Why my income email BLOCKED by KESC – CEO & higher management to get rid of complains

[sharif]

Why my income email BLOCKED by KESC – CEO & higher management to get rid of consumer’s complain
I am much surprised and shocked when came to knew that my all email sending to KESC CEO and their management is blocked which indicates they do not want to first listen the complain that reasons blocking my email, how many consumer’s email yet they have blocked including me. But I am very ordinary person in spite of this blocking my email by KESC CEO and management is a big surprise for me.

Who gave power or authority to do this, if any consumer face problem or want to forward his complain if his email is blocked than what source left to sending complain to KESC? I must asked question from Nepra, Governor of Sind and Power Minister to take an immediate notice and make a surprise visit and allow all consumers complain reaching to all in KESC without any hurdles.

If any complain reaches to KESC than what they do ignore or avoid the complain or take a immediate action, in my case I do not find any response or sincere attitude to attending complain by KESC which looks like talking with wall or animals?

Awake KESC and realized when a consumer’s in problem than he making complain and consider that all complain is blessing for organization those who want to improve their working atmosphere but where from TOP to Bottom are un-sincere, careless and corrupt working than only God punishment ( with silent stick ) Is the last method to teach them?


Thanking You.


( Ashfaq Sharif )

 

[waltky]

Granny not only encrypts her email - she writes `em in Klingon too...

How the US government secretly reads your email
Tuesday 11 October 2011 - Secret orders forcing Google and Sonic to release a WikiLeaks volunteer's email reveal the scale of US government snooping

Somewhere, a US government official is reading through a list of those who sent or received an email from Jacob Appelbaum, a 28-year-old computer science researcher at the University of Washington who volunteered for WikiLeaks. Among those listed will be my name, a journalist who interviewed Appelbaum for a book about the digital revolution. Appelbaum is a spokesman for Tor, a free internet anonymising software that helps people defend themselves against internet surveillance. He's spent five years teaching activists around the world how to install and use the service to avoid being monitored by repressive governments. It's exactly the sort of technology Secretary of State Hilary Clinton praised in her famous "Internet Freedom" speech in January 2010, when she promised US government support for the designers of technology that circumvented blocks or firewalls. Now, Appelbaum finds himself a target of his own government as a result of his friendship with Julian Assange and the fact WikiLeaks used the Tor software.

Appelbaum has not been charged with any wrongdoing; nor has the government shown probable cause that he is guilty of any criminal offence. That matters not a jot, because, as the law stands, government officials don't need a search warrant to access our digital data. Searching someone's home requires a warrant that can only be obtained by proving probable cause, but digital searches require no such burden of proof. Instead, officials essentially "self-certify" to a judge that the information they seek is, in their opinion, relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation. On this basis, Google and a small ISP called Sonic were made to hand over to the government all Appelbaum's email headers from the past two years.

Most people are not aware of the ease with which governments – free, open and so-called democratic – can access and peruse our private communications. This is because these court orders are commonly sealed. What is uncommon is for internet service providers to request the orders be unsealed so they can inform their customers, as Sonic and Google did in Appelbaum's case. Privacy researcher Chris Soghoian estimates there are likely tens of thousands of these 2703(d) orders made annually by the federal government under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. He bases this on the number of pen registers granted to the federal government annually: 12,000. These allow officials to intercept telephone and internet meta-data in real time. "There's far more data to be had after the fact, so probably these 2703(d) orders are even more common," Soghoian says.

The fourth amendment of the US Constitution should protect against unwarranted search and seizure. Its inclusion in the Bill of Rights was a result of colonialists' anger at abuse suffered at the hands of British officials using writs of assistance. Writs were general warrants issued by the British Parliament to allow customs officials to search for smuggled goods, but in the American colonies, they were used by agents of the British state to interrogate people and raid their homes on the pretext of searching and seizing any "prohibited and uncustomed goods", which often meant "seditious" publications that criticised government policies or the King.

MORE