Thursday, September 22, 2016

Vic police suspended for leaking info



There are plenty more actions of police corruption that the corporate media has not reported.

One example is one that occurs every day in the so called (kangaroo) courts of Australia.

For one the police swear an oath to a false entity namely the Queen of Australia.

As of 2013 Victoria Police was made a corporation with a CEO, arising from the Victoria Police Act 2013.

Is the corporate media protecting the names of criminals in Victoria Police?

Normally the corporate media publishes the names of (alleged) criminals in society.

When you are taken to court for an alleged criminal offence, you do not know (the legal name of the person) who takes you to court in the case of police, whereas your name is published in the court list.

As an example the name of an officer is published as P. Smith, which is NOT a legal name.

See article from news.com.au from 22 September 2016 of the headline:

Vic police suspended for leaking info

Four serving police officers and a former officer are being investigated in Victoria over drug use and the leaking of police information to criminals.
Search warrants were executed at five Melbourne properties on August 17 and the five were all interviewed and released as part of an ongoing investigation, Victoria Police say.

"The arrests and searches relate to a protracted investigation into the improper release of police information to people not entitled to be in possession of such information, including criminals," a police spokesman said.

The investigation is also looking at drug use.

The four police officers, a female senior constable and three male detective senior constables, have been suspended with pay pending the outcome of the criminal investigation.

Police would not comment any further, saying it would be inappropriate "as the investigation is ongoing".

Over 700 Million People Taking Steps to Avoid NSA Surveillance



There's a new international survey on Internet security and trust, of "23,376 Internet users in 24 countries," including "Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Tunisia, Turkey and the United States." Amongst the findings, 60% of Internet users have heard of Edward Snowden, and 39% of those "have taken steps to protect their online privacy and security as a result of his revelations."

The press is mostly spinning this as evidence that Snowden has not had an effect: "merely 39%," "only 39%," and so on. (Note that these articles are completely misunderstanding the data. It's not 39% of people who are taking steps to protect their privacy post-Snowden, it's 39% of the 60% of Internet users -- which is not everybody -- who have heard of him. So it's much less than 39%.)

Even so, I disagree with the "Edward Snowden Revelations Not Having Much Impact on Internet Users" headline. He's having an enormous impact. I ran the actual numbers country by country, combining data on Internet penetration with data from this survey. Multiplying everything out, I calculate that 706 million people have changed their behavior on the Internet because of what the NSA and GCHQ are doing. (For example, 17% of Indonesians use the Internet, 64% of them have heard of Snowden and 62% of them have taken steps to protect their privacy, which equals 17 million people out of its total 250-million population.)

Note that the countries in this survey only cover 4.7 billion out of a total 7 billion world population. Taking the conservative estimates that 20% of the remaining population uses the Internet, 40% of them have heard of Snowden, and 25% of those have done something about it, that's an additional 46 million people around the world.

It's probably true that most of those people took steps that didn't make any appreciable difference against an NSA level of surveillance, and probably not even against the even more pervasive corporate variety of surveillance. It's probably even true that some of those people didn't take steps at all, and just wish they did or wish they knew what to do. But it is absolutely extraordinary that 750 million people are disturbed enough about their online privacy that they will represent to a survey taker that they did something about it.

Name another news story that has caused over ten percent of the world's population to change their behavior in the past year? Cory Doctorow is right: we have reached "peak indifference to surveillance." From now on, this issue is going to matter more and more, and policymakers around the world need to start paying attention.

Related: a recent Pew Research Internet Project survey on Americans' perceptions of privacy, commented on by Ben Wittes.

schneir.com 15 Dec 2014