Australian man allegedly acting for North Korea charged over weapons of mass destruction, breaching UN sanctions and arms sales

From the AFP - some heavyweight charges.

Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 10.10.19 am

The Australian Federal Police (AFP) has arrested a 59-year-old Sydney man for allegedly acting as an economic agent for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Government (North Korea) in Australia, in breach of both United Nations (UN) and Australian sanctions. Notably, the man has also been charged with brokering sales and discussing the supply of weapons of mass destruction.

This is the first time a person has been charged under the Weapons of Mass Destruction (Prevention of Proliferation) Act 1995 (Cth) in Australia.

Operation BYAHAUT commenced earlier this year when a 59-year-old man from Eastwood, NSW, was identified as a person of interest to the AFP.

As a result of extensive investigations, the AFP alleges the man was acting as an economic agent of North Korea through his facilitation of various exports from North Korea.

The AFP believes the man was generating income for the North Korean Government, contrary to the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) and the Commonwealth Regulations relating to sanctions against North Korea.

Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 10.13.12 am

Specifically, it will be alleged in court the man was involved in:

  • brokering the sale of missiles and missile componentry and expertise from North Korea to other international entities; and
  • attempting to transfer coal from North Korea to entities in Indonesia and Vietnam.

The AFP will allege the missile componentry identified could contribute to the delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction.

AFP officers conducted search warrants in Sydney yesterday, Saturday, 16 December 2017), and the man was subsequently arrested.

He has been charged with acts under the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth); the Weapons of Mass Destruction (Prevention of Proliferation) Act 1995 (Cth) and the Autonomous Sanctions Act 2011 (Cth)and will appear before Parramatta Local Court today. The maximum penalty for these offences is 10 years’ imprisonment.

AFP Assistant Commissioner Neil Gaughan, National Manager Organised Crime and Cyber, said investigators carefully and methodically investigated the actions of this individual over a period of months.

“This case is like nothing we have ever seen on Australian soil. This is the first time charges have been laid under the Commonwealth Weapons of Mass Destruction Act in Australia, and the first time we have laid charges specifically for alleged breaches of UN sanctions against North Korea,” Assistant Commissioner Gaughan said.

“The Australian public should be assured that police have acted to ensure no direct risk to our community. The AFP endeavours to support international efforts to maintain peace and security.”

“Any individual who attempts to fly in the face of sanctions cannot and will not go unnoticed in Australia.”

Investigations are continuing and further charges against the man have not been ruled out.


What are the specific charges against this man?

The AFP will allege that:

WMD Act offences (two charges)

  • The man provided services, being brokering services, that would or may assist a weapons of mass destruction program, and the provision of the services was not authorised by a permit or written notice, contrary to s 11 of the Weapons of Mass Destruction (Prevention of Proliferation) Act 1995 (Cth) (Law Part Code: 91754).

UN Act offences (two charges)

  • The man  engaged in conduct that contravened a United Nations sanction enforcement law, namely the provision of brokering services for the sale of missiles and related expertise from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, contrary to s 27(1) of the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) with reg 11(2) of the Charter of the United Nations (Sanctions – Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) Regulations 2008 (Cth) (Law Part Code: 88348).

Autonomous Sanctions Act offences (two charges)

  • The man engaged in conduct that contravened a sanction law, namely the provision to a person or entity of a brokering service for the sale of coal from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), that assisted with or was provided in relation to an extractive or related industry in the DPRK, contrary to s 16(1) of the Autonomous Sanctions Act 2011 (Cth) with regulation 13(1) of the Autonomous Sanctions Regulations 2011 (Cth) (Law Part Code: 91757).

What actions have prompted these charges?

  • We will allege that the man provided services to a Weapons of Mass Destruction Program and discussed the sale of specialist services and ballistic missile technology, with a view to generating income for the North Korean regime. 
  • We will further allege those discussions have included the establishment of a ballistic missile production facility, the supply of missile construction plans and the provision of North Korean technical specialists for training and development outside of North Korea.
  • We will also allege he discussed the possible sale of missile guidance systems in an effort to generate further income for North Korea.  

The $4,000,000,000.00 compo scheme where the bloke behind the counter decides there's a "reasonable likelihood" you deserve the money

Most compensation schemes require fairly rigorous testing of your case, particularly if you're after a big payout.

My mates who deal with the Department of Veterans Affairs tell me stories of endless medico-legal interviews, reams of paperwork and cascading hoops to jump through - and that's after their war service records have been proven.

If you have a prang in the car, do your back on a banana-peel at Woollies or get head-noises after years on the front line as a copper you have to put your case with some evidence to back it up.  Your evidence must conform to the rules of evidence, it must be able to be tested - and each side in our legal system expects some rights to an appeal.

If you're used to that system you might be interested to hear of another approach to handing over other people's money.

I know one bloke who appeared at the Child Abuse Royal Commission.  

The Australian Army tolerated a notorious old paedo working amongst the Army Apprentices at Balcombe and my mate came within range of the offender.  The crook was notorious.  We were 15 year old boys miles from home, on camp 24 hours a day and the crook was an authority figure.  The Army should compensate my mate because the Army didn't take reasonable steps to give the offender the flick - and I know the damage my mate suffered is with him still as a man in his 50s.

But fair dinkum victims like my mate will suffer again as they watch every two-bob bullshit artist from here to the black-stump front up to the Turnbull compensation scheme for their share of the $4,000,000,000.00 on offer.

Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 6.32.54 am

On 26 October this year the Government of Turnbull quietly slipped a bill into the House of Representatives to establish a $4,000,000,000.00 compensation scheme for persons for whom "there was a reasonable likelihood the person suffered institutional sexual abuse as a child".

That's the test - is there a reasonable likelihood the person suffered institutional sexual abuse as a child?

This extract is from the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill circulated by Minister for Social Services, the Hon Christian Porter MP

Eligibility for redress

Eligibility for redress will be assessed on whether there was a reasonable likelihood the person suffered institutional sexual abuse as a child. A claim can be made at any time from commencement of the Scheme until 12 months before the closing date of the Scheme, which is 30 June 2028. However, applications for redress under the Scheme are limited to one application per survivor, whether or not that person suffered sexual abuse in more than one institution. Survivors will be able to include multiple episodes of sexual abuse and related non-sexual abuse suffered in multiple institutions in the one application.

Payments range from $10,000 to $150,000

Redress consists of three elements: a redress payment of up to $150,000, (minimum payment $10,000) access to counselling and psychological services and a direct personal response. Survivors will be able to choose whether to accept one, two or all three of the components of redress. The amount of the redress payment will depend on the level of sexual abuse and related non-sexual abuse that a survivor suffered and will be an amount up to a maximum of $150,000. The intention of this payment is to recognise the wrong the person has suffered. Survivors who have accessed redress under another scheme or received compensation through a settlement or by judgment of a court will not be excluded from applying for redress under the Scheme. However, any prior payments made by a participating institution in relation to the abuse suffered by a survivor that is within the scope of this Scheme, will be deducted from the amount payable by that participating institution.

...bureaucrats will decide who gets the loot - decisions not subject to review by courts - no rules of evidence

Internal review Reviews of decisions made under the Scheme are limited to internal review. This follows the recommendation of the Independent Advisory Council on redress, appointed by the Prime Minister, which included survivors of institutional abuse, representatives from support organisations, legal and psychological experts, Indigenous and disability experts, institutional interest groups and those with a background in government.

The Independent Advisory Council considered that providing survivors with external review would be overly legalistic, time consuming, expensive and would risk further harm to survivors. The internal review processes will enable applicants to seek review of determinations on applications for redress. The person conducting the review must have had no involvement in the original decision and may affirm, vary or substitute the original decision.

Merits review in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or judicial review in the Federal Circuit Court or Federal Court under the ADJR Act will not be available to survivors or participating institutions. This is considered appropriate as redress is not intended to replicate civil litigation standards or processes. The Scheme is intended to be an alternative to civil litigation that avoids the risk of further harm to survivors. The lower evidentiary thresholds under the Scheme and the broad discretion of the decision-makers mean that merits review and judicial review under the ADJR Act are not appropriate for decisions under the Scheme. The Scheme is to be supportive, survivor-focussed and non-legalistic and decisions will be made expeditiously. Participating institutions will also not have the right to seek a merits or judicial review under the ADJR Act of any decisions made under the Scheme. This is because institutions participate in the Scheme voluntarily and opt-in to the Scheme with the understanding that certain matters will be decided by the Operator (or delegate).

So there you have it.

  • A Government of Turnbull scheme
  • Designed to make grants of $4,000,000,000.00
  • Grant recipients face a "reasonable likelihood" test
  • Grants range from $10K to $150K
  • Bureaucrats will decide who gets the money - and bureaucrats will review their own decisions

What could possibly go wrong?


FedCourt file re Gillard slush fund part of NSW Casino Control Authority investigation into Leighton Holdings

On 13 June 1995 Bruce Wilson deposited a $20,160 cheque from Thiess (a wholly owned subsidiary of Leighton Holdings Ltd)  into the Melbourne based slush-fund that would lead to the discovery of his corrupt network.

The $20,160 was one of about 40 secret commission payments corruptly made by Thiess executives to the Wilson/Gillard slush fund.

When Wilson's crimes (in the Melbourne slush fund) were discovered, his lawyer Bernard Murphy negotiated for the return of the secret commissions (and other) payments to the companies which had paid them - along with bogus redundancy payments to Wilson and crew.  The repayments and redundancies came with a request for "no further investigations" by the AWU.

AIRC File 1296/95 is the Industrial Relations Court's file for several proceedings relating to Wilson:

  • Bill Ludwig's application for the return of the redundancy payments to Wilson et al
  • Ludwig's application that Thiess and other companies remit to the AWU the slush fund monies Wilson returned to them 
  • Orders about a web of other slush funds and bank accounts Wilson had operated.

In 1999 the NSW Casino Control was conducting a $400K inquiry into whether or not Leighton Holdings Ltd was a fit and proper entity to be entrusted with ownership of a slice of the Star City Casino in Sydney.

It wasn't.

What's new today is the evidence that the Authority's investigation included examination and copying of the court file regarding Thiess and Wilson and the slush fund GILLARD built to receive secret commission payments.

Here are some of the details.

Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 12.14.29 am

The following two pages are from the Casino Control Authority's 1999/00 Annual Report.

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 11.55.36 pm

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 11.57.41 pm

The following two pages are from a 1997 report into Leightons by the same authority.

Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 12.48.31 amScreen Shot 2017-12-17 at 12.47.50 am

Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 12.47.50 am

And this letter to AWU officials from McLelland's law firm describes the contents of the file the Casino Control Authority were interested in.

Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 12.59.24 am Screen Shot 2017-12-17 at 1.42.53 am

And finally here's a story by Hedley Thomas about this very matter!



Detectives intend to execute search warrant to retrieve a legal file concerning Bruce Wilson

FEDERAL Court officials have been told by Victorian detectives investigating the AWU "slush fund" scandal that they intend to execute a search warrant at the court's registry to retrieve a legal file concerning Julia Gillard's allegedly corrupt former boyfriend, union official Bruce Wilson.

The file is regarded by police and legal figures, including former Australian Workers Union national secretary Ian Cambridge, now a commissioner for Fair Work Australia, as significant because it is believed to include several affidavits and evidence of allegedly corrupt payments by building companies to Mr Wilson.

In a letter to Victoria Police's Major Fraud and Extortion Squad earlier this month, Federal Court official Robert Thomsett described the file's documents and subpoena material about building companies Thiess, John Holland Construction and others. These firms allegedly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to Mr Wilson, a former AWU state secretary who has denied any wrongdoing.

A large part of the alleged fraud was carried out through the AWU Workplace Reform Association, which was set up in the 1990s after legal advice from Ms Gillard in her role as a lawyer at Slater & Gordon. Ms Gillard, who later described the association as a "slush fund" for the re-election of union officials, has vehemently denied wrongdoing, saying she knew nothing of the operations of the association.

The Federal Court's letter asks police to "advise if you wish to continue with the proposed action of serving a search warrant on the court for this file. If required I can send the original file to the Victoria registry of the court."

A second Federal Court file, which is regarded as more significant and is also being sought by Victorian police, cannot be found. The files contain numerous legal documents that are meant to remain the permanent property of the Federal Court. Responsibility for storage and availability rests with the Federal Court in NSW. It is unclear whether the file can be reassembled from documents that might be held by other parties.

The Federal Court's Mr Thomsett has advised police that despite repeated searches since late last year the second file is still missing. A senior source said the missing file had held a sworn statement made in 1996 by an AWU staffer, Wayne Hem, who has told The Australian he was instructed by Mr Wilson to put $5000 into Ms Gillard's personal bank account in 1995. Mr Wilson did not deny the claim and said Mr Hem was an honest man who was probably correct. Ms Gillard said she had no recollection of getting the money.

The circumstances surrounding the file's disappearance are part of the ongoing investigation into the alleged fraud by Victoria Police, which has sent several detectives to Sydney this week to speak to witnesses and gather further evidence. Last month, one of the detectives spent a week in Queensland interviewing a legal secretary, Olivia Palmer (formerly Brosnahan), who worked at Slater & Gordon lawyers with Ms Gillard and became involved during the purchase by Mr Wilson of a Melbourne terrace house with union funds. Mr Cambridge last week called on all witnesses to co-operate fully with police.

A Federal Court spokesman said yesterday that the NSW registry received a written inquiry "from an officer of the Victorian Police's Fraud and Extortion Squad on 7 February 2013 in relation to the availability of, and some information about, several files to proceedings conducted in the Industrial Relations Court".

In his detailed letter of reply to the detectives, Mr Thomsett, the director of people and operations, wrote on February 8: "A number of searches of various areas and other activities have failed to locate this particular file."

Mr Thomsett's letter, released by the Federal Court to The Australian yesterday after Victoria Police said it would not prejudice their investigations, advised: "The last recorded movement on 17 May 2002 shows the file was returned to the registry file room on this date."


ABS reports immigration into Australia rose a massive 27% during the last financial year

I don't recall the Government of Turnbull making any noises about increasing immigration by 27%!

On Thursday the ABS released its most recent Australian Demographic Statistics.

ABS Demography Director Beidar Cho said: "Australia's net overseas migration for the year ending 30 June 2017 was 245,400, an increase of 27 per cent from the previous 12 months (2015-16).

New South Wales and Victoria have recorded their highest ever levels of net overseas migration (NOM), according to the latest population figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).

"Net overseas migration in New South Wales and Victoria increased by 31 per cent and 23 per cent respectively. This growth has seen both states surpass their previous recorded high in 2008-09."

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection's budget papers tell us:

In 2016–17 ....there will be 190,000 places made available to permanent migrants in the Migration Program.

The Migration Program planning figure has never exceeded 190,000 places, so this marks five years of the program being maintained at a record high level.

2016/17 actual figures are reported here - 186,515 plus 3,485 child slots - 190,000.

But the ABS says 245,000 came in.

So where'd the extra 55,000 come from?

The only other source of immigrants is our Humanitarian program.

It's yet to update its figures for 2016/17 - the latest figures are for 15/16.

In 2015–16, a total of 77,026 people lodged applications under the offshore programme component compared with 62,946 in 2014–15.​

Humanitarian Programme figures​

Humanitarian Programme grants by category 2011–12 to 2015–16
Category 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–161
Refugee 5,993 11,980 6,491 5,994 8,284
Special Humanitarian Programme 714 503 4,505 5,007 7,268
Onshore2 7,037 7,505 2,751 2,747 2,003
Total3 13,744 19,988 13,747 13,748 17,555

1Offshore statistics for 2015-16 include visas granted towards the Annual Humanitarian Programme and the Additional 12,000 places for Syrians and Iraqis
2Includes protection visas and onshore humanitarian visa grants that are countable under the Humanitarian Programme.


55,000 is a lot of people.  I'll let you know how the ABS and Peter Dutton's people reconcile the differences.

I thought immigration numbers peaked during the reign of The Rudd.

But apparently not.

That crown now belongs to the Chairman.


Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 7.18.29 pm

New South Wales and Victoria have recorded their highest ever levels of net overseas migration (NOM), according to the latest population figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).

ABS Demography Director Beidar Cho said: "Australia's net overseas migration for the year ending 30 June 2017 was 245,400, an increase of 27 per cent from the previous 12 months (2015-16).

"Net overseas migration in New South Wales and Victoria increased by 31 per cent and 23 per cent respectively. This growth has seen both states surpass their previous recorded high in 2008-09."

All states and territories recorded an increase in NOM compared with the previous year. New South Wales was the most popular destination, with NOM of 98,600 and Victoria followed, with 86,900. This was followed by Queensland (31,100), Western Australia (13,100), South Australia (10,500), the Australian Capital Territory (2,800), Tasmania (1,500) and the Northern Territory (900). 

Overall, Australia's population grew by 388,100 people, or 1.6 per cent, to reach 24.6 million by the end of June 2017. Victoria was the fastest growing state or territory, with a population increase of 2.3 per cent, followed by the Australian Capital Territory, 1.7 per cent.

Australia is growing faster than our close neighbours and other major OECD countries, except for Papua New Guinea (2.1 per cent). The Philippines and Singapore were the next fastest growing countries at 1.5 per cent, followed by Malaysia (1.4 per cent) and South Africa (1.3 per cent). In 2017 Australia's population is ranked 53rd in the world and is projected to rank 56th by 2050.


And if you sometimes feel that you're living in a foreign country - this extract from the 2016 Census might explain why.

The Census shows that Australia has a higher proportion of overseas-born people (26%) than the United States (14%), Canada (22%) and New Zealand (23%). What about the United Kingdom, you say? Not even close (13%).

This makes Australia a hugely diverse nation.

Dig a generation deeper and our diversity becomes even richer. People born overseas, or who had at least one parent born overseas, made up almost half (49%) of our entire population in 2


Bennelong by-election - by 8PM it was all John Alexander - except for the victory party which was Chairman Mal's



UPDATE - 40 minutes of counting and it's done and dusted.  Bill Shorten and Labor appear to have overplayed their hand somewhat - rather than Turnbull it's Shorten who's been sent a very clear message.

This is a disastrous result for Bill, his girl and their red army.




This is the AEC TallyRoom result as at 7.20PM

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 4.23.05 pm

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 4.23.45 pm

At 7.40 PM - note Cory Bernardi's candidate, 5% of the vote!

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 4.43.09 pm

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 4.42.40 pm

At 8PM - JA's looking home and hosed.

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 5.02.03 pm

Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 5.02.20 pm

This space intentionally left blank.

Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 4.00.30 pm

This space has intentionally been left blank.

If I could have stomached it - I would have placed GILLARD's self-serving ABC 730 interview re the selective Royal Commission into some but not other child abuse.

I might also have reported GILLARD's 5 months on the board of CVS lane.

But I just can't.  The facts I'm reading about her and friends from her role in The AWU Scandal make me physically ill.

I'll spare you further images of GILLARD.

Until she's charged.

AG George Brandis's website promoting wedding stationery printer - and indeterminate/intersex/unspecified brides/grooms/partners

Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 10.48.24 am


This is the marriage section of the website of Commonwealth Attorney General Senator The Honourable George Brandis QC.

Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 10.31.44 am

There you'll find a link to a heap of new marriage stationery and forms.

This page has information on the following:

George is now doing ads for commercial organisations - or to accurate, one commercial organisation which "has the contract".

Marriage forms

The forms on this page are for official use under the Marriage Act 1961 and Marriage Regulations 1963. Do not modify these forms as this may result in void documents. 

All forms can be downloaded from this site, with the exception of the Form 15 Certificate of Marriage, which can only be purchased by an authorised celebrant through CanPrint Communications. CanPrint is contracted by the Australian Government to supply the Form 15 and other marriage stationery—including marriage registers, official forms and certificates. Your marriage celebrant registration number must be quoted when purchasing marriage stationery.

Visit the CanPrint Communications website for information, order forms and contact details. You can email CanPrint Communications at

Marriage celebrants may generate or purchase the approved marriage forms from other sources, but must ensure that such forms comply with the forms approved under the Marriage Act. If such forms do not comply, the registries of births, deaths and marriages have the authority under the Marriage Act 1961 to reject them.

Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 10.35.47 am

And if you follow all those links you'll come to the new world, courtesy of George.

Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 10.39.08 am Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 10.39.53 am

That's a fair bit more than we were postal surveyed for George.

But then we always did get a lot more from you than met the eye.

Screen Shot 2017-12-14 at 10.56.57 am

Dastyari is just a symptom of the Sussex Street disease - "I have always put the pursuit of the Labor cause first"

Screen Shot 2017-12-12 at 2.49.49 pm

Dastyari sums it up himself.

"I have always put the pursuit of the Labor cause first".

Not the truth.  Not even his family.  And certainly not Australia.

But Dastyari is only a symptom of the Sussex Street disease.

And it has taken hold of both parties.

The disease is slowly destroying the character of its host.


We're in a critical condition.

And farewelling Sam from the parliament won't help.



Screen Shot 2017-12-12 at 12.17.29 pm

Screen Shot 2017-12-12 at 12.17.29 pm

Screen Shot 2017-12-12 at 12.17.29 pm