Bali – October 2002. When a suicide bomber entered Paddy’s Irish Bar, and detonated a bomb, everybody who survived from the attack fled outside the club only to find a more powerful bomb, planted in a parked van opposite the club. As many as 202 lives were lost in the tragic accident, and 240 others were injured. Unfortunately, it was fellow Indonesians who carried out the attack, on their own soil (BBC News).
Even in countries which have a law requiring all citizens to carry the ID card at all times, the existence of terrorists is often missed from our awareness. Therefore, National ID Card is a ludicrous idea to provide national security.
As we all know, after the horrific tragedy of the 9/11 terrorist attack, the U.S government answered with a sharp and intense response to prevent such traumatizing incident from happening again: starting from metal detectors, camera surveillance, airport body scanners, to pat-down procedures, and most recently, they came up with the idea of National ID card. Wait! What? ID card, really? Is the government seriously kidding? As the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) puts it, ”many of [the terrorist] reportedly had identification documents on them, and were in the country legally” (74). In other words, the ACLU believes that even with legal documents, individuals are still capable of terrorist acts. Moreover, whether we realize it or not, our attempts to secure the nation from terrorist acts have always been focused and attributed to protect us from foreign terrorists, but one thing we fail to remember; not all terrorists are foreign, and even Americans themselves have attempted terrorist acts.
For example, last year, a car bomb was parked in Time Square, New York, and Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani born-naturalized American, who had a clean legal history, was arrested for masterminding the attack (Rashbaum and Weiser). Likewise, a Pennsylvanian woman, Colleen LaRose, also known by the nickname of “JihadJane”, conspired to commit murder, and provided materials to endorse terrorism acts (Johnson). These examples show how the National ID card wouldn’t work in fighting local terrorists.
While it is true that our government is capable of checking people backgrounds, and legal histories before issuing the ID cards, I am not convinced if it really was the best alternative to protect us from all sort of threats, after all, the information that is in the National ID cards might have been outdated, which make the ID cards unreliable source of information.
After all, despite tremendous sufferings that Osama bin Laden had caused, I’m sure we are all in an agreement that he is not an imbecilic moron who would send a suspicious looking man with an unkempt criminal record to destroy other nations. But hey, this is not about judging one particular group, but rather just an illustration how legal documents might not reveal accurate information about one’s true self.
The issue of whether we are obliged to carry the National ID cards whenever and wherever we go inside our wallet is not important at all. Not because our bulky wallet already is filled with too many other cards: credit cards, ATM card, driver license, employee, or student ID card. But, because we are all in the same boat if we had to go back to an era of totalitarian, where “Your paper, please,” replaced the warmth of greetings by the authorities.
But rather, focusing on why the National ID cards are making ourselves accessible to a more wicked threat, identity theft, which is capable of destroying one’s existence without having to set up a bomb in an airplane. How many times have we seen or heard people who suddenly received thousand of dollars in credit card bills, while screaming, crying, and claiming they did not use it? Even with credit cards alone, the case of identity theft has terrorized us. What if someone stole our National ID card? Hmm, interesting.
As the ACLU points out, “A National ID [card] would require a government database of every person in the U.S, containing continually updated identifying information,” (74) but, the creation of database itself is not an effortless matter, as the ACLU also complicates matters further when the organization writes, “[The database] would likely contain many errors, any one of which could render someone unemployable and possibly much worse until they get their ‘file’ straightened out. (75)” In making this comment, the ACLU tries to show us how the National ID card is very susceptible to abuse if someone lost their ID cards, or their identities got stolen.
Of course, many will probably disagree by saying that the National ID cards will use bar codes and biometrics data; like a palm print, and iris scan, which make the ID impossible to be falsified. Yet, wasn’t the same concept is what the government was thinking when they first issued the current driver license? With the skyrocketed improvement of technology that we have seen, one day, any such thing will be possible. Who knows one day if the biometric ID card will be as easy to defraud as a handwritten card?
It is never wrong to find alternative ways to enhance our national security, yet bad ideas and mistakes seem to be our government’s favorite disease. If the U.S government would learn from Indonesia’s experience with National ID cards and terrorist acts, I’m sure experts would not waste their time to debate a moot point like this.
Besides, we must admit, our government reactions were always in response to the most recent terrorist incidents, and for that we know, Al-Qaeda and their ilk are always one-step ahead of us.
Works Cited
American Civil Liberties Union. “National ID Cards: Five Reasons Why They Should Be Rejected.” What Matters in America. Ed. Gary Goshgarian. New York: Longman, 2010. 72-76. Print.
Johnson, Carrie. “JihadJane, an American Woman, Faces Terrorism Charges.” The Washington Post. The Washington Post Company, 10 Mar. 2010. Web. 13 Feb. 2011.
Rashbaum, William, and Benjamin Weiser. “Time Square Bombing Suspect Appears in Court.” New York Times. New York Times, 18 May 2010. Web. 13 Feb. 2011.
“Timeline: Bali Bomb Trials.” BBC News. British Broadcasting Corporation, 08 Sep. 2008. Web. 22 Feb. 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment