Recycling, another corporate scam in Australia

This is another example of how Australian 'consumers' are getting defrauded of their cash, by paying for services that never existed.

No fines from the people in government for this fraud?

No fines from the people in government for false 'advertising'?

The firm will still be allowed to carry on with business?

All that matters is that you pay for your unlawfully issued fine.

Rule of law under the Australian Government

As stated by the Attorney-General's Department, under the jurisdiction of the Australian Government:

"laws are publicly made and the community is able to participate in the law-making process"

See also the book: YOUR WILL BE DONE by Arthur A Chresby

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B21_coIgIYu2SndnN0RpWmZYQ1E

Police sell firearms on black-market

Victoria is in a midst of a crime epidemic, a crime epidemic committed by Victoria Police.

The organisation is home to many criminal offences (more so than the general population - per capita) where the focus of this post is on the selling of confiscated or handed in firearms to Victoria Police.

The real figures are much higher, where only this information, as reported by the Fairfax media, is allowed to be in the public domain: 

Do you know why there is no government policy to weed out criminals in Australia's police force?

 

Australian's forced online health records at risk

Australians are given the illusion that they live in a democracy with a choice, in this case with regards to their health records being online.

The official statement by The Department of Health is as follows:

"As part of the 2017-18 Budget, the Australian Government announced that the My Health Record system would transition to opt-out participation. By the end of 2018, every Australian will have a My Health Record, unless they choose not to have one."

Australians may not be aware that their health records are already online, maybe not in the "My Health Record" folder, but nonetheless "online".

When the corporation aggregate commonly referred to as the Australian Government, takes an action with regards to the 'budget' it's a cost cutting exercise where the general population is at risk.

The Australian Government's I.T. infrastructure is in shambles, but don't take the word of people in government to tell you this, as not only are they not obliged by any law to tell you (the tax slaves) the truth, the inadequacies can be hidden under whatever national security or secrecy laws they choose to install.

Make no mistake about it, your health records are 'online', where they can be accessed, but with the introduction of another publicly funded scam called My Health Record you are given the illusion that you have blocked a person's access to your entire medical history.

This is already what's happening where the people in government have not told you this but rather a publisher's employee trawling the web:

In any event you should opt-out of the scam scheme.

Royal Commission into banking and The Statute of the Jewry

People employed in businesses called banks have been committing criminal activity against the 'good' general population for quite some time, where only now a royal commission is being setup to investigate (and incarcerate?) those people committing criminal activity.

People should also note that this 'criminal' activity has deep seeded roots.

When a peasant commits a (criminal) driving offence, one's entire history is (unlawfully) put forward before the court since the person was legally in charge of a motor vehicle.

The people in charge of the banks, were oppressing the good people of England, to such an extent that to end this oppression the first Edward issued a law called The Statute of the Jewry in 1275.

When the Normans ceased to be strictly 'Normans' and became English in settlement as well as in domicile, the Jews were kicked out in 1290 AD.

So, can anyone point to this history being mentioned in today's royal commission?

The above pdf is also available for download at:

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B21_coIgIYu2WEs2VXVlUEpsYUU/

Top Cop in possession of illegal firearms

Let's see Victoria Police sweep this one under the carpet and hide the name of the criminal.

Do 'community standards' dictated that charges not be laid ?

Will he even face court, like the peasants do for the same offence?

See article from 8 Jun 2018 by 3aw of the headline:

Exclusive: IBAC raid uncovers ‘illegal firearms’ at high-ranking cop’s home

EXCLUSIVE

Neil Mitchell believes a high-ranking police officer has been suspended for allegedly possessing illegal firearms.

Sources told 3AW Mornings the superintendent’s house was raided, and that a pistol and rifle were found.

“I am told neither was registered,” Neil Mitchell said. “And I’m told the superintendent does not have a gun licence.”

3AW Mornings believes the raid was organised by the state’s anti-corruption body, IBAC, regarding an unrelated matter.

If the allegations are proven, it does not tarnish the whole force. But, at a time police command are chasing illegal firearms down every second borrow, it would be immensely embarrassing.
Victoria Police are not having a good run at the moment.
-Neil Mitchell

Victoria Police later confirmed a superintendent “from a corporate support area has been suspended with pay in relation to allegations of firearm and weapons offences on 5 June 2018”.

US sheriff's racketeering and anti-competitive contracts

In Victoria, Australia people should be aware that the so called sheriff has been acting unlawfully on allegedly issued warrants arising from the Infringements Court since 2006 causing harm and financial damage to many motorists.

The Victorian sheriff and the 'deputies' were aware that the warrants were not issued in accordance to the law (i.e. Form 1 within the Schedule in the Infringements (Reporting and Prescribed Details and Forms) Regulations 2006) , yet they chose to act on them confiscating stealing people's possessions through the use of deception, extortion, force and fear.

So, what are the cheeky sheriffs up to across the pacific in a place under administration called the United States of America?

This is what techdirt has to say on the topic on the 4th of June 2018, under the headline:

Sheriffs Are Raking In Millions In Prison Phone Fees And Some Really Don't Want To Talk About It 

from the cashing-in-on-people-with-nowhere-else-to-go dept

MuckRock is currently conducting a public records survey of prison telephone contracts. What it has secured so far will shock you, but only if you haven't been paying attention. There's nothing like a captive audience, and prisoners are the most captive of all. There's one way out via telephone and its routed through mercenary companies and the law enforcement agencies that love them. 

Why so much law enforcement love for telcos specializing in prison phones? Because money buys a lot of love.

A recently-released contract for prison phone services in Bartow County, Georgia shows that the County receives a commission of 77% from its current provider of inmate communications, ICSolutions.

And it's not 77% of some small amount. In this agreement, phones calls are $0.16/minute and billing for calls involves fees of $3-6 for payment processing. The contract is so profitable for both ICS and the sheriff's department that ICS installs the system for free and provides the county with $225,000 in grants in exchange for an auto-renewing contract that helps lock out competitors. In addition, the county collects 50% of video visitation and "inmate tablet usage" fees. 

This may be at the low end of prison phone contracts, as far as commissions go. Other records obtained by MuckRock show government agencies angling for higher percentages and larger payouts. The Bristol County Sheriff's Office sent out a handful of proposals with demands for anywhere from 58-72% of call revenue. Depending on contractor, the department would make $2-4 per call, along with a cut of other communications services provided by contractors. The end result is more than $2 million a year flowing directly from prisoners (and their families) into county coffers. Unsurprisingly, this sheriff's department is being sued for its high-cost prison phone system. 

Also unsurprising is the fact those profiting from these agreements are reluctant to talk about them. Beryl Lipton reports one sheriff's department is seeking to withhold documents by deploying a dubious public records exemption.

According to the Laramie County Sheriff’s Department in Wyoming, a request for its contract with inmate phone service provider Inmate Calling Solutions (ICSolutions) cannot be made public because the agreement itself is consider a “trade secret.”

The letter from the county attorney's office claims the agreement between the sheriff and ICS prevents the documents from being released. Supposedly, the wording says the entire agreement is "confidential" or a "trade secret" (the attorney's letter doesn't specify which). Even if true, private companies can't do business with government entities and expect all of their documentation to remain out of the public eye. If the wording is similar in other ICS contracts, it hasn't stopped multiple government agencies from turning over copies of their contracts with the company to records requesters. This appears to be a case of someone at the county level finding a loophole to keep requesters from finding out just how much the local sheriff is making on prison phone calls.