2010 February - Because there is a WAR on for your MIND

Archive for February, 2010

Entensys Releases Usergate Proxy & Firewall 5.0

Entensys Corporation – an International security software vendor, announced the release of UserGate Proxy & Firewall 5.0, which offers centralized management of networks and protection from complex Internet threats. UserGate now enables System Administrators to control their employees’ browsing habits and to monitor downloads in real-time. UserGate server can help boost employee productivity by giving you total control over what your employees can browse and what files they can download in real-time.

Complete Internet access control is achieved through web categorizations and web filtering techniques. BrightCloud Service and the BrightCloud Master Database are now included in UserGate and they have the largest, most accurate categorized URL database in the world.

This lets you control what sites your users can browse and lets you block access to websites that fall in particular categories, such as adult, online gaming, personal email, P2P and other work-unrelated resources. UserGate also allows you to monitor user downloads in real-time, letting you block specific file-types, such as mp3, mpeg, exe, zip, etc. It also scans all files for viruses and other malware using multiple anti-virus engines such as Panda and Kaspersky. This radically decreases the time to obtain virus signatures, thereby reducing the possibility of infection. UserGate even reduces the risk of social engineering by blocking access to phishing websites through the use of an auto-updatable database of phishing URLs.

“We examined all the recent IT trends and implemented each one that brought the slightest improvement to UserGate’s already very advanced protection, ease of use, and blazingly fast, security-enhanced Web access”, says Alexander Levchenko, President of Entensys Corporation. “We at Entensys are extremely proud of this release.”

UserGate Proxy & Firewall 5.0 includes multiple security features integrated into one complete solution. Features such as its dynamic traffic management system (Bandwidth Manager) that lets you specify a maximum amount of traffic for both directions (to and from your network or each computer on your network), a warning system of alert messages generated by UserGate server in response to virus detection, external attacks, virus definition file updates, and other server events. An Application Firewall is also implemented to manage Internet-based software at the client side with a detailed Web Statistics module and many other advanced capabilities.

Key Product Features

UserGate Proxy & Firewall 5.0 is a security solution that provides comprehensive protection by combining essential network security functions. UserGate now includes:

· Application Firewall – integrated module that enables the management of Internet-based applications, including the setting of restrictions on application usage per version/type/protocol and/or name.

· Dual Antivirus Engines – Panda Security and Kaspersky Lab engines filter mail, FTP and HTTP traffic for viruses to protect your network.

· Categorized URL Filtering – Includes BrightCloud URL filtering that restricts access to specific Web site categories that are generally not pertinent to a company’s use of the Internet.

· Alert Manager – is a warning system of alert messages generated by UserGate server in response to virus detections, external attacks, virus definition file updates and other server events.

· Bandwidth Manager – A dynamic traffic management system that uses simulation models combined with real-time traffic and origin/destination information to predict the effects of various management strategies, thus allowing more effective management and providing better traffic information than is currently possible.

· Web Statistics module – reporting, enables complete access to users’ statistics of their Internet browsers.

About Entensys

Entensys is an International security software vendor and developer of Internet connection sharing and firewall products that have a clear, easy-to-use administrative interface and multifunctional services. Entensys is the producer of the popular UserGate Proxy & Firewall, which provides centralized network management and protection from a very broad array of Internet threats. Entensys’ products solve complex security problems by addressing new security threats, as well as increase information protection and improve corporate IT infrastructure reliability. Entensys offers a wide range of information security services for today’s organizations, governments, commercial corporations and educational institutions.

More information is available at www.entensys.com.

Helen Markova
http://www.articlesbase.com/security-articles/entensys-releases-usergate-proxy-firewall-50-679255.html

Cultural Singapore Attractions

The cultural industry in Singapore has blossomed of late and now high art and the wonderful world of cultural exhibitions have invaded this island nation to an extent where the scene itself has piqued interest within the community. The National Arts Council and the Heritage Board, working together with MICA (Ministry of Information, Culture and the Arts) have worked together for years to build Singapore into a Renaissance City – hoping to emulate the explosion of culture and art in Italy in the 14th Century – and hopefully spawning their own Michelangelo or Leonardo Da Vinci.

The Singapore museum and the heritage museum are just some of the examples of how this nation has leveraged on its own culture and rich history to put together exhibitions and attractions that cannot be missed. Singapore’s founding, its prime leaders and its birth from a footnote in history to Sovereign nation are chronicled in a rich world of sound, art and words in the Singapore National Museum and the heritage gallery as well. Be sucked into the 1900′s again as chronicled in acute detailed is history of Singapore – with journals of our early colonial founders etched out in aching beauty and sound. Also, recently in the national museum was some of the notes of William Farquhar and his chronicle of some of the species of animals that used to reside in the Singapore jungles and some of the names the locals or ‘Orang Asli’ used to give to them.

The Asian Civilisation Museum is also a prime example of a cultural Singapore attraction that you must visit as soon as possible. The rich tapestry of the Asian civilisations are realised in life like and breathtaking models and statues transported from dig sites all over Inner Mongolia, China and all over South East Asia. Be amazed as they tell the histories and lifestyle of Old Asia in a way no – one can, through pictures and objects that inspire the greatest story teller of all – your imagination. This museum also deals with propaganda and cultural material and how politics of old and of new has changed the face of culture in countries like Burma, Indonesia and China.

There is no end to the sort of cultural experiences you can enjoy in Singapore. The National Heritage Board has a smorgasbord of facilities and organisations to whet the cultural appetite. They have converted the old Ford Factory in Singapore to a memorial – museum like emporium of the 1960′s. The Peranakan Museum and the Singapore Philatelic Museum are just some of the examples of rich locations where you can view great cultural pieces and demonstrations for just a nominal fee.

Singapore is culture. It is founded on culture, built by tradition and lovingly shaped by hundreds of years of history – a maelstrom of inculturality that has given this country an identity that is rich, varied and beautiful. Singapore has decided to share this with anyone who wants to look, as well as bringing the rest of greater Asia into a single location – to inspire a living heritage and dynamic cultural attractions.

Ethan Ong
http://www.articlesbase.com/travel-articles/cultural-singapore-attractions-678144.html

A Strong Political Will, a National Level Combat Force and an Effective Judiciary – Prof. Arindam Chaudhuri

What happened on 9/11 is something that the world would never forget. Memories of the twin towers coming down are impossible to erase but more than that what made this event even more ‘memorable’ is the manner in which the US government has gone around hunting for terrorists in Afghanistan, and followed it up with an engagement in Iraq, thus changing the future course of global geo-politics. Similarly, 7/7 would also remain a memorable day as that brings forth the memory of the gruesome London blasts; and more than that the way the UK police had gone about chasing the perpetrators of the crime, making the incident even more unforgettable, almost giving a new definition to terrorism. What the US did to Afghanistan and then to Iraq would always remain a matter of contention globally, and has left a lot of room for criticism, but then the way the Indian government has been sleeping on terrorism over the past so many years, and allowing innocent citizens to be killed, is probably worse than that. This is evident from the fact that unlike 9/11 and 7/7, there would be very few people who would remember the following dates – 3/12 (1993), 2/14 (1998), 10/1 (2001), 12/13 (2001), 9/24 (2002), 5/14 (2003), 8/25 (2003), 8/15 (2004), 7/5 (2005), 10/29 (2005), 3/7 (2006), 7/11 (2006), 9/8 (2006), 5/18 (2007), 8/25 (2007)… People don’t remember these simply because the government itself has slept over the corpses of hundreds of innocents who were blown up by bombs somewhere in the country. Forget about a national consensus for combating terrorism, the government is still in a denial mode about the very fact that terrorism exists in the country. This attitude is evident from all the ghastly incidents that have occurred over the past decades and the manner in which the government has gone about handling them.

Starting from the Mumbai blasts on 3rd March, 1993, to the Hyderabad blast on 25th August, 2007, all of them have been a horrifying reiteration of the very same fact that terrorism in India exists and that the Indian government is in a state of perpetual amnesia. Oh yes, the Special Task Force of the Andhra Pradesh Police is surely investigating the twin blasts. But you can take it for granted that just like in the previous cases, the moment the media attention goes away (which it inevitably will), the issue would die its unnatural death. In fact, after a point of time, even media would lose its focus as in this country, too much talk on serious issues becomes a sore point for the public at large; and as such, such ‘socially-oriented’ programmes are bound to lose out on the TRP ratings. Politicians in general and successive governments in particular have taken advantage of this short memory of our citizens and have never bothered to devise a strong anti-terror policy. As a result of this, innocent citizens continue to bleed even after a decade.

Reports state that in 2006 alone, a total of 3,033 terror incidents happened in India. The figure for the year 2007 (till July 31st) has been 1579, and one should not be surprised if by the year end, the tally breaks the previous year’s records by a huge margin. Recent reports further state that the number of people who have died in terror related incidents from 1994 till 2005 in India is a shocking 47,371, of which Jammu & Kashmir alone accounts for 32,677 deaths. Again, these figures do not include Naxalite related deaths – for which one can safely add another 7,000-8,000 to the total count over the eleven year period. Incidentally, in 2005, Naxalite related deaths accounted for 1,594 casualties while the figure for the same period in 2006 was 1,509.

Shockingly, the attitude of the government is glaring when it comes to the state of police and special investigative agencies, our main combat force to counter terrorism! With shoestring budgets, corroded equipment and overworked manpower, what better can one expect. To get an idea of how much the police machinery is understaffed, one only needs to compare the ‘cop to population’ ratio of the western countries to that of India.

Whereas on an average there are 250 cops for every 1,000 people in western countries, the UN recommended figure of having 222 cops for every 1,000 people is a distant dream compared to the Indian statistics of 122 for every 1,000 people. In certain parts of India, it would be tough to find even 50-60 cops for every 1,000 people. To give an example of the utterly dismal situation, one look at the Special Operations Group of the West Bengal CID (which is responsible for counter terrorism) would be enough – the group has barely 13 personnel and one old Ambassador car to take care of the entire state. Similar is the condition in most of the states barring few. But in reality, political interference and bureaucracy stand as the biggest hurdles for any investigation to conclude.

Frankly, it is not difficult to combat terror – for that, we have successful home grown examples like KPS Gill, who almost single-handedly uprooted militancy from Punjab. What is needed is a strong political will coupled with a national level combat force and an effective judiciary to deliver prompt and befitting sentences to the perpetrators. More than anything else, given the lack of political will, it is the common man who can collectively force policy makers and politicians to act tough on terror, enact more stringent provisions in our laws and make sure that those who are involved with the execution of brutal terror acts are dealt equally brutally and judiciously.

Kartik
http://www.articlesbase.com/news-and-society-articles/a-strong-political-will-a-national-level-combat-force-and-an-effective-judiciary-prof-arindam-chaudhuri-711886.html

Dui Guilt Myth — Chapter 12

Chapter 12 DWI Lawyer Bob Keefer: DUI Guilt Myth

CHAPTER 12

“WHAT DO I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE LAW IN MY STATE?”

—DUI LAW IN VIRGINIA

Differences in DUI Law in Virginia from Other States

The Virginia legal system for DUI’s has several notable differences from other state these major differences will be outlined below.

DWI and DUI in Virginia are the Exact Same Offense

In most states there is a difference between DW I, “driving while intoxicated” and DUI, “driving under the influence.” For an example, in most states driving while intoxicated is a more serious offense than driving under the influence. Other states have even a third finding available such as operating while impaired or OWI.

In Virginia, there is no difference between DUI and DWI. Virginia Code Section 18.2-266 makes it illegal to drive while intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.

The Virginia Code defines intoxicated as follows: “‘Intoxicated’ means a condition in which a person has drunk enough alcoholic beverages to observably affect his manner, disposition, speech, muscular movement, general appearance or behavior.”

Blood Alcohol Content (“BAC”) relates to BAC While Driving

Another difference from many states is that Virginia looks at the blood alcohol content (“BAC”) while driving. Other states will base their legal limit on the BAC at the time of the taking of the breath or blood sample. The distinction is that Virginia motorists are able to present evidence that their BAC while driving was lower than the subsequent blood or breath test.

Under Virginia DUI law, anyone driving on the highways of Virginia has, according to Virginia’s implied consent law, given their “consent” to a breath or blood tests if they are arrested for DUI. If this test results is a .08 or above, there are are significant effects in the prosecution of one’s case. One way of proving DUI, known as the “per se” law, looks at nothing but the breath result. If it is .08 or above, the person is guilty of DUI; if it is below .08, the person is not guilty of DUI. However, since Virginia looks at the BAC at the time of driving, the defendant still has the ability to present expert testimony that his BAC while driving was in fact less than a .08.

Similarly, another way of proving DUI, looks at the .08 or higher breath result as one of the pieces of evidence in the overall trial. Although the statute says that if the BAC is .08 or above, there is a “presumption” of intoxication, the Virginia Court of Appeals ruled in 2007 that such presumptions are an unconstitutional infringement upon the Constitutional guarantee of the presumption of innocence in any criminal trial unless the language is interpreted to mean that there is not a mandatory presumption of intoxication. The Virginia Court of Appeals ruled that the courts must interpret the words “shall be presumed” to mean “may be inferred.” Thus, in a DUI prosecution under this section, the judge may infer (but is no longer required to presume) that someone is intoxicated if the prosecutor proves that they were a .08 or above while driving. Again, the defendant may present evidence that in fact his actual BAC while driving was below a .08 or that the results should not be given much weight because of issues with the machine or manner of testing. If the defendant is able to do this, then the judge may not make any inference based on the breath result.

Right to New Trial on Appeal to Circuit Court- Trial de Novo

General District Court, most commonly referred to as “traffic court” for DUI defendants, is the lower of the two trial courts in Virginia. There are no jury trials at the General District Court level. Doesn’t the Constitution of the United States guarantee a criminal defendant the right to a trial by jury? Yes.

Virginia grants anyone convicted in General District Court what is called a “trial de novo” on appeal to the higher trial level court in Virginia, known as the Circuit Court. Thus, any DUI defendant in Virginia who is unhappy with the judge’s ruling or sentence in the General District Court, has the ability to appeal to the Circuit Court and as soon as the appeal is noted, the conviction of the lower court is completely wiped off his record. I like to tell my clients that it is just like taking an eraser to a blackboard, and the client is in the exact same position that they were prior to the first trial (i.e. they are presumed to be innocent and have not been convicted of DUI.) Or, to use a golf analogy, Virginia allows all DUI clients a “Mulligan” on their first DUI trial!

The trial courts rule on both fines and jail time and license suspension issues

In many states, a DUI charge leads to two separate trials. The trial in court in front of a judge who determines whether someone is guilty and what fine and/or jail time someone receives, and in administrative license hearing in front of that state’s Division of Motor Vehicles. Virginia does not have a separate hearing for the determination of the status of someone’s driver’s license. By statute, the judge has to suspend the person’s license for a specific time based on whether this is a first or subsequent offense. The judge has the authority to grant a Restricted License allowing the person to drive to work, school, alcohol education classes and certain medical and family driving.

Virginia DUI Penalties

Administrative License Suspension (ALS)

For a first DUI offense and/or breath test refusal, your driver’s license will be automatically suspended for seven days if your BAC is 0.08 percent or higher.

For a second DUI offense and/or breath test refusal, your license will be automatically suspended for 60 days or until you go to trial, which ever comes first.

For a third DUI offense and/or breath test refusal, your license will be automatically suspended until you go to trial. Conviction of a DUI offense will result in suspension of your driver’s license and other penalties in addition to the administrative suspension.

First Offense – Penalties

i) BAC < .15

Class 1 misdemeanor (Up to $2,500 fine and 12 months in jail) with a mandatory minimum fine of $250.

ii) BAC .15 to .20

If the person’s blood alcohol level as indicated by the chemical test administered as provided in this article was at least 0.15, but not more than 0.20, he shall be confined in jail for an additional mandatory minimum period of 5 days or,

iii) BAC > .20

if the BAC level was more than 0.20, he shall be confined in jail for an additional mandatory minimum period of 10 days.

License Suspension

License revoked for 1 year. Eligible for immediate Restricted Operator’s License. Ignition Interlock required for BAC of .15 or above.

Second Offense – Penalties

A) Committed within less than 5 years from a prior offense

• Minimum $500 fine

• Confinement in Jail for one month to one year. 20 day mandatory minimum jail sentence.

• If the BAC was between .15 and .20, additional 10 days mandatory minimum jail sentence.

• If the BAC was greater than .20, additional 20 days mandatory minimum jail sentence.

B) Committed within 5 to 10 years from a prior offense

• Minimum $500 fine

• Confinement in Jail for one month to one year. 10 day mandatory minimum jail sentence.

• If the BAC was between .15 and .20, additional 10 days mandatory minimum jail sentence.

• If the BAC was greater than .20, additional 20 days mandatory minimum jail sentence.

License Suspension

License revoked for 3 years.

• 2nd conviction within 5 years- eligible for Restricted Operator’s License after 1 year. Ignition Interlock required for Restricted OL.

• 2nd conviction within 5-10 years- eligible for Restricted Operator’s License after 4 months. Ignition Interlock required for Restricted OL.

Third Offense – Penalties

A) All 3 committed within 5 years period

• Class 6 FELONY: 1-5 years imprisonment; or up to 12 months in jail and $2,500 fine.

• Mandatory minimum jail sentence of 6 months

• Mandatory minimum fine of $1,000.

B) All 3 committed more than 5 years and up to 10 year period

• Class 6 FELONY: 1-5 years imprisonment; or up to 12 months in jail and $2,500 fine.

• Mandatory minimum jail sentence of 90 days.

• Mandatory minimum fine of $1,000.

• License Suspension

License revoked indefinitely.

Fourth Offense in 10 Years- Penalties

Class 6 Felony with mandatory minimum 1 year imprisonment and mandatory minimum $1,000 fine

License Suspension

License revoked indefinitely.

Transporting Children While Under the Influence

Conviction of any DUI offense involving a juvenile passenger (age 17 or younger) in the vehicle at the time of the offense carries an additional mandatory five-day jail term in addition to all other fines and jail sentences. You may also be assessed an additional fine of at least $500 and up to $1,000.

A second DUI offense with a juvenile (age 17 or younger) in the vehicle carries an additional 80-hour community service requirement in addition to all other fines and jail sentences.

Multiple Offenders and the Trauma Center Fund

Virginia also requires anyone has been previously been convicted of DUI/DWI in any state to pay $50 to the Trauma Center Fund to subsidize the cost of emergency medical care to accident victims in alcohol or drug use car crashes.

Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP)

If convicted under Va. §18.2-266 (DUI/DWI statute) or Va. §46.2-341.24 (DUI/DWI of a commercial vehicle), Virginia statute requires enrollment in ASAP. This course costs between $250 and $300. The program is 20 hours long and focuses on substance abuse and driving, substance abuse and health, and self-evaluation of potential for substance abuse.

Ignition Interlock Program

Virginia requires that anyone convicted of a second DUI or anyone that has a BAC greater than .15 for their first DUI have an ignition interlock system installed. This system records the drivers BAC via breath test each time the car is started. It also requires that the driver blow into the breath analyzer ever 5-20 minutes.

8 Secrets

1. If everyone insists on their constitutional right to go to trial, the prosecutor will be in court all day.

2. In most cases, the mandatory minimum sentences for DUI are so harsh that a defendant in a DUI trial risks absolutely nothing by going to trial. Many clients ask me if a judge will penalize them with a harsher sentence if they assert their right to trial. The Virginia legislature has now raised the minimum sentence for all DUI cases to such a high level, that, if you decide to go to trial on your case, in most instances, as a practical matter, you are going to get the same sentence as the person who pleads guilty.

3. The prosecutor doesn’t want to be there. No one takes a job at a prosecutor’s office because they fantasized about prosecuting in traffic court! In most jurisdictions, the prosecutors would rather be prosecuting their felony cases than handling a traffic court docket. Furthermore, the prosecutor has 20 to 30 other cases with attorneys on the traffic court docket that they must handle that day.

4. The prosecutor is unprepared. In the vast majority of jurisdictions in Virginia, prosecutors do not look into traffic cases ahead of time. Most of my clients are shocked when I tell them that it is impossible for me to contact a prosecutor with knowledge about their case prior to the court date to discuss their case, because the prosecutors do not look into the cases ahead of time. In most jurisdictions, if someone shows up without an attorney, the prosecutor does not get involved. Thus, it is impossible for someone attempting to represent himself in these jurisdictions to discuss a possible plea bargain with the prosecutor, because the prosecutor will not speak to them. In some jurisdictions, such as Virginia Beach, there is not even a prosecutor for any traffic case, even a DUI with an attorney!

5. The police officer is unprepared. Your case is just one of an entire docket full of cases that the officer has on that date. It is not unusual for an officer to have 5 to 10 DUI cases on one date in addition to dozens of other traffic tickets. The officer often has little if any recollection of your arrest. That becomes apparent time and time again in court when I object to an officer testifying by reading from his notes and, after my objection is sustained by the judge, the officer clearly has no independent recollection of the arrest.

6. Most prosecutors know very little about the science (or lack thereof) behind field sobriety testing. At no time during law school does the professor ever say, “Today we’re going to learn about standardized field sobriety testing.” A thorough knowledge of these tests would actually hurt their cases and prevent them from making arguments that I routinely hear prosecutors make to judges while trying to argue that the results of these tests should be given more weight than they were ever intended to. For example, the three standardized field sobriety tests were only used to predict a BAC of .10 or above. Since the legal limit is now .08, there is almost no weight that a judge could give to these tests on someone with a BAC of .08 or .09.

7. The police officer did not follow proper procedures for the field sobriety tests. If a police officer receives proper training about field sobriety tests, they will be told the proper standards and procedures according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”). However, for example, on the “follow the pen with your eyes” test (the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, or HGN), the manual says that if the suspect moves his head during the test, the officer should use his flashlight or his free hand as a chin rest of the suspect.

In 25 years of practicing law, I have never seen an officer use anything as a chin rest for a suspect, even though in the vast majority of those cases the officer testifies that the suspect was swaying and unsteady on his feet! The manual also states that the walk-and-turn and one-leg stand test should not be done if the suspect is over 50 pounds overweight or has physical impairments that could affect his balance. The manual also states that the walk-and-turn test “requires a line that the suspect can see.” This is rarely done.

8. The breath testing equipment is inaccurate. The breath testing machine is just that- a machine. The machine uses an assumption to calculate the amount of alcohol in a person’s blood based on the amount of alcohol that is released into a person’s breath. The amount can vary from between 1100 and 3200. However, the machine uses a standard ratio of 2100, almost the average between the two.

If you exchange alcohol at the 1100 rate, the machine gives a reading twice as high as it should. On the other hand, if you exchange at the 3200 rate, it gives a reading half as high as it should. In any event, the principle is flawed and readings can vary up to 50% from the actual breath content. The manufacturers of the Intoxilyzer 5000 have flat out refused to reveal their source codes to defense attorneys. The source codes are basically the mathematical formula that the machine uses to convert a small sample of breath to a blood alcohol content number. Courts in Florida and Minnesota have already ruled that this refusal is a basis to dismiss DUI prosecutions. Virginia appeals courts have yet to rule on this issue.

CONCLUSION

A DUI charge is liable to make you feel overwhelmed and at the mercy of a Court system, police system and legal system that you do not understand. With the police and the prosecutor trying to convict you, you might think that it is useless to fight the charges against you.

The goal of this book is to help you feel more in charge of this potentially overwhelming ordeal, to shed some light on what you are going through, and to help you find a qualified defense attorney who will work to ensure that justice is done. When it comes to your case, justice means demanding that the police follow proper procedure, that only legally admissible evidence is presented at trial, and that you are not convicted on the basis of anyone’s opinion or prejudice.

Regardless of the particulars of your case, you deserve to find a lawyer who knows what your are going through, who knows what you are up against and who has years of experience going to bat for others in your situation by fighting the DUI Guilt Myth. And a chance to fight for your rights is not simply what you deserve. It’s the law.

www.BobKeeferLaw.com

Bob Keefer
http://www.articlesbase.com/criminal-articles/dui-guilt-myth-chapter-12-679822.html