Australian Government to blame for the latest 'hack'

In the second week of October 2017, Australia's general population was informed that there was a security breach in the offices of the defence force, where it was revealed to the public that secret F-35, P-8 C-130 data was stolen.

Since Australia is a Constitutional Monarchy the government went into 'Monarchical Mode', meaning the Queen can do no wrong, where the government denied all responsibility, something which cannot be further from the truth.

What is also concerning is that the people in government are under no mandate to report to the general population security breaches nor the accuracy of what data has been 'stolen' (or rather copied - can you really technically 'steal' data?), where the people are left in the dark with regards to the true state of incompetence of the people in government.

As late as 2011 the people in government have been warned not to use default passwords and the latest defence 'hack' was as a result of default parameters being used. 

Some would even say they deserve that hack.

Irrespective of whether or not a contractor was involved, a person employed within the government overseeing the project is ultimately responsible, where  at the end of the day they failed in their job, therefore it's a 'failure of government' and the person should be on the unemployment queue the next day.

Since many government jobs fall in the category of 'money for mates' where even if we name the person responsible, they will still be employed no doubt still capable of putting the Australian population in harm's way.

Don't the police 'fine' the herd population for traveling over the speed limit  ('Wipe off 5' BS campaign) an action which apparently may cause someone harm, but did not at that actual point in time?

Irrespective of whether these people in positions of significance are assholes or just plain imbeciles incapable of carrying out the duties required, it seems that these assholes are in charge of the safety of their Australian tax slave population.

STILL trust the people in government?

Leaked document reveals UK plans for wider internet surveillance

The UK government is soliciting feedback from a handful of internet providers, but isn't consulting the tech industry or the public.

The UK government is planning to push greater surveillance powers that would force internet providers to monitor communications in near-realtime and install backdoor equipment to break encryption, according to a leaked document.

A draft of the proposed new surveillance powers, leaked on Thursday, is part of a "targeted consultation" into the Investigatory Powers Act, brought into law last year, which critics called the "most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy".

Provisions in proposals show that the government is asking for powers to compel internet providers to turn over the realtime communications of a person "in an intelligible form," including encrypted content, within one working day.

To that end, internet providers will be forced to introduce a backdoor point on their networks to allow intelligence agencies to read anyone's communications.

This "backdoor" capability was heavily criticized last year when it was floated as part of the draft law's proposal. Apple chief executive Tim Cook last year warned of "dire consequences" if the legislation required internet providers or companies to put backdoors into their systems. The provision would effectively prohibit companies operating in the UK from introducing end-to-end encryption, a feature now commonplace in many messaging apps, including Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Apple's own messaging platform iMessage.

But it's not clear exactly how the provision would be enforced -- or if it would only affect companies operating or based in the UK.

Similar questions arose when a committee of UK lawmakers criticized the original Investigatory Powers Act prior to it becoming law late last year.

Jim Killock, executive director of Open Rights Group, who obtained the document, said in an email that the proposals, if passed, would "make security products much easier to break into, and means that companies may be obliged to lie to their customers about the privacy and security that is applied to their communications."

The draft document also asks for the capability to realtime intercept data on one out of 10,000 citizens at any given time, allowing the government to wiretap over 6,500 citizens at any given time.

But the lack of transparency over the proposals has already drawn ire.

"The government doesn't think it has any legal or moral obligation to consult anyone outside of industry partners and the security services," said Killock.

So far, the draft document has only been circulated among the UK government's technical advisory board, consisting of six telecoms giants, including O2, BT, BSkyB, and Vodafone, as well as government agencies who would use the powers, thought to include at least MI5 and GCHQ.

But the document was not made readily available on the government's website, or to partners in the tech industry, who would be directly affected by the provisions if passed into law.

The consultation is open for the next three weeks until May 19, said Killock, during which anyone can file a response with the Home Office.

A spokesperson for the Home Office did not respond to a request for comment at the time of writing.

 The draft of the proposed new surveillance powers is as follows;



zdnet.com  5 May 2017

A new government of Western Australia from the 18th of October 2017?

Sometimes it can be hard to keep up with what's going on within government.

You know there's these things called Bills and Acts that sneak past the plebs.

In the corporate world it's also hard yakka, as amalgamations, 'hostile' takeovers, and other business deals are a plenty.

So, what's been happening in Australia's largest state, the state of Western Australia?

What happened on their morning of the eighteenth day of October in the year of our lord two thousand and seventeen, while the rest of the country was still sleeping due to the time difference of the circular globe spinning around on its axis?

Well from what we are told, Clause 61 of an old Imperial law called the Magna Carta was used to oust the two lawful tiers of government.

That's a bit of a bugger for them !!!

Please Note:
We have a spare room for any Western Australia politician who has no where to sleep as a result of this action.

See the following post from social media;

The text for the above screen captures reads as follows:

UPDATE:

Apparently the post was NOT posted by the real Wayne Glew.

Coles misleading customers?

Could be it be that Coles is suffering from the 2047 bug?

Or maybe the "Millennials" (you know the ones who FAIL in simple mathematics) programed their computers.

Let's take a look at a 'case study'.

In the above illustration, Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Coles (ASX:CGJ) states that 120 grams of a brand of pretzel sticks is worth  one Aussie dollar and twenty five cents.

Coles (ASX: CGJ) also state that this is worth half an Australian dollar per 100 grams.

Simple Hindi-Arabic mathematics will tell you that 100 grams of these pretzels are worth one Australian Dollar and four cents, which is rounded up  to five cents, because the fractions of a dollar in the penal colony are worth less now than they were before, but that's another post or seventeen.

Since we're talking about an 'error' by the corporations committed against the slaves in a penal colony, the corporations are allowed forgiveness.

If this action was to occur in the 'the land of the free' (the Ewe Ess of Aye) maybe a homo-sexually married pair (Aussie term: poofs or lezzos) could get 21.6969 million USDM (United Snakes Drug Money- from the poppy seeds of Afghanistan) for their 'feelings' being hurt...

VicRoads CEO John Merritt quits - Conspiracy 'theory'

So, the mainstream media reported that John Merritt, CEO of VicRoads has quit.

Who in their right mind would quit a 'money for mates' job, right ??? !!! ???

We have seen documentation alleging criminal actions by the CEO Mr. John Merritt, which also includes privacy breaches, and claims of a lawsuit against him and the business he works at.

VicRoads has (and still is) committed actions against motorists which carry a criminal conviction and financial penalty, but it's up to you the 'victim' to call the crime AND support it according to the given laws.

We 'invite' John Merritt to comment here with regards to his 'quitting' of such a cushy job.

P.S.

Let's see how long Victoria's (alleged) sheriff Brendan Facey will be around for, as we've heard that things are heating up against him

Australia's 'justice' system lets killers walk free again and again.

Remember the "good ol' days" on this penal colony of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland?

You know in the 1780's when the British authorities dumped criminals onto the Indigenous peoples of Australia under firearms and force?
(Such 'honourable' people in the Monarchy in doing a treaty with the Indigenous Australians)

Well it seems that the policies of the late 1700's are upon us again, where this time the so called 'justice' system lets out criminals / killers onto the general population.

(illustration: Convicted killer Philip Bracken)

Some people may erroneously state that the system is 'broken' whereas in reality
it is functioning exactly the way the people in government intend it to.

The action of letting killers out into the general community is literally a 'terrorist' action by those who let the criminals out, as the 'criminals' are then allowed to terrorise the good people of Australia.

How are those actions for "peace order and good government*"

*- whatever that really means.

What we really think of Coca-Cola

Apparently the global junk drink giant Coca-Cola Amatil has an opinion about the herd population consumers.

Wow, who would have thought.

The best part about it is the we too have an 'opinion' about Coca-Cola.

We think;

- Coca Cola should be inducted into the 'junk food' category of consumable products,

- Coca Cola's sugar laced products are carcinogenic,

- Coca Cola's products products are detrimental to the environment and to a person's well being,

- Coca Cola would not exist in Demolition Man (1993),

- Canon fodder and people who want cancer deserve to drink Coca Cola's sugary products,

- Coca Cola destroys communities e.g Warrnambool in Victoria, Australia.

Lawmaking in Australia - false information by the Australian Government

You know how the story goes;

- Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

The people in the Australian Government state (on the internet) that there are 3 (three) levels of  lawmaking in Australia.

1). Federal - i.e. the Commonwealth, i.e. Parliament of the Commonwealth

2). State / territory,

3). Local, i.e. City Councils.

This is plain and simply false information by the people in 'government'.

According to the 'law', i.e. the 'Constitution'
(The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 UK),
there are only 2 (two) lawful lawmaking levels / bodies / tiers in Australia,
i.e. Federal and State / Territory.

Briefly, according to the Constitution 'local government' is referred to as the government of the state.

What we call 'local government' today or City Councils are defined within the Constitution as Departments of the State with no law making powers bestowed upon them.

Another piece of false information by our deceitful friendly people in 'government'.

Citizenship in High Court

The 'people' (i.e. the masses) have lost their High Court quite some time ago, but that's only a minor detail to be covered in a post or seventeen a bit later on.

This current High Court sits outside Australia's 'true' Constitution, the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900, where this Act defines the ONLY law making authority to be "The Parliament of the Commonwealth", which this High Court does not sit under, as defined by it's empowering document the High Court of Australia Act of 1979.

Putting all this aside, the next issue is an apparent translation being needed by a business called the High Court of Australia (ABN 69 445 188 986) with regards to federal Ministers of Parliament sitting in office while being citizens of another nation or under the influence of a foreign power, i.e. Freemasons, where the latter is never discussed by the corporate media.

(Illustration: dual citizen - Barnaby Joyce)


ALL the accused or alleged foreign nationals must be expelled from office by all seven of the High Court judges.

At this point only time will tell what the verdict will be.

Watch this space for an update on the judgement.

Piracy tv commercial using fear to purchase a service

Many people do not comprehend that the television medium is a sole advertising space, where the messages outside of the 'program' are called television "commercials" for a reason, i.e. a message enticing one to commit to an action in commerce.

Any so called government 'messages' are actually enticements for you to commit to a purchase of a product or service, INCLUDING the ABS census ads of last year, and the ABS marriage SURVEY of this year.

On the topic of piracy we have seen letters that were written to the authorities where the names of (alleged) 'pirates' (whatever that means) were given and no follow up criminal charges or prosecutions have occurred.

Apparently the 'authorities' went on a rampage to stop piracy where they raided the computer swap meet stalls, but alas they are alive and well still today, i.e. government fail.

At the moment Australian television air waves are littered with a bs message about piracy.

So an actor is put in a dimly lit room, walking into a spotlight where his message starts out with the words

"I need to talk to you about illegal downloading, because the game's  changed"

So it may be "illegal" but is it really "unlawful", as there is a BIG difference.

"New laws have blocked all major pirate sites ..."

This really means nothing as you can still stream movies from whichever site you choose.

Have  those laws (in Australia) been put in force lawfully? - We say no.

Now the next part of the sentence is using FEAR in order for you to purchase from other movies streaming sites.

"as for the rest, well hell of a risk...  "

appealing to your emotion, this one being fear.

"could end up with viruses , spyware stolen credit card details, even identity theft"

Notice the word "could" which does not mean you will.

We know of people who have been downloading (illegally?) from personal computers for a very long time, who have not had any of their credit card details stolen or viruses on their personal computer.

We know that if you download / stream from specialised computer hardware dedicated to downloading sites, credit card theft cannot occur since this computer equipment does not contain any of your personal banking details.

What guarantee have you got that if you purchase (with your credit card, as you cannot with cash) a service from the advertised streaming sites e.g. Stan or Netflix, that your credit card details will not be taken or even hacked from them?

NONE!

He then goes on to say "or you can spend a few bucks...." blah blah blah

Umm, yeah you have already spent a few bucks - on your internet service / streaming box.

Then he states "the choice is yours" - which it is, and there is little anyone can do about it.

He then caps it off with "good luck" - appealing to fear again ?

What an idiot,  a$$hole or hard up for work actor putting his face to this bs message.

See the enticement for you to commit to a commercial transaction: