Super-hacker loses extradition appeal

Commonwealth Laws are made to protect Corporate Criminals.

The Law Makers of the Anglo - Masonic judicial empire of the UK / US / Australia and others have set up the legal system in such a manner that people (companies) that commit fraud are NOT sentenced, whilst if an individual commits a similar fraudulent activity, they spend considerable jail time.

None can be more true than of the recent case of a 'hacker' from the U.K that made his way into the government computer network, in the U.S.

In the article is stated that he has lost his extradition appeal.

In Australia, the fraudster that took the wrap (Christopher Skase - Quintex, there were politicians, lawyers, bankers, etc involved but they did NOT get named) for a BILLION DOLLAR FRAUD, escaped to Mallorca could NOT be extradited, as he bribed the local judges.

The BIG difference is that in this case an individual committed a 'crime' against an authority, whereas, Quintex's lawyers, bankers, etc committed fraud against the people, NO ONE there saw any jail time.


Reference to story:

Superhacker loses extradition appeal,

Freemason’s advantage in the courtroom

A member of the freemasons boasted how his belonging to the 'brotherhood' helped him ‘win’ a case against the other party who was not a member of the freemasons.

The brother then stated that it was already decided in the ‘lodge’ that he was to win a claim against the other party.

The method in which it was to be achieved was in the manner that a letter of the court date was NOT sent to the other party, as a result the attending party ‘wins’ by default.

This is not an isolated incident, as confirmed by the source, and is widely practiced from the lowest traffic infringement to the higher level of corporate law suits.

The mass media conveniently ommits any references to masonry, and its external influences.

Pokies money laundering and winnings fraud.

The secret dealings of organised crime generally do not make it to the mass media, and the ones that do are usually the smaller players, who are competition to the main syndicates, or just simply rogue traders.

In the world of night clubs members (girls) are ‘employed’ (not physically, but in the means of kick backs, drinks, drugs, etc) to entice patronage of a particular venue. This is a well known and practiced fact.

This is also true of in the gambling arena. An interview with a ‘patron’ revealed that their sole purpose was to ‘entice’ others to the venue. The ‘enticer’ then revealed that they are given chips to gamble with, and to register at the venue to show that there is patronage.

The networked poker machines then give out a ‘winning’ to the ‘enticer’ of which they have been given specific instructions that the money IS NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE PREMISES and MUST be put back into the system. The person revealed that this is how the drug money is laundered through the system.

The winnings are carefully controlled, and the significant winnings are NOT given to just anyone.

Telstra keeping us in the DARK AGES

The retail version told to the masses is that in Australia we have 'competition' is plainly a deliberate lie.

Whilst there may be companies, like : Optus (Virgin - Virtual Mobile Network Operator), Vodafone, 3, and a plethora of up and coming VMNO's, there is ONE thing in common:

They ALL use the copper that Telstra owns.

It does NOT matter how forward thinking the operators are, at the end of the day it is TELSTRA that thwarts all efforts to move technology along.

None can be better described by the following response from an internal document from a service provider with Telstra:

Our wholesale agreement is currently with Telstra. I am not sure if they
will allow for a naked DSL service any time soon. There is nothing which
I am aware of in the pipeline....

Naked DLS means that you do NOT have to connect a phone line to provide internet, a service that TELSTRA clearly dos NOT want to offer the customer.

US Marines renew ban on Twitter

The US Marine Corps has renewed a ban on Twitter and other social networking sites as the Pentagon weighed a similar prohibition over cyber-security concerns.

The marines had already banned the use of social media on military networks but issued a more detailed order this week defining which sites were out of bounds and noting possible exceptions to the rule, Marine Corps spokesman Lieutenant Craig Thomas said on Tuesday.

"These internet sites in general are a proven haven for malicious actors and content and are particularly high risk due to information exposure, user-generated content and targeting by adversaries," the Marine Corps said in an order posted on its website.

"The very nature of SNS (social networking sites) creates a larger attack and exploitation window, exposes unnecessary information to adversaries and provides an easy conduit for information leakage that puts opsec (operational security), comsec (communications security) ... at an elevated risk of compromise."

Those marines whose assignments may require access to social media could apply for a waiver, it said.

Marines working in criminal investigations, press relations and recruiting have a need to use social media to carry out their duties and would most likely be granted access, Thomas said.

But he said "social networking sites have always been banned in the Marine Corps".

The Defence Department, meanwhile, confirmed it was carrying out a formal review of its policies on the use of social networking sites.

In a July 31 memo, the deputy secretary of defence, William Lynn, said he had asked the Pentagon's chief information officer to draw up policy options examining the threats and benefits of so-called Web 2.0 capabilities.

The memo acknowledges how social networking sites have proved valuable for recruitment, press relations and sharing information with allies and among military families.

"However, as with any internet-based capabilities, there are implementation challenges and operational risks that must be understood and mitigated," the memo said.

The policy review comes as other branches of the armed services have embraced social media with enthusiasm, seeing the sites as a means of reaching a wider audience and spreading information within the military.

The US Army has set up a new office for online social media but the military has struggled to balance security concerns with demands to modernise its communications.

Security rules have been blamed for stifling blogging by soldiers from the battlefront, even as some senior commanders write blogs or maintain a Facebook page.

ninemsn 8 Aug 2009

One of the real reasons for STOPPING 'soldiers' from blogging at the frontline is NOT about security, BUT rather about the military propaganda machine, on e.g. how 'we' are winning the war against terror, and covering up information so the public do NOT know the truth.

The mass media 'sanitises' information, and in most circumstances 'misrepresents' actual facts on the frontline.