Stopping official coercion & terrorism at Brisbane International Airport (#62)
It seems that the Brisbane Airports Corporation (BAC) is now requiring biometric scanning to re-enter the country through Brisbane International Airport. One month ago, on 3 November 2025, I informed it of the crimes this is committing via its website feedback page. These crimes fall under the Criminal Code Act of 1995, namely coercion (Section 270.1A) and terrorism (Section 100.1). Their automated response advised that I would receive a reply in 5 days but I am still waiting.
So I called them on 2 and 3 December and was again told by the same lady that no biometrics were being required at BAC. When I said that I had established that there were around six machines there which do a biometric scan of faces to compare with passport photographs, she became quite angry and asked if I wanted them removed. When I replied “Of course”, she said “Well go tell the Prime Minister because that’s who is making us do it”, before she abruptly hung up.
I have therefore emailed my local member, who is also the Communications Minister, requesting that she take action to ensure BAC complies with Australian law and removes this equipment. If the BAC advises her that the direction to break the law came from somewhere in government, she will obviously need to identify which part of government it came from and have it stopped.
This is likely to be a matter that public pressure would greatly assist in resolving. You could email the Communications Minister and local member Anika Wells on anika.wells.mp@aph.gov.au . You could possibly also base your submission on grounds I did not mention, such as the nation’s privacy commissioner having found it breached privacy laws when used at Kmart and Bunnings. You could also focus on the sneakiness of it having been introduced without any publicity. You could also ask how it is that government has been captured into not only promoting but mandating use of a commercial product.
You could also call or email your local politicians about this, asking them to bring pressure to bear on both government and private sectors to abide by the law, which is supposed to apply to all. Doing that would assist them with avoiding their criminal liability for Digital Slavery offences, which you could also bring to their attention. Notice of this was sent to all MPs and Senators on 10/10/25 – and to all State lower house members (excluding the NT) by 12/10/2025. The text of that advice is in my Substack post #55.
This is also positive action that can be taken against the further age verification/ Digital ID coercion abuses that are about to be heaped upon us, all irrespective of age, under the disingenuous cover of the Trojan Horse under 16 social media ban.
The original feedback I sent the BAC feedback address https://www.bne.com.au/passenger/contact-us/feedback appears below.
Biometric scanning equipment submission to BAC via feedback form submitted on 3/11/2025
I called BAC on the afternoon of 29 October 2025 regarding the collection of biometric data at the Brisbane International Airport terminal. I was assured that no biometric data was being collected and there was no intention to do so.
The following day my neighbour arrived back from overseas through Brisbane International Airport and had entered some booth where she was required to give biometrics – facial scan and fingerprint, as I understand. She did so without realising the invasiveness and illegality of this. So the advice your switchboard gave me the previous day was clearly incorrect.
Installing equipment and arrangements that deceive and/ or coerce people into divulging unique, irretrievable information on their bodies, allowing storage they can’t control, as well as data trading on it that they also can’t control, is clearly illegal in Australia and commits at least two crimes under the Criminal Code Act of 1995, namely:
1. coercion which is any of force, duress, detention, psychological oppression, abuse of power or taking advantage of a person’s vulnerability. (Section 270.1A).
2. A terrorist act which means an action or threat to advance a political, religious or ideological cause by intimidating the public or a section of the public. (Section 100.1).
Biometric scanning at airports is trapping people when they are travelling and vulnerable and clearly constitutes coercion. Failing to tell people that this will be done constitutes entrapment and deception. Failing to provide a practical alternative does the same.
BAC senior management is managing an international facility and so must well know the global politically coercive surveillance agenda that installing this invasive equipment is part of, unless openly admitting wilful ignorance or incompetence. Refusing to let people pass for achievement of these political objectives is intimidating the public and constitutes official terrorism.
Furthermore, Section 74 of the Digital ID Act 2024 says “A participating relying party must not, as a condition of providing a service or access to a service, require an individual to create or use a digital ID.” You will be well aware that biometrics form an integral part of Digital ID.
Managing an international facility, you cannot be unaware of the New World Order that is being openly promoted by the United Nations, the World Economic Forum and the large banks of the world. You will surely understand the reluctance of any of your customers/ passengers also following such international matters to have their unique personal data coerced from them in support of that. They will not want it stolen and then entered into whatever criminal/ security/ military databases that such proceeds of crime and official State terrorism might be stored in or sold into. Such people will expect to have a realistic option to decline, without entry being denied.
You must surely also be aware that this exact same type of biometric data has been used to identify, target and kill Palestinians suspected of being Hamas fighters in the Gaza war. If you are not, you should Google “Lavender” and “Gospel” for this publicly available information – See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI-assisted_targeting_in_the_Gaza_Strip . You will see how they were used to identify people then track them to their home, which is then set within the control grid as their kill-box by AI. If your media sources have not informed you about the military concepts of the kill-box or the control grid, a simple Google search will reveal what those are.
While we in Brisbane are thousands of miles from that conflict, why is there any need for such target enabling data to be collected here? This data has the potential to be used as a source of terror against peaceful, law-abiding locals who may have views deviating from media or government approved narratives. All the militaries and police forces of the world cooperate and have their ‘show and tell’ conferences and collaborations facilitating data sharing. Many people will strongly object to the possibility of such data being used and either sold or shared without their consent in this way.
Coercively collecting such data terrorises any of your customers who are aware of this. Allowing this data’s potential life-or-death power to be in the hands of either governments or corporations is dangerous and open to abuse. It should simply not be collected. It facilitates the temptation to use it for coercive ideological purposes as well as for any purpose that our own governments, security or police forces might from time to time think necessary. This technology implementation facilitates turning our service provider politicians and public servants into our masters, which they have no mandate to be.
Furthermore, handing monopoly arrangements to suppliers of digital products leaves open the possibility of future extortion or price-gouging. Alternative, workable, practical analogue options must be made freely available and any biometric recording stations must have large signs erected, truthfully advising of all the institutional, criminal, military and other databases this data will be sold into. This is necessary for fully informed consent, to avoid deceiving and coercing people into giving up their unique data into a system over which they have no control. Of course, with such signage, no-one would agree, so the practicality of this is that all such technology must be removed and never re-introduced.
Continuing failure to do this effectively locks down anyone recognising the danger of being biometrically coerced if they travel overseas. This has reintroduced by stealth the pandemic-style lockdowns all over again, under a different disguise. Many will be refraining from overseas travel until this unconscionable foolishness is reversed.
Of course, you may be unaware that following the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will severely reduce ALL air travel. Furthermore, this is being done for demonstrably false reasons. See e.g. Geology Professor Ian Plimer’s Little Green Books. So any forward growth projection you have will be thwarted, and your support for the UN driven climate change agenda must ultimately lead to your own corporate financial failure. There is therefore significant long-term economic benefit to your organisation, your investors, and man-kind in general, in resisting use of these unconscionable and draconian measures/ equipment that have been introduced into your premises.
I am also aware of a Channel 9 Perth report at https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1FM2Qyfbua/ asserting that the collection of biometric data would be 5 years away in Australia. This was clearly false as well.
If you aren’t fully aware of other invasive ways that this and other surveillance data can be abused, see the following:
· Wrong think prohibited: https://www.facebook.com/reel/803220335958510
· Ordering a pizza with Digital ID: https://www.facebook.com/JeniSpring/videos/827143648849392
· Google ordering a pizza: https://www.facebook.com/reel/750351013835398
If you aren’t aware of how personal bodily data is collected for trading and crypto-currency data mining, allowing gambling on the dark web, see the assessment of WIPO Patent WO2020060606 at https://stephenmcgrathphd.substack.com/p/patent-wo2020060606-crypto-currency . This is what you are getting mixed up in by allowing such invasive equipment on your premises.
In summary, this is to bring to your attention that to comply with the Criminal Code Act of 1995, it will be necessary to remove the offending biometric equipment from your premises.
I look forward to your action and your advice of it in reply, as I am suggesting no more than complying with the law.
Yours Faithfully
Steve McGrath PhD