What the Channel Nine takeover of Fairfax means to Australians

It seems that in Australia, duopolies are so last millennium where monopolies under seemingly independent businesses or shelf companies will be the norm.

People should see that the corporations are trying to kill off the likes of the ABC (Australian Broadcasting News) irrespective of which side they are aligned to.

ALL part of the 'nanny state' agenda.

Who needs the apparent China/Russia 'bad guys' propaganda single news media sites? 

Noam Chomsky 'documented' this in his 1989 presentation called;

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, as seen in video:

Corrupt cops above computer hacking laws?

There are plenty of indicators both in law and action on the streets that Australia is a police state as started on the 26th of January 1788, but distractions of the footy and beer keep the herd population docile.

One place that has officially lost its democracy is Queensland, that being in 1922, but that's another story altogether.

Among other crimes committed, it seems that the business called QPS (Queensland Police Service, ABN:29 409 225 509) nurtures stalkers and hackers, who do not get prosecuted according to the same laws that are handed out to the slave population.

Australia's judicature is one cesspool of criminal activity, where now apparently judges and magistrates are making it public knowledge that they are stressed.

Maybe because they've heard too many cases ex-parte which is unlawful, and they know they are liable for their actions, where some people are slowly waking up to this.

But that's another story altogether.
 
Let's read the article by theguardian.com of the headline:

Queensland police computer hacking: no action taken in nearly 90% of cases

Of officers charged, one accessed ex-girlfriends’ data and one gave woman’s details to abusive partner

Queensland police took no action against 52 of 59 officers investigated for hacking in 13 months. Photograph: Dave Hunt/AAP

Queensland police took no disciplinary action against 52 of the 59 officers investigated internally for computer hacking during a 13-month period, amid concern police do not have adequate measures in place to prevent the wrongful access of private personal data.

Four police officers were charged with computer hacking offences last year under what was considered a crackdown on improper access of the Queensland Police Records and Information Management Exchange (QPrime) database, which stores personal information.

In one case, an officer was charged for looking up personal details of his former girlfriends and the former Australian netball captain, Laura Geitz, “out of curiosity”.

But concerns have been raised that comparatively more serious cases have not led to similar charges or proper disciplinary action.

Renee Eaves, a social justice advocate, found out through a right to information request in 2016 that her personal information had been accessed 1,400 times since 2008. She does not have a criminal record.

A police officer sent the address of a Gold Coast woman to her abusive former partner and advised the man to “just tell her you know where she lives and leave it at that”.

The Brisbane Times reported this week that the woman at the centre of that case recorded a conversation with police commissioner Ian Stewart, in which Stewart said there “was insufficient evidence to place it before a criminal court. We then took that down our discipline process”.

Michael Cope, the president of the Queensland Council for Civil Liberties, said police accessing personal information was a systemic problem.

“The public has lost confidence in this process. We’re going back to the bad old days, pre-Fitzgerald.”

Information released under Queensland right to information laws shows police conducted 59 investigations into improper access of the QPrime database between August 2016 and September 2017.

In 52 cases, no further action was taken. These included some allegations deemed vexatious, and allegations where police were unable to obtain sufficient evidence. Specific details of the allegations were redacted.

Two officers were dealt with by “chastisement”. Two had their salaries reduced. In three cases, allegations were found to be true, but the files gave no details of what action was taken.

Cope said police security measures were clearly not good enough. He said most modern organisations that retained sensitive data had sophisticated tracking systems that would be able to closely monitor who was accessing data, and for what purpose.

“The security system in being able to track people who get in this system is not as good as in other institutions,” Cope said.

“If complaints are being dismissed for lack of evidence ... it means their control over data access is just not up to modern standards.

“It may well be the tip of the iceberg. There may be people whose information has been used and abused and have no idea about it. That would suggest there’s something wrong with their internal data controls.”

The Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission has an oversight role of internal police investigations. Cope said the CCC needed to become more directly involved.

“This needs to be taken more seriously and it’s time for the CCC to get involved and conduct a review of these investigations and perhaps exercise their power to take on some of these and do them themselves.”

Queensland police and the Queensland police union were both asked by Guardian Australia to comment.

The police union president, Ian Leavers, has previously said police were afraid to properly investigate cases due to fear of being accused of improper use of the QPrime database. The union last year published guidelines for officers and suggested they document their access.

What the government doesn't want you to know about your online data

The commotion with regards to the recent actions of the corporation conglomerate called the Australian Government putting patient's health records online is the illusion that they have an 'opt-out' choice, where in reality the information will still be shared between various agencies, just without the patient's knowledge.

What people did not know prior to the focus on the health records is that their data was already available six years prior with the ability to be shared.

As sure as death and taxes, politicians will lie, where the Australian people have been lied to and will keep on being lied to by those in authority.

Despite the false assurances by those in government, your 'online' data is not safe and never will be, where security (or rather lack of it) will be breached in order to access your records which will later be used against you in various ways, which could potentially kill you if you are easily vulnerable with regards to your medication.

As seen in the above screen capture, Australia is a cyber espionage hot spot.

The Australian Government's I.T infrastructure in order to keep data allegedly safe is in an appalling state, subject to many vulnerable points of entry, but that's something that is no doubt vehemently denied.

As an example in the screen capture below, Singapore is much more technologically advanced where not too long ago, what was put into the public domain was that 1.5 million medical records were hacked.

Whatever the real figure of hacked Australian records that have occurred and will occur, you can be sure that the people in government will not tell the general population the real numbers.

MyHealthRecord is a scam that has cost the Australian tax payers millions.

Australia's corporatised schooling system

Australia is one of the best corporate slave prison camps on the planet, established on the 26th day of January 1788.

The corporation aggregate will even let you leave the country if you haven't paid your fines, for now.

They've even have to audacity to 'advertise' corporate sponsorship in the schooling system.

What happens if you want to use Apple operating system products, which we do not recommend if you truly value your privacy.

What's worse is if you are aware of the privacy breaches the Australian Government is supporting in the public (and private sector) schooling system via the use of Apple and Samsung products, where you would want your son or daughter to use more privacy centered hardware and software you are literally ostracised and on your own. 

MANY articles in the mainstream media point to the deliberate failure of government with regards to the education of the children of the general population, where the standard is deliberately low, on a global scale.

After all it's not to the benefit for the people in government to have highly educated (or even skilled), children of the cannon fodder, but rather a dumbed down, financially struggling, (corporate) subservient  herd population where footy and beer is their staple diet to be only educated in consumerism.

Health Minister backs down on My Health Record

As seen in smh.com.au from 31 July 2018.

Health Minister Greg Hunt will re-draft the My Health record legislation.
Photo: Dominic Lorrimer
Australians may be given an extra month to opt out of the MyHealth Record after Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt agreed to tear up the legislation behind the controversial system to protect patients from having their medical records accessed by police.

Following crisis talks with the head of the Australian Medical Association in Melbourne on Tuesday night, Mr Hunt confirmed the My Health Record Act will be redrafted to ensure "no record can be released to police or government agencies, for any purpose, without a court order."

Mr Hunt was due to meet with state and territory health ministers in Alice Springs on Wednesday night and said in advance of that meeting he would consider extending the opt-out deadline beyond October 15.


"So, the medical groups have asked if we could extend for an additional month. I am disposed to that," Mr Hunt told ABC's AM program.

Senior doctors had held talks with Mr Hunt over growing and wide-spread concerns over privacy and security of the online records, which are designed to follow patients through their lives and streamline treatment.

Doctors and privacy experts were particularly concerned about provisions in the legislation to allow police access to the records without a warrant.

"The Digital Health Agency’s policy is clear and categorical - no documents have been released in more than six years and no documents will be released without a court order. This will be enshrined in legislation."

Mr Hunt said the reform would "remove any ambiguity on this matter".

He added that the legislation would also be amended to ensure that if any Australian wished to cancel their record, they could do so permanently, with their record deleted from the system.

"The government will also work with medical leaders on additional communications to the public about the benefits and purpose of the My Health Record, so they can make an informed choice," Mr Hunt said.

AMA President Tony Bartone told Fairfax Media that he had enjoyed a "frank and constructive discussion" with Mr Hunt and welcomed the Minister's decision, which he said would allow patients to make "an informed choice".

"In addition, we’ve also impressed upon the Minister that there’s a need to have some clear air, to ensure that the community has time to fully understand what is a My Health Record and what is entailed in the opt out process," Dr Bartone said.

My Health Record is scrambling to put through new restrictions on mobile phone apps that use its data.

Dr Bartone sought to meet Mr Hunt after doctors, patients and privacy advocates raised a raft of concerns about the My Health Record Act.

He last week vowed to do "whatever it takes" to safeguard patients' interests.

It is understood that support for a redrafting of the legislation emerged within the Liberal Party after last weekend's byelections, in which Labor bolstered its position in part by attacking the Turnbull government's record on health.

Labor health spokeswoman Katherine King yesterday said Mr Hunt had not gone far enough and that the roll-out should be suspended until women fleeing domestic violence can be sure their privacy is protected.

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson also came out against the system, posting detailed instructions on how her supporters can opt out.

"I’m sorry, but with cyber hacking at an all time high, I can understand the general public's concerns with their personal details being kept online," Ms Hanson said in a statement on Tuesday.

Queensland Health Minister Dr Steven Miles has threatened to disrupt the three-month opt-out roll-out period, calling for this week's Council of Australian Governments (COAG) meeting on Thursday between states and territories to discuss whether to suspend it.

Privacy Commissioner Angelene Falk has also raised concerns with Mr Hunt and the Australian Digital Health Agency, which is administering the scheme, while former AMA President Kerryn Phelps highlighted concerns with the legislation and warned that GPs may boycott the system.

Royal Australian College of General Practitioners president Harry Nespolon, who has opted out, last week told Fairfax Media that he believed the government would have "no choice" but to redraft the legislation after backlash from patients and doctors.

Queensland Australia's most corrupt police state?

"Welcome to Queensland"
- but just don't get imprisoned by police, 'cause they'll beat you and get away with it.

"Queensland beautiful one day.."
- corrupt as f_ck the next!

You see the 'brotherhood' has taught its members a lesson,  via Rick Flori, in that if you expose criminal actions within the force, you will be sacked, and your path will be on the road to ruin.

While the general population may be outraged, this is normal behaviour in a police state.

See article by HeraldSun of the headline:

Whistleblower Rick Flori accuses Qld Police of lack of disclosure

August 1, 2018. Whistleblower Rick Flori has accused Queensland police of withholding documents in his bid for damages over alleged bullying. Mr Flori, who left the force before being acquitted of misconduct for leaking footage of Gold Coast police bashing a handcuffed man, spoke to reporters after appearing in Brisbane Supreme Court in his civil matter against the state and eight police officers. "I'm very disappointed in the behaviours of police particularly towards their own," My Flori says. (AAP VIDEO/Warren Barnsley)

The shocking hidden legal secret in new estates

With every new action or law put into force by the colonialists in government, the good people of Australia are having less and less rights (term used very loosely).

This thing we call 'normal' today may not have been so a generation ago where the new normality steered by people in authority is not necessarily for the benefit of the general population, or "peace, order, and good government".

An important aspect of society has attention drawn away from it with deliberate distractions, one that profoundly effects our daily lives, that being law. 

In particular people's rights where it can be easily argued that Australia's general population has none, but that's another story altogether.

Today newly developed land, which is supported by businesses called city councils, not in line with the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK), may come with a caveat or the 'trend' of not having a front fence or gate.

To the legal profession this should raise alarm bells but instead the topic has been moot.

MANY thousands of words can be written on this topic and specific reference to case law will be deliberately omitted , where only the relevant information will be provided, in order to make this post as short and as easy to comprehend as possible.

"the occupier of any dwelling-house gives implied licence to any member of the public coming on his lawful business to come through the gate, up the steps, and knock on the door of the house." This implied licence extends to the driveway of a dwelling-house. However, the licence may be withdrawn by giving notice of its withdrawal. A person who enters or remains on property after the withdrawal of the licence is a trespasser.”

A sign at your front entrance clearly indicates that you do not give permission unless by invitation therefore entry is prohibited. Information from QLD has indicated that the police will enter through an open gate regardless of the sign, but cannot open one. Therefore, keep your gates closed. Police have also indicated that they cannot deliver a summons past a proper Trespass sign unless a felony has been committed under the Crimes Act and a warrant issued.

Without a clear boundary, or a gate which can be closed, your protections and right to no trespassing has been taken away from you.

The protection afforded within entrenched imperial laws is being taken away from Australians with use of the Roman law of guilty until proven otherwise, and subverted use of contract law in order to obtain your consent, by default.

Sabotage of the Constitution laying dormant

(illustration above: scan of actual Bill from 1988, minus the royal coloured graffiti)

Whether people know it or not the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) stands in the way of the Judicature's misbehaviour.

So, as with all great plans, the sneaky creeps in government have a hidden Bill or two, in the waiting, as law to be passed which is in effect a sabotage of the Commonwealth Constitution Act.

These Bills have been hidden from the general population since 1988 and are waiting no doubt to be put into 'force' maybe at 3am on some football premiership morning.

How good is your research to uncover this sabotage?

Australians already lost their 'presumption of innocence'.

It is astounding how politicians lie or rather give false or inaccurate information to the general population, even after they've retired.

After all there are no 'fines' for false information given to the tax slaves,
unless someone can point to a law (i.e. 'Act') that states otherwise.

It seems that old habits are hard to break.

Victoria's ex premier Mr. Jeff  Kennett, states that "Presumption of innocence too precious to lose", where in fact it has already been lost.

Maybe under some entrenched imperial laws there might be the official slogan of innocent until proven otherwise, but this is definitively not the case under Roman Law, which operates in Australia's court system, a fact that Kennett should be aware of given his role in the legal/political community.

When one's person is accused of a road offence, this matter is listed in the entry level courts as a criminal matter.

Within the  jurisdiction of the courts, your person is under strict and/or absolute liability when in the position of the accused / defendant / respondent .

To make it simple for people:

Absolute liability = GUILTY and a penalty is enforced,
Strict liability = GUILTY until proven otherwise.

By entering the jurisdiction of the court, you understand that your right to "innocent until proven otherwise" is taken away from you.

What the police don't want you to know about phone tracking

A lot of information is written on this topic, and the purpose of this post is to keep it simple for the non technically minded reader.

In recent high profile murder cases, e.g. Adrian Bayley and Borce Ristevski, the police do not want the general population to know how their 'private and confidential' data is used to incriminate them (i.e. taking away the entrenched law of the right to self-incrimination), citing that they want that data "kept from the public domain"

The deception already by police, is that people must comprehend that the government resource what we now call the internet, has been comercialised, where any information (e.g. on phone tracking) obtained from the medium is already in the "public domain".

Every Australian who uses a mobile phone, be it a 'dumb' phone or smartphone must be aware of how information from is taken from that device and what it can be used for.

What police are referring to with regards to withholding information from the general population is that with regards to the use of smartphones.

To the detriment of people's privacy, Australians are some of the world's highest users of smartphones  per capita, where the predominant spyware is Google's Android and Apple's iOS operating systems, including Microsoft's Windows operating system for tablets and personal computers.

False information is also put out by the mainstream media, in order to deceive the general population.

Since the inception of GSM communications, i.e. the use of 'dumb' phones, 'location services' have been deliberately built into the communications protocols, where the authorities have had access to the phone user's location, using tower triangulation (i.e. no GPS dedicated chip, yet) to an approximate location of 10 meters depending on circumstances.

Since the injection of GPS chips into smartphones, the accuracy has been further increased, where this data can be read by the telcos, and now other people via apps, from your phone.

It is not sure how much the senior technician at Optus, Mr. Oleg Prypoten is being paid, but it seems that Optus is not getting good value from his technical abilities or he is just plain an simply deceiving the general population, as seen in article below:

See video clip below of how YOUR data is harvested and available to others using your consent by default / force to Google where 'opt out' is not an option.

Note: We do not recommend the use of Google's Android operating system or Apple phones if privacy is a legitimate concern.

Edit:
Another thing not mentioned is that if your dumb phone does not have a sim card in it and it's turned on it still attaches itself to the towers and can be tracked via its IMEI number.