyse, extract from, manipulate and insert data into our digital twin, as and when desired.

“True Digital ID” serves both the public and the private sectors. Both government and multinational corporations evaluate your “risk signals”—whatever they deem them to be—and treat you accordingly. Which, often, is not very well.

The UK digital ID products, that we all carry around and use today, represent components of the “true Digital ID” system. The system will bind together all of your licenses, contracts, permits and cards, all records of your interactions with online and offline services, all your health data, all payment platforms you use, every transaction you make, and all data from all other government and commercial services you use.

Your “true Digital ID” is constructed and develops systematically whenever you interact with the system, be it in a council office, a supermarket, a hospital or a bank. In fact, pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

The UK government is currently trying to fix your “true Digital ID” to all access points, thus making your ability to interact with wider society conditional on the public-private partnerships’—the state’s—systematic assessment of your individual, ever changing “risk signals.”

This system-wide, or “interoperable,” digital ID network is what the UK government is actually trying to coerce us into adopting. Though the government would be cock-a-hoop if we accepted the BritCard gateway into the system, BritCard has virtually nothing to do with it.

When Labour Together—the dodgy Labour think tank that bunged Starmer into the Labour leadership—first concocted its BritCard PR stunt, it made a couple of telling comments:

For a progressive society to work, it needs to be able to collectively agree who is allowed to join it. Because it will exclude those who cannot join it.

Just to be clear: Digital ID will permit or deny your access to society. If your “risk signals” aren’t up to scratch you will be excluded. The Fabians continued:

[BritCard will build] on the existing One Login and Gov.UK Wallet. [. . .] All the necessary elements of the technology needed to deliver BritCard exist and are already in use in multiple arenas.

This is partially true. Certainly, all the necessary elements of UK digital ID, including One Login and GOV.UK Wallet, already exist and are commonly in use, but they are not “needed to deliver BritCard.” They are needed to subject us all to the rigours of “true Digital ID” interoperability and, thereby, to limit our behaviour to whatever is permitted by the public-private state.

Though One Login is conveniently available as a smartphone app, you can also “register your details” by other means. You could “answer security questions online” or prove you exist at a UK Post Office using your existing biometric digital ID products like your passport, driving license, or UK biometric residence card, for example.

Probably, many people who wish to resist digital ID in the UK—imagining it to be the BritCard—will choose one of the alternative options, such as registering using a third party Authorised Corporate Service Provider (ACSP). Unfortunately, that means the ASCP or the Post Office will still enter your details into the system for you and you will still be subjected to “true Digital ID,” though initially you might wrongly assume you won’t.

One Login is a single sign-on (SSO) service which authenticates the users online access to government, or rather to GOV.UK “services.” Currently, your One Login SSO only controls your access to forty-seven essential services, without which, if you need them, your life will be put on hold.

Things like signing a mortgage deed, applying for a vehicle operator’s license, canceling a lost or stolen passport, applying to drive with a medical condition, applying for a grant, etc. Obviously, this doesn’t give the government enough digital control over your life, so thankfully it promises that “access [to] all services on GOV.UK” will be “mandatory” through One Login soon, by which it means December 2027.

One Login is overseen by Government Digital Service (GDS), part of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). “Think Digital Partners” (TDP) recently convened its “Cybersecurity and Digital Identity for Government” event with its partners, including GDS, the Home Office, the Department of Defence, the Department of Work and Pensions, Microsoft, Amazon, and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), etc.

By the end of 2027, digital identity system One Login will become the only way to access all central government services

.

Speaking at the TDP soiree, Natalie Jones, director for digital identity at GDS, said:

Citizens don’t experience their lives in terms of government departments. They experience them in terms of getting jobs, starting families, buying homes or planning retirement. One Login is helping us organise around those real-world needs.

Natalie Jones: director for digital identity at the Government Digital Service (GDS)

When Jones refers to “us” organising all citizens’ “real-world needs,” she means GDS and their partners. Sure, in order to get a job, start a family, buy a home or plan our retirement, we do sometimes have to deal with the government and its private sector partners. So, One Login will probably seem convenient for millions.

Apparently, eleven million of us have already signed up for UK “true Digital ID.” If the government’s plans proceed, these people won’t be able to do any of those things “legally” without their digital ID. So they better hope their “risk signals” don’t go off-track for any unforeseeable reason.

With regard to the alternative verification options—via an ASCP or the Post Office for instance—which are the routes people opposed to the BritCard may well use to verify themselves, Jones refers to them as “inclusion routes” and added:

They’re essential components of a digital identity system that serves all citizens.

One of the many drawbacks with the GOV.UK’s One Login digital ID plan is that it is extremely high risk for “us”—meaning “us.” Though it is outstanding at harvesting every scrap of data about our lives, there is no reason at all to imagine it is secure. Part of the problem is that millions of people will access and use One Login and not all of them will be entirely honest.

In May this year, the Telegraph reported the accounts of One Login whistleblowers who noted:

The One Login project [developers] had been routinely accessing the system without the required security clearance and background checks on laptops that were not secure. Some development on One Login was even taking place in Romania, without the top leadership’s knowledge. Foreign intelligence services are active in Romania, which is a favourite with cyber criminals. All of this should have alarmed senior management at GDS, but instead, their response was to disband the whistleblower’s team.

This cycbersecurity debacle resulted in One Login losing its Digital Identity Attributes Trust Framework (DIATF) accreditation only a few months ago. It still hasn’t regained it, but it’s totally fine for everyone to use this hopelessly insecure life-or-death system now. Or so says the government, absent any plausible explanation.

When a gang of Bulgarian fraudsters committed a £54 million benefit heist between 2016 and 2021, they used UK government online services to do it. Specifically, they targeted the online Universal Credit application service which moved into the even weaker cybersecurity realm of One Login in 2023. Far from protecting public safety, “true Digital ID” will usher us into the technological equivalent of the mythical Wild West.

To be fair, rubbish One Login cybersecurity is to be expected because SSO systems are inherently vulnerable. As noted by business-to-business technology specialists TechTarget:

An attacker who gains control over a user’s SSO credentials will be granted access to every application the user has rights to, increasing the amount of potential damage

GDS is very unlikely to admit its treasured One Login has been compromised. If, by the end of 2027, One Login is “the only way to access all central government services,” then being hacked seems both likely and potentially devastating.

Good luck trying to convince GDS—and the police—that you did not fraudulently apply for benefits or a government grant. With access to your digital ID facial recognition data and the national public-private network of digital surveillance cameras, there will be no escape. Your “risk signals” will be awful. “The computer says no” could well have very grim consequences.

So let’s say millions more of us hurl ourselves into the abyss and, for some inexplicable reason, volunteer to live under this evident public-private tyranny. Where will all the seized data go and who will have access to it?

The generated data sets will be held by the GDS’ GOV.UK. If we look at the GOV.UK so-called privacy notice, we note that the first private sector corporation to get hold of your data is the multinational data broker Experian.

On behalf of the government, Experian will scrutinize and record your “true Digital ID” in order to verify your identity. It can do this easily enough by checking “your UK current account details against the details held by banks across the UK.” So, right off the bat, through Experian, your “government” digital Identity service—One Login—suddenly extends to your private sector bank account.

Most of us in the UK have been forced to use Experian’s credit check service at some point in our lives. Of course, Experian isn’t overly secure either, having been hacked by “identity thieves” a number of times. But don’t worry, just “trust” the government and its partners. What could go wrong for you and your family?

A big part of Experian’s business empire is based on selling data internationally. So having a contract with the UK government to hoover up the data from every citizen is fantastic news for Experian’s leading investment shareholders, represented by, as usual, BlackRock and Vanguard.

Pausing a moment: we need to understand that the GOV.UK considers us its customers. In turn, Experian sees GOV.UK as one of its customers. Furthermore, in public-private legalese jargon “we may” or “we might” means “we reserve the right” or, more succinctly, “we will.”

This is important when we consider Experian statements like this:

The information you provide to Experian Consumer Services might be used by Experian Marketing Services to: validate and update IP address, postal address and age details; create models into the ‘make-up’ of the UK population for characteristics across age, gender, number of adults and composition of the household and length of residency; identify when you change address; in linking profiled data about you to a client’s customer file (where you are already their customer).

This means Experian will use your IP address, your physical address, all your personal details, including your family’s details, and your financial data to track you and yours and provide profiles about you and your family to their customer, GOV.UK, because you—and your loved ones—are “already” a GOV.UK customers.

And:

We will use automated systems to collect information from [your] bank and credit card accounts, which includes transactions for the last 12 months (incoming, outgoing, including payments) and account balance and other information, such as (account name, number, sort code, fees, charges, interest, benefits and rewards) in order to conduct analysis. [. . .] We may use your information for the investigation, detection and prevention of crime (other than fraud).

Experian will use all of your personal financial data for the “investigations” that won’t have anything to do with fraud but will, instead, update your “risk signal.” The commitment to the prevention of crime also means that you will be investigated by GOV.UK’s partner—Experian and others—regardless of your standing as a good citizen and whether or not they actively suspect you of a crime. It’s all about safety and prevention, you see.

And:

Your data may also be shared with other lenders or brokers as part of services we have developed to help them understand customer behaviours. [. . .] Where possible, this information will be provided in an anonymised or pseudonymised way.

Note: “where possible” means “we don’t have to, and we probably won’t.”

Sharing your data with any corporate partners, for any reason, is all part of the “true Digital ID” system in the UK. As GOV.UK points out:

The data we collect may [will] be shared with other government departments, agencies and organisations. It may [will] also be shared with our technology suppliers.

GOV.UK data—which you consent to hand over when you use One Login—will be shared with every branch of government, including the intelligence agencies, and it will be shared with the government’s technology suppliers. This includes every corporation, (e.g Deloitte, Mastercard) that have DIATF accreditation.

Other “technology suppliers” include Palantir, and it is through their partnership with the UK government that we can really start getting to grips with the immense threat that “true Digital ID” presents to all of us in the UK.

Here’s a reasonable summary of Palantir’s relationship with the UK government:

Palantir [. . .] has established a significant and growing footprint within the United Kingdom. The company primarily offers its sophisticated data integration, analytics, and AI-powered decision-making platforms, such as Palantir Foundry and Gotham, to help complex organizations manage and interpret vast datasets. Its involvement spans critical public and, increasingly, private sectors within the UK.

Palantir Gotham can scrape data from “any” source, such as satellite data, social media chatter, government digital ID data and any data set held by any government department or agency or private sector “customer” or partner. Palantir Gotham is capable of “data fusion.” This means it can translate data, no matter what the source or format, into a single, coherent and actionable data set. It is primarily used by governments.

Palantir Foundry has commercial applications and is more widely used by the private sector. Like Gotham, Foundry “fuses” data sets to enable AI to interrogate the disparate data sources to produce meaningful outcomes and reports.

Palantir Gotham and Foundry are underpinned by Palantir Apollo software. This means Palantir can push data and software updates to any system connected to either Foundry or Gotham.

The UK government already uses and is connected to both Gotham and Foundry. The sharing of all your personal data with public-private partnerships—encompassing the whole of society and the entire economy—has already been deemed “legal” via the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025.

The government explains that Gotham and Foundry “integrates siloed data,” i.e., “fuses” it from any source. The government says it enables investigations and analysis “across all data,” and it does mean “all.”

The use of Apollo, inherent in both Gotham and Foundry, means that system-wide “new functionality” can be introduced at any time. This means your individual “risk signal” can be updated as a result, for example, of opinions you might express on social media. It also means that whatever government and its partners tell you today about “true Digital ID” can be altered with “new functionality” after you are trapped by it.

This, then, is the essence of “true Digital ID” in the UK:

Your data, entered via One Login, is not safe and it is not secure. The government and an expanding list of private sector partners “will” have access to that data. The data will create your ultimate “digital twin” and that will be linked to your real, physical self via your harvested biometrics.

Every transaction you make, every comment you utter online, every political rally you attend, every donation you make, everywhere you go, and everything you do can and will be analysed, interrogated and manipulated. If your “risk signal” is awry, you will be cut off. So you’d better behave yourself and be a good citizen: or else!

All the government needs us to do is somehow dupe us into submitting our data to One Login. Hence, the BritCard bait-and-switch.

Once we step over the One Login Rubicon, our biometrics and all our data can be linked to our official “digital twin.” Thereafter, the entire interoperable system can be centrally managed—almost certainly by AI—to “allow” or “exclude” us from society in order to control our behaviour, that is control our lives.

In the immediate term, the only way to stop digital ID slavery is not to comply and refuse to create our One Login accounts. This will make life harder, we will be cut off, but it essentially boils down to what part of your soul you are willing to trade for the sake of permissioned convenience.

(Check out Fiona Rose Diamond’s Mass Non Compliance for further information.)

In the longer term, I suspect the law is the arena where this battle will be won or lost. For us, this is a battle for our survival as free human beings. I’m no expert on the law, but the government’s gambit to insist that we “must” have digital ID to live and work in the UK may be “legal,” but it doesn’t appear to be lawful. And lawful trumps legal every time.

The 1688 Bill of Rights compels the government never to undertake any “Proceedings to the Prejudice of the People.” Threatening the people with the loss of their rights, customs, and their livelihoods, if they don’t submit to digital ID is, it seems to me, to the prejudice of the people. But what do I know?

As we approach the point of no return, perhaps we might ask the government why it needs to force people who don’t want anything to do with its “true Digital ID” system to use it. If it is just for our convenience and safety, and not about social control, then what’s the problem with maintaining paper-based administrative services for the likely minority who don’t want digital ID?

You could even imagine volunteers or small businesses providing this paper-only service to the non-digital market. We might even reinvigorate the postal service. If “true Digital ID” is not about enforcement and control, and if we are willing to take on the responsibility ourselves, what possible objections could the government raise?


https://iaindavis.substack.com/p/the...s-true-digital

[norman]

Why You Should Be Worried About Digital ID - Silkie Carlo
Triggernometry - Oct 5, 2025


Silkie Carlo is Director of Big Brother Watch, a UK civil liberties group, and a leading campaigner on privacy, surveillance, and digital rights

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=xhymUHtl4p8

Good observations, good questions, good answers, but the host interrupts his own video to flog stuff too much. My adblocker doesn't see self inserted promotions so I had to sit through them all as if I had no adblocker.

[ExomatrixTV]

• We Need to Talk About DIGITAL ID - A WARNING:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=W3PvadvTi18

David Icke discusses the global introduction of Digital ID and the agenda behind the AI control grid we are about to enter.

[Tintin]

This is what it feels like we're up against in this hybrid war on humanity

Saruman's Uruk-Hai reach Helm's Deep - 'The Two Towers'

[Paul D.]

TEXT -
Parliament to debate "Do Not Introduce Digital ID" Petition on December 8th... I’ll be waiting with bated breath for this latest performance of fake democracy.

The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (signed up to by 193 member states in 2015) runs on digital ID; it’s the bloodstream of the whole machine. And yet some people genuinely believe one tiny island’s government theatre is about to smash the global control grid.

We have to stop looking to MPs, Westminster, or whatever shiny new party rolls onto the stage for salvation. They’re not running the show; they are the show - the distraction, the costume, the script.

If there’s any pushback, it won’t come from them. Only the people can break this, and if we don’t, no one will.

Because to the globalists, we’re expendable consumers - “useless eaters” - destined, if they get their way, to be equally poor and equally controlled.

[Mari]

Posted by Paul D. (here)
TEXT -
Parliament to debate "Do Not Introduce Digital ID" Petition on December 8th... I’ll be waiting with bated breath for this latest performance of fake democracy.

The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (signed up to by 193 member states in 2015) runs on digital ID; it’s the bloodstream of the whole machine. And yet some people genuinely believe one tiny island’s government theatre is about to smash the global control grid.

We have to stop looking to MPs, Westminster, or whatever shiny new party rolls onto the stage for salvation. They’re not running the show; they are the show - the distraction, the costume, the script.

If there’s any pushback, it won’t come from them. Only the people can break this, and if we don’t, no one will.

Because to the globalists, we’re expendable consumers - “useless eaters” - destined, if they get their way, to be equally poor and equally controlled.

So very well said Fiona. And the frustrating thing with all this, is that the masses still wont wake up to the fact that they hold the key. I doubt they will, simply because there's a kind of 'comfort' in having things stay as they are, because it absolves them of personal responsibility. They are too 'comfortable' at the moment to really care. That will change, and some.

[Paul D.]

Posted by Mari (here)

Posted by Paul D. (here)
TEXT -
Parliament to debate "Do Not Introduce Digital ID" Petition on December 8th... I’ll be waiting with bated breath for this latest performance of fake democracy.

The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (signed up to by 193 member states in 2015) runs on digital ID; it’s the bloodstream of the whole machine. And yet some people genuinely believe one tiny island’s government theatre is about to smash the global control grid.

We have to stop looking to MPs, Westminster, or whatever shiny new party rolls onto the stage for salvation. They’re not running the show; they are the show - the distraction, the costume, the script.

If there’s any pushback, it won’t come from them. Only the people can break this, and if we don’t, no one will.

Because to the globalists, we’re expendable consumers - “useless eaters” - destined, if they get their way, to be equally poor and equally controlled.

So very well said Fiona. And the frustrating thing with all this, is that the masses still wont wake up to the fact that they hold the key. I doubt they will, simply because there's a kind of 'comfort' in having things stay as they are, because it absolves them of personal responsibility. They are too 'comfortable' at the moment to really care. That will change, and some.

I agree Fiona nailed it, well said indeed , I almost put it in 'the 'Great Quotes' thread
Very well said Mari as well , also nailed it

[sdv]

http://https://ico.org.uk/for-organi...on-exemptions/

As in many countries, the UK has a Data Protection Act. The above website lists the very many exemptions that the government has awarded itself. Unfortunately, this is probably the case in most countries. If there are any activists here, it may be useful to look at the Data Protection Acts and Privacy Acts in other countries to see what you should be fighting for rather than against.

http://https://popia.co.za/

Bit, have a look at all the exemptions here:

http://https://serr.co.za/exemptions...nformation-act

Goverment is the problem. For many decades, countries around the world and especially the West have been scare-mongering about communism and socialism, but it seems that the call is coming from inside the house. It has happened slowly over decades though, and AI has finally given governments an opportunity to go hard core fascist control.

[norman]

The Only REAL Solution to Digital ID
corbettreport - Nov 5, 2025


Hakeem Anwar of AbovePhone.com returns to the de-program to discuss his latest report: “Life Under Digital ID: A Global Analysis with Solutions.” We talk about what digital ID is, the broader question of digital public infrastructure, the control grid vs. the surveillance grid, and the counter-economy that is the only solution to this impending threat to free humanity.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=U5g_fmcDMHM

SHOW NOTES:

Life Under Digital ID: A Global Analysis with Solutions

Russia Moves to Mandate State Biometric ID for Online Age Verification

Brazil Launches National Digital ID System Powered by Blockchain

The Laws of Identity by Kim Cameron (2004)

Aadhaar Mandatory for ITR Filing: What Taxpayers Need to Know for FY 2024–25

"Aadhaar” reporting on corbettreport.com

The EU Entry / Exit System (EES) Explained

TakeBackOurTech.org

TBOT Substack

GrapheneOS

Above Phone Black Friday Sale

5 Must-Change Privacy Settings for Android & iOS

[gini]

Nov 19, 2025 SPEAKERS' CORNER--

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=XBaAUWc4GDg

--8 min---´Digital ID: A Grave Warning From A Chinese Exile´

[norman]

Digital ID plans TORN APART in intense Parliament committee session
Big Brother Watch - Nov 19, 2025


If you want to support our work fighting for a freer future, please join us: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/join/now/

Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo gives evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on digital ID.

This cannot be understated: Introducing a mandatory digital ID in Britain would fundamentally change the nature of our relationship with the state by eroding our freedoms and turning us into a papers, please society.

Silkie made those dangers unmistakably clear to the committee today.

If you agree with what Silkie told the committee today, I’d like to invite you to stand with us in opposing mandatory digital ID.

As the prospect of a digital ID system draws closer, we urgently need more people standing with us to push back. Becoming a Big Brother Watch supporter is the single most effective way to strengthen this campaign.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=WizqWi8_49g

[norman]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=QCDR_v6d72o

[norman]

The most profound anti DIGITAL ID common sense sales pitch to broadcast across the world that I've heard to date.

"You can change your password but you can't change your biometric data"

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=dG_XWTWy2Cw

[Tintin]

Phil Wiseman (from Oracle Films) is bang on the money here, and it is an important distinction to make, and certainly in trying to persuade folks away from buy-in. In short it ought really to be referred to as DPI - DIGITAL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE - not the somewhat ambiguous "Digital ID".

-------------------------

I’m observing a big semantics problem in the Digital ID discussion.

Hopefully this post can provide some clarity.

As I see it:

Digital IDENTIFICATION is the digitised equivalent of physical identification - anything which you currently use to identify yourself; such as a passport, driver’s license, bank card, utility bill etc.

This is what most people seem to think of when they think of ‘Digital ID’. It’s hard to see anything explicitly wrong with this idea. And that’s why I believe many are confused by the uproar and the massive pushback against ‘Digital ID’ initiatives.

Digital IDENTITY is the sum of those identifiers that exists in the form of data about you. It’s your digital footprint. Currently this largely exists in silos in fragmented public and private sector databases.

Again, nothing explicitly wrong with this idea, provided people understand the terms and conditions of the products they’re using and have provided fully informed consent for their data to be utilised for their respective, stated purposes. Though I’d wager most have not.

The inherent danger with Digital IDENTITY however, and the stated direction of travel, is the desire to introduce interoperability between these datasets on a global scale.

Such an environment is what’s formally referred to as DIGITAL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.

According to the principles of DPI, your digital footprint, also referred to as your ‘Digital Twin’ will be updated every single time you interact in society at any noteworthy level; be that using public services, filing taxes, making financial transactions, browsing the internet, posting on social media etc.

Any human action for which the exchange of data is required will facilitate the collection and profiling of said data – tethering it to your digital twin as a permanent record. This is not speculation. This is what Digital Public Infrastructure is designed to enable.

This should pose some questions:

What happens when your digital identifier isn’t a physical app or a card but a biometric such as a fingerprint or facial recognition scan? What does opt-out look like at that point?

What happens when cash is eliminated, along with any analogue off-ramp from this closed digital environment?

What happens when such vast troves of data are inevitably surveilled by AI and enforcement mechanisms are introduced?

Carbon allowances, social credit scores, vaccine mandates... the potential for social control is quite literally endless.

These enforcement mechanisms could be imposed centrally, automatically, at scale.

Add to that the fact that such systems are currently demonstrably insecure and offer a goldmine to would-be hackers.

In summary, you are being coerced to onboard to a system loaded with immense personal risk, for which your consent is not required going forwards and if you refuse to participate, you will be penalised.

Does that sound familiar?

And yes, you could make the case that national governments of today have no intention of utilising such a system for these purposes. I disagree, but you could make that case. What of the fact that these administrations have shown they are not beholden to the public but rather to public-private-partnerships?

And what can be said at this point about the ethos of future administrations?

This architecture has been constructed from disparate foundations to established, global technological standards which will allow all parts to snap together into a functional digital panopticon as soon as popular demand is substantial enough.

Call me a paranoid conspiracy theorist if you like. At current pace, this system will be kicking your front door in long before I’m insulted by such a label.

6:20 PM · Nov 24, 2025

[norman]

NHS DATA PIPELINE - WHERE DOES YOUR DATA GO?
The Scouse Oracle - Dec 1, 2025

My FOI response confirmed key parts of the new NHS data pipeline: where identifiable data enters, where pseudonymisation happens, and how this fits into the wider digital phases. Sharing it clearly so the public understands

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6OAayjVx51U

[norman]

UK Column News — 10 December 2025

00:30 Digital ID: Opposition at last within UK corridors of power



UK Column News — 10 December 2025

00:00 Introduction
00:30 Digital ID: Opposition at last within UK corridors of power
10:48 War Narratives: No sign of peace anywhere on Earth
19:32 Syria: Relentless BBC propaganda to protect regime change
27:12 Check out UKC’s website, get tickets for our Salisbury event, support our work:
29:54 Grooming Gangs: Inquiry won’t touch the real scale of child abuse
38:55 Derek Dimmock: Update from midazolam inquest
43:50 Syria Propaganda: Re-Criminalisation of Assad
53:52 Glyphosate: Compromised data affects all of us
59:24 And finally…