These Police TRICKS Work on Everyone in Australia Unless You SAY THIS (One Sentence)

The colony's police forces are corrupt, which is a matter of fact and not speculation.

Quite simply put MANY motorists get deceived by police either on the road or in the courtroom.

In the courtroom police also have the support of magistrates and/or even judges.

See explanation by Benny Brown in his approx 20min video:

You can cross reference what Benny says in this clip for the state you live in.

False charges against Atlanta man Sam Tunick at US border crossing?

Governments, authorities and prosecutors cannot be trusted, period.

The ‘United Snakes of America’ is definitely a subset of the above.

The anti-privacy agenda, under the excuse of child protection is in full swing against the good citizens of the world.

‘Everyday’ people, whatever that means, are not afforded privacy, yet billionaires, CEO’s, politicians et al are shielded.

IF ‘child protection’ (meaning children of the cannon fodder), truly is so important to the authorities, then charges would arise from the Epstein Files, where the full treasure trove would be released and not deliberately suppressed, but in reality people should be aware that will never happen, as for one reason, the statute of limitation has expired, in many ‘allegations’ of criminal activity.

Over the past few days the online world has been set ablaze, with the news of an Atlanta man, Sam Tunick, ALLEGEDLY destroying 'evidence' from his Google Pixel smartphone.

With all this noise about this matter, Australia’s ‘news’ agencies are mute on this topic.

Why?

Do they not want to draw the corporate fodder’s attention that there is another operating system apart from the global duopoly from Apple and Google that prioritises privacy and security?

Do they not want the Aussie serfs (as opposed to surfs) to know that the world’s (allegedly) most elite smartphone hacking tool, by Israeli firm Cellebrite is apparently useless against up to date Pixel phones that have GrapheneOS instead of the spyware loaded factory (e.g. Samsung, Motorola, Nokia, Sony, LG, etc) flavour of Android?

So the ALLEGED criminal action is that a Mr. Sam Tunick, has wiped/destroyed ‘evidence’ from his phone, as a result of a ‘duress’ PIN being typed in by the officer, where that action alone is beyond the scope of this article.

And this is where the FALSE charges / scam by the authorities begins!

Putting aside any legalities of the US Constitution, request for lawyer being denied, and the holding area of the airport, the focus in this article is on the alleged destruction of evidence.

So, let’s make a simple analogy to obtain a clear understanding of what factually happened.

Let’s just say that the phone is equivalent to a file storage cabinet which has a key to open the drawers, where the only way to read the files in their original format /legibly is to use that unique key.

In order to gain access to the files/'data’ on that smartphone the correct PIN (Personal Identification Number) must be entered in order to read those files, otherwise they will remain ‘scrambled’, or in an  encrypted state, and unreadable, BUT most importantly they still reside ON the phone.

A ‘feature’ of GrapheneOS is that a user can set a ‘duress’ PIN, which is obviously different from the one that decrypts the data from the phone, where if a person uses that PIN, the decryption key is removed from the device and the smartphone restarts.

Because the decryption key is removed that phone is not in an operational state.

THE most factual and important part of this action is that the phone does NOT ‘wipe itself’ nor is the data on it ‘destroyed’.

The 'data' that they seek is still there.

It’s just the the key to unscramble this data is not present.

Therefore the person cannot be charged for ‘destroying evidence’ as it is still on the phone.

Could a person be charged for destroying evidence (i.e. the files within a filing cabinet), by throwing away the key?

IF the US courts find that the ‘accused’ did ‘erase evidence’, which the ‘key’ is not part of, then the courts are corrupt beyond any shadow of a doubt.

In any event if you only rely on Australia’s ’news’ outlets to inform you on what’s going on in the Information Technology & Telecommunications world, you will truly be doing yourself a disservice.

See articles:

https://www.techspot.com/news/113236-us-prosecutors-charge-atlanta-man-after-grapheneos-phone.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/28/us/duress-password-phone-wipe-charge.html

Australian Census 2026 - Another Government Farce?

Right now the federal (or feral, as we like to call it) government is advertising for the people to participate in an action in business/commerce/trade called the Census.

The excuse is that it needs to know certain things about you, but in reality, this is false and/or misleading information as they already have all this information through something called ‘surveillance capitalism’, from your electronic devices where they 'just' need you to confirm it.

If the government is advertising for you (the general population) to do something, you should realise it’s dodgy.

The most important aspect about this action is that a fundamental question needs to be asked:

• Is the ABS request for your information ‘lawful’?

The short answer is no, but that should come as no surprise or shock, as many actions by state or federal governments in this colony are not lawful, where they may be ‘legal’ but not necessarily lawful.

Remember a previous time when they sold your data and YOU (the stakeholder) received zero financial compensation?

Well they’re going to do it again.

At the end of the business day, the Census is another farce the authoritarian state wants you to participate in.

See other articles on this topic:

Australia's Census fail - You did not have to fill it in?

Census a failure admits the Australian government.

I don't trust ABS with my personal data: ex-ABS staffer

Australian Bureau of Statistics sells YOUR data for $41 million

Letter from the Australian Bureau of Statistics for census not a lawful request

WHEN PRIVACY IS A CRIME: US government targets Cop City protester over phone operating system

Concern over US effort to prosecute Sam Tunick, accused by authorities of wiping his phone using GrapheneOS

A memorial to Manuel Terán, also known as Tortuguita,

a Cop City protester who was killed by police in January 2023.

The US Department of Justice is attempting to prosecute an Atlanta resident in connection with the movement against the police training center known as Cop City because he had GrapheneOS on his phone, an open-source operating system that enables users to enter a passcode and wipe a phone clean.

The case, which had its first hearing on Monday, centers on a little-known US federal statute that makes it a crime to destroy property in an effort to prevent it from being seized.

Experts said it may be the first time the law has been aimed at the operating system, which works on Google Pixel phones, and expressed concerns about a technology created for privacy and security being used to criminalize protesters.

“It’s concerning – and sends the message that [GrapheneOS] is criminal by default,” said Christophe Boutry, a cybersecurity and surveillance expert. Boutry and Bill Buddington, senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, both said they had not seen a similar case.

The defendant, Sam Tunick, was stopped for interrogation at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airport on 24 January last year, after vacationing in the Dominican Republic. Unbeknown to him, federal authorities had put him on a terrorism watchlist because of his alleged association with the movement against Cop City.

Opposition to the $109m police training center, which opened last spring, came from a wide range of local and national organizations and protesters, centered on concerns around police militarization and clearing forests in an era of climate crisis. Atlanta police said the center was needed for “world-class” training and to attract new officers.

Several state attempts to prosecute Cop City protesters have foundered in the last several years, while this is the second recent federal effort, after the justice department announced another indictment last month.

The case began shortly after Tunick got off a plane in Atlanta, returning from a vacation spent whale-watching and enjoying nature on a friend’s boat. He did not know that a homeland security agent had circulated an email three hours before. The email contained Tunick’s name and photo and indicated he was being investigated for “suspected terrorism activities”. It was sent to agents on the Customs and Border Patrol tactical terrorism response team and an FBI Atlanta joint-terrorism taskforce officer.

When Tunick arrived in Atlanta, an agent took him to a room with a table, several chairs and a camera and microphone, and several agents began a “secondary inspection”. But all their questions were centered on child sexual abuse images.

These and other details were revealed in Monday’s hearing, held for a judge to hear testimony on a motion filed by Tunick’s federal public defenders, asking the court to suppress all evidence the agents obtained, including the erasure of the phone’s contents after he gave them a passcode, due to violations of his constitutional rights.

The interrogation, including the questions about child sexual abuse images, was “a pretext for a fishing expedition into Mr Tunick’s connections” to the movement against Cop City, according to the motion.

Tunick asked four times during the interrogation to speak with a lawyer, but was rebuffed each time, according to courtroom testimony. Additionally, the agents produced no warrant and did not read Tunick his rights.

But a justice department attorney and the airport agents testifying on Monday asserted Tunick was merely subjected to an everyday interrogation at an international airport, “looking for anything that’s prohibited”, as Larry Findley, a CBP officer, said.

Agent Findley and several others repeatedly asked Tunick to open his phone during the interrogation, telling him they would seize it if he did not. When he finally provided a passcode, “the screen went blank, flashed several times and the phone appeared to restart”, according to the motion.

The motion filed on Tunick’s behalf draws into focus the question of which constitutional rights apply and which ones are suspended at national borders, including international airports.

A judge’s decision on the motion will take at least until end of October.

Marlon Kautz, a member of the Atlanta Solidarity Fund, said: “We all have a right to secure our private data against unconstitutional searches. And we should – especially in a time of rising authoritarianism.”

Meanwhile, Boutry, who lives in France, said Tunick’s case was of a piece with tendencies in France and Spain, where authorities have been frustrated in attempts to gain access to the phones of journalists, lawyers and political opponents due to GrapheneOS.

In Catalonia, Spain, police have been profiling people with Google Pixel phones, assuming they have GrapheneOS installed and are drug dealers or gang members.

At the same time, Boutry said, the “main goal [of the operating system] is protection of privacy”.

“They’re our phones and the state can’t tell us how to use them.”

Source:The Guardian

Corporations DICTATE how we communicate on the internet.

Today the internet is not the same as the one that came into the homes of the general population, even though it is a government controlled carriageway.

FIRSTLY, there is no such thing as ‘freedom of speech’.

Your ‘opinion’, or even facts that you present are censored, moderated and/or removed by corporations, especially if they do not fit the current political/mainstream media narrative.

Today the internet is under the control of a corporatocracy, a handful of billionaires, also a totalitarian (virtual) state, that would make Mussolini smile in his grave, as it’s thriving in a world beyond his dreams.

Surveillance capitalism is also the order of the business day, where if something is for ‘free’, YOU are the product, period.

You are conned that the information collected is for 'advertisers', where it primarily goes into the annals of governments. 

The world’s best surveillance device (for governments and corporations) is this self sponsored invention called the smartphone.

Governments and corporations are forcing, or rather ‘enticing’ the general population to use them, in order to monitor and later control them.

Personal Computers pale in comparison to the treasure trove of data that a smartphone produces.

Data is the new gold, as it has a many to one, sale relationship, compared to gold’s one to one.

A very popular resource/forum is reddit, where now it’s limiting how you communicate through it.

Before one could communicate via a browser on a PC or smartphone, whereas now if reddit detects that you’re using a browser on a smartphone, it will terminate your browsing where one MUST download the app to keep on using reddit.

So, where is the 'democracy' there? OOPS! There is none!

This is the way of the order of the new world, where privacy is becoming a criminal act.

The terrifying reason the internet exists - Weaponised against the masses from its inception?

Today, the 'interwebs' has fascist elements that would make our 'mate' Benito a proud man, as it's ideology was born before the tech was made to implement it.

Police and government surveillance is masquerading as so called 'advertisements'.

Deception by government and corporations is rife in the digital realm, where now, people who expose these ('alleged') criminal activities will be silenced through various new laws being put into place.

For those who are interested in a narrative format of an accurate account of what happened and what's going on, with regards to the tech, you can tune in to Cyb3rMaddy's Youtube channel, while you still can, where with regards to this topic you can see the video of the title:

The terrifying reason the internet exists:

Apple conning you that iPhones need to verify your age in the UK.

People should all be aware that governments and corporation lie to us every single day.

Apple are prolific liars, and that’s without any exaggeration whatsoever.

The new age verification laws put in place all over the world have seriously nothing to do with ‘child safety’ but rather everything to do with data collection, so that this can be used against the people to not only monitor and control their movements, but more importantly especially to stifle so their so called ‘free speech’.

Corporations (and governments) are now dictating how people can communicate on the internet, and that's deliberate by design.

See approx. 17 minute explanation by David Bombal on YouTube within the video of the title: Install GrapheneOS Before Your Phone Becomes the Checkpoint:

Laws like the Online Safety Act 2023 (UK) apply to websites and online services, where a phone's operating system does not fall under any of the two categories of the said Act.

Keeping in mind that Apple is an active participant of the FiveEyes 'Anglosphere' global surveillance network.

If you truly value your online security and privacy, the use of Apple products is not recommended.

What is Australia 101: Still a (penal) colony?

MANY people get it wrong what this land mass called Australia is factually at law.

If your so called 'legal representative' has got it wrong, maybe you need another one?

It may be seen as an island or even a continent, but that’s really irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Some may call it a republic of the CCP (Chinese ‘Commie’ Party) according to the actions of a state so called ‘leader’ (or rather premier puppet, who runs over under aged persons AND gets away with it, with the help of corrupt police, oopsie, that’s another topic for another article) by the name of Daniel Michael Andrews.

It can be seen as a fascist state that would make Mussolini (and his mate, Adolf) proud.

It’s part of the top tier of global surveillance that being the Five Eyes (FVEY) ‘Anglosphere’  network, where the Five Eyes ‘Anglosphere’ does not answer to the known laws of its own countries, as exposed by Edward Snowden.

Over decades, Australian law makers have put in law, say for example at 2am or during major sporting events that that turned the nation into a totalitarian state, where realistically democracy has been thrown under a bus, or more politely put; into a museum in Canberra (MOAD), where things of the past, that are no longer current reside, like dinosaur bones and fossils, etc.

So let’s get into the ‘meat and potatoes’ of this story, where at law Australia is a colony, albeit a self-governing one, as seen in paragraph 8 of the second page of the Constitution.

See excerpt below:

And with the colonialists in charge, 'Penal Colony Policies' apply. 

Moira Deeming a LIAR, should be removed from office! #Headlockgate

Australia is FULL, of low quality ‘persons’ in politics, period.

Ms. Deeming came to the top of the cesspool, as she made false accusations against another politician Mr. Matthew Guy, accusing him of a headlock.

After police reviewed the camera footage of the ALLEGED ‘assault’ they saw no criminal action or even an action according to her so called description, hence no charges were ever laid.

In order to gaslight the population, Ms. Deeming then lied that she misunderstood the term headlock.

illustration of a headlock at ground level

ANY person who grew up or went to primary or secondary school in Australia, which Ms Deeming did, would be aware of the ‘real’ action associated with the term headlock, therefore the public accusation against Mr. Guy is deliberately false.

Australia’s parliaments have too many low quality person siphoning from the public purse, where taxpayers pay dearly for this 'joke'.

At the end of the business day, there should be an action analogous to the US’s ‘drain the swamp’, but as we know there will never be such action in this (penal) colony. 

Also at the end of the day, she should be charged for making false accusations, where too many women get away with this type of action against men, but that is another topic outside the scope of this article.

Opinion:supplied.

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:

Sydney couple sue NSW Police over ‘fabricated’ complaint and secret watchlist

The colony's police forces are corrupt, that just plain and simple.

They do not act honourably a lot of the time and criminally on too many occasions.

It's really up to the public to catch them out and take them to court, but the problem is that the officers rarely pay out of their own pocket but rather the tax payers are slugged with any compensation payouts.

"The system is broken" is a deliberately false narrative, where it's actually functioning quite perfectly, the way the lawmakers have set it up.

The Anglo-Masonic set-up legal system looks after its own making it deliberately difficult and expensive for the general population to claim any wrong doing by the police.  

IF police were to pay out of their own pockets like the plebs do then there would a a whole lot less if not ZERO police corruption.

The mainstream only reports what they are allowed to and not nearly enough of what really goes on.

In any event this is one story the public is allowed to know about:

He’s a tradie and she sells booze online. But this ordinary couple are stuck on a secret watchlist typically reserved for gangsters until 2038. 

A suburban couple have claimed in court that a NSW Police officer helped “fabricate” a domestic violence complaint that spiralled into them being placed on a secret watchlist.

Jarrod and Kathleen Davies claim a “trumped-up” apprehended domestic violence order (ADVO) was levelled against Jarrod after he had first reported an alleged assault on his gravely ill father in early 2023.

It is alleged in a statement of claim before the NSW Supreme Court that a policeman assisted Mr Davies’ relative – who was accused of the assault – to then create a false DV complaint against Jarrod.

More than 100 text messages and calls lasting up to 45 minutes were exchanged between the cop and the relative – who are also related to each other – in the days after the assault allegation in February 2023, the Davies’ lawsuit claims.

Ms Davies, who runs a boutique alcohol business, and her husband, who works in transport for the construction industry, claim they were later placed under surveillance and labelled “violent, dangerous and paranoid” by police as they tried to clear their names.

The Sydney couple were put on a watchlist until 2038, when they would be in their mid-60s, which they believe has seen their passports flagged at airports.

“This has taken a huge toll on both of us – financially and mentally – and now it’s even affecting our ability to travel internationally,” Mr Davies told news.com.au.

They have sued the State of NSW for misfeasance in public office and private nuisance in their suit filed last month.

NSW Police said it was unable to provide any comment as the matter was before the court.

‘Distress, humiliation’

It comes 18 months after news.com.au first reported the Davies’ claims, revealing their incredulity at being probed by the State Intelligence Command – which usually focuses on high-level and organised crime – despite having no criminal record.

The Davies have sought aggravated damages and claim they suffered psychological injury and economic loss as a result of the police attention on them.

“The plaintiffs have suffered distress, humiliation and nervous shock knowing that they are the subject of an intelligence report suggesting that they have been violent and/or threatening to police and are paranoid, when in fact that is not the case,” their lawsuit states.

The person they alleged assaulted Mr Davies’ father Max had an ADVO taken out against them in February 2023 before it was dropped in April of that year. No charges were laid.

Mr Davies’ ADVO was also laid in February 2023 and dropped seven months later, but not before he was also accused of possessing an illegal firearm, which was never located.

He was not charged but still lost the firearms license he had held without incident for decades, something he was fighting to have reinstated almost three years later.

The statement of claim alleges the police officer “assisted his (family member) in the fabrication of a complaint supporting an application for an ADVO against” Mr Davies.

The couple claims this was done with “reckless indifference to the identified harm likely to ensue to the plaintiffs”, their lawsuit states.

Having spent hundreds of thousands defending themselves in court already, they launched a GoFundMe page to assist in financing their lawsuit.

A police car appearing to be marked as belonging to Raptor Squad

outside the Davies’ home in 2023. Picture: Supplied

Treated with ‘contempt’

Court documents seen by news.com.au claim the Revesby couple’s lawyers were sent an email from another senior police officer in May 2023 stating no investigation into complaints about the first officer was warranted.

An internal State Intelligence Command report was also created detailing the “perceived threat” the Davies posed to police, describing their “fixation” and “paranoia”.

It cited their decision to install CCTV cameras at their property and a sign stating police did not have permission to enter their land as evidence of those assertions.

“They have taken numerous actions in furtherance of their paranoia,” the report states.

Ms Davies has claimed in court documents to have seen the first police officer “driving slowly” past their house on more than one occasion, and captured CCTV footage of a police vehicle marked as belonging to the gang-busting Raptor Squad parked in their driveway.

These alleged incidents have been cited in the couple’s claims for public nuisance.

Ms Davies told news.com.au she “tried every avenue” to raise concerns at their treatment but “instead of help, we’ve been treated with absolute contempt”.

“It’s disturbing that two Australian-born, middle-aged, law-abiding small business owners with no criminal history or links to terrorism, extremism or violence can be monitored for years, while genuine threats appear to evade that level of scrutiny,” she said.

The matter is due to be first heard in court in May.

Source: News Corp Australia

Google WIPES OUT over 700 videos of Israel's Human Rights abuse in Palestine - Of Course It Does!

"YouTube Quietly Erased More Than 700 Videos Documenting Israeli Human Rights Violations", 4 November 2025

A documentary featuring mothers surviving Israel’s genocide in Gaza. A video investigation uncovering Israel’s role in the killing of a Palestinian American journalist. Another video revealing Israel’s destruction of Palestinian homes in the occupied West Bank.

YouTube surreptitiously deleted all these videos in early October by wiping the accounts that posted them from its website, along with their channels’ archives. The accounts belonged to three prominent Palestinian human rights groups: Al-Haq, Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights.

The move came in response to a U.S. government campaign to stifle accountability for alleged Israeli war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

The Palestinian groups’ YouTube channels hosted hours of footage documenting and highlighting alleged Israeli government violations of international law in both Gaza and the West Bank, including the killing of Palestinian civilians...

After the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants and charged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Secretary Yoav Gallant with war crimes in Gaza, the Trump administration escalated its defense of Israel’s actions by sanctioning ICC officials and targeting people and organizations that work with the court...

“Congress did not intend to allow the president to cut off the flow of information to the American public and the world — instead, information, including documents and videos, are specifically exempted under the statute that the president cited as his authority for issuing the ICC sanctions.”

YouTube...confirmed to The Intercept that it deleted the groups’ accounts as a direct result of State Department sanctions against the group after a review. The Trump administration leveled the sanctions against the organizations in September over their work with the International Criminal Court in cases charging Israeli officials of war crimes.

“Google is committed to compliance with applicable sanctions and trade compliance laws,” YouTube spokesperson Boot Bullwinkle said in a statement...

Al Mezan... told The Intercept that its YouTube channel was abruptly terminated this year on October 7 without prior notification...

...Al-Haq’s channel was deleted on October 3...with a message from YouTube that its “content violates our guidelines.”...

The Palestinian Center for Human Rights, which the U.N. describes as the oldest human rights organization in Gaza, said in a statement that YouTube’s move “protects perpetrators from accountability.”...

The three human rights groups’ account terminations cumulatively amount to the erasure of more than 700 videos...

The Al-Haq spokesperson said Mailchimp, the mailing list service, also deleted the group’s account in September. (Mailchimp and its parent company, Intuit, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)...

Source:business-humanrights.org

France is ditching Microsoft Windows and so should Australia, but will it?

AS many (European) nations ditch the 'surveillance state' products that emanate from the head of the Five Eyes snake, many others are locked in to feed the beast.

If a nation that governs approximately 70 million people can abandon closed source data hoovering monopolised operating system, there is no technical reason why fascist rulers governing a colony of approximately 28 million tax slaves cannot do the same.

The real reason is political, where the lawmakers, politicians, bureaucrats are not "public servants", but rather corporate whores, subservient to 'Big Tech', Big Pharma, Big (Four) Banks, et al.

The Australian population/serfs/plebs are nothing more than another 'resource' to be fully exploited.

Australian governments are putting the people's data/privacy in danger since all that data goes to Microsoft where we do not know where else it goes and who they sell it to.

See the following article from pcmag.com of the title:

France Kicks Windows to the Curb, Pivots to Linux OS

David Amiel, France’s Minister of Public Action and Accounts, said his country must 'break free' and 'become less reliant on American tools.'

Amid strained relationships between the Trump administration and the EU, numerous politicians in the bloc have discussed pivoting away from US technology firms in the interests of national security, including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron.

Now, France has announced it’s moving some of its government systems away from Windows towards the open-source operating system Linux, following Denmark and parts of Germany announcing similar departures from Microsoft products earlier this year.

David Amiel, France’s Minister of Public Action and Accounts, said his country must “break free” and “become less reliant on American tools.”

“We can no longer accept that our data, our infrastructure, and our strategic decisions depend on solutions whose rules, pricing, evolution, and risks we do not control,” Amiel said in a statement first spotted by TechCrunch.

Linux, as it is open source, means you can run software without using an OS controlled and designed by an American firm—for example, Apple or Microsoft, as in the case of iOS and Windows. France’s government digital agency, DINUM, will be the first to make the jump, with other parts of government following at a later date.

The news comes after France announced it would be migrating its national healthcare database from US-based providers to an unnamed new platform earlier this month. It’s also set to pivot from using Microsoft Teams for video conferencing to the French-made tool Visio across all government departments.

Independence from US tech enjoys broad support in much of the EU. Around two-thirds of EU citizens support greater independence from American technology, according to recent market research from YouGov, particularly in areas like data storage and video conferencing. However, roughly four in ten thought independence was unrealistic.

In January, a clear majority of European lawmakers voted to adopt a report on technological sovereignty and digital infrastructure that directs the European Commission to find ways to reduce its reliance on foreign technology providers in areas like semiconductors, cloud infrastructure, software, and AI systems.

If you truly value your online privacy, then you would not use Microsoft's products.

See also the same topic from another source: