11 October 2014

Queensland Police Service Recruit Training Program

From page 46 of the document, Recruit Training Program Introduction to Policing (Version 1.7, July 2013) by the Queensland Police Service.

How is the law made?

Your role as a police officer is to preserve law and protect life and property. The law is your guidebook as to what you need to do.

This topic focuses on informing you about the law, how it is made and how police officers must work with it, so that it can be upheld.

Most people in the community function within the law without knowing exactly what the law is and how it is made. The law is based on logic and common sense and is largely a collective agreement about how people should treat others and the property of others. People come in contact with the law when they choose to behave in a manner contrary to reasonable behaviour. An example of this would be to plant a tree that obstructs a neighbour’s access to their own property. Another example would be when someone chooses to act contrary to the road rules.

While it is the role of the police officer to enforce the law, it may be helpful to remember that sometimes people may not always be aware that they are breaking the law. The role of police officers in the law is not only to enforce the law but to educate the community about the law and when it applies. It’s similar to owning a motor vehicle that receives regular servicing.You don’t need to know how the car works but can just trust in the expertise of your mechanic to keep it running and to tell you what you need to do to keep it working properly. Police officers are the mechanic in this example; they must know the law and be able to judge how it applies to people and people’s actions within the context of their community. Your training will equip you with the know-how to make these judgements and the experiences you gain while on the job will allow you to hone and refine your skills.

To begin learning the fundamentals of law it is good to firstly look at how laws are made in Australia.
In Australia, laws are made:

  • by politicians in Parliament (called the legislative process)
  • by judges making decisions about court cases (called common law or case law).
The three levels of government (federal, state and local) all help make our laws, by-laws and regulations. For a detailed explanation of how an Act of Parliament is made, go to the Law in Australia website. Government made law overrules court made law if both apply to a case.

Whilst Parliament makes laws, courts make laws (common law) either through:
  • their decisions or
  • their interpretation of the law.
The term Common Law is court made law and through their decisions, judges shape the law. An important aspect of the common law system is that decisions made by judges and magistrates, are informed by the decisions of previously settled cases, i.e. they follow the precedents determined in cases decided by higher courts. This is what is known as the doctrine of precedent.

By way of example, you are probably aware that it is an offence to wilfully and unlawfully damage property (section 469 of The Criminal Code). An appeal court (Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal) was asked to determine how the word “wilful” was to be applied. It was determined by an appeal court of five judges that the word ‘wilful’ requires proof that the accused person either:

  • actually intended to do the damage to the property or
  • willed an act (deliberately did an act) aware that the damage to the property was a probable consequence of his or her actions and that the action was taken regardless of the risks.
The decision of the appeal court is referenced as R v Lockwood; Ex parte A-G[1981] Qd R 209 (‘R’ being the Queen and Lockwood being the person who was charged with the offence). The effect of this decision is that all Queensland Courts are to apply this decision to their determination. In turn, police officers now are Introduction to Policing Booklet v.1.7  47 aware of what is required to prove the action of an offender was wilful when investigating and collecting evidence of this type of offence.

Some of the decisions made by courts may be made into law by Parliament. If Parliament disagrees with how an Act is applied by the courts then Parliament can pass amending legislation to make its intention clearer.

A lot of current police practices are based on decisions made by judges as to what is acceptable best practice for police investigations. The Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000(Qld) is a piece of legislation where a lot of common law practices of police officers are written into statute law. For example, the Act stipulates when police officers can conduct an immediate search of a person or premises, how they are to handle and deal with exhibits and how they are to conduct interviews with suspect offenders.

Comments to this page:

Note: For the purpose of this article, the validity of law is put aside.

The fundamental falsehoods that stand out are (in reference to p46-7):

In Australia there are 2 tiers of government, Federal and State ONLY.

There has not been a lawfully created third tier of government called 'local'.

'(l)ocal' (g)overnment in this context referring to municipal offices or 'city councils' are a department of the state (just like the Department of Education), and cannot lawfully make 'laws'.

Courts cannot and do not make laws.

Australian courts are a place of business, trading, commerce and a place of public record.

The lawful procedure of making 'laws' in Australia follows a process of Bills, upper and lower house debates supported by 'hansards' then written in Acts.

In Australia 'Acts' are law.

The Brainwashing of police or policy enforcers, where the people are the enemy of the state.

Still not convinced that Australia is a Police State?

The document: Recruit Training Program - Introduction to Policing (Version 1.7, July 2013) by the Queensland Police is available for download (82pp, 1.12MB) at:

10 October 2014

Canberra the most livable city in the world also the crime capital of Australia

According to some recent survey apparently Canberra obtained the title of the world's most livable city in the world, a title taken away from Melbourne which apparently is the most livable city every few months according to some survey based loosely on some shady characteristics.

Canberra is geographically located in the south east corner of New South Wales surrounded by a political border called the ACT (Australian Capital Territory), where the Australian parliament resides.

What most Australians would be unaware of is that the area of the ACT is where the most crime occurs in Australia.

The people in office that call themselves politicians, MP's, law makers, etc are committing a crime when laws are being made and passed onto the people as law (Acts), with full support of their corporate allies, the police.

When the Europeans came to the continent currently known as Australia, it was settled by people belonging to over 600 'nations' calling the land Kamerra.

The Europeans settled on the land under hostile conditions bearing guns, committing genocide, and as a result occupying the land, which incidentally it still is.

Conversely in 'New Zealand' the Europeans made a treaty with the original inhabitants, a treaty called the Waitangi Treaty on the 6th of February 1840.

The rules of applying law to the people of an occupied land compared to that of a land where a treaty occured are not the same, but this is a fact that 'Canberra' guards so vigorously and does not want the people of this nation to be aware of.

As a result many so called Australian laws are actually unlawful, where this fraud is perpetuated by all in 'power', especially judges, magistrates, lawyers, barristers and solicitors.

Very briefly, 'occupied land', 'residents', 'post-code' are terms that have military origins.

Should the new TLA (Three Letter Acronym) for the ACT be Australian Criminal Territory?

A short history of Vanuatu citizenship sales

As Vanuatu introduces dual citizenship, it does no harm to review where we have gone wrong – most voters would agree – with citizenship for sale in the past.

This excerpt concerning Vanuatu from an article from 2007 reviews the situation back then …

Commonwealth and Comparative

Politics (2007) Volume 45, Number 2,

Pages 138-163.

Citizenship For Sale: Passports of

Convenience From Pacific Island Tax



Anthony van Fossen

Griffith University

e-mail: a.vanfossen

Pacific Island tax havens have apparently collected $153,450,000 from (mostly ethnic

Chinese) purchasers of passports. This paper considers the evolution of passport sales in

Tonga, Samoa, the Marshall Islands, Vanuatu and Nauru and internal and international

opposition to them. Tension exists between different conceptions of citizenship within the

world-system. Sales reflect classical liberal, individualistic, free market conceptions of

citizenship. Opponents invoke both conservative and democratic conceptions of

citizenship. The paper favours democratic solutions to many problems sales create.

Sales schemes involve secrecy, corruption, and facilitate crime—which attenuates

following exposure by media, opposition politicians, watchdogs and crusaders against

international terrorism. Pacific Island havens currently have no legal, official passport

sales schemes, but the paper demonstrates that they probably continue.

In 1995 and 1996 it appears that at least 2,000 Marshall Islands passports sold for at least $11,000 each—produced revenues of $22m (about 11% of GDP per year).


Attempts to establish schemes in Vanuatu OFC have required state co-operation to waive its ten-year residency requirement for citizenship and lift its dual citizenship prohibition.

Many failed when fraudulent connections were publicised. In 1994 John Avram, former CEO of failed Australian tourism property developer Interwest (who had breached Australian corporations law), and Melbourne associates proposed a A$400m five star tourism complex on Moso Island, with a bank, a casino, its own companies register, financial markets, and a business migration programme (involving Vanuatu citizenship, passports and residence) for investors (Armstrong and Gross 1995:76, 232, 297-8, Vanuatu Weekly 24/2/96, 14/9/96). Although the government approved the scheme it never eventuated. In July 1994 he Olilian Group proposed a new bank, OFC and export processing free trade zone (FTZ), with government approval, to entice about 3,000 wealthy Asian passport purchasers to settle in Luganville on Espiritu Santo. It included residential, hotel, commercial and medical developments. It failed when promoters were charged with fraud in July 199516.

On 20 June 1997 Vanuatu’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Vidal Soksok, advised by Prime Minister Serge Vohor, gave the Resort Las Vegas Group (a.k.a. the South Pacific Immigration Authority) exclusive rights to sell Vanuatu citizenships. Jai Yong (Richard) Jung (a.k.a. Sung Ho Jung), the principal of Resorts Las Vegas, was granted citizenship and an official passport (as trade commissioner to South Korea) despite only fifteen

months’ Vanuatu residence and his retention of South Korean citizenship. He had a criminal conviction and had fled South Korean securities fraud charges. Jung claimed he would build a $100m hotel and casino at Tukutuku in western Efate. His citizenship programme for 60,000 to 80,000 people (a tax haven refuge for Asians) was supposed to bring the government over $350,000,000 and probably more to Jung and other middlemen, based on $17,000 to $25,000 per passport. This would increase Vanuatu’s citizens by 50% and change its ethnic and class character drastically. The country’s ombudsman Marie-Noëlle Ferrieux Patterson exposed the scheme’s fraudulent elements (Patterson 1997), attracting considerable media attention, and it failed to attract the necessary two-thirds legislative majority.

In October 1997 Interim Prime Minister Vohor’s government approved the plan of

Volani International (a Gibraltar OFC registered Italian firm) to establish a ‘state within a state’ on Espiritu Santo. Volani promised an OFC, FTZ, upgraded airport, luxury and low-income housing, and a large casino-hotel complex for Asian visitors. Volani was to transfer the international airport to the Vanuatu government after twenty-five years (Patterson 1998a; Vanuatu Trading Post, 11/7/98, 22/2/99; Vanuatu Weekly, 5/11/97,


On 22 July 1999 Vanuatu’s Deputy Prime Minister, Willie Jimmy, and Lord Keyes,

representing the Mondragon Group, signed a Memorandum of Understanding in

London’s House of Lords. Mondragon’s associate, Nevada real estate developer Michael Oliver, had sponsored tax haven-oriented secessionism in the New Hebrides-Vanuatu since the mid-1970s. He attempted to create a new (libertarian-based) country and sell citizenship to thousands of settlers. His ‘Republic of Vemerana’ briefly controlled

Espiritu Santo in 1980 until Papua New Guinean troops defeated it and restored the island to Vanuatu (van Fossen 2001). Mondragon proposed to develop a FTZ on 80,000 hectares of land in Big Bay, Espiritu Santo; to operate Vanuatu’s consular offices around the world (beginning with Israel, Belgium and Michigan); and to engage in exclusive Internet activities, air services and fishing.

The FTZ would have its own currency, postal service and OFC. On 17 December 1999 Vanuatu’s Council of Ministers approved the project and on 28 January 2000 it appointed Israel’s Major General Daniel Rothschild, Mondragon’s choice, as Vanuatu’s Honorary Consul in Tel Aviv. Vanuatu’s Foreign Investment Review Board approved Mondragon’s FTZ in principle on 26 July 2000.

Obstacles developed in August 2000 when the Vanuatu Trading Post newspaper exposed the dubious past of Oliver’s colleague Stefan Mandel (Mondragon’s man The scandal deepened in June and July 2001, with the revelation of Mandel bankruptcy in Australia in 1995. Oliver severed connections with Mandel and his projects on 11 October 1999; an Israeli court ordered Mondragon to stop offering its shares there without a prospectus; and investors in a betting syndicate run by Mandel (which won $27m on the Virginia lottery) complained that they were not paid. Finally, the new Ombudsman Hannington Alatoa concluded that Mandel had financially assisted Willy Jimmy and three other government officials improperly (Alatoa 2001). From 1997 media scandals concerning Vanuatu’s passport sales continued. Deposed cabinet minister Jimmy accused senior officials at Prime Minister Vohor’s office

illegally selling passports to unqualified Asian businessmen–between fifty (Jimmy’s figure) and three hundred (anonymous government estimates) were sold, reputedly costing $8,000 to $25,000. Honorary Consul positions in Macau and Hong Kong allegedly cost about $90,000 each. Vanuatu’s government apparently received no proceeds. The media scandal continued until several civil servants resigned17.

In March 1998 the Ombudsman reported the illegal issue of numerous ordinary,

diplomatic and official passports since 1993 under instruction from high government officials—particularly Korman, Jimmy, Vohor and Soksok. Recipients included people with criminal, or dubious, histories, or no recorded address. It was impossible to determine how many ordinary passports were issued to foreigners; at least 29 diplomatic and 42 official passports were granted (only six of these being formally accepted by a receiving country)18. The Ombudsman was concerned about possible abuses of exemptions granted with diplomatic and official passport–to carry drugs, ‘dirty’ money, or weapons. The Ombudsman detailed direct or indirect improper payments to Vohor, Jimmy, and Soksok. Scandals continued with the suspension of Citizenship Commission Secretary General, Kepouwe Manwo, accused of illegally issuing passports, in March 2003. Ironically, all powers concerning citizenship were transferred from Manwo to Jean Sese–previously suspended for unlawfully issuing a passport to Richard Jung of Resorts Las Vegas and issuing 64 passports to ineligible foreigners (Patterson 1998b, Vanuatu Trading Post 6/3/03).

In one year (probably its most active one 1996-1997) Vanuatu received about $3.3m for three hundred passports; approximately 1!% of its gross national product. Suggestions (with alarm in 2001) continue of significant illegal sales (Far Eastern Economic Review 5/4/01).

Vanuatu’s international reputation was damaged and some countries (e.g.,

Canada) dropped visa waivers for Vanuatu’s nationals (Ottawa Citizen 5/12/01,

Vancouver Sun 7/12/01).

vanuatudaily.wordpress.com 8 Dec 2013

08 October 2014

Windows 10 Technical Preview contains a keylogger

Don’t freak out.
Don’t freak out. Source: AFP
Developer previews and beta releases aren’t consumer software — they’re for testing, or at the very least, preparing devs for approaching the platform. And while this is obviously the case for Microsoft’s Windows 10 Technical Preview, the idea of a company watching your every keystroke is no less uncomfortable. 

According to The Inquirer, Microsoft has admitted to monitoring file usage within the preview version of Windows 10, up to and including keylogging. The company has responded to concerns over the language in its Privacy Statement by reminding everyone it’s not a consumer product and users have agreed to the policy.

Windows 10s updated user interface.
Windows 10’s updated user interface. Source: IGN
“Users who join the Windows Insider Program and opt-in to the Windows 10 Technical Preview are choosing to provide data and feedback that will help shape the best Windows experience for our customers,” said Microsoft in a released statement.

But before you work yourself into a frenzy and drop Windows for a tinfoil hat and Linux, Microsoft claims the privacy statement may change in the future. Or, at the very least, the company will be less inconspicuous on the matter.

“As always, we remain committed to helping protect our customers’ personal information and ensuring safeguards are in place for the collection and storing of that data,” says Microsoft. “As we get closer to a final product, we will continue to share information through our terms of service and privacy statement about how customer data is collected and used, as well as what choices and controls are available.”

news.com.au 8 Oct 2014

Trust us, we only log your data and open backdoors to your personal computer, so that we can give you a better experience in providing the [censored] information we deem optimal for your needs.

This is a 'beta' test, for the official release, where your every key stroke WILL be monitored, regardless of opt in choice.

NZ cops raid investigative reporter's home

NEW Zealand police have carried out a raid on investigative journalist Nicky Hager's house. 
OFFICERS are investigating the alleged hacking of blogger Cameron Slater's emails, which provided the basis for Hager's book Dirty Politics.

Police said they had removed computers and related items under search warrant from a Wellington address as part of the investigation.

They urged anyone with information to come forward.

Hager received the emails from an anonymous hacker, who goes by the name Rawshark.

Rawshark later drip-fed hacked emails through his @Whaledump Twitter account.

The account was suspended and a new @Whaledump account popped up in its place.

Rawshark announced there would be no further tweets hours before a High Court injunction in September, sought by Slater, which prevented further publication of the emails.

Dirty Politics alleges Slater's Whale Oil blog ran anti-Labour campaigns in collusion with National Party supporters, including former Justice Minister Judith Collins, who later stood down as a minister.

dailytelegrraph.com.au 6 Oct 2014

Once fundamental question must be asked, whether or not the so called 'warrant' is actually lawful.

In Australia or in Victoria specifically, warrants are NOT LAWFUL.

This is one enormous coverup and fraud the authorities / corporate media are not informing the masses about.

The police are a corporation that works for politicians, lawmakers etc and NOT the general populous.

The role of the police is to keep the masses subservient.

Data leaks: How your personal information is at risk

Australians’ private data is hugely vulnerable to cyber attackers.Australians’ private data is hugely vulnerable to cyber attackers. Source: ThinkStock
THE personal data you entrust to companies is at greater risk than you realise; and for businesses in today’s hi-tech world, it’s not a question of if this information will be breached, but when. 

That’s the view of UK technology expert Guy Bunker, who says recent cyber attacks overseas should serve as a wake-up call for Australia.

Personal information of up to 750,000 Japan Airlines (JAL) customers was leaked last week due to a cyber attack. This followed the celebrity nude photo leak from earlier this month, where explicit photos showing more than 100 female stars, including Jennifer Lawrence, hit the internet.

The head of Australia’s corporate regulator has also warned that Australian businesses are not taking the risk of cyber crime seriously enough. In March, Australian Securities and Investments Commission chairman Greg Medcalf said each attack in Australia cost $2 million and that cyber crime had the potential to be the next “black swan event”.

Dr Bunker, the chief technology officer of information security company Clearswift, believes Australia is behind the rest of the world in protecting customers’ sensitive information — and says data breaches are much more common than what is disclosed.

Australia is five to 10 years behind the US and UK in protecting customer data.

“In the UK, America and Europe, we’ve been hardened,” Dr Bunker said. “In general, organisations are better prepared through a huge number of small attacks.”

There have been a number of recent wide-scale hacking events that have rocked the world.
There have been a number of recent wide-scale hacking events that have rocked the world. Source: ThinkStock
Australian customers are more vulnerable because we lack specific laws to protect privacy. The Australian Law Reform Commission has recommended that it be mandatory for companies to notify affected individuals in the event of a data breach, but there is no legal obligation to do so.

“Australia is behind the curve, not least because of privacy laws. Those laws drive the adoption of security. The threat is no greater (in Australia), but because of the lack of privacy laws, you are more vulnerable,” Dr Bunker said.

It’s not clear if bank account or credit card information was compromised in the JAL attack, but Dr Bunker said hackers getting a hold of other customer details could be just as dangerous.

“They weren’t able to siphon off credit card information but that’s almost by the by because the cyber criminals are after other information: names, addresses, email addresses, birthdays — enough stuff to create a perfectly tailored phishing email,” Dr Bunker said.

Instead of seeking bank details directly, which are often better protected, hackers can use the other information companies have to create an email masquerading as a trustworthy business and entice the customer to enter their credit card number with an attractive offer.

“They know where you live, they know everything about you, so they create an email that says ‘You get a special discount if you book through this website’ and, bang, they’ve got your credit card number,” Dr Bunker said.

Companies also store information that commonly forms the answers to questions required when resetting online banking passwords, such as birth dates and maiden names, which is also highly valuable to fraudsters.
“That’s where the real threat comes from,” Dr Bunker said.

Your personal data could be at risk. Source: ThinkStock
Your personal data could be at risk.In Australia, employees are most likely to be the source of data security breaches, with Clearswift research showing they are the culprits in 44 per cent of cases.

Twenty per cent of Australian organisations claim ex-employees are a source and 21 per cent blame customers, partners or suppliers.

And Dr Bunker has some frank advice for Australian companies on the need for cyber crime vigilance.

“First thing is, it’s not about if you are going to be breached, but when. And it’s often not if or when its happened, but when you find out — because it’s happening right now,” he said.

“It doesn’t matter how big or small you are, your data is of use to someone.”

He said companies’ reputations could be protected if they put in place proper safeguards, such as data-loss prevention systems, which allow sensitive data to be removed before the information leaves the organisation. If JAL has a system like this in place, the incident wouldn’t have occurred.

“If you’ve got a malicious insider, or ‘the enemy within’, you need systems in place that watch for information being used and abused, and travelling outside the organisation.”

Hacking has become more sophisticated.
Hacking has become more sophisticated. Source: Supplied
He said breaches could also occur inadvertently, through holes in company systems. Common mistakes can be workers printing out sensitive customer information, burning unencrypted data on CDs or not being careful enough with the details contained in emails.

“That inadvertent stuff happens a lot. It’s not just cyber attacks. JAL is a good wake-up call that those systems need to be checked out so the processes around them is secure and protected,” Dr Bunker said.

“Ask the people at the sharp end, do they know of any practices that might put information at risk?”

He said customers needed to be equally aware of the risks. The general public could learn from the celebrity nude photo hacking scandal, because it’s not just the picture itself that can be valuable, but the metadata contained in the image.

“In this particular case, it’s not about the obvious; it’s the other data. With the celebrity selfies, it’s really embarrassing to have a photo of you naked, of course, but the metadata tells you exactly where the picture was taken and this can be just as dangerous, in the hands of the wrong people, such as a stalker.

“The first thing is to acknowledge that using the net can be secure but it can also be very insecure.

“This has to be taken seriously, because actually your info is of incredibly good use to the cyber attacker.”

news.com.au 1 Oct 2014

People in government who obtain your information together with storing it for future reference are stalking you and by law are classified as stalkers, BUT nothing can be done about this.

Privacy laws are made for corporations and not private individuals.

People in government hack individual's computers, but once again there are no criminal repercussions.

ABS internet activity report shows increasing demand for downloading but slower connection speeds

New record ... Australians downloaded almost one exabyte of data between April and June 2
New record ... Australians downloaded almost one exabyte of data between April and June 2014, the ABS reports. Picture: AP Source: AP
AUSTRALIANS download more than 10 times as much data as they did just five years ago and consumed almost one million terabytes in just three months this year, the Australian Bureau of Statistics revealed today. 

Despite the 16 per cent jump in broadband downloads, however, fewer Australians were connected to the internet at the highest speeds, with more than 58,000 subscribers ditching the fastest connections available.

EARLIER: Illegal downloading in government’s sights

The Australian Bureau of Statistics internet activity report showed more than 12 million Australian households and businesses were connected to the internet in June this year, and they collectively downloaded 996,225 terabytes — or almost one exabyte of information — between April and June.

ABS spokeswoman Lesley Martin said the great majority of that data was downloaded using a broadband connection, but 4 per cent of it, or more than 38,000 terabytes, came from mobile internet connections including smartphones.

Australia’s three-month download tally was up more than 135,000 terabytes on December’s total and 338,000 terabytes on June last year.

“Exactly five years ago, for the three months ended June 2009, we were just about to hit 100,000 terabytes of downloads, so today’s result makes a tenfold increase in just five years,” Ms Martin said.

The ABS also found two thirds of Australia’s broadband subscribers were connected at speeds of greater than 8 megabits per second, but the number using the speediest connections fell this year.

Despite NBN Co connecting 250,000 homes and businesses to its network, Australian internet users connected at 25mbps and over fell by more than 58,000 to 2.03 million.

More users (4 million) subscribe to services offering downloads at less than 8mbps.

A recent Akamai report ranked Australia 41st in the world for average internet connection speeds and 40th for peak speeds.

Telsyte managing director Foad Fadaghi said despite the fall, at least half of Australian internet users were keen to adopt higher connection speeds.

“When we asked consumers if they would upgrade their services to faster speeds in the next three years if they were available, more than half indicated they would,” he said.

“That would imply there’s a pent-up demand for faster services.”

Mr Fadaghi said the increase in data downloaded could be explained by more devices and a greater use of videostreaming services.

“It’s understandable given the growth in devices in the household and the types of content consumers are accessing,” Mr Fadaghi said.

“Download amounts should continue to grow, particularly when we look at things like video consumption.”

news.com.au 7 Oct 2014