Sunday, December 8, 2019

DVA a major contributor to veteran suicide


So, this is how the administration government of a colony of the British empire rules over the people.

The people in government send their cannon fodder over the seas to kill other nation's people for their benefit.

As a result of killing other people, those who make it back alive, have enormous (mental) health problems, but they are literally discarded by the very people that sent them overseas to kill other people.

In typical colonial fashion those in government then hide/falsify the problems they caused to the returned veterans.

Briefly,

When veterans deal with the Department of Veteran Affairs, they are up against an opposing force that deals with their claims to such an extent that many commit suicide where the modus operandi is not to acknowledge any claims first and foremost, and change the ‘goal posts’ on the claimant, after completing what that 'person' was told to.

When a suicide occurs a cover-up is made by those in government, stating that the death was an ‘accident’.

Whether people ‘volunteer’ or get told to go overseas to kill other people for the benefit of those in government, at the end of the day it’s up to you to say no to enrolling to kill people for those in government, in other countries.

Thursday, December 5, 2019

The corrupt police state's secret court rulings

This is what goes on in the (penal) colony we call Australia.

From an article by the ABC of the headline:
'The quiet person you pass on the street': Secret prisoner Witness J revealed

Exclusive by political editor Andrew Probyn

Updated about 10 hours ago



Just 13 words are all there are on the public record to note one of the most extraordinary episodes in Australian legal history.

Key points:

  •     Witness J was a prisoner who was tried, sentenced and imprisoned in secret
  •     The former military intelligence officer worked in various parts of the sprawling military and defence network
  •     He has been accused of acting so dangerously he was imperilling lives and national security

After a secret trial of a secret prisoner, the sentence was delivered — you guessed it — in complete secrecy.

You have to know what you're looking for, but even when you find those 13 words, they are not at all illuminating. In fact, they would defeat the purpose of being there at all, were it not for the legal tease they present.

"Before Justice Burns, in Court Room SC4, at 10:00am," it starts promisingly enough.

Then comes the inevitable punchline: "Sentence: Matter Suppressed."

The date was February 19 of this year. The venue was the ACT Supreme Court in Canberra.

Exactly why the Commonwealth and the justice system should conspire to allow such exceptional measures has unnerved legal experts and dismayed former judges.

"Permanently secret legal proceedings is not the kind of conduct we want an Australian justice system to include," said barrister Bret Walker, a former independent national security legislation monitor.

An investigation by the ABC has uncovered the remarkable events that led to the secret trial, the unravelling of a man's impressive career and the circumstances of his arrest, which led to a jail sentence of two years and seven months for serious national security offences.

Photo: ACT Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker remanded Witness J in custody in May 2018. (ABC News: Tegan Osborne)

The secret case of Prisoner 123458

By February 19, the defendant had already been locked up for nine months as Prisoner 123458. He had been remanded in custody by ACT Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker in mid-May 2018.

After a month in solitary confinement, he was placed in the high-security sex offenders' wing of Canberra's Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC).


He was not a sex offender. Not at all. Housing him with convicted paedophiles and rapists was deemed a better option than putting him alongside murderers, gangsters and other hardened criminals in the other wing.

The legal proceedings before his sentencing had not gone entirely unnoticed. That was impossible with two burly security guards sitting outside the courtroom, barring the curious from entry.

Two professionally curious court reporters, the ABC's Michael Inman and The Canberra Times' Alexandra Back, jointly wondered what was happening inside SC4.

It was decided Back should make an inquiry with the Chief Justice, Helen Murrell.

The response, which came from Justice John Burns, seemed regretful, practically apologetic, for what he described as the "generally undesirable" and "unusual" security arrangements.

Justice Burns said that on November 19, 2018, he had agreed, at the request of the parties to the proceeding, to make "consent orders" under the National Security (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004, closing the court to the public "during the taking of evidence and submissions".

"The particularly sensitive nature of the material to be exposed in the proceeding, and the grave harm that could occur if the material became public, outweighed the desirability of ensuring that proceedings before the Court are open to the public," Justice Burns said in a note to the reporters.

"The decision to close the Court was not taken lightly," he told them, adding that he regretted not being able to say any more.

The nation's chief law officer insists secrecy was needed to protect national security.

"The court determined, consistent with the Government submission, that it was contrary to the public interest that the information be disclosed and the information was of a kind that could endanger the lives or safety of others," Attorney-General Christian Porter told the ABC.
The raid that led to a secret becoming public

What happened to Witness J, as he has become known, might not have become known were it not for the fact that the day before he was sentenced by Justice Burns, his cell was raided by Australian Federal Police officers under court warrant, looking for a memoir Witness J had written during his time locked up alongside sex offenders.

What can be gleaned publicly about Witness J came almost by accident, when he took action in the ACT courts to complain about his treatment and what he claimed was a breach of his human rights.

The action failed, at his own considerable cost, but it did at least drag Witness J's fate from the darkest shadows into the half-light.

Photo: Little is known about Witness J's appearances in court. (ABC News: Emma Machan)

Witness J was convicted under the myriad security laws that can trigger wide-ranging suppression of any outside scrutiny or media reporting.

Since his civil action against the ACT Government became public last month, a person purporting to be Witness J has been testing the bounds of the suppression orders, taking to Twitter to claim he is the victim of an unfair prosecution.

    "Persecuted. Jailed after asking for mental health support three times, and falling through the floor," he has tweeted.

A former military intelligence officer, Witness J is a Duntroon graduate in his mid 30s who served in East Timor, Afghanistan and Iraq. He has a distinguished record.

Witness J worked in various parts of the sprawling military and intelligence network.

But Witness J's downfall began during a civilian posting in a South-East Asian country when he was undergoing a re-validation of his Top Secret security clearance, which by practice is about every five years.

He would have been one of 25 or so people in his service undergoing a re-validation process that month and the questions from the vetting officer would have been standard, including about his financial and personal circumstances.

But there were some anomalies in his answers that prompted more and more inquiry. Truthfulness is key in these interviews.


Photo: A Twitter account belonging to a "Witness J" appeared in November.

It is understood his lack of candour prompted concerns being raised with Witness J about how he was conducting himself as a single man in the South-East Asian capital. There was a worry he could be compromised.

This coincided with a mental health crisis, which is not uncommon with people who have given many years' service in hostile environments.

Witness J sought internal help on three occasions for his mental health but his security clearance prevented seeking help outside his employment.

Internal complaint lands Witness J in the crosshairs

The ABC has been told Witness J was infuriated by the accusation that his behaviour while overseas had made him a compromise risk. He complained internally to the head of security and a departmental psychologist back in Australia.

It was an unwise decision delivered dangerously. It is understood his complaints were communicated by email and other unsecure electronic means.

Witness J immediately found himself in the crosshairs of an organisation that had been his employer for five years.

    In his complaints, he accused fellow case officers of behaviour which he believed was more egregious than his own. Worse, he identified agents who had been recruited for direction and control. These were grave, unforgivable sins in his line of work.

His employer said Witness J had breached secrecy provisions. It believed he was acting so dangerously, he was imperilling lives, national security and the very working environment of his colleagues.

According to one person, Witness J had to be "shut down".

On Twitter, "Witness J" claims his case was unprecedented. From what the ABC has uncovered, he is probably right.

"How do I know? The open-mouthed gapes from my defence team and the DPP as they waded through unwalked ground," he has tweeted.

However, he did not contest the five charges and he pleaded guilty, as advised by his barrister Kieran Ginges, even though Witness J had argued there had been no public disclosure and no release of information outside his employer.

That is not how the prosecution or his employer saw it.

"The orders provided for a mechanism for closure of the court in circumstances where highly sensitive national security information would have been disclosed, but did not prevent the defendant or his counsel from accessing the information," Mr Porter said.
Release prompts complaints about treatment

Witness J's complaints had put critically sensitive information within the potential grasp of rival espionage capability, if the unsecure communications were electronically "triangulated".

Witness J was released from jail on August 16, some 16 months or so before the expiry of his sentence. It is understood there are conditions attached to his release, including six-monthly regular psychological testing and an overseas travel ban without prior permission.

By negotiation, he is able to describe his convictions as having been for "mishandled classified information". Other descriptors of his crimes, perhaps less damning, had been offered to him, in the hope it would help him find employment.


Photo: The prisoner was held in secret at the Alexander Maconochie Centre in Canberra. (ABC News: Ian Cutmore )

Since his release, Witness J has complained about his treatment to the inspector-general of Intelligence and Security. She, however, has no power to overturn his convictions.

Witness J appears to claim being the victim of an injustice; that what should have been treated as an internal complaint left him with a criminal conviction and serious mental health issues.

Witness J admitted to serious breaches of security protocols, but observers say his secret dispatch by Australia's legal regime raises considerable concern for a robust democracy.
Calls for secrecy to be explained

John Dowd, a former NSW Liberal leader, attorney-general and Supreme Court judge, said there needed to be an explanation for the secret trial.

"Society has to be very careful in the circumstance in which we hold limited-publicity trials and it's important that we know the extent of such trials and the reasons for them," Mr Dowd said.

"There are obvious circumstances where trials have to be limited in terms of publicity but these should be extremely rare.

    "There needs to be some explanation to the public as to why this has occurred — and if it's not a matter explained to the public, then the matter should be explained to the Parliament."


Photo: Bret Walker fears our national security legislation is not working. (Supplied: The Kings School)

Mr Walker's criticism is similar: "The public has an interest to know when information is being kept secret from them — it's not good enough for the public to be told 'it's in your interests that you are not told'."

"What the [Witness J] case has produced is a concrete example of the dangers of not publishing, in real time as they occur, the fact of the orders being made; it's a really interesting example of the way in which a perfectly well-intentioned piece of national security legislation might not be operating in the way one would like."

Federal independent MP Andrew Wilkie, a former military analyst, is circumspect about the Witness J case, perhaps surprisingly so given he has been outspoken in his criticism of the pursuit of Witness K and his lawyer Bernard Collaery.

"I have made my own inquiries and decided not to comment," is all Mr Wilkie will say of the Witness J case.


Photo: Independent MP Andrew Wilkie has made his own inquiries. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

But this opaque episode provokes big questions for Australia's legal regime.

Even if there are serious matters of national security at issue, should questions of wrongdoing be held entirely in secret and covered by blanket suppression orders?

And how is it that a man who has given considerably to his nation over a decade and a half — and has the physical and mental scars to show for it — should have his contribution effectively scrubbed out in 13 words?

"I am you. I am an Australian," the man purporting to be Witness J said on Twitter.

    "The quiet person you pass in the street. Tonight, I want to do my best to answer your questions, but as a secret prisoner from a secret trial who worked for a secret organisation, I am limited."

But as one informed person observed: "Some secrets must remain secret."

Follow this story to get email or text alerts from ABC News when there is a future article following this storyline.

Monday, December 2, 2019

Optus ordered to pay $6.4 million over misleading NBN disconnection email to customers




RCS vulnerabilities can help a hacker take control of your bank account



Rich Communication Service, or RCS, is the next generation in wireless messaging. Unlike SMS/Text, which uses a wireless operator's cellular connection, RCS runs through a carrier's data network. This allows messages to be sent over Wi-Fi when possible. It also will lead to an increase in the number of characters allowed per message to 8,000 from the 160 cap that text has. In addition, RCS issues "read receipts" so that users know when their message has been read by the recipient. And when someone is typing a response to an RCS dispatch, a three-dot indicator will let a user know that an incoming message is being composed. Group messages with up to 100 participants can take place, and larger files containing images and videos can be shared.

The U.S. wireless carriers have big plans for the platform. All four major U.S. carriers have formed the Cross Carrier Messaging Initiative (CCMI) and are planning to deliver an RCS based messaging app next year to their Android toting customers. The wireless operators are planning to monetize RCS by allowing users to purchase tickets, visit their favorite brands, and even buy products without leaving the messaging app. Meanwhile, as it did in the U.K. and France earlier this year when it pulled an end-run around the carriers by releasing an RCS messaging app, Google recently started rolling out RCS Chat to all Android phones in the states. Those receiving it have to select the Android Messages app set as their default messaging platform.

Hackers using vulnerabilities found on RCS can steal one time passwords and make changes to users' online accounts

 But there does seem to be a dark side to RCS as discovered by Germany (SRLabs). The security firm says that the process of getting Android handsets ready for RCS leaves the platform wide open to be hacked and that there is very little protection for users. Attackers can take over user accounts, and the most widely used RCS Client at the moment (the aforementioned Android Messages app) does not do enough validation of domains, certificates, and user identity. As a result, hackers can spoof a domain name and even allow caller ID spoofing and fraud.


SRLabs found that through RCS, hackers can track users and verify if they are online. Spoofing caller ID, the hackers can pretend to be someone else.  The vulnerabilities in the platform can allow a bad actor to hijack a one-time password sent by SMS; this could allow an unauthorized bank transaction to be approved, or help transfer the control of an account to a hacker. The report notes that "The underlying issue is that the RCS client, including the official Android messaging app, does not properly validate that the server identity matches the one provided by the network during the provisioning phase. This fact can be abused through DNS spoofing, enabling a hacker to be in the middle of the encrypted connection between mobile and RCS network core."


SRLabs says that the vulnerabilities can be corrected. Some of the suggestions include the use of "strong" one time password codes, and employing information from a user's SIM card to authenticate the user. The RCS client being employed (for example, the Android Messages app) should connect only to trusted domains and validate certificates.

If RCS is going to live up to its potential, the vulnerabilities need to be patched. And that is especially true if the carriers plan on monetizing it. Consumers are going to want to use a messaging app that they can trust and at this point, it isn't clear that RCS can be fully trusted.

Source:phonearena.com

Saturday, November 30, 2019

Google admits that ‘others’ can access the camera on Samsung and android smartphones


In Brief
  • The Facts:Hackers have successfully been able to access the front facing cameras on Google and Samsung phones without permission from the user and regardless of whether or not the phone was unlocked. They were able to take pictures and record video.
  • Reflect On:Why should you care? This is an outright invasion of our right to privacy. If we continue to willingly give up all our rights, soon we won't have any left.
As handy as they are, our smartphones are literally portable tracking devices. Equipped with GPS technology, people can easily be located and for most android users a record of where they’ve been each day since they’ve had their fancy phones is stored online. If that’s not creepy enough, the microphones on our phones are also able to record our conversations because they are listening even when we don’t think they are. Finally, you know those handy front-facing cameras often used to capture the perfect selfie? Recently, researchers have revealed how this camera can be used to spy on users, who would have thought?

The security research team from Checkmarx has uncovered a major vulnerability that is affecting Google and Samsung smartphones and has a potential to impact the hundreds of millions of android users across the globe. Apparently it’s now fixed, but the researchers discovered a way for a hack attacker to take control of the front facing camera and remotely take photos, record video, listen in on your conversations and more. All happening silently in the background without your awareness.
And, although it’s important to note that the following is merely speculation, if hackers have the ability to do this, then you better believe that the NSA and other high level government agencies are able to do the same thing.  This isn’t something new, Edward Snowden, NSA whistleblower, and many others like him have talked about and have explained how our phones are actually used to spy on us.

What Did The Checkmarx Security Research Team Find?

Their research began on the Google camera app on the Pixel 2XL and Pixel3 smartphones, they found a few vulnerabilities which were initiated by allowing an attacker to remotely bypass user permissions. Apparently facial recognition, fingerprint and password security, are not as secure as we’ve been led to believe.

“Our team found a way of manipulating specific actions and intents,” Erez Yalon, director of security research at Checkmarx said, “making it possible for any application, without specific permissions, to control the Google Camera app. This same technique also applied to Samsung’s Camera app.”

Davey Winder, from Forbes.com explains how an attacker is able to exploit the Google Camera app vulnerabilities,

Checkmarx created a proof of concept (PoC) exploit by developing a malicious application, a weather app of the type that is perennially popular in the Google Play Store. This app didn’t require any special permissions other than basic storage access. By just requesting this single, commonplace permission, the app would be unlikely to set off user alarm bells. We are, after all, conditioned to question unnecessary and extensive permission requests rather than a single, common one. This app, however, was far from harmless. It came in two parts, the client app running on the smartphone and a command and control server that it connects to in order to do the bidding of the attacker. Once the app is installed and started, it would create a persistent connection to that command and control server and then sit and wait for instructions. Closing the app did not close that server connection. What instructions could be sent by the attacker, resulting in what actions?

I hope you are sitting down as it’s a lengthy and worrying list.
  • Take a photo using the smartphone camera and upload it to the command server.
  • Record video using the smartphone camera and upload it to the command server.
  • Wait for a voice call to start, by monitoring the smartphone proximity sensor to determine when the phone is held to the ear and record the audio from both sides of the conversation.
  • During those monitored calls, the attacker could also record video of the user at the same time as capturing audio.
  • Capture GPS tags from all photos taken and use these to locate the owner on a global map.
  • Access and copy stored photo and video information, as well as the images captured during an attack.
  • Operate stealthily by silencing the smartphone while taking photos and recording videos, so no camera shutter sounds to alert the user.
  • The photo and video recording activity could be initiated regardless of whether the smartphone was unlocked.”
Of course when Google was confronted about this alarming issue they seemed glad to hear about it so that they could fix the problem, telling Winder after he reached out,

“We appreciate Checkmarx bringing this to our attention and working with Google and Android partners to coordinate disclosure. The issue was addressed on impacted Google devices via a Play Store update to the Google Camera Application in July 2019. A patch has also been made available to all partners.”

Why Should You Care?

While it is great that they are enhancing their security, there is no doubt in my mind that hackers can find a way to get around the new security and in my opinion. What’s even more alarming than hackers is government agencies having the ability to turn on your camera and “check in” on you whenever they  please without your permission, or your awareness.

Sound Familiar?

This is literally Orwell’s 1984 coming to life! If you are unfamiliar with this book, firstly, I highly recommend it, secondly, it basically foreshadows a totalitarian government referred to as, “Big Brother” that is constantly watching and spying on the citizen’s ensuring they are following the rules set forth by the state. As Orwell writes,

“The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever the wanted to. You had to live- did live, from habit that became instinct- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”

and..

“He thought of the telescreen with its never-sleeping ear. They could spy upon you night and day, but if you kept your head you could still outwit them. With all their cleverness they had never mastered the secret of finding out what another human being was thinking. . . . Facts, at any rate, could not be kept hidden. They could be tracked down by inquiry, they could be squeezed out of you by torture. But if the object was not to stay alive but to stay human, what difference did it ultimately make? They could not alter your feelings; for that matter you could not alter them yourself, even if you wanted to.

They could lay bare in the utmost detail everything that you had done or said or thought; but the inner heart, whose workings were mysterious even to yourself, remained impregnable.”

So, What Can We Do?

I’m sure there are a great number of you out there who are thinking, I’ve got nothing to hide, so who cares? This is a very passive stance, and it’s not about whether or not you are participating in illegal activities, and/or are worried about being sentenced to jail or caught by authorities, it’s about our right to privacy. As whistle-blower Edward Snowden has said, arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.”

But, to each there own. Some steps you can take to protect your privacy,
  • Tape the front facing camera on your device while you’re not using it.
  • You may want to put some sticky tac over the microphone when you’re not using it as well.
  • Turn off your phone when not in use.
  • Simply use your phone less, and when not on it, put it in a different room.
  • You may want to be extra cautious when changing, or plotting to overthrow your government.
  • You can actually buy nifty little sliding covers to block your camera for your phone and computer.
  • Personally, I’ve been toying with the idea of going back to a good ol’ basic flip phone… not just for the security and privacy measures, but to avoid wasting so much time.
Source: nexusnewsfeed.com

Wednesday, November 27, 2019

How to get out of being interrogated by police





Australia is a ‘funny’ ol’ place, where archaic colonial rule applies, i.e. penal colony policies, where the police state is running amok.

So, how do you get out of being grilled by the suits in such a dark blue that it’s so close to black that it’s not funny, where history will tell us that it does not end well for the ‘people’?

Well, you ‘just’ tell the cops that you’re sick.

That's right it's THAT simple.

You know you have “ill health”, you’re suffering, maybe even got an attack of the sniffles, your stomach hurts as a result of your poor diet as shown via your Candida infested tongue, or quite simply that you’re suffering from CBF.

That just might work for the (‘supported’ personnel of the ) ‘administration’ or it seems to work well if you're a molester in a position of authority in Australia, but surely not you the serf?



Give it a go and share your experience here with the rest of us.

Tuesday, November 26, 2019

Trump immune from questioning on association with paedophile Epstein?

It seems that the leader Mr. Donald John Trump of the administration of the United States is immune from a ‘grilling’ unlike Andrew Christian Albert Edward or ‘Prince’ Andrew for short, with ties to the now deceased paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.


Impeachment should be the least of Trump’s worries.

Whilst we’re at it why not include Melainia Trump (née Knavs) in the questioning process?

Let’s have a look at the photo that got Handy Andy in the crap:

 Bugger!

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Bourke St massacre a police incompetence cover-up




The information we have obtained a while ago with regards to this matter, has always pointed to the incompetence and failure of Victoria Police, where the pinnacle of their multiple failures has made it out into the public news media of late.

As usual police lie, and get away with their lies, from alleged speeding fine infringements to murder and drug trafficking activities, but that's a little off topic.

On Wednesday the 20th of November, Victoria Police released ‘blame’ on the bail justice for letting Gargasoulas out, because they were both Greek.



Wow, can you imagine if that was equated to persons who were both from the Holy land?

What sort out outcry would there be?

As usual to denounce any responsibility the police lied.

It wasn’t the bail justice’s fault or the allegation of comradery, but rather just a simple one box too little ticked.

Once again you can rely on the deception and lies to pull through for Victoria Police, and the best part about it for them is that they get away with it, but that’s ‘normal’ in a police state.