Entries in Internet-Censorship (25)

Wednesday
Apr152015

Anti-vaxxers co-ordinate Denial of Service Attack against Federal Government

If you've seen the news lately then you'll know that the Abbot government has recently announced plans to strip anti-vaxxers of welfare payments for refusing to vaccinate their childeren. 

Australian parents will lose thousands of dollars of childcare and welfare benefits if they refuse to vaccinate their kids.
The “no jab, no pay” plan, announced by the federal government today, has bipartisan support. Thousands of families could lose payments, with the government estimating about 39,000 children under seven have not received immunisation because their parents are vaccine objectors. But Social Service Minister Scott Morrison said it’s not fair for taxpayers to subsidise parents who choose not to immunise. -The Australian

Australian welfare payments have certain conditions that must be met before you can claim a hand out from the taxpayer. For example the Disability Support Pension is only available for people who have a disability. Student welfare payments, called AusStudy in Australia can only be claimed by people undertaking a "full-time study load" who do not earn money via paid employment. While people claiming the New Start job seekers allowance must be looking for work.

 

Other welfare payments such as The Family Tax Benefit part A and the Child Care Benefit. Also have requirements that need to be met before a person is eligible to claim the benefit. In this case it is a requirement to immunise your children to be eligible for payment. However there was a loophole that allowed parents who neglect to vaccinate their children to still claim welfare payments despite not meeting the eligibility requirements. However there was an exemption in place that allowed people to claim “Conscientious Objection” to vaccination that would allow them to claim welfare payments despite failing to meet the immunisation requirements.

 

For years, anti-vaxxers have claimed “Conscientious Objection” to life saving medicine in order to claim a welfare payment they do not meet the requirements for. This is welfare fraud, albeit a legal one. The government has now closed this loophole to prevent tax payers money being spent on people who wish to endanger the community.

 

Unsurprisingly the Australian Vaccination Network, an extremist anti-vaccination lobby group that is no stranger to committing criminal acts. Is now encouraging members to partake in a “Phone Jam” whereby they attempt to flood the phone lines of Social Services Minister, Scott Morrison.

 The idea was first posted on No Vaccines Australia with the stated intention of clogging up the phone lines.

However attempting to "Clog up the phone lines" is a crime in Australia as it is in effect a Denial of Service Attack.

477.3  Unauthorised impairment of electronic communication

             (1)  A person is guilty of an offence if:

                     (a)  the person causes any unauthorised impairment of electronic communication to or from a computer; and

                     (b)  the person knows that the impairment is unauthorised; and

                     (c)  one or both of the following applies:

                              (i)  the electronic communication is sent to or from the computer by means of a carriage service;

                             (ii)  the electronic communication is sent to or from a Commonwealth computer.

 

Penalty:  10 years imprisonment.

-Criminal Code Act 1995, Part 10.7—Computer offences, Australia

For some reason anti-vaxxers,especially The Australian Vaccination Network like to think they are above the law and free to engage in harassment and abuse as they see fit. So far the Australian Vaccination Network has tried the following (and rapidly growing) list of tactics.


  • False DMCA reports.
  • False reporting of critics websites to anti-virus vendors.
  • Threatening Politicians.
  • Harassing, abusing, vilifying Grieving Families.
  • Impersonating critics websites (badly).
  • Spamming, email bombarding Members of Parliament.
  • Calling Doctors and Courts peadophiles.
  • Accused a mobile health service of kidnapping kids off the street.
  • Abusing Facebooks report feature to get critics banned.
  • Withholding Financial Reports from the department of Fair Trading.
  • Advocating the use of violence against critics.
  • Contacting Civil Rights groups and failing to spot the irony.
  • Promoting a fake church to dodge the law.
  • Lying to fair trading, and it's not even a very good lie.
  • Bullying Doctors.
  • Calling their critics terrorists.
  • Seeking Court orders to silence their critics.
  • Bomb Threats to venues if anti-vax talks are cancelled.
  • Compare Health advocates to Charlie Hebdo gunmen.
  • Ask for photos of dead childeren to be sent to the media.
  • Crimminal Vandalism of pro-vaccination billboards.
  • Registering other peoples business names.
  • Attempted Murder, by giving bogus health advice. (You find another name for it)
  • Anti-vaxxers claim to be persecuted like the Jews in the holocaust.
  • Phone Jamming Session.
  •  

    This is only a small list of abhorrent or at the very least, questionable behaviour that I have documented on this site over the past 5 years. I know there is a significantly enormous amount of bad behaviour that I haven't written about yet. Mainly because I haven't had the time to write a whole encyclopedia.

    Saturday
    Mar212015

    Anti-vaxxers continue their Facebook censorship campaign.

    Let's be clear about this. Censorship is the tool of the coward and so it comes as no surprise that anti-vaccination campaigners always attempt to suppress criticism rather than address it. Their most popular tactic is to abuse the Facebook reporting feature to get their critics kicked off Facebook.

    There is a group on Facebook called Anti Vax Wall of Shame (AVWOS) which mocks and ridicules the absurd claims of anti-vaxxers on Facebook in public groups. So rather than simply ignoring AVWOS, or better yet refrain from saying stupid things in public. The anti-vaxxers have decided to play their trump card; Facebook censorship.

    The plan is to bombard Facebook with complaints until Anti-vax Wall of Shame is removed. The anti-vaxxers have learned how to exploit Facebook's automated tools and have a well established history of using it to silence anyone they don't like. Of course if the plan doesn't work they have a conspiracy theory all lined up ready to go.

    When questioned by other members about freedom of speech they just repeat one of their favorite lies about critics.

    You're asking for proof from anti vaxxers? Good luck with that.

    I really hope this is true because it will certainly be a lot of fun. The last anti-vaxxer to accuse me of hacking was ordered by the court to pay my legal costs. It should come as no surprise that lunatic conspiracy theorists don't tend to fare so well in court.

    Anti-vaxxers also oppose the use of virus scanners. For the love of all viruses.

    Flooding Facebook with false complaints for the purpose of punishing your critics is harassment. This is a deliberate orchestrated campaign to have people banned from Facebook for daring to post screenshots that have been taken from a public group.

    This is not the first time anti-vaxxers have resorted to these tactics and probably won't be the last. It all started back in 2012. See: Why does Meryl Dorey fear free speech?

    Friday
    Feb132015

    Anti-vaxxer silences The Spudd

    A favorite tactic of miscreants seeking to silence their critics is to threaten a lawsuit in the hope that the website owner will cave into the threat and remove the criticism from the internet.

    TheSpudd.com a satire site that pokes fun at alternative health cranks has become the latest victim of this tactic.

    Yes folks for the first time, and presumably not the last, The Spudd has been threatened with libel action about a recent post. The post has since been taken down and we will not be divulging any details about the person responsible. -The Spudd

    Unfortunately the Spudd did cave into the threat and the material that the anti-vaxxer wanted removed is now gone. In my opinion handing the anti-vaxxer an easy victory like this only encourages them to continue the activity against their critics. Not only has the requested content been removed but the decision not to name the anti-vaxxer means there can be no Streisand Effect either.

    Thursday
    Dec262013

    Anti-vaxxers ramp up censorship campaign.

    Supporters of the Australian Vaccination Network have increased their efforts to suppress critics by abusing Facebook's "Report Abuse" feature.

    Anti-vaccination activists are well known for their attempts to censor the voices of their critics. Their tactics to silence critics include:

    1. False DMCA reports.
    2. False reporting of critics websites to anti-virus vendors.
    3. Threatening Politicians.
    4. Harassing, abusing, vilifying Grieving Families.
    5. Seeking Court orders to silence their critics.
    6. Abusing Facebooks report feature to get critics banned.
    7. Advocating the use of violence against critics.
    8. Calling their critics terrorists. 

    Recently #6 has made a comeback with several critics receiving multiple 12 hour bans from Facebook. Even for mundane comments such as this.

    It's clear that these people are simply reporting everything and anything in order to get their critics removed from Facebook. They have even set up a page to brag about their latest censorship campaign.

    This is not the first time AVN supporters have engaged in these tactics. I wrote more extensively about their first round of abuse Here. I have no doubt that this abusive organisation will continue to do whatever it can to silence criticism. But rest assured we will all still be here fighting to close the bastards down.

    Saturday
    Sep212013

    AVN Founder accuses the courts of corruption.

    As expected Meryl Dorey of the Australian Vaccination Network has come out accusing the courts of corruption because they refused to issue orders that myself, Peter Bowditch and Daniel Raffaele be restrained from talking about her on the internet. 

    Last year, at the suggestion of police in two NSW jurisdictions, I filed three separate APVOs: against Daniel Raffaele, founder of Stop the AVN (SAVN), Peter Bowditch, committee member of the Australian Skeptics and Dan Buzzard, WA member of SAVN.

    I could have filed APVOs against many more SAVN members. So many have threatened and harassed me, as well as inciting others to do me harm, but these were the three whom I considered to be the ‘ringleaders’ – whose abuse and harassment were unremitting. My reasons for taking this action were two-fold

    1-    To stop them from continuing their criminal campaign of abuse, harassment and threats against me; and

    2-    To send a warning to others that the justice system would protect someone who was being openly abused, harassed and threatened.

    1. To date Ms Dorey claims about being harassed and threatened are dubious at best. I still await credible evidence of these claims.

    2. I am well aware of Ms Dorey intention to intimidate her critics with these lawsuits. In court I clearly stated that I agree with Ms Dorey taking out AVOs against people who abuse, harass or threaten her. But as I am not one of those people I have to question her motive for naming me in the lawsuit.

    I wonder if it had anything to do with the Australian Vaccination Network trying to keep their committee members hidden from the Department of Fair Trading?

    Freedom of Information is a wonderful thing.

    It is my firmly held belief, based on the evidence from both cases that actually went to trial, that my losses had nothing to do with the evidence presented to the courts. Based on that evidence alone – APVOs should have been granted without question. But both magistrates showed a strong disapproval for the work that I have done for the last 20 years with the AVN and I feel that they were unable to separate Meryl Dorey the mother, woman and victim of institutionalised and long-running abuse, from Meryl Dorey, ex-President of the AVN and vaccine rights advocate.

    More lies, the magistrate made it clear that the case had nothing to do with vaccination and was about whether or not Ms Dorey had cause to fear the defendant. In my case despite having an almost 4 year long opposition Ms Dorey simply could not produce any evidence or justification for seeking an AVO against me.

    Ms Dorey did present evidence of a death threat sent to her by a user called fantasticfox5@tormail.org but this person has no connection to me other than having emailed me on a single occasion, which can be seen here. I told the court that I think Ms Dorey would be perfectly justified in seeking an order against that individual, but I don't see how the actions of an unknown third party have anything to do with me.

    Just a clarifying note at this point for those who are unaware of my case against Daniel Raffaele: the APVO against him was granted without his making any admissions of wrongdoing even though threatening calls to my home were made from his house in the middle of the night. I was advised to accept these terms rather than going to trial. In retrospect, I think I made the right choice since even with the damning evidence against him, I am unsure that the courts would have granted my application had Raffaele opposed it.

    The key phrase here is "Consent without admission" Mr Rafaele consented to the AVO in order to avoid the costly and time consuming proceedure of defending against a vexatious litigant. While I can certainly understand the desire to get the AVO out of the way fast I believe Mr Rafaele made a mistake in consenting to the AVO. Meryl Dorey and current AVN President Greg Beattie continue to make unfounded allegations against Mr Rafaele despite there being no admission to any wrong doing.

    When I went to the courthouse last year to make the initial applications, I selected several of the standard orders from the list available (orders which limited the perpetrator’s ability to come near me or enter my property or threaten me). I also asked that they not be allowed to mention me in any online forum in a derogatory manner. At the initial mention in Ballina Courthouse almost a year ago, the magistrate said that he did not have the power to grant the latter order and I agreed to withdraw it. All I was asking the court to do was to prevent them from coming near me or physically threatening me. None of that would in any way ‘silence’ them.

    Not true, the purpose of these AVOs was to bully, defame AND silence her critics. I have the documentation that specifically asks that I be silenced on the internet and numerous examples of her defaming the defendants long before the cases even got to court. Her continued defamation of Daniel Rafaele only shows that these application were not brought in good faith and only intended to harass.

    In fact, during the time when these cases were still before the courts, sub judice reports were appearing in the media to the effect that taking away my opposition’s right to free speech was the only reason I made these applications.

    Ms Dorey was speaking on public radio and sending out media releases about the AVOs within days of filing them. Long before this article was published: Founder of anti-immunisation group Australian Vaccination Network, Meryl Dorey, uses AVOs to gag critics

    It is my belief that the magistrate in my case against Dan Buzzard may have used this misinformation in his decision since he did refer to media reports when making his summation. In fact, he criticised me openly many times during the hearing to the point where I was relieved to only have to pay $11,000 in court costs – at one point, I had the distinct impression that I was going to be sent to gaol. I do not remember him sanctioning Dan Buzzard even once despite his admissions to having asked people to send me violent pornography.

    I believe that Ms Dorey will be serving time behind bars in the future. Obviously not over an AVO hearing, but over the many unlawful and fraudulent activities engaged in by her organisation. A few of which I have written about. Also I didn't tell people to send Dorey "violent pornography", the court obviously realised this.

    These people are truly guilty of using bureaucracy and the media to silence their opposition.

    All I asked was that the courts protect me from these abusers who had openly threatened and harassed me. This is a protection that should be available to all Australian citizens and residents – indeed – to everyone in every country around the world. It is a basic human right which, thanks to what I consider to be the bias of the courts, was denied me in these cases.

    I continue to wait for evidence that Ms Doreys critics have ever engaged in unlawful activity against her. So far as the evidence suggest all SAVN members are operating entirely within the law.

    Ms Dorey clearly thinks that the act of simply initiating a lawsuit implies guilt on behalf of the defendant. It does not you still have to prove the allegation in court, she found out the expensive way.

    Read about my case here.