TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Speaker argues digital ID is being pushed with investment to force voluntary adoption, and that without it, it will fail and is the cornerstone of UN Agenda 2030; programmable, surveillable money and digital ecosystems depend on it. They compare to vaccine passports and urge planning to avoid compliance, like avoiding vaccine mandates. In the US, conservatives are framed as solutions to illegal migration and voter fraud; biometric IDs pitched as addressing cybercrime and societal ills. Digital ID is seen as essential to social credit scores and Orwellian designs. The speaker says convenience is used to ensnare people into compliance: opt-in smartphones, voting for two evils. The carrot approach may come with a stick; people have power and should act locally to opt out, starting with no to digital ID to avoid biometric surveillance state, predictive policing, precrime, and health care prevention measures and emergency use authorizations. We can opt out.

The speaker is discussing the World Economic Forum (WEF) Agile Nations Charter that the Government of Canada signed in November 2020 and how it relates to digital credentials and other technologies. The speaker notes that the prime minister did not tell Canadians that this would usher in the fourth industrial revolution by changing how policy is made in Canada. After outlining several Agile Nations projects—Coordinating National Standards Body of Agile Nations, digital credentials, preloaded air cargo targeting, consumer connecting products, experimental approaches, anticipatory regulation, digital health software devices—the focus is narrowed to digital credentials and related technologies. The Digital Credentials Project is described as being led by Canada under Agile Nations, aiming to make digital trust and digital ID technologies more seamless across borders. It involves workshops, proofs of concept, and pilots. The speaker asserts that there is a lack of transparency surrounding these initiatives and points to concerns about government abuse of centralized personal data. Canadians are presented with a request for the ability to opt out of privacy-intrusive digital IDs, artificial intelligence, and smart technologies. Examples cited to illustrate potential government overreach include the Emergencies Act usage to freeze protesters’ bank accounts and the ArriveCAN app, which the speaker claims discriminated against seniors who lacked smartphones. The central argument is that digital IDs should not be mandatory given past government actions, and that people generally use existing digital means (bank cards, online payments) without government control over all their data. The concern is that a digital ID could enable government surveillance or social-political control, especially if linked with other data such as driving records, health information, banking data, purchases, or even sensitive attributes like religion or political beliefs. The speaker connects digital IDs to central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), suggesting that a move to digital IDs could enable CBDCs, which could allow governments to track purchases and impose limits or programmable constraints on spending, travel, or item availability. This leads to questions about ethical frameworks, governance, and safeguards. The absence of transparency, public engagement, or legislation is framed as evidence that the prime minister does not prioritize protecting Canadians from digital ID abuse. Further concerns include the lack of comprehensive privacy legislation to regulate both government and private sector use of digital IDs. The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) is described as focusing on businesses, with government roles under-regulated. Bill C-27, the Digital Charter Implementation Act, is noted as addressing privacy only in the private sector, with responsibility shifted to businesses. The speaker argues for a national, overarching framework to protect privacy, rather than pushing obligations onto small businesses. The speaker asserts that the Agile Nations Charter demonstrates liberal government intentions and urges ongoing democratic involvement to prevent executive overreach. Pierre Poilievre is highlighted as listening to concerns and promising that digital IDs will never be mandatory. The message concludes with a call to contact federal representatives to support a federal digital charter that protects Canadians from digital ID abuses by government and corporations.

The speaker discusses the lack of knowledge regarding what happens to our digital identities when creating new accounts or logging in through large platforms. To address this issue, the speaker mentions that the commission will soon propose a secure European digital identity. This identity can be trusted and used by citizens across Europe for various activities, such as paying taxes or renting bicycles. The speaker emphasizes the importance of a technology that allows individuals to control the data exchanged and its usage.

Technology, particularly digital technology, has evolved from having analytical power to now having predictive power. Some companies, like yours, are already involved in utilizing this predictive power. The next step could be moving towards a prescriptive mode, where elections may no longer be necessary because we can accurately predict the outcome beforehand. This raises the question of whether elections are still needed if we already know the result.

"my long term personal political view has always been in favor of ID cards." "I supported the last Labour government's introduction of ID cards." "The first bill I've spoken on in Parliament was the ID cards bill, which the then conservative Lib Dem coalition scrapped." "It wasn't in the manifesto." "my other colleagues in government have started this conversation about how we might roll out more digital ID." "I think that a system of digital ID can also help with illegal working, enforcement of other laws as well." "Forgive me, could we be in a situation where everybody would be compelled to have a digital ID at some point?" "Well, the government's position at the moment is to look at digital ID, further rollout."

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen advocates for digital IDs, claiming they can boost emerging economies. She wants public digital infrastructure that is interoperable, open, and trusted. Nigel Farage criticizes this as a dangerous move towards global government control and wealth redistribution. Von der Leyen aims to enforce digital IDs by the early 2030s, along with a central bank digital currency, potentially leading to a cashless society. Farage warns of the risks of personal data falling into the wrong hands and the potential for a Chinese-style social credit system. He emphasizes the importance of democratic nation states cooperating and trading together, rather than surrendering sovereignty to unelected bureaucrats. Farage believes in liberty and freedom.

The UAE is positioned at the forefront of using AI in government. The conversation highlights the importance of building basic digital infrastructure—cloud services, data centers, and digital identity—as a foundation for an effective digital system. Speaker 1 emphasizes that securing this digital infrastructure is crucial. He predicts a passwordless future, stating that this could be the last year you log on to an Oracle system with a password. He describes biometric logins where the computer recognizes the user, can verify identity through voice, and may prompt for a fingerprint on the return key. He argues there is no reason to enter a password because passwords are too easily stolen. The approach involves using the latest security technology, with biometrics assisted by AI to ensure authentication. He concludes that this will verify identity, even asserting that the system can make sure that the user is, in fact, Tony Blair.

- The report centers on nearly a year of investigation into the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) and Larry Ellison, the world’s second-richest man, highlighting a close relationship between Ellison and the Israeli government, including Benjamin Netanyahu, and noting Ellison’s donations to Friends of the IDF as their biggest donor. Oracle, co-founded by Ellison, is described as on the verge of taking over the US version of TikTok, a platform influential with American youth. - The narrative emphasizes Ellison’s advocacy for the use of social media as a battlefield and identifies Oracle’s potential role in global information control through AI and data strategy. - Safra Catz, Oracle’s former CEO, is quoted as saying she wants to embed love and respect for Israel into American culture. The transcript also notes a controversial LinkedIn policy stance on hate speech, with a claim about “from the river to the sea.” - It is claimed that David Ellison, Larry Ellison’s son, owns Paramount, which recently took ownership of CBS News, run by Ari Wise, described as a “self-proclaimed Zionist fanatic.” The report asserts that anti-Zionism is equated with anti-Semitism in the narrative. - The event coverage includes a Dubai World Leaders Summit in February where Ellison, interviewed by Tony Blair, spoke about AI. Ellison allegedly proposed unifying national data into a single, easily consumable database for AI models. - The investigation indicates the UK government is starting to unify its data, with Blair’s Institute advising on this effort. Blair is depicted as a long-time advocate for ID cards and digital ID cards, proposing to bring together all personal data in one place. - The discussion contrasts the potential benefits of digital ID (faster, cheaper, more reliable interactions with the state) with the potential dangers of centralized personal data controlled by a single private company, noting Blair’s push and Oracle’s willingness to take on the role. It is noted that Ellison advocated for ID cards as far back as 2001. - The conversation expands to health data: a call to consolidate health care data, diagnostic data, electronic health records, and genomic data into a single unified data platform, arguing the NHS has a rich but fragmented population data set not easily accessible to AI models. These models are said to be trained mainly on data from the Internet, implying national health records are particularly valuable and not publicly available. - The report asserts deep TBI involvement in Keir Starmer’s government, creating a risk that valuable UK data could be co-opted by Ellison and Oracle for private gain. It claims Oracle has earned over £1.1 billion in UK government contracts and Ellison has already benefited from such arrangements. - It is alleged that Blair and Ellison have maintained a long relationship, with Blair appearing in Ellison’s yachts and on Lanai. Blair has recorded a video for Oracle; Ellison’s wealth and ventures are described through the rhetorical question about the difference between Larry Ellison and God, implying Ellison’s outsized influence and wealth. - The piece asserts the potential for surveillance-driven monetization through AI and data consolidation, with Ellison stating that citizens will be on their best behavior as data is constantly recorded, “the camera’s always on,” and that recordings are accessible only with a court order. - The report finishes by noting the influence of the Tony Blair Institute in UK policy, its international reach, and the concern that its promotion of big-tech and AI boosterism may overshadow the needs of local populations. It calls for further independent media scrutiny of big-tech lobbying and its impact on policy, inviting support for Double Down News on Patreon.

Your wake up call. The British government is pushing forward with plans for a national digital ID system. They've called it the Brit card and if that name doesn't send a chill down your spine you have not been paying attention. This is about building a centralized state controlled digital identity system that could be used to link your finances, your medical history, your travel movements, your social media activity, even your social activity in real life and more. It's quite frankly a digital dog tag and once it's clipped around your neck, you will not be able to take it off. There are active conversations now about linking spending capabilities to your digital identity. That means if your ID is flagged, limited or suspended, I don't know because maybe you said some hurt words on social media, that will mean you can't access your own money.

They're rolling out digital ID even when people don't want it? In The UK, over 2,000,000 people said no. We don't want it. The government's response? We're gonna do it anyway. And now the line is no digital ID, no jobs. They said you will not be able to work in The United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID. It's as simple as that. Just a reminder, pilot programs always start somewhere and then scale to the rest of the world. Today, it's The UK. Tomorrow, it's where you live. They will market it as if it's for your convenience or your safety, like they are doing now by saying it's to tackle illegal immigration. But once your likelihood is tied to a QR code or a government app, your freedoms can be taken away with the flip of a switch. Now it's just for a job. Soon it will be banking, travel, grocery shopping. You will be completely under control.

Speaker 0 explains that these groups have invested heavily to find excuses to push digital ID, urging voluntary adoption. They argue digital ID is the cornerstone of the entire UN Agenda 2030; without it, programmable, surveillable money and many online designs won’t work, and they frame it as something people must comply with, even though it’s pitched as voluntary. They compare digital ID to vaccine passports, suggesting that to change the direction of the world, people must plan to live in a way that avoids compliance with digital ID, just as one might navigate around vaccine mandates. In the United States, conservatives are portrayed as being pitched digital ID as a solution to illegal migration and voter fraud, while claims are made that biometric digital ideas are presented as essential to solving cybercrime, hacking, cyberbullying, and other societal ills. The speaker contends that digital ID underpins social credit and other Orwellian designs that are part of the agenda. A key theme is that the push relies on convenience: opting in is convenient, having money on a phone and a life centered on a smartphone is convenient, and voting every four years is convenient but framed within a system of “two lesser evils.” The speaker argues this convenience is a carrot used to enslave people, while resisting adoption is inconvenient and requires changing one’s life to be more resilient and sustainable for families and communities. They call for reconnecting with neighbors, meeting in person, and reducing online dependence to build real human connections and solutions. The speaker notes that during COVID, lockdowns contributed to isolation and pushed people toward virtual-only connections controlled by those who own the infrastructure, software, and platforms. The claim is that the power to set up digital ID resides with those investing in it, and people should reclaim power by actions in neighborhoods and families and by saying no to digital ID and the surveillance state. There is concern that digital ID enables not only real-time surveillance but predictive capabilities about future behavior, with intelligence agencies pursuing predictive policing (precrime) and extending similar predictions to health care to prevent the next pandemic, potentially eliminating the need for pandemics to be declared to justify emergency use authorizations or mandates in communities. The overall message is to opt out of digital ID, recognizing that this is the world some are trying to create, and that opting out is possible.

In 2016, the UN decided to give everyone a digital identity for daily use, integrating driver's licenses, bank accounts, media, and health records. A global vaccination strategy was also introduced. This laid the groundwork for a social credit system, similar to China's model. Currently, they are collecting medical data and basic information, with plans to include CO2 emissions, financial data, and personal IP addresses linked to biometric data. The goal is to monitor internet activity. They don't care about our arguments because there is a hidden agenda. It's not about climate, helping people, trade, or public health. They want to maintain pressure on healthcare to push vaccinations. We need to understand why ICU capacity isn't being increased. It's important to recognize the manipulation behind the housing crisis and the division caused by fabricated issues like nitrogen emissions. We must unite for our collective rights and freedoms.

Mike Schellenberger argues against digital IDs: "We don't need digital IDs for any of those things. The United States just stopped illegal migration without digital IDs." He says centralizing data would undermine cybersecurity: "Having separate logins ... ensures that if one of them is hacked, they aren't all hacked." He warns that "if the digital ID were to actually link social media vaccine records and bank accounts, that would allow governments to censor and control the population." He notes Kirstarmer: "every working person must have a digital ID or Brit card." Real IDs contain embedded microchips; MDLs are digital IDs; Gavin Newsom moved driver's licenses to Apple and Google wallets. Ellison: "The secret is to get all and get all of that data in one place." China’s 2019 social credit system; UK Big Brother Watch warns it could be gateway to surveillance. Starmer: "Digital ID will make it tougher to work illegally" and YouGov: 42% in favor, 45% against; Gates documentary on AI censorship; "The Starmer government's digital IDs should be a wake up call to all of us."

In 2016, the UN decided to give everyone a digital identity for daily use, integrating driver's licenses, bank accounts, media, and health records. The EU and UN also introduced a global vaccination strategy to provide digital health certificates to all people. This sets the foundation for a social credit system similar to China's. Initially, it involves medical data, but financial information and personal IP addresses will eventually be linked to biometric data. The true agenda behind this is not about climate, helping people, trade, or public health. They ignore our arguments because they have a different agenda. We need to understand why ICU capacity isn't being increased and why they want to maintain pressure on healthcare and vaccinations. They manipulate public opinion for a nitrogen and climate lockdown, weakening social cohesion and pitting us against each other instead of fighting for our collective rights and freedom.

Today, Kirstjarma made a speech where he said that he is going to be mandating digital ID for all of The UK public. You won't be able to work without digital ID. Digital ID will be linked to a social credit score. Your social credit score will go down if you are a bad citizen. You'll be told you can't do things like buy a plane ticket. If you don't wanna be a government slave for the rest of your life, you need to say no to digital ID. The NHS tried to mandate COVID vaccines to all NHS workers, but enough of them said no, and that was dropped. They couldn't do it. If everybody stands up and says no to digital ID together, they won't be able to roll it out. This is your warning. If you don't wanna be a government slave, say no to digital ID. Thank you.

Many of us warned that COVID was the catalyst for Agenda twenty thirty, a UN driven plan to put the entire earth into a digital surveillance grid that would mean the introduction of digital currency, digital ID, a social credit system where your online activities are directly linked to your ability to access money. Australia introduced a voluntary digital ID in May 2024, and as of December, just over a year later, Australians will not even be able to do a Google search without verifying themselves online. Now in lockstep, The UK has announced they will also be pressing ahead with digital ID. Digital ID will give you access to government services. One option under consideration would give digital IDs to all people legally entitled to reside in Britain, whether citizens or those with legal immigration status, the Financial Times said.

Speaker 0 announces a policy: 'Made today, I am announcing this government will make a new free of charge digital ID mandatory for the right to work by the end of this parliament.' He adds, 'Let me spell that out.' The policy states, 'You will not be able to work in The United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID.' He concludes, 'It's as simple as that.' The speaker conveys an intent to require digital ID at no cost, tying it to employment rights by the end of the current parliamentary term, and asserts that absence of digital ID would bar work in the UK, framed as a straightforward requirement.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen advocates for digital IDs, claiming they can boost emerging economies. Nigel Farage criticizes this as a dangerous move towards global government control and wealth redistribution. Von der Leyen wants a digital ID enforced by the early 2030s, along with a central bank digital currency, creating a cashless society. Farage warns of potential data breaches and the risk of a Chinese-style social credit system. He emphasizes the importance of democratic nation states cooperating and trading together, rather than surrendering sovereignty to unelected bureaucrats. Farage concludes by affirming a belief in liberty and freedom.

Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Finance are all involved in promising that data will improve our healthcare, making it more convenient, affordable, and keeping us healthier. However, global organizations and governments are also entering this space. The future of healthcare lies in the digitalization of the system, which is essential as our healthcare systems will eventually collapse without it. It's remarkable how similar the messages from politics, business, science, and media are. Is this really just about our health, or could there be other interests at play?

We know the government is looking at digital ID cards at the moment. Well, Kirst Dahmer, our prime minister, has said we are looking at what other countries have done to bring in sort of digital accreditation. I think there's real actually benefits right across here from obviously dealing with illegal working, but also actually imagine if your viewers imagine that they had one credential that would allow them to access all the different government services and our public services do. I think it is an interesting idea that other countries have taken forward and we want to learn from what they've done.

Speaker 0: The speaker argues that digital ID is bad and that the government is coming for children by announcing digital ID cards for 13-year-olds. They claim this is not a good thing because children have the right to grow up in privacy, to come of age, to explore, to experiment, and to make mistakes, with everything they do logged, tracked, and documented into a device that will follow them for the rest of their life and potentially discriminate against them. They say digital ID will document things like skill reports, mental health issues, behavioral issues, accomplishments, and failures, and that having so much information about a person before adulthood would make it easy to build systems that profile people based on socioeconomic background, behavior, and psychology, determining what type of citizen they are before they have a chance at life. They posit that as a parent you raise your children with boundaries, ethics, and moral, but the government has its own ethics, morals, and boundaries. They claim the government will have the power to give a child a bus pass, a bank account, access into entertainment venues, and a work permit when they turn 16, and the government can decide what makes a child applicable for that. They ask who should raise the child— you or the state. They argue that assigning a QR code to enter a playground and another to go skateboarding normalizes surveillance as safety for children, and that future generations could be convinced to accept more surveillance and control because they have been conditioned since childhood to see it as normal. They acknowledge pushback, noting some may call the concerns exaggerated, but they insist there is no reason to think digital ID will be used ethically, and they insist digital ID is forever. They challenge the idea that the last 500 years of humanity justify the next 500 years as superior, and say the government cannot provide a solid explanation for this institutional change. They dismiss migration as “bollocks” and claim the only justification given is convenience. The core claim is that the refusal to provide a straight answer hides a motive: control, plain and simple. The speaker concludes that there is an opportunity to change history in a positive way, and that opportunity starts with individuals choosing not to comply and saying no, for the sake of their kids and future generations.

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen advocates for digital IDs and a global digital infrastructure, claiming it can boost emerging economies. Nigel Farage criticizes this as a dangerous move towards global government control and wealth redistribution. He highlights the potential risks of personal data falling into the wrong hands. The discussion also touches on the development of individual carbon footprint trackers and the programmability of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) for targeted policy functions. The speakers express concerns about loss of privacy, potential debanking based on political opinions, and the surrendering of sovereignty to international organizations. They emphasize the importance of democratic nation states cooperating and trading together while preserving liberty and freedom.

Have digital ID. It's been taken up on a voluntary basis in huge numbers, not least because it means that you can access your own money, make payments so much more easily than is available with others. So I think now we need to go out and make that case of the

Digital technologies have evolved from being analytical to now having predictive power. Companies, including yours, are already involved in utilizing this predictive power. The next step could be moving towards a prescriptive mode, where elections may no longer be necessary. This is because we can accurately predict the outcomes and question the need for elections when we already know the results in advance.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is advocating for digital IDs, claiming they can boost emerging economies. However, Nigel Farage warns that this is about global government control and the redistribution of wealth. Von der Leyen wants a digital ID card or app enforced by the early 2030s, with France and Germany already trialing it. This ID card would contain personal information such as date of birth, gender, eye color, height, vaccine status, and financial status. Farage cautions against the dangers of this initiative, as it could lead to a Chinese-style social credit system and the loss of individual freedoms. He emphasizes the importance of democratic nation states cooperating and trading together, rather than surrendering sovereignty to unelected bureaucrats.