Do Not Be Fooled by the CCP's Coercion of Flagging ID Cards

(Minghui.org) Nowadays, many daily activities in China require showing one's resident ID cards. Dafa practitioners’ ID cards have been flagged in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s database in recent years, especially after they sued Jiang Zemin for initiating the persecution of Falun Dafa. 

Even when the practitioners did not show their ID cards, the police could still find that their IDs were tagged by inputting other identifying information into the database. 

People in China need to use their ID cards to purchase tickets and enter the train station while taking long-distance transportation. When the database shows an abnormality with an ID, the police will forcibly search the Falun Dafa practitioners’ luggage and confiscate their cell phones. 

If any truth-clarifying materials or Falun Dafa books were found, the practitioners would usually be detained or sent to the police station. 

Many Falun Dafa practitioners across the country have been persecuted in this way. There are some practitioners in our region who also experienced illegal searches while taking the high-speed train. 

This has caused great difficulties to their normal life and being able to fulfill their vows of helping people gain salvation. This treatment is similar to the Nazis’ racial discrimination against the Jews.

The CCP Tricks Practitioners to Sign the Three Statements 

A dozen local practitioners were arrested and had their homes ransacked by the police last October. Seven elderly Falun Dafa practitioners were arrested and detained for a day when they were caught studying the Fa in a group. 

They were released on bail awaiting trial. The police department then notified them a few months later to come and pick up the confiscated items at the station. 

When they arrived at the police department, however, the police did not return the illegally confiscated items but asked them to sign their names to a three-page statement instead.

The officers claimed that if the elderly practitioners signed their names, the flagging on their IDs would be removed, making it convenient for them to travel in the future. 

Most of the practitioners signed their names without thinking much about it. When we discussed why they signed their names, some of them claimed their education level was not high enough to understand the content of the statements. 

Some also said the police did not fully show them the statements, so they did not know what was written. If we don’t know what is written on a document, we absolutely should not sign. 

A signature is an agreement of being responsible for whatever is written on the document. This is not the practitioners’ true intention, and our cultivated sides would not agree with it.

Master Li Hongzhi, Falun Dafa's founder, has already taught us the Fa principle of not cooperating with the evil's persecution at any time, under any circumstances. If we are all able to do this, the evil itself will no longer exist. 

When I saw many solemn declarations published on the Minghui website of practitioners voiding their signatures on the three statements, I felt sorry for them. I know many of our elderly practitioners did very well in clarifying the truth to the public and persuading people to withdraw from the CCP and its affiliated organizations. 

Some can persuade many people to quit the CCP within a day. But why do they comply with the evil when being threatened? 

I understand that maybe their human attachments were taken advantage of, or they were not very clear about the Fa principles.

Master taught us,

“The Fa can break all attachments, the Fa can destroy all evil, the Fa can shatter all lies, and the Fa can strengthen righteous thoughts.” (“Drive Out Interference”, Essentials for Further Advancement II)

Diligently studying the Fa to assimilate to the Fa principles is the foundation for practitioners to cultivate themselves well and do the three things. We should have few omissions and leave no regret for our cultivation path.

Editor's note: Views expressed in this article represent the author's own opinions, for which the author is solely responsible. Readers should evaluate the article's merits on their own.