A 38 year old British mother was arrested at home in front of her children before going through the standard British intake procedure surrendering fingerprints, DNA, and a photograph after referring to a man in an online forum by his God given sex and the name his parents gave him (archived). Because the man chooses to larp about the world as a woman, Airstrip One's agents of violence decided her posting was a transgression against the Crown, a Crown which long abdicated its old position of sovereignty over their former colonies' European forward operating base.
DNA testing firm FamilyTreeDNA has been caught openly handing over customers information to the criminal FBI without their knowledge or consent (archived). CEO Bennett Greenspan claims his desire to be a "crime-fighter" and live out his fantasy of being Batman without the risk of getting punched was the motive for his appalling subversion of customer trust.
Italy is breaking with the EU and continuing to recognize Nicolas Maduro as Venezuela's president under the non-intervention doctrine, the UN endorsed idea that foreign states should not try to force outcomes in other state's internal affairs (archived). This comes as USG endorsed interim president Guiadó is refusing to engage in a dialogue between Maduro and other Venezuelan parties in Montevideo to be hosted by Mexico and Uruguay.
Meanwhile the US is considering sanctions against NATO ally Turkey over Turkey's ongoing trade relationship with Venezuela. Turkey at the same time is the key party Trump is negotiating with to assure US troops a relatively safe exit from Syria.
A contact on the ground reports greater than normal power fluctuations and internet connectivity interruptions today. Without an acknowledge shot being fired, it appears that Trump's appointement of John Bolton has damaged US and greater anglophone influence on an Obamaesque scale. For engaging a rich, if undernourished, country with war posturing the US is discovering that many of its "allies" just aren't that committed when money is on the line.
Peter Boghossian is facing sanctions at Portland State University for his participation in an investigation into the intellectual bankruptcy of contemporary 'academic journals' purporting to publish in the 'social sciences' (archived). The University's institutional review board has determined Boghossian is guilty 'research misconduct' under the guise that academic journal editors being presented candidate papers are 'uninformed human research subjects' when their purported job involves functioning as a sort of meat powered spam filter. The board futher is alleging Boghossian engaged in academic fraud dismissing the core discovery of the investigation, that there are in fact very few checks against the publication of academic fraud in 'prestige journals' by parties less inclined to disclose their deceptions.
Seven year veteran of Germany's Der Spiegel Claas Relotius was fired after the news came out the fellow didn't much care to do reporting or journalism and had simply been fabricating stories and winning awards for doing it. As recently as December 3rd of this year Relotius was lauded by his peers as THE German reporter of the year:
The jury for the 2018 German Reporter Award was once again of the opinion that he had written the best feature story of the year, this one about a Syrian boy who lived with the belief that he had contributed to the country's civil war through a graffito he had daubed onto a wall in Daraa. The jurors praised the article for its "unparalleled lightness, intimacy and relevance that is never silent regarding the sources on which it is based."
And in Der Spiegel's own telling:
It has now become clear that Claas Relotius, 33 years old, one of DER SPIEGEL's best writers, winner of multiple awards and a journalistic idol of his generation, is neither a reporter nor a journalist. Rather, he produces beautifully narrated fiction. Truth and lies are mixed together in his articles and some, at least according to him, were even cleanly reported and free of fabrication. Others, he admits, were embellished with fudged quotes and other made-up facts. Still others were entirely fabricated.
Relotius and Der Spiegel's fraud were undone by a woman from rural Arizona who took issue with a report slandering a local US border integrity activism group she is afflilated with. As per their usual modus operandi, Relotius fabricated a fiction demonizing bloodthirsty nationalist vigilanties while Der Spiegel happily published the creative writing exercise instead as "truth from the front lines."
The Australia's Department of Home Affairs published a statement, since deleted annoucing an agreement during a 5Eyes meeting to pursue measures "prevent illegal and illicit content from ever being uploaded"1 and this move among the 5Eyes has been comfirmed by French collaborator Macron who argued for measures rather similar to those being whispered by the Anglophone 5Eyes cartel (archived). Another since deleted memo2 originally published by the Australian Home Affairs referring to conclusions reached during the 5Eyes powwow suggests New Zealand's recent adoption of "Digital Customs Searches" is a preview of things to come for the rest of the totalitarian criminal Anglophone block.
Full statement since deleted:
This is Google's cache of https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/national-security/five-country-ministerial-2018/countering-illicit-use-online-spaces. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Oct 14, 2018 05:10:38 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more. Full versionText-only versionView source Tip: To quickly find your search term on this page, press Ctrl+F or ⌘-F (Mac) and use the find bar. Home Menu Five Country Ministerial 2018 Access to evidence and encryption Countering the illicit use of online spacesCurrently selected Department of Immigration and Border Protection Ministers Contact us Report suspicious behaviour Search this site Search Individuals and Travellers Businesses, Agents and Trade Professionals Australian Border Force About Us About Us Five Country Ministerial 2018 Access to evidence and encryption Countering the illicit use of online spacesCurrently selected Skip Navigation LinksHome > About Us > National security > Five Country Ministerial 2018 > Countering the illicit use of online spaces Five Country Ministerial Statement on Countering the Illicit Use of Online Spaces We, the Homeland Security, Public Safety, and Immigration Ministers of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, stand united in our commitment to protect our citizens from child predators, terrorists, violent extremists and other illicit actors. We are as determined to counter these threats online as we are to counter them in the physical world. We note with disappointment that senior digital industry leaders did not accept our invitation to engage on critical issues regarding the illicit use of online spaces at the 2018 Five Country Ministerial meeting. Nevertheless, we reiterate our determination to work together constructively to ensure our response is commensurate to the gravity of the threat. Our citizens expect online spaces to be safe, and are gravely concerned about illegal and illicit online content, particularly the online sexual exploitation of children. We stand united in affirming that the rule of law can and must prevail online. We are committed to an open, safe and secure internet; one that provides global connectivity, better access to services, and new ways to conduct business and share news and information. But we recognise that the anonymous, instantaneous and networked nature of the online environment has magnified the threats we face, and has opened up new vectors for harm. We are determined to ensure that the technologies that have been developed to enhance prosperity and freedom are not exploited by those who seek to promote terrorism and violent extremism; prey upon and exploit our children; or spread disinformation and discord to undermine our democratic institutions. The evolution of digital technology has created new opportunities for widespread transmission of child exploitation material, and for perpetrating the most abhorrent kinds of child sexual exploitation, such as live-streaming of abuse. And it is not only in the recesses of the dark web that such material is accessible. Much is hosted on the most common top‑level domains. Moreover, the growing sophistication of mobile technology has enabled offenders to target children, including through apps that can be used to recruit and coerce children to engage in sexual activity. The low financial cost, and the anonymised nature of this criminal enterprise, is contributing to a growth in the sexual exploitation of children. We must escalate government and industry efforts to stop this. We also affirm the need to build upon efforts to counter the use of the internet by terrorists and violent extremists who continue to exploit online spaces to share materials designed to radicalise and mobilise individuals to violence. These materials are used for recruitment, facilitation, training and financing purposes, often with devastating consequences. Governments and industry have made some progress in tackling this issue. However, the task is far from complete. Terrorists and violent extremists remain able to disseminate propaganda promoting violence, and to use online platforms to radicalise and recruit. And, despite concerted efforts, a great deal of terrorist and violent extremist content remains accessible online to anyone inclined to seek it out. We therefore call upon industry to go further in proactively and innovatively addressing the illicit use of their platforms and applications at pace. In this context we welcome and support the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT). But we urge industry leaders to champion more rapid responses, both under the auspices of the GIFCT and beyond. Digital industry must take responsibility to reduce the availability of online terrorist and violent extremist content across all platforms and applications, and to do so comprehensively. Recognizing the G7 Interior Ministers' statement on terrorism and violent extremism, we echo and amplify their call to action, and we affirm that efforts must extend to all types of illegal and illicit online content. We are also increasingly seeing the use of online spaces to spread disinformation, sow division, and undermine our democratic institutions. The proliferation of interference activities and disinformation undermines the trust of citizens in online communications and information, delegitimizing the benefits and opportunities that communications and social media platforms create. We call upon industry to meet public expectations regarding online safety by: Developing and implementing capabilities to prevent illegal and illicit content from ever being uploaded, and to execute urgent and immediate takedown where there is a failure to prevent upload. Deploying human and automated capabilities to seek out and remove legacy content. Acting on previous commitments to invest in automated capabilities and techniques (including photo DNA tools) to detect, remove and prevent re‑upload of illegal and illicit content, as well as content that violates a company's terms of service. Prioritising the protection of the user by building user safety into the design of all online platforms and services, including new technologies before they are deployed. Building upon successful hash sharing efforts to further assist in proactive removal of illicit content. Setting ambitious industry standards, and increasing assistance to smaller companies in developing and deploying illicit content counter-measures. Building and enhancing capabilities to counter foreign interference and disinformation. Preventing live streaming of child sexual abuse on all platforms. We recognise that governments also have a major role to play in addressing the spread of illicit content online. We commit to build the capacity of non-'five eyes' countries to protect and defend the most vulnerable. We undertake to enhance information flows from government to industry, and work towards overcoming barriers to cross-sectoral collaboration. We agree to ensure our enforcement capabilities, including technical data such as hashes, can be shared with industry to support the development of scalable, Artificial Intelligence-driven solutions. Through the same innovation and cross-sectoral collaboration that has underpinned so many technological advances, the challenge of countering illicit online content is not insurmountable. To focus our collective efforts, we agree to establish a senior officials group charged with monitoring industry progress on the above actions on a quarterly basis and reporting back to us. We welcome digital industry Chief Executive Officers to future meetings of the Five Country Ministerial to update us on their efforts directly. Australian Border Force (ABF) Who We Are A career with us Border Force officer recruit traineeship Report something suspicious About us
This is Google's cache of https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/national-security/five-country-ministerial-2018/access-evidence-encryption. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Nov 2, 2018 21:38:38 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more. Full versionText-only versionView source Tip: To quickly find your search term on this page, press Ctrl+F or ⌘-F (Mac) and use the find bar. Home Menu Department of Immigration and Border Protection Search Skip Navigation LinksHome > About Us > National security > Five Country Ministerial 2018 > Access to evidence and encryption Statement of Principles on Access to Evidence and Encryption Preamble The Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are committed to personal rights and privacy, and support the role of encryption in protecting those rights. Encryption is vital to the digital economy and a secure cyberspace, and to the protection of personal, commercial and government information. However, the increasing use and sophistication of certain encryption designs present challenges for nations in combatting serious crimes and threats to national and global security. Many of the same means of encryption that are being used to protect personal, commercial and government information are also being used by criminals, including child sex offenders, terrorists and organized crime groups to frustrate investigations and avoid detection and prosecution. Privacy laws must prevent arbitrary or unlawful interference, but privacy is not absolute. It is an established principle that appropriate government authorities should be able to seek access to otherwise private information when a court or independent authority has authorized such access based on established legal standards. The same principles have long permitted government authorities to search homes, vehicles, and personal effects with valid legal authority. The increasing gap between the ability of law enforcement to lawfully access data and their ability to acquire and use the content of that data is a pressing international concern that requires urgent, sustained attention and informed discussion on the complexity of the issues and interests at stake. Otherwise, court decisions about legitimate access to data are increasingly rendered meaningless, threatening to undermine the systems of justice established in our democratic nations. Each of the Five Eyes jurisdictions will consider how best to implement the principles of this statement, including with the voluntary cooperation of industry partners. Any response, be it legislative or otherwise, will adhere to requirements for proper authorization and oversight, and to the traditional requirements that access to information is underpinned by warrant or other legal process. We recognize that, in giving effect to these principles, governments may have need to engage with a range of stakeholders, consistent with their domestic environment and legal frameworks. Principles The Attorneys General and Interior Ministers of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand affirm the following principles in relation to encryption. 1. Mutual Responsibility Diminished access to the content of lawfully obtained data is not just an issue for Governments alone, but a mutual responsibility for all stakeholders. Providers of information and communications technology and services - carriers, device manufacturers or over-the-top service providers -– are subject to the law, which can include requirements to assist authorities to lawfully access data, including the content of communications. Safe and secure communities benefit citizens and the companies that operate within them. We are always willing to work with technology providers in order to meet our public safety responsibilities and ensure the ability of citizens to protect their sensitive data. Law enforcement agencies in our countries need technology providers to assist with the execution of lawful orders. Currently there are some challenges arising from the increasing use and sophistication of encryption technology in relation to which further assistance is needed. Governments should recognize that the nature of encryption is such that that there will be situations where access to information is not possible, although such situations should be rare. 2. Rule of law and due process are paramount All governments should ensure that assistance requested from providers is underpinned by the rule of law and due process protections. The principle that access by authorities to the information of private citizens occurs only pursuant to the rule of law and due process is fundamental to maintaining the values of our democratic society in all circumstances – whether in their homes, personal effects, devices, or communications. Access to information, subject to this principle, is critical to the ability of governments to protect our citizens by investigating threats and prosecuting crimes. This lawful access should always be subject to oversight by independent authorities and/or subject to judicial review. 3. Freedom of choice for lawful access solutions The Governments of the Five Eyes encourage information and communications technology service providers to voluntarily establish lawful access solutions to their products and services that they create or operate in our countries. Governments should not favor a particular technology; instead, providers may create customized solutions, tailored to their individual system architectures that are capable of meeting lawful access requirements. Such solutions can be a constructive approach to current challenges. Should governments continue to encounter impediments to lawful access to information necessary to aid the protection of the citizens of our countries, we may pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions. Australian Border Force (ABF) Who We Are A career with us Border Force officer recruit traineeship Report something suspicious About us
In the last 48 hours a number of famous Pantsuitist party figures in the United States have had packages address to them seized in transit, with the notable exception of the first which was allegedly located in George Soros's New York mailbox at a time the noted terrorist happened to be away from "home" for an extended period. These packages are egregiously being misgendered as "bombs" by pantsuit media in spite of an apparent incapacity on the part of the packages to explode.
The Pantsuit press has begun hyping this phenomenon under the hashtag #MAGABomber and attributing the phenomenon to US President Donald Trump. This is as the Pantsuit political left in the United States has been issuing increasingly loud demands for political violence for more than two years. Purported photos of the packages being misgendered as "bombs" floating around on social media and US media organs completely lack any markings indicating they had been processed by the US postal service. This, once again, is in spite of many of them being "intercepted" in sorting facilities.
US President Donald Trump has already issued a statement from his podium calling for civility and condemning violence, a stark contrast to the Pantsuitists seeking to blame him for "the incivility" while themselves promoting violence and celebrating incivility.
It seems indisputable that the perpetrator or perpetrators behind this hoax hopes to influence the outcome of the local US midterm election which is set to provide a "Red Wave" cementing Trump's control over the legislature. It is also clear that the perpetrator(s) either intended no harm to the package recipients or is functionally retarded. In light of the scant facts, there are two very probable hypothesis for the packages being mailed:
- Pantsuit loyalist "law enforcement professionals" of the well documented sort that tried and failed to prevent the election of US President Donald Trump and have since tried and failed to delegitimize his presidency did it. Using the package in Soros mailbox or another pretext1 to enter postal service facilities, more harmless packages were inserted into the mail processing stream.
- The FBI, as they are known to do, cultivated a stupid and socially inept fellow to carry out what the fellow thought was an actual terror plot at the FBI's encouragement. In this scenario the fellow's handlers took the opportunity to use this fellow for their own political purposes. Normally they would just swoop in to claim credit for arresting they terrorist they created.
With the low amount of information available at this time, it could as well be some combination of one and two involving a left wing activist group. Or something else. Given what has happened in Britain over the past year, the biggest surprise might be that they didn't just sacrifice one of the lower ranked leftist stooges in an nerve agent hoax to revive the "Russian Bot" narrative.
War on Drugs ↩
Various "national security" agencies in the US and Airstrip One are aggressively denying reports that server motherboards assembled in China for their darlings including Amazon and Apple by way of a defense contractor, contained hardware implants allowing for Chinese ownership of the machines (archived). The language of the denials, especially on the part of the afflicted darlings, involves substantial claims and fabrications of ignorace with respect to this particular embarrassing episode. At the same time the denials on the part of the companies are sufficiently slimey to likely evade claims of fraud over the denials when weighed according to the rituals performed by empire courts at a later date.
Given their hallucinations of immunity from claims, denials by "national security" agencies are rarely bounded by such cautions. Given the weight of incentives, hedging by parties that might have problems, and the contrasting boldness by parties imagining themselves to immunity from those problems… The credibility of these denials is very low.
Josh Garza of GAW miners infamy has been sentenced to 21 months in prison to be followed by 6 months of home confinement and 3 years of "supervised release" after pleading guilty to one count of wire fraud. The wire fraud relates to Garza's "paycoin" altcoin with the rest of his vaporware operation swept under the criminal liability rug.
Today the New York Times published an opinion piece by disgraced and imprisoned former Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva with the apparent intent to influence the outcome of the upcoming Brazilian election (archived). This comes after the New York Times has spent nearly two years attempting to delegitimize US President Donald Trumpś election with a social engineering campaign alleging Russian influence in the form of foreign Facebook memes affected the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election.1
In the piece Lula attempts to frame his and his party's decade and a half long kleptocratic reign as a "labor movement" and the criminal investigations that leaded him in jail and his successor impeached as a "right-wing coup".
Lula is attempting to run in the Brazilian presidential election from prison against a "Great Again" candidate despite his conviction as a corrupt motherfucker. Brazilian prosperity peaked in the 19th century under Emperor Pedro II, and lags behind the successes of its imperial age as it as been afflicted by socialists and kleptocrats of all flavors. For maximum meddling value the New York Times published the corrupt motherfucker's piece in English, Spanish, and Portuguese.
Editor's note: Qntra is not particularly concerned with the pretense of legitimacy fiat sovereigns try to drape themselves with by using "democratic" electoral processes. ↩