Tag Archive: internet


internet does demo?

Filed under: democracy, entirely from other sources., institutional abuses, SOCIAL, temporary rear to protest, uk — 3 Comments
December 3, 2012

pay for begin, being benign, on top of the search list:

it is also why there is situations where a blog have 300 hundreds hits for not being nothing extraordinary and the other one, not any worse, why not better, but receiving zero visits or approaching.

Play for prize.              Phone for text. 88990

the same I was desperate to find a software to upgrade my computer fearing to lose my data.

instead of the free software that I had searched for hours, when I clicked on finally a link that did not run on my computer advertisement and program that I would have to pay after filling a form. I clicked on this prize lottery wanting to answer 3 questions and finally downloading my software as there were absolutely no other way round.

Click for a free software that you searched for hours and despair to acquire because you need to have on your free time some time out, you clicked and the only door now is a lottery. I thought they wanted a survey, cause it is a survey, you answer questions and after they say you ll win a prize. Yet again impossible to say no you have to say yes it is ok for the free lottery, (as you still want your software, you need it actually, or else your computer is in disrepair.

I clicked on the link thinking that the survey and the lottery were finished and that i could have finally a link to the software, but ney. So i clicked and clicked and clicked, and received text messages suddenly, informing me that i ll have to pay 6 pound a day to entering the competition etc, i received 5 of them, the clicks i made that i thought did not work as nothing appeared on the webpage.

I just have to reply them to stop in order to stop them wanting me to pay them daily for a lottery i never asked or agree to.

I replied praying fervorly that i did stop and that i won’t even be charged one day (five times as i was clicking frenitically trying to go out of this ad that i thought was only fantasy and waste time not pure high way robbery)

Consequences? End of month my phone bills asking me to pay for the texts i send asking them to stop something i never agree to start, and even pay the texts they send me saying to me for the free lottery you could not not avoid (nor see the real content of it) the prize is heavy. I assure you they anounce me i have to pay something while they intrude in something i was searching, block me the route, you are oblige to click to get rid of it and go on with your search, and manage i don’t know how to make me paid for their texts with the risks of me having to pay a fee daily.

so yes they stopped harassing me, I did ot pay to them directly but I had to pay them to send me text announcing to me I had been conned. or that I was to be if not clicking again. sweet thing I could use my phone, what if I was out of credit. do they have access to my bank account the same.

To be over it. Not the Net police are on it, honey, and what if it was the little scam that prepare us for the big, and bigger, and grosser scenery. Set up.

Software searching.

Try to alert the police who gave me a 10 minutes file to fill up, unless i wanted to pay for the phone maybe. After the 10 minutes an error on their sites, id on’t know what i did wrong, it have no patience or else to retry the procedure. Thank you the police.

To whom can one report that report to the police is an odyssey.

Note: metropolitan police does not provide you with proof of your request = no proof of you having raised a offence, in case they don’t look after it?? Or in case they give you wrong information that would bring you in verge of illegality, or in case they give you wrong information that make you sweat 100 times more that the others do (in case of commercial authorisation, etc), they don’ t like the peddler too much in particular, if wrong info given, arrestable in no time for the offence of following restrictions unknown by them and too lazy to check it right anyway.

                       

We use cookies to help us understand how people use our website. The cookie settings on this website are set to ‘allow cookies’. If you want to opt out, select no and we won’t track your future usage. Are you happy for us to track your usage?
Find out more about how we use cookies.

YesNo

<div
class=”grid_16″> <p> It appears
that Javascript is turned off, or you are using an older browser. This may stop
some of the page functionality from working correctly. </p> </div> <o:p></o:p></span></p>

Fraud Alert

Reporting Fraud

In an emergency you should phone 999. You should use the 999 service to contact police when you need an immediate response – if a crime is happening now or if anyone is in immediate danger. The national local police number is now 101.

If you have been a victim of fraud please follow the guidelines below. If you wish to report other types of crime, please see the MPS Reporting Crime page.

The police are not the only agency with power to investigate fraud related offences; it is often difficult to determine what has happened and who to make reports to.

Action Fraud, is the UK’s national fraud and internet crime reporting centre. It was set up by the National Fraud Authority to take reports of fraud from victims as well as provide support and advice. They issue a ‘crime reference number’ which should be quoted in the same way as one issued by police.

Reports received by Action Fraud are fed into the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB), the central facility overseen by City of London   Police to coordinate fraud investigation.

The NFIB analyses information from Action Fraud and other sources to create intelligence packages of trends and linked cases to be sent to the appropriate police or other law enforcement organisations for investigations which may involve enquiries throughout the UK and overseas.

Reporting Fraud Related offences

The advice sections within the Fraud Alert web pages above may help to understand what has happened to you and be of use before making a report. Further advice is available from Action Fraud.

Special arrangements apply to the fraudulent use of credit cards, bank debit cards, cheques and bank accounts. See item 2 below. See below also for information about trading standards, consumer issues, on-line and vehicle related fraud.

Fraud and Scams

If you are a victim of fraud, often also referred to as ‘scams’, you should make a report.

Action Fraud is available to report fraud and attempted fraud offences on line or by phone.

Local police should take a formal report of fraud in the following circumstances:

· Where the person suspected of committing the crime can be easily identified and apprehended.
· Where the person reporting or the victim is vulnerable.
· Where the crime is in progress.

Victims of fraud often believe that they know the person who has defrauded them because of what they have been told by mail, phone or over the internet.

· Fraudsters use technology to hide their true whereabouts and identity.
· All information that they have provided about themselves may be false.
· Action Fraud will accept reports from overseas where money has been lost and there is a clear link to the UK. A report to your local police in your country should also be made.

See the right side of this page for Metropolitan Police Stations or Police.uk for the contact points for all UK Police organisations.

Vulnerable Victims and Third Party Reports.
A vulnerable victim may not be able to make a crime report or may lack the capacity to understand their situation as a victim of crime.
A third party may make a report for or on behalf of a vulnerable person who is unable to make a report or lacks capacity, where this is in their best interest.

Credit Cards, Bank Debit Cards, Cheques and Bank Accounts

If your credit card, bank debit card, cheques or bank details have been used by fraudsters, your bank or other financial Institution must be informed, they make a report to the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB).
A report should be made to Action Fraud in addition to a report that your bank or other financial institution may make, in the following circumstances:
· The card/account involved is not a UK bank or financial institution.
· Your bank or financial institution will not reimburse you or they have asked you to make a report.
· You have information which may identify the perpetrator of the fraud, (including merchant chargebacks).
If a fraudulent account has been set up in your name and you don’t have a relationship with that bank or card company, a report must be made by you.

If you have lost or had stolen any of the above items, a separate report must be made to Police.

Trading Standards and Consumer issues

If you have a dispute or complaint about something that you have bought in a shop, by mail order or via the internet, or want some consumer advice, contact the Citizens Advice consumer service on 08454 040506 (textphone users should dial 18001 then the full number) or email using the web form

For additional information and online advice, please see the Citizens Advice consumer service website

The Citizens Advice consumer service handles initial complaints on behalf of Trading Standards.

eMails, on-Line and Web Sites

If you have been the victim of a fraud by answering an advert on line, this should be reported as above. It must also be reported to the web site concerned, unless you believe that the whole site may be fraudulent. If you believe that an advert that you have seen is suspicious, report your suspicions to the web site. Many sites allow you to do this as part of the advert.

If you have received a ‘phishing’ email, text, letter or scam communication by any other method and have not lost money or clicked on any website links contained in the message, you can report this online to Action Fraud at Report Attempted Scams or Viruses. This tool will identify the most appropriate email address to forward phishing emails to for disruption, investigation and/or prevention activity
Do not reply to the email or contact the senders in any way, do not click any links in the emails.

Reports by companies.
Organisations of all sizes may make a report to Action Fraud. This covers most fraud related offences and circumstances, however some specialised reports, for example mortgage fraud, which have special arrangements are not reportable direct to Action Fraud at present.

Fraud Alert

Had to complain to police other site, (Das ist) i filled a file showing me they reported any kind of crime on earth they could possibly make me select and beforehand read about it, but mine, but that after the ordeal a website error prevent me to complete my report.

Fw: impossible fil your file, say i use more than 1500 words; it is untrue.

To: “action.fraud@nfa.gsi.gov.uk” <action.fraud@nfa.gsi.gov.uk>

I don’t want to complain i just don’t want, last time i have been conned by my landlord or even my bank pretending an error of reading, not finding the proof of my writing to them obviously, they would not have to be searched or if not they would erase it. After having been conned by my landlord, i ask the police nothing they can do about it, not even keep a record of having been conned, like if it was daunting to keep a file nowaday. Meaning one can keep deposit, and rent, why not ransack your room, not ransack your room this they would have taken the complain, but i could not invent it, being robbed or several months of rent being enough, with an emergency moving being more than enough for wishing to lose any trace of identity.

The landlords that stay correct in this land of insanity- mind between the price of a room and of transportation that cut the working class for decent living possibilities, write this will become a complete useless, they will become our daily daftly lay.

Draft.

How to Report a Scam

http://www.consumerfraudreporting.org/reporting.phpCached – Similar
You +1’d this publicly. Undo

10 Nov 2012 – A catch-all for bringing internet scams to the attention of the FBI and FTC … Do you want to report a fraud, scam or crime to the FBI (the Federal …

Web Traffic

–>

Tags: , , , , ,
Comment

C: Internet, free get rid home. C: internet (fry) ridom. (Rhizome) rid all rival tidal, tied doll. psible?

Filed under: entirely from other sources. — Leave a comment
January 18, 2012
Public Order Act: repeal Section 5

Law open to abuse by over-zealous police and prosecutors

 

Ban on insult and distress threatens free speech & right to protest

By Peter Tatchell

Huffington Post UK – London – 17 January 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-g-tatchell/public-order-act-repeal-section-5_b_1209096.html

Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 is a menace to free speech and the right to protest. It has been repeatedly abused by over-zealous police and prosecutors, to variously arrest gay rights campaigners, Christian street preachers, critics of Scientology and even students making jokes.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64
 
It is time Section 5 was repealed, to allow freedom of expression without the threat of arrest.

The opportunity for reform exists. The current Protection of Freedoms Bill could easily be amended.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2010-2012/0121/lbill_2010-20120121_en_1.htm

Some MPs and Lords want to amend it. Alas, the Con-Dem government is hesitating, despite its professed commitment to restore many of civil liberties that were whittled away during the Blair-Brown era.

Section 5 Public Order Act 1986 states:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64

Harassment, alarm or distress.

(1)    A person is guilty of an offence if he-

 

(a)    uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or

(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.

This legislation is sweeping, draconian and has a chilling effect. There is no requirement to prove that the person intended any of the aforementioned likely consequences. They can be convicted under Section 5, regardless of their intention. Thus innocently intended words, behaviours or signs can result in a criminal record.

The first part of Section 5 is about criminalising disorderly behaviour, and words, behaviour or images that are threatening. Threats and disorderly behaviour are unacceptable. Criminalising them is therefore not unreasonable.  

It is less clear that mere abuse warrants criminalisation. What constitutes abuse? Calling someone a “bloody fool” or a “drunken bastard” is abusive but should it be a crime? Different people have different interpretations regarding what level and forms of abuse should be lawful or unlawful. It’s a subjective judgement.

Likewise with insults. When does an insult cease to be a legitimate (if bad mannered) expression of opinion and become a matter for arrest and prosecution? Much satirical comedy and many polemical critiques of religion may be deemed insults by some people.

The second part of Section 5 is equally worrying. A crime is committed if a person is “likely” to be caused “harassment, alarm or distress”. There is no requirement to prove that anyone actually has been harassed, alarmed or distressed. The mere likelihood is sufficient to secure a conviction.

In particular, the criminalisation of harassment in Section 5 is superfluous. Safeguards against harassment exist in other legislation, notably the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40

What constitutes alarm and distress in Section 5 is a further subjective judgment, open to widely different interpretations. For some ultra-sensitive people, what others regard as valid criticisms may cause them distress. Provocative challenges to their beliefs can provoke alarm.

Indeed, any controversial or dissenting viewpoint has the potential to upset someone and result in them complaining that they felt insulted, alarmed or distressed. Liberal Muslims offend traditionalists, gay pride marches alarm homophobes, mixed race couples distress racists and gender equality is an affront to sexist men. You see my point?

Section 4A of the Public Order Act is sufficient to cover any exceptional circumstances requiring prosecution (although its criminalisation of mere insults should also be repealed for the afore-mentioned reasons). Moreover, 4A has the added safeguard that the person must have acted with intent.

If we accept that abuse or insults resulting in likely alarm or distress should be a crime, we risk limiting free and open debate and criminalising dissenting opinions and alternative lifestyles that some very conservative people may find offensive and upsetting. The right to mock, ridicule and satirise ideas, opinions, people and institutions is put in jeopardy. Section 5 can, in theory, be used to criminalise almost any words, actions or images, if someone (anyone) is likely to be alarmed or distressed by them.  

To give some examples:

Campaigns against religious homophobia have sometimes resulted in lesbian and gay activists being arrested for causing insult or distress to homophobes and their religious supporters.

This is what happened to myself and other members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) human rights group OutRage! when we protested against 6,000 supporters of the Islamist fundamentalist group, Hizb ut-Tahrir, outside their mass rally at Wembley Arena in 1994.
http://tiny.cc/3xha3
 
They called for the killing of gays, apostates, Jews and unchaste women. They were not arrested but we were. Our crime? We shouted slogans and displayed placards that factually condemned Hizb ut-Tahrir supporters for inciting murder and also denounced the persecution of LGBT people by Islamist governments, such as the Iranian regime. Our placards were deemed insulting and likely to cause distress.

Section 5 has been also used unjustly against Christian street preachers who have merely condemned homosexuality, without being aggressive or threatening. What they said was homophobic and should be challenged but they should not be criminalised.

Dale McAlpine was arrested in Workington in 2010, after condemning homosexuality as a sin. He was charged with using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress, contrary to Section 5.  
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1270364/Christian-preacher-hooligan-charge-saying-believes-homosexuality-sin.html

The same law was also used to stifle the views of Muslims who condemned British soldiers in Iraq as “terrorists” and as the “butchers of Basra”.

In 2008, a teenager was charged under Section 5 for holding a sign outside Scientology’s London headquarters calling the movement a “cult”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/may/20/1

Two years earlier, an Oxford student was arrested for jokingly suggesting that a police horse was “gay”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4196447/Arrest-for-gay-horse-jibe-is-absurd-says-Tatchell.html

In both cases, even though the charges were later dropped, the protesters had their freedom of expression infringed and they suffered public humiliation by the police.

The civil rights watchdogs, Liberty and Justice, want Section 5 either repealed or radically reformed.
http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/pdfs/policy12/liberty-s-committee-stage-briefing-supplementary-prot-of-freedoms-bill-hol-j.pdf

http://www.justice.org.uk/data/files/resources/137/Protection_of_Freedoms_Bill_HCcommittee_stage_JUSTICE_amendments_7apr11.pdf

Freedom of expression is one of the most important of all liberties and human rights. It should be only restricted in extreme and very limited circumstances. The open exchange of ideas – including unpalatable, even offensive, ideas – is a hallmark of a free and democratic society.

There is no right to be not distressed or offended. Some of the most important ideas in history – such as those of Galileo Galilei and Charles Darwin – caused great offence and distress in their time.

While bigoted opinions should always be challenged, in most instances only explicit incitements to violence and damaging libels, such as false allegations of tax fraud or child abuse, should be criminalised.

Causing insult or distress is far too low a threshold for criminalisation. It can inhibit the right to protest and free speech. There is no place for Section 5 in a democratic society.

A Select Committee should be charged to examine Section 5 and all public order laws, with a view to proposing reforms that strike a better balance between protecting the public and safeguarding freedom of expression, as Lord Avebury has proposed.

  • Peter Tatchell is Director of the human rights lobby, the Peter Tatchell Foundation. 
     
  • To find out more about the Peter Tatchell Foundation and support its work visit:www.PeterTatchellFoundation.org 

 

 

 

PLEASE DO NOT REPLY DIRECTLY TO THIS EMAIL

If you would like to contact the Peter Tatchell Foundation, please email: Peter@PeterTatchellFoundation.org

 

C: Internet, free get rid home.

Room for Sodom the way and day you don’t want it: uncalled for or unmarried (like hetero advertise (an) us gay..

Us but not ours nay.

Tags: , , ,
Comment
%d bloggers like this: