Lawyers Will Be FORCED to Report You Starting Tomorrow

From 1 July 2026, Australia’s AML/CTF regime expands and the people you trust with some of your most private affairs may now have new reporting obligations.

Lawyers, accountants, real estate agents, conveyancers and other professionals may be required to report suspicious matters to AUSTRAC. And because of the tipping off rules, they may not be allowed to tell you if they have done so.

This video explains what is changing, why it matters, and why this is not just a boring compliance update. It goes to something much deeper: trust, legal privilege, professional obligations, and the way power expands quietly through paperwork.

The key issue is not whether the stated purpose is serious. Money laundering, organised crime and terrorism financing are real problems. The issue is what happens when the system designed to catch serious criminals is built into ordinary professional relationships.

Because a dragnet does not only catch the people it was aimed at.

This is general legal information and commentary only. It is not personal legal advice. If you are concerned about your own situation, speak to a lawyer or qualified professional before the changes come into effect.

See explanation by JamesGlissanOfficial within his short video of the title:

Lawyers Will Be FORCED to Report You Starting Tomorrow:

Australia is still a [penal] colony, ruled by the colonialists.

It's basically Alcatraz v2, where you still can leave today if you desire so.

How corporations get away with paedophilia and omit age verification

Governments are giving corporations a free pass to host material that can put the children (of the cannon fodder) in danger, contrary to their actions against the general population.

‘Age verification’ has been setup by shell corporations of Meta, in order to disassociate the onus from the ‘social media’ giants, where governments are following along with this.

The global policy to enact age verification started in the (penal) colony called Australia, under the false premise to ‘protect the children’.

In reality the action is used to hoover as much information as possible on a person that is connected to the internet, to be later used against that person.

People have too many ‘freedoms’ (e.g. of speech) on the internet and this must be kerbed by governments and corporations 

An operating system (either mobile or personal computer) that may not even be connected to the internet, must now be subject to age verification and even content scanning, to allegedly keep the children ‘safe’.

Source: https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/industry-regulation/social-media-age-restrictions/which-platforms-are-age-restricted

Even though Facebook and Instagram are Meta’s ‘assets’ that are age-restricted social media platforms, at face value, other Meta assets Messenger and WhatApp are given free reign.

WhatApps is considered a ‘social media’ platform, yet it’s immune from ‘age-restriction’ law in Australia.

Roblox, facing over 150 child abuse cases,  needs them moved out of the courtroom, as it does not want the instances on ‘public record’.

What’s worse is that once you enter into an agreement to use Roblox, you forfeit any ability to pursue lawsuits in an open court.

How is that even allowed by the lawmakers?

Discord is also dodgy.

Keep in mind that's it's not about the safety of the children [of the serfs], but rather stifling people's alleged right to 'free speech' on the internet.

No one taking action on the Epstein Files?

No one going to prison for paedophilia?

No one releasing the FULL data cache?

In any event, the Epstein Files are a farce, as the statue of limitations has expired for many victims to obtain a so called 'remedy'.

Microsoft removes article about Australia’s migrant intake

(https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/targets-and-tests-firm-up-for-migrants-under-budget/ar-AA2325gN)

Australia’s government, in relation to this topic, that being the federal (or as we put it ‘feral’)  government, really hates the ‘good’ people of Australia as it’s evident in their actions.

Immigration into Australia is a hot topic over the past couple of generations where it wouldn’t be IF the government did right by the Australian people.

The government created the 'housing crisis' by over-importing immigrants, period.

And that's just one of the issues that is hurting the 'good' people of Australia in all states and territories.

Over the decades the government has decided to import the world’s trash into the colony, basically low value, low quality humans, including criminals and terrorists.

Importing criminals is bad for the population at large, but good for the corrupt courts and judiciary, keeping the Anglo-masonic wheels of injustice turning. 

So the federal government deliberately created a problem for society, and the people are supposed to believe that the government will remedy this?

Yeah, Nah!

Maybe that's why the article was deleted, because it's all BS?

Melbourne is not ‘the most liveable city’ as according to corporate lies, but rather most unsafe capital city in Australia, no thanks to our illustrious governments (both state and ‘feral’).

If you’re a criminal in Victoria or even Australia whose actions are supported, then you’ve got it made, but if you allegedly drive 3km/h over the allowed limit the police will hunt you for years to come.

In any event this is text from the article that ‘Micoslop’ removed from their ‘news’ site:

A push for fewer, more skilled migrants and a more robust migration system has been outlined in the 2026/27 federal budget.

SKILLED migrants already onshore are set to benefit from changes to how Australia processes arrivals from overseas, the federal budget reveals.

Of the 185,000 places allocated for permanent migrants, more than 70 per cent of those will be skilled workers.

Migrants already in Australia will also make up more than two-thirds of those allowed to stay, with the offshore applicants having to jostle for the remaining 55,000 visas dedicated to high-skilled individuals.

The measure will place downward pressure on net overseas migration, according to 2026/27 budget documents released on Tuesday night.

Most permanent skilled migrants are examined by a points test to determine their likely contribution to Australian society. 

That test will be optimised to “select better educated, highly skilled and younger migrants overall,” according to budget papers.

About $85.2 million will also be allocated over the next four years to help speed up the assessment and licensing of foreigners with overseas qualifications – such as electricians and plumbers – to work in Australia.

The budget also set aside $74.2 million for court systems to combat misuse of the protection visa system, and about $20 million to better scrutinising applicants for student visas.

These form part of a four-year, $167 million package to strengthen the migration system’s integrity.

The application fee for graduates seeking temporary visas doubled in March, a move expected to attract an additional $1.2 billion into federal coffers.

Labor has faced mounting pressure from One Nation and the coalition to put a lid on migration to reduce housing demand and ease burdens on services.

Support for One Nation swelled to new heights in the months after the Bondi massacre, with Pauline Hanson tying overseas arrivals to fraying social cohesion.

In April, federal Opposition Leader Angus Taylor also proposed imposing values tests and scouring the social media accounts of foreigners wishing to move to Australia.

'Telstra' scam email - Governments and corporations failing to keep us ‘safe’.

MANY people, especially those that are victims of a corrupt legal/judicial system, will say that “the system is broken”, but that is far from the truth.

The system is deliberately ‘broken’, unless of course you owe an alleged debt to state authorities or the taxation department.

Make no mistake that the system is not broken, but rather it’s functioning quite perfectly, the way they have intended it to.

A global deception that is going around at the moment in the ‘online’ world is something called ‘age-verification’ where the authorities allege that it’s in place so that the children (of the cannon fodder) are protected.

The uncomfortable reality is that governments do not care about the children of the slaves, but rather about controlling and monitoring society with this latest farce.

With regards to internet traffic, Australia has all sorts of DNS filters, firewalls, etc which moderate what content people can see or comes into Australia.

You may not be able to 'consume' content under DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act, US law), but corporations are allowed to 'steal' your (copyrighted) content.

Phishing emails like the one shown below can also be stopped with a simple ban of the domain name within the email.

So why isn't it done?

Because realistically, the people in government do not give a stuff about the serf's trials and tribulations.

As long as the people in government are looked after, is all that matters at the end of the business day.

Livin' the life in a (penal) colony.  

King’s Birthday - No Crown, Not a King - Another legal farce in Australia!

Australia is a legal clown show and the motherland sees it as a complete basket case.

It [the colony’s governments] cannot even agree on a single national unified date for a monarch’s celebratory birthday, so what does that tell you about the clown colony?

In most states it’s the 8th of June, but then in other states it’s September or even October.

So, there is another farce that is introduced to the colony’s population, that being a title called the “King of Australia”.

It maybe a legal title, just like the preceding Monarch’s ‘Queen of Australia’, but it certainly is NOT a lawful one, just like the preceding Monarch’s.

BUT, the amusing aspect of all this is that they’re actually telling people that there is no ‘King’ quite simply in the minted coin.

No crown on Charlie? Isn't he supposed to be a 'King'? Why is he facing the other way?

MOST IMPORTANTLY, this is also supported within a legal document from the Australian Government’s, Attorney-General’s Department dated 20 October 2022

See document from 2022 within the post:

King’s Birthday, but is there a ‘King’ of Australia?

See also FOI documents within the post:

King of Australia. No legal instrument to create one. Questions deliberately unanswered!

ALSO, see in a Freedom of Information response the author attempted to reveal the identity of the Queen who New South Wales Police officers swear their oath to. Section 5 of the NSW Constitution Act 1902 provides law making parameters for the legislator of New South Wales. Part 2 of the State Constitution provides for the Powers of the Legislator within the Constitution Watch site under the article title:

Will the real King please stand up?

Documents source:Constitution Watch

VicPol Files: Evidence tampered with that incriminates police - GONE!

The businesses known as Courts collude with the state’s and territory’s police forces in order to cover up criminal or dishonest activities of either entity.

At the end of the business day, it’s more common than people think, where magistrates (judicial registrars, judges et al) generally turn a blind eye to the ‘dishonest’ and even illegal behaviour of their ‘brethren’ in the force.

Sometimes the judiciary behaves and allows a defendant a so called ‘win’, but at what cost, as generally that does not come easy.

Real journalism is dead in Australia, it died a while ago, where there are no longer real ‘investigative’ journalists but rather (social media) flogs that skew articles towards a particular agenda, as dictated by editors and others of positions in power.

GONE are the days where there would be real ‘court’ reporters, drawing the attention of the public to matters that would be in the ‘public interest’.

Sure ‘news’ media or rather entertainment corporations may tell readers that they have a ‘court reporter’ but that is just an honorary title, irrespective of the person’s previous work.

A matter in the public interest, has been brought before a Victorian court, where in reality Victoria Police is a vexatious litigant and most importantly does not come to court with clean hands.

What's worse is that Victoria Police was caught out, falsifying evidence and even being caught out 'on the record'.

BUT, when it came to cross-examining this evidence, it mysteriously went missing.

Even if VicPol get caught out and the public get wind of it, they generally go on a taxpayer funded holiday.

This is not a failure of the system, but rather the system is deliberately designed to function the way it does.

Unfortunately more details for example whether the matter is afoot or has already been dealt with cannot be revealed as the source would be exposed, and as we should know their life would be made very 'uncomfortable', to say the least.

This is just one example of the Australia's legal business is one huge con job on the 'accused' or realistically anyone participating in purchasing an order from the courts.

Long live the (Stasi) police state of Victoria!

   

Never ever trust police and always have in 'independent' witness at your disposal.

Albo: 43 days left of fuel, thanking the Australian public.

Briefly,

Today the current (puppet) prime minister, Mr. Anthony Norman Albanese went on the public record in the mainstream media stating that there are 43 days of petrol left for Australians.

This is not because the Australian Government (tm) has ANY reserves or proper production facilities, in full swing, but rather it is due to the public being fuel misers, taking trips ONLY when necessary and walking to the shops to get their soy chai latte, instead of driving there.

He went on to thank the Australian public for using fuel sparingly.

What a pathetic clown show the government of this colony really is.

Australia is going downhill and it’s going down very quickly.

Taking your investments out of Australia would be a sound financial move, according to many financial advisers, but that topic is for another day.

Donald Horne was too generous stating that this place is run by “second-rate” people.

It’s realistically run by low-quality human beings.

Ontario police using spyware to take over your phone, fighting to keep almost everything about it secret

The police use of ODITs is so secret that police forces have signed agreements to drop serious criminal investigations rather than reveal the name of their vendor.

The Joint Technical Assistance Centre (JTAC) makes local police and prosecutors agree not to disclose key details of the so-called ODITs. JTAC is a collaboration of the OPP, Toronto Police Service, Peel Regional Police, York Regional Police, Durham Regional Police and Ottawa Police Service. Led by the OPP.

When police in Windsor began looking into an alleged international auto‑theft ring in late 2022, they turned to familiar investigative techniques.

Some officers went undercover, others conducted long hours of surveillance, while the courts gave police permission to hide a tracking device in the alleged ringleader’s car and to intercept his cellphone location.

Within a few months, cellphone data placed the main suspect’s phone near 23 car thefts, sometimes hours apart. Yet, police never caught him actually stealing any vehicles.

Up to this point, it was an investigation like many others — but the police believed it wasn’t enough.

In April 2023, Ontario Provincial Police and Windsor Police Service asked a judge for something far more intrusive: authorization to wiretap phones, plant audio probes in homes and vehicles, and to secretly deploy what law enforcement calls “on‑device investigative tools,” or ODITs. Far more than a simple wiretap, these allow police to not just intercept calls, but to directly hack into a target’s phone or computer to extract everything from call logs and photos to encrypted messages, and more.

Essentially spyware, an ODIT can grant almost unlimited access. Investigators can capture screenshots, monitor keypresses, access emails and text messages — including those that are encrypted — and even remotely activate microphones and cameras. All without the owner knowing.

By August, police announced 23 arrests, 279 charges, and more than $9 million in recovered vehicles.

But the case has also done something else: It has pulled back the curtain on how police forces in Ontario — not just in Windsor, but in Toronto and Peel Region — are now using these powerful technologies to reach deep inside suspects’ devices. And despite ODITs growing use in major prosecutions in the province, government lawyers and police are fighting tooth and nail to keep almost everything about them secret: how they work; what safeguards, if any, govern their use; even the names of the companies that sell them.

The secrecy around the tool is so extreme that the Crown may abandon the prosecution rather than reveal the vendor’s identity and details of the ODITs capabilities and limitations, according to a court document filed in Windsor Superior Court. 

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association says the lack of openness is troubling.

“If police want to make the case that use of spyware is justified, they need to do this in a transparent manner that fully explains the details and level of intrusiveness of the tool,” Tamir Israel, the CCLA’s director of privacy, surveillance and technology, wrote in an email in response to the Star’s questions. 

If the secrecy makes it impossible for police to provide the information courts need to assess these tools, “then these tools are inappropriate for police investigations, and police should not be using them.”

The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario — which has previously raised alarms about police use of artificial intelligence, facial recognition technology and genetic genealogy — shares the concern and says the office is “closely monitoring” ODITs in terms of technical capacity, privacy risks, guardrails and ongoing court cases where their use is involved.

Given the privacy and security risks, “it is critical that police adopt and apply an appropriate transparency and accountability framework,” the privacy commissioner’s office said in a statement. 

How Ontario police are using ODITs

On Tuesday, a highly secretive court case involving the use of ODITs is set to resume in Brampton, where prosecutors are fighting to keep details about the spyware under wraps.

Most of the court documents in the opium-smuggling investigation are under seal, pretrial arguments have been held behind closed doors, and the judge’s 146-page decision relating to ODIT-related disclosure remains under a publication ban — at least for now.

The type of ODIT used in both the Windsor and Brampton cases has been “shrouded in secrecy,” defence lawyers Kim Schofield and Miranda Brar wrote in their factum filed in Ontario Superior Court in the Windsor case. Although based in Toronto, the lawyers also represent some of the accused in Project Fairfield, the name of the Windsor vehicle theft investigation.

Schofield and Brar are challenging the constitutionality of the ODIT warrant, saying police did not release volumes of related information to the authorizing judge, nor did they tell him such documentation even existed. They also didn’t tell the judge about the agreement between the police and the Crown to end the prosecution in the event the court orders them to disclose the identity of the ODIT vendor.

This “novel technique” demands “scrutiny and fully informed judicial oversight,” Schofield and Brar write in their filings, arguing they need these details to ensure there was no infringement of their clients’ constitutional rights.

They’re also arguing the warrant is invalid. Police obtained a general warrant when they should have requested a search warrant — hacking into a phone to seize data is essentially a search of the device, they argue.

The CCLA’s Israel says that because police in Ontario appear to be using commercial spyware tools, the public absolutely needs to know whether the currently secret vendor can see, store or access any of the data being collected.

“A court needs to understand the full scope of how the tool is going to operate if it’s going to fully assess its impact,” he wrote.

“This capability is among the most intrusive in terms of the detailed window it can open into any individual’s life and in a democratic society.”

He noted that regimes around the world lacking strong human rights protections have misused spyware tools to spy on political dissidents, journalists, civil society groups, political opponents and others in their home countries and around the world, including Canada.

Why so secret?

In court documents reviewed by the Star, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada says that, like other police techniques, details about how the spyware works must be kept secret if revealing them would compromise future investigations. The accused still gets full access to the evidence gathered — just not the technical play‑by‑play of how police obtained it, the Crown argues.

If disclosure “results in the police no longer having access to an effective technological tool that allows it to intercept communications, then that will have a profound impact on public safety and the ability of the police to do their job,” they write.

In the separate Brampton case, Schofield, Brar and lawyers Leora Shemesh and Michael Little are representing three brothers charged in connection with opium smuggling. They all declined to comment as their cases are before the court.

Dubbed Project Vegas, the Crown’s case against the accused drug dealers relies almost entirely on ODIT-derived messages. Defence lawyers are demanding access to the tool’s manuals, configuration details and vendor information, arguing it’s the only way they can make a full answer and defence.

The Windsor court documents indicate that federal prosecutors in Brampton have refused to release more than 140 documents related to the ODIT, citing Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act. That section allows the Crown to object to disclosure of information on the grounds “of a specified public interest.”

The Windsor court documents reveal ODITs in Ontario are managed by the Joint Technical Assistance Centre (JTAC), a little‑known unit that pools resources from multiple police agencies — the OPP and the local services in Toronto, Ottawa and York, Peel and Durham regions — and is funded by the province.

The court documents say JTAC has a relationship with a private company vendor. But the information is so secret that JTAC is making the Crown and local police sign an agreement to potentially drop major prosecutions rather than reveal the name of the company that made the tool, Brar and Schofield write in their factum. 

Disclosure of sensitive information — including the vendor’s identity, where they’re located, the name of the tool, its capabilities and its technical infrastructure — could impact “relationships with domestic and international partners, and undermine the JTAC’s ability to use the tools and techniques in the future,” reads an “engagement agreement” in the Windsor court documents.

There are a number of reasons why the vendor should be known, Israel argues. “Different companies have different track records when it comes to their data handling practices, their respect for human rights and more,” he writes, crediting the University of Toronto’s Citizen’s Lab for putting information about specific spyware tools and companies in the public domain.

“This is not a tool that police buy and operate themselves, and as a result, you cannot separate the vendor from the tool.”

A parliamentary committee report on the RCMP use of ODITs stated the Mounties have dropped a number of prosecutions rather than reveal key details.

The scrutiny pushed the Mounties, in 2024, to publish a “transparency bulletin” that said ODITs had been used in 32 investigations between 2017 and 2022.

However, in an email responding to the Star’s request for updated information, the RCMP indicated ODITs have only been used in three additional investigations since 2022. “To be clear, ODITs are used extremely rarely and in limited cases,” involving serious criminal and national security investigations, a spokesperson wrote in an email.

They’re also expensive.

A former senior intelligence officer and expert on national security and intelligence told a parliamentary committee that just one operation involving an ODIT “will easily reach half a million dollars. That’s just to make one interception on one target with maybe one device only.”

Source:Toronto Star

With regards to Australia's corrupt police forces, when will this technology be available to them and will the general population be aware of this? 

NDIS Files: The one that got away and allowed to come back.

It’s back to 1788, where Australia is into importing criminals (hasn’t it always?), and the ‘best’ part about it, is that it’s not going to stop, after all the courts need more ‘customers’, right?

But that’s not always the case where some are allowed to get away with criminal activity.

Information has been provided from a source close to the matter on the condition of anonymity as that person’s livelihood will be at stake if the source is identified or too many identifiable parameters point to the source.

A person who recently immigrated to Australia in order to commit fraud (a common occurrence nowadays), defrauded Aussie taxpayers well into seven figures, where how will not be disclosed as the source could be exposed.

When a so called investigation was launched the ‘private’ company’s case worker was implicated together with their customer.

A phone call was made to the NDIS funds recipient, where that person pretty much immediately packed their bags and fled the colony, meaning Australia to a country which will not be disclosed as again the source could be identified.

The one that got away, or so one would think.

‘Normally’ most people would call this a ‘failure of government’ but in reality that person was ‘allowed’ to escape.

What’s worse, is that person was not only allowed back into the colony, but no repercussions from criminal activity ever saw that light of day in a courtroom.

NOTHING!

This is just one unknown (to the public), example of how pathetic the government and police are, ‘allowing’ people to get away with ripping off taxpayers, while others who travel (allegedly) 3km/h over the speed limit will get pursued by the law to the n-th degree and in many cases unlawfully.

Donald Horne was right that Australia is run by second rate people, where that opinion was formed in the mid 1960's where now they're much lower than 'second' rate.

Another pathetic 'Failure of Government' is that 'Puneet Puneet' has not faced the criminal charge of a hit-and-run of university student Dean Hofstee in 2009, after fleeing to India.

After all Australia has to keep the Indian PM happy with importing 500,000 dalits per annum into the colony.

Note: NDIS, VicPol, etc ‘Files’ are articles of fraud or corruption that have not made it out into the public news media.

What is Australia and Who Runs it?

Let's start off with what Australia is not.

Australia is not a "Lucky Country", sorry Donald Horne, it's factually still a (self governing) colony where it won't take long to find that in the Constitution.

It may have been 'lucky' at one stage where it was "run mainly by second-rate people", but for quite a while now, it is deliberately 'mismanaged' by total scum in office that are also destroying Australian people's quality of life, more on that for another article.

Also, Australia has become authoritarian state with elements of a totalitarian régime.

It also has other elements such as fascism, oligarchy and nepotism just to spice things up a little.

It's truly a 'Money for Mates' paradise.

SO, who's been running Australia for a while?

See half an hour video by OnePath Network of the title: Israel Is Running Australia and No One Is Talking About It 

The signs are in every state, e.g. Victoria: