Australia and New Zealand have the same policies and appear to be in lockstep. I always thought that Australia, New Zealand and Israel would be the countries on which the Great Reset policies would be trialled and be the proving ground, the best way to dispose of us Human Rubbish, as quickly as conveniently as possible after vaccines and nothing has changed my mind on that, so far.
Almost everyone with a functioning brain realizes by now that governments definition of misinformation and disinformation is anything they disagree with or don’t want others to know about. It can be the opposite side of any debate or a political disagreement they don’t want to negotiate. The entire notion of misinformation is to stifle free speech, and put a label on the other side which brings into question their ethics and lawfulness. The more people that realize this, the better it will be for everyone.
Yet British conservatives bang on about diversity being a bad thing and yet seem to wish everyone to have the same beliefs. How does this sit with free speech?
When have British conservatives ever said that they wish everyone to have the same beliefs? Diversity isn't inherently a good or bad thing. It can be simultaneously an asset and a liability. It is the totalitarian Left that is pushing diversity as an inherent good, except when it comes to diversity of thought and speech. The Left also has no qualms about using disinformation to advance its interests, as you have personally demonstrated.
Our very Government seeks to deceive us, to restrict us ONLY to their Official Narrative. We are to OBEY WITHOUT QUESTION. Doubt is deviancy, it is not Orthodox to question Authority... meh. H8 the St8, mate! Aussie! Aussie! Aussie!
Many of these U.S. activists know that they can’t get around free speech laws in America so instead they are doing an end run around our constitution via other countries to get social media to censor. It’s happening with many other gov’t agencies already. The global minimum tax. Stopping mergers via the EU. Changing the rules or just ignoring the rules to encourage more illegal immigration from other countries.
Years ago I was enraged at (what I then thought was arrogant hubris) when Attorney General George Brandis stated during parliamentary Question Time, that "...people had the right to be bigots...". Now I realise that I entirely missed the context of that comment as it related to the value of free speech. In the light of the legislation now before Parliament AG Brandis' comment was/is golden and I applaud the Hon. Russell Broadbent MP for making a stand on this subject, particularly as what happened during the past 4 years. His emphasis on the culpability of the media highlights that media interests have lobbied to maintain their protected status whereby the media is excluded from liability claims for wantonly misinforming the public. See the link below.
John Stuart Mill (arguably the grandfather of libertarianism) once penned that individuals ought to be able to do anything they like so long as it doesn't harm others, and that when it does harm others the government has the right to intervene ...or some such. It is commonly referred to as the 'harm principle'. It pivots on the definition of 'harm', though, and it is not surprising that recent debate exists around just this.
Last year at a swimming pool I attempted some humour with the counter staff, with no mal intent, and one of the employees was so disposed, psychologically, to lodge a complaint. She was a young woman who seemed hypersensitive (a product of her own innate nature and years of exposure to MSM and formal education). After verbal and written exchanges with more senior personnel, I eventually returned to the centre but have religiously adopted the practice of zipping my mouth and abstaining from eye contact. It is working.:)
Very hard not to offend at least someone with an attempt at humour.
Of course, more generally, we go out into the world seeking human company (or excitement in some other form) only to get bitten by an interaction/experience and to retreat back into our shells until sufficient boredom drives us out again ...and so on. Enough of human psychology.
The notion of 'truth' is not straightforward, either.
Just what constitutes 'truth', outside of maths and formal logic? Ultimately we just have perceptions of reality. We have as many such perceptions as we have people.
"We all have truths. Are your truths the same as mine?" ...another quote from JCSS, this time Pilot.:)
Then there is the issue that it can rate higher on the moral spectrum to lie or withhold facts than to tell the 'truth'.
Delivering 'truths' can foment panic, depression, phobias and destructive behaviour.
MSM has a practice of cherry picking 'truths', for instance, in a way that leaves society worse off.
During the great plague there was cherry picking of cases of young people getting COVID badly and cherry picking of 'experts' comments about COVID.
The Greens seem to have been using their balance of power to leverage environmental 'gains' ... along the lines of: "We'll scratch your backs if you'll scratch ours."
This has been somewhat problematic, methinks.
My back neighbour planted a gum tree in his backyard 50 years ago and wishes to remove it now for safety and for the promotion of sunlight - not least to solar panels he wishes to have placed onto his roof). The local council won't allow him, though, citing that they are bound by regulations coming out of state government.
People cannot park on verges (to ease road congestion) because of the damage they might cause to greenery (weeds and grass).
This MAD (Mis And Dis) Bill breaks the promise, one of the basic tenets, made to each migrant arriving at the shores of the untouched pure land of this land. Starting from the early settlers, for hundreds of years people have come to this country for freedom & a new life. In the US, the Great venerable founding fathers, leaders put it in writing in the 1st amendment to their constitution, ensured it sustained forever.
Isn't it high time we have that Freedom incorporated somewhere in the Australian books ?
It occurred to me some years ago that all news was slanted to the political party in power and I decided to stop reading the local rag or watch the free to air TV news programs at 6pm - I only read stuff on this substack and I form my opinions of what I choose to believe in, from other free online newspapers, where possible, avoiding those which are obviously "bolshie" posting on stuff which is appropriate to my thinking and consistent with my own free opinion of what is atually happening and not what our government would spoon feed us into thinking is right.
I only found out about the disinformation vaccines program from early 2020 to May 2023 in 2024 and I've been posting my free salt water cure as an alternative to those vaccines, the whole time, for anyone who wanted an alternative to do instead, like me - but from my substack.
From what I understand of Australia, 97% of the total population has now been vaccinated with these killer vaccines which means there won't be many left, if an extermination procedure is in place or begins soon, especially if those not vaccinated are seniors who will die off naturally or those few kids whose parents don't agree with government vaccines policies - just like in New Zealand at the moment too.
I guess it is time for any free thinking person to decide to read or hear only stuff which has not been subjected to Disinformation Laws and form their own opinions of what they will do for themselves and don't discuss that with anyone about them and where they live, so they don't shit in their own nest and get to become the focus of attention, because of it.
I am in dissonance with your claim that all news is slanted to the political party in power. More typical has it been for the msm to be at variance with the sitting government and to offer push back against government practices. Msm has been a thorn in the side of most governments. The years of the great plague were noticeably different in respect of covid, though. We had a rare case of almost total cooperation between msm (all of it - ABC, SBS, 7, 10 or 9) and government. It was a bizarre contrast to the normal.
I also offer the view that moving (for one's 'information') from msm to Youtube, say, is problematic in that one gets sucked into echo chambers - or into one big echo chamber involving a number of Youtubers. Tis like jumping from pan to fire.
I don't go to msm or YouTube for anything - my main sources are anti vaccines from the get go, like me and my substack, because anything which is overlooked by Government has to meet Government criteria or be banned from publication and to stay in business they have to meet the Government rules and regulations, whereas, so far, this substack does not, however the Australian government is rebooting their earlier disinformation bill from early 2020 to June 2023 to take control of what you read and hear, so that, in effect from very soon, that will only be what the Australian Government wants you to hear and think is correct, according to their model and not the free press, or mine: Australian Government Reboots the Misinformation Bill
By Andrew Lowenthal
This week, Australia’s Labor Party reintroduced its misinformation and disinformation bill. I did a deep dive into the bill last May. Among its many flaws, the biggest is its very origins.
As Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said in Parliament on September 12th, “This bill seeks to strengthen the voluntary code by providing a regulatory backstop.” That code was co-written by First Draft, participants in the Aspen Institute’s coordinated effort to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story.
If that story is new to you, the Twitter Files revealed that in August 2020, the Aspen Institute organised a “table-top” exercise with Twitter, Facebook, First Draft and a host of media organisations including the New York Times and Washington Post, that ran through a day-by-day playbook of how they would respond to the release of Hunter Biden’s laptop. The story didn’t break publicly until October, so how did the Aspen Institute know two months in advance?
A page from the Aspen Institute’s Hunter Biden laptop playbook
Mark Zuckerberg thought the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story was so egregious he recently issued a sort of apology.
To be even more explicit, the bill extends the code, which is written in part by an organisation that worked to suppress a true story of major historical significance. It should be dead on arrival. It tells you all you need to know about the real aims of the bill.
But the Labor Party is adamant they want it passed, and they can likely count on the Greens and independents in the Senate to pass it. It was after all the Greens that recently teamed up with Labor to pass the Digital ID bill.
Predictably, Rowland cited the Bondi Junction attacks and the riots in the U.K. as part of her justification for the bill. Perhaps the most significant disinformation spread about the Bondi stabbing was reporting done by mainstream media. In such cases, there are already defamation laws that can deal with such issues. Interestingly, professional news organisations remain exempt in the updated version of bill.
Regarding the U.K., as I have recently written, misinformation is a convenient scapegoat for what is actually a massively complex problem that has its foundations in material reality, not in people’s perceptions.
Interestingly, the bill’s relaunch comes a week after failed U.S. Disinformation Czar Nina Jankowicz visited Canberra. Did she meet with any politicians and advise them on setting up Australia’s own Ministry of Truth? I’d ask her, but she has blocked me last week, despite us never having interacted.
That conversation platformed Guardian columnist and paragon of Leftism, Van Badham. Does Van Badham understand that Nina works closely with security and intelligence agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security? DHS used to be a stock standard foe of progressives during the War on Terror for its hyper-surveillance of Muslim communities and many an alleged civil liberties violation. Now its former employees are just the right people for Leftists to share the stage with.
The best place to get the details on the changes to the bill is via Rebekah Barnett’s recent story (which she also interviewed me for), though I offer a few other quick comments…
There are some mild improvements to the bill, including specifications that “harms” should be “serious”, “imminent” and with “significant and far-reaching consequences”. However, the fundamentals remain the same. The bill outsources truth policing to social media platforms on pain of having to pay up to 5% of their annual revenue if they fail to comply. The result is sure to be a massive chilling effect.
Content only has to be “reasonably verifiable as false, misleading or deceptive”, but who is doing the verification? Anyone who followed the Covid debacle knows that what is “false” today in a few months becomes plausible, and a few months after that it becomes true – whether that was the theory that the virus may have originated in a lab, the collateral of lockdowns or that the vaccines would stop transmission. In the future, questioning government authorities on these issues will be against the law. In fact, it is stated so explicitly. Harm is to question “the efficacy of preventative health measures”.
For progressives thinking of supporting this, the Right will take power again, whether in the next election, the one following or the one after that. If you are on the Palestine side of the Israel-Gaza conflict, make no mistake, these laws will come for you.
This is not about defending Musk or Zuckerberg, though that is how they are trying to frame it – goodies vs baddies – this is about defending fundamental civil liberties that go beyond Left and Right. Other than dealing with criminal behaviour, the government has no business policing speech.
I hope progressives can grasp that quickly because we don’t have much time.
Andrew Lowenthal is a Brownstone Institute fellow, journalist and the founder and CEO of liber-net, a digital civil liberties initiative. He was co-founder and Executive Director of the Asia-Pacific digital rights non-profit EngageMedia for almost eighteen years, and a fellow at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society and MIT’s Open Documentary Lab. This article first appeared on his Network Affects Substack.
I, too, was blocked by Nina Jankowicz — surprisingly, because I didn't know who she was until reading this column. Other public figures enmeshed in COVID and vaccine malfeasance also have blocked me, despite a lack of interaction. One might conclude that a master block list of investigators and critics is being circulated within a group of culpable cronies in government, industry, and media, in a belated and lame attempt to reduce public access to incriminating evidence.
> As Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said in Parliament on September 12, “This bill seeks to strengthen the voluntary code by providing a regulatory backstop.”
But there are more options, so if it’s always a case of swapping 1 shed load of dung for another, it means the people are either afraid of real change or the other options are even worse! In that case, why vote at all, mass sit down, zero voting, strikes galore and boycott everything! Bring the whole ugly, diseased system down!
But no, it won’t happen and we’ll continue funding corruption as long as we get enough scraps to keep us tiding over, living the dream 😵💫
So we can report msm and governments under this law too? 😁 Could open a gateway to bring this ship down 🤔 Use their own weaponisation of censorship against them
Australia better concentrating on people's & nations needs rather than misinformation /censorship idea Most Disinformation appears from inner govt circles where co-operation is of poor quality demanding clearer leadership
... obliterates that myth and proves the exact opposite is true, For one thing, the skyrocketing anti-Semitism globally.
On page 33, I document the case when a terminally ill man in England, just weeks following October 7th, was arrested for posting a video on Facebook of himself raising issues he had as he filmed numerous Palestinian flags being displayed in his street in the wake of the heinous Hamas perpetrated massacres of October 7th.
In endnote 328 on page 50, I give the following sources:
Pushing the pro-Hamas line is much safer than pushing the pro-Israel line. To which I might add, the violent anti-Semitic-pro-Hamas demonstrations at University campuses throughout the Western world. Not to mention, the likewise brainwashed "Catastrophic Climate Change" Alarmist Greta Thunberg transforming herself into a "Middle East expert". Just search for "Greta" or "Thunberg" who must think the road to climate justice passes through a free "Palestine", as these fellow raving leftist Climate Catastrophists of hers attest to at:
And just to add, there never has been a nation of Palestine. It was an early 1960s construct of the old Soviet KGB. I deal with this in depth. On page 15 for example I quote Zuheir Mohsen; the Military Department head of the PLO from 1971 to 1979:
“There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity.... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel."
Never thought Australia would be doing this. Heaven help us.
Amr Australia
Australia and New Zealand have the same policies and appear to be in lockstep. I always thought that Australia, New Zealand and Israel would be the countries on which the Great Reset policies would be trialled and be the proving ground, the best way to dispose of us Human Rubbish, as quickly as conveniently as possible after vaccines and nothing has changed my mind on that, so far.
Do you subscribe to the idea that vaccines are being used as a depopulation agent?
Yes and if you read my latest post, you can find my argument and how I arrived at it there - my substack is free, so no reason not to join is there?
Almost everyone with a functioning brain realizes by now that governments definition of misinformation and disinformation is anything they disagree with or don’t want others to know about. It can be the opposite side of any debate or a political disagreement they don’t want to negotiate. The entire notion of misinformation is to stifle free speech, and put a label on the other side which brings into question their ethics and lawfulness. The more people that realize this, the better it will be for everyone.
Yet British conservatives bang on about diversity being a bad thing and yet seem to wish everyone to have the same beliefs. How does this sit with free speech?
When have British conservatives ever said that they wish everyone to have the same beliefs? Diversity isn't inherently a good or bad thing. It can be simultaneously an asset and a liability. It is the totalitarian Left that is pushing diversity as an inherent good, except when it comes to diversity of thought and speech. The Left also has no qualms about using disinformation to advance its interests, as you have personally demonstrated.
Our very Government seeks to deceive us, to restrict us ONLY to their Official Narrative. We are to OBEY WITHOUT QUESTION. Doubt is deviancy, it is not Orthodox to question Authority... meh. H8 the St8, mate! Aussie! Aussie! Aussie!
Many of these U.S. activists know that they can’t get around free speech laws in America so instead they are doing an end run around our constitution via other countries to get social media to censor. It’s happening with many other gov’t agencies already. The global minimum tax. Stopping mergers via the EU. Changing the rules or just ignoring the rules to encourage more illegal immigration from other countries.
Years ago I was enraged at (what I then thought was arrogant hubris) when Attorney General George Brandis stated during parliamentary Question Time, that "...people had the right to be bigots...". Now I realise that I entirely missed the context of that comment as it related to the value of free speech. In the light of the legislation now before Parliament AG Brandis' comment was/is golden and I applaud the Hon. Russell Broadbent MP for making a stand on this subject, particularly as what happened during the past 4 years. His emphasis on the culpability of the media highlights that media interests have lobbied to maintain their protected status whereby the media is excluded from liability claims for wantonly misinforming the public. See the link below.
https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/free-speech-in-australia-under-threat?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email#media-7450b0a3-944d-4fc3-8276-a77b3038fcd2
This is not straight forward.
John Stuart Mill (arguably the grandfather of libertarianism) once penned that individuals ought to be able to do anything they like so long as it doesn't harm others, and that when it does harm others the government has the right to intervene ...or some such. It is commonly referred to as the 'harm principle'. It pivots on the definition of 'harm', though, and it is not surprising that recent debate exists around just this.
Last year at a swimming pool I attempted some humour with the counter staff, with no mal intent, and one of the employees was so disposed, psychologically, to lodge a complaint. She was a young woman who seemed hypersensitive (a product of her own innate nature and years of exposure to MSM and formal education). After verbal and written exchanges with more senior personnel, I eventually returned to the centre but have religiously adopted the practice of zipping my mouth and abstaining from eye contact. It is working.:)
Very hard not to offend at least someone with an attempt at humour.
Of course, more generally, we go out into the world seeking human company (or excitement in some other form) only to get bitten by an interaction/experience and to retreat back into our shells until sufficient boredom drives us out again ...and so on. Enough of human psychology.
The notion of 'truth' is not straightforward, either.
Just what constitutes 'truth', outside of maths and formal logic? Ultimately we just have perceptions of reality. We have as many such perceptions as we have people.
"We all have truths. Are your truths the same as mine?" ...another quote from JCSS, this time Pilot.:)
Then there is the issue that it can rate higher on the moral spectrum to lie or withhold facts than to tell the 'truth'.
Delivering 'truths' can foment panic, depression, phobias and destructive behaviour.
MSM has a practice of cherry picking 'truths', for instance, in a way that leaves society worse off.
During the great plague there was cherry picking of cases of young people getting COVID badly and cherry picking of 'experts' comments about COVID.
The Greens seem to have been using their balance of power to leverage environmental 'gains' ... along the lines of: "We'll scratch your backs if you'll scratch ours."
This has been somewhat problematic, methinks.
My back neighbour planted a gum tree in his backyard 50 years ago and wishes to remove it now for safety and for the promotion of sunlight - not least to solar panels he wishes to have placed onto his roof). The local council won't allow him, though, citing that they are bound by regulations coming out of state government.
People cannot park on verges (to ease road congestion) because of the damage they might cause to greenery (weeds and grass).
Enough for now.
This MAD (Mis And Dis) Bill breaks the promise, one of the basic tenets, made to each migrant arriving at the shores of the untouched pure land of this land. Starting from the early settlers, for hundreds of years people have come to this country for freedom & a new life. In the US, the Great venerable founding fathers, leaders put it in writing in the 1st amendment to their constitution, ensured it sustained forever.
Isn't it high time we have that Freedom incorporated somewhere in the Australian books ?
It occurred to me some years ago that all news was slanted to the political party in power and I decided to stop reading the local rag or watch the free to air TV news programs at 6pm - I only read stuff on this substack and I form my opinions of what I choose to believe in, from other free online newspapers, where possible, avoiding those which are obviously "bolshie" posting on stuff which is appropriate to my thinking and consistent with my own free opinion of what is atually happening and not what our government would spoon feed us into thinking is right.
I only found out about the disinformation vaccines program from early 2020 to May 2023 in 2024 and I've been posting my free salt water cure as an alternative to those vaccines, the whole time, for anyone who wanted an alternative to do instead, like me - but from my substack.
From what I understand of Australia, 97% of the total population has now been vaccinated with these killer vaccines which means there won't be many left, if an extermination procedure is in place or begins soon, especially if those not vaccinated are seniors who will die off naturally or those few kids whose parents don't agree with government vaccines policies - just like in New Zealand at the moment too.
I guess it is time for any free thinking person to decide to read or hear only stuff which has not been subjected to Disinformation Laws and form their own opinions of what they will do for themselves and don't discuss that with anyone about them and where they live, so they don't shit in their own nest and get to become the focus of attention, because of it.
I am in dissonance with your claim that all news is slanted to the political party in power. More typical has it been for the msm to be at variance with the sitting government and to offer push back against government practices. Msm has been a thorn in the side of most governments. The years of the great plague were noticeably different in respect of covid, though. We had a rare case of almost total cooperation between msm (all of it - ABC, SBS, 7, 10 or 9) and government. It was a bizarre contrast to the normal.
I also offer the view that moving (for one's 'information') from msm to Youtube, say, is problematic in that one gets sucked into echo chambers - or into one big echo chamber involving a number of Youtubers. Tis like jumping from pan to fire.
I don't go to msm or YouTube for anything - my main sources are anti vaccines from the get go, like me and my substack, because anything which is overlooked by Government has to meet Government criteria or be banned from publication and to stay in business they have to meet the Government rules and regulations, whereas, so far, this substack does not, however the Australian government is rebooting their earlier disinformation bill from early 2020 to June 2023 to take control of what you read and hear, so that, in effect from very soon, that will only be what the Australian Government wants you to hear and think is correct, according to their model and not the free press, or mine: Australian Government Reboots the Misinformation Bill
By Andrew Lowenthal
This week, Australia’s Labor Party reintroduced its misinformation and disinformation bill. I did a deep dive into the bill last May. Among its many flaws, the biggest is its very origins.
As Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said in Parliament on September 12th, “This bill seeks to strengthen the voluntary code by providing a regulatory backstop.” That code was co-written by First Draft, participants in the Aspen Institute’s coordinated effort to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story.
If that story is new to you, the Twitter Files revealed that in August 2020, the Aspen Institute organised a “table-top” exercise with Twitter, Facebook, First Draft and a host of media organisations including the New York Times and Washington Post, that ran through a day-by-day playbook of how they would respond to the release of Hunter Biden’s laptop. The story didn’t break publicly until October, so how did the Aspen Institute know two months in advance?
A page from the Aspen Institute’s Hunter Biden laptop playbook
Mark Zuckerberg thought the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story was so egregious he recently issued a sort of apology.
To be even more explicit, the bill extends the code, which is written in part by an organisation that worked to suppress a true story of major historical significance. It should be dead on arrival. It tells you all you need to know about the real aims of the bill.
But the Labor Party is adamant they want it passed, and they can likely count on the Greens and independents in the Senate to pass it. It was after all the Greens that recently teamed up with Labor to pass the Digital ID bill.
Predictably, Rowland cited the Bondi Junction attacks and the riots in the U.K. as part of her justification for the bill. Perhaps the most significant disinformation spread about the Bondi stabbing was reporting done by mainstream media. In such cases, there are already defamation laws that can deal with such issues. Interestingly, professional news organisations remain exempt in the updated version of bill.
Regarding the U.K., as I have recently written, misinformation is a convenient scapegoat for what is actually a massively complex problem that has its foundations in material reality, not in people’s perceptions.
Interestingly, the bill’s relaunch comes a week after failed U.S. Disinformation Czar Nina Jankowicz visited Canberra. Did she meet with any politicians and advise them on setting up Australia’s own Ministry of Truth? I’d ask her, but she has blocked me last week, despite us never having interacted.
That conversation platformed Guardian columnist and paragon of Leftism, Van Badham. Does Van Badham understand that Nina works closely with security and intelligence agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security? DHS used to be a stock standard foe of progressives during the War on Terror for its hyper-surveillance of Muslim communities and many an alleged civil liberties violation. Now its former employees are just the right people for Leftists to share the stage with.
The best place to get the details on the changes to the bill is via Rebekah Barnett’s recent story (which she also interviewed me for), though I offer a few other quick comments…
There are some mild improvements to the bill, including specifications that “harms” should be “serious”, “imminent” and with “significant and far-reaching consequences”. However, the fundamentals remain the same. The bill outsources truth policing to social media platforms on pain of having to pay up to 5% of their annual revenue if they fail to comply. The result is sure to be a massive chilling effect.
Content only has to be “reasonably verifiable as false, misleading or deceptive”, but who is doing the verification? Anyone who followed the Covid debacle knows that what is “false” today in a few months becomes plausible, and a few months after that it becomes true – whether that was the theory that the virus may have originated in a lab, the collateral of lockdowns or that the vaccines would stop transmission. In the future, questioning government authorities on these issues will be against the law. In fact, it is stated so explicitly. Harm is to question “the efficacy of preventative health measures”.
For progressives thinking of supporting this, the Right will take power again, whether in the next election, the one following or the one after that. If you are on the Palestine side of the Israel-Gaza conflict, make no mistake, these laws will come for you.
This is not about defending Musk or Zuckerberg, though that is how they are trying to frame it – goodies vs baddies – this is about defending fundamental civil liberties that go beyond Left and Right. Other than dealing with criminal behaviour, the government has no business policing speech.
I hope progressives can grasp that quickly because we don’t have much time.
Andrew Lowenthal is a Brownstone Institute fellow, journalist and the founder and CEO of liber-net, a digital civil liberties initiative. He was co-founder and Executive Director of the Asia-Pacific digital rights non-profit EngageMedia for almost eighteen years, and a fellow at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society and MIT’s Open Documentary Lab. This article first appeared on his Network Affects Substack.
I, too, was blocked by Nina Jankowicz — surprisingly, because I didn't know who she was until reading this column. Other public figures enmeshed in COVID and vaccine malfeasance also have blocked me, despite a lack of interaction. One might conclude that a master block list of investigators and critics is being circulated within a group of culpable cronies in government, industry, and media, in a belated and lame attempt to reduce public access to incriminating evidence.
Surprise, surprise 🙄
“This bill seeks to strengthen the voluntary code by providing a regulatory backstop.” That code was co-written by First Draft,"
Sorry for sounding obtuse...but are you actually claiming First Draft wrote some of the Legislation mentioned in Hansard?
Just that it explicitly builds on the code:
> As Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said in Parliament on September 12, “This bill seeks to strengthen the voluntary code by providing a regulatory backstop.”
Thanks
Why can’t we contact representatives asking them to put forward a vote of no confidence?? We need this lot out!
I remind you that it was Scomo who sent OZ into lock down.
There’s more than 2 parties, I couldn’t stand that shower either
Essentially, this is a two party nation. This lot out = other lot in.
But there are more options, so if it’s always a case of swapping 1 shed load of dung for another, it means the people are either afraid of real change or the other options are even worse! In that case, why vote at all, mass sit down, zero voting, strikes galore and boycott everything! Bring the whole ugly, diseased system down!
But no, it won’t happen and we’ll continue funding corruption as long as we get enough scraps to keep us tiding over, living the dream 😵💫
So we can report msm and governments under this law too? 😁 Could open a gateway to bring this ship down 🤔 Use their own weaponisation of censorship against them
Both are exempt and may continue to propagate as much bullshit as usual.
Reckon we bombard lists of their b.s to One Nation as they seem to be the only ones who try to hold them to account!
Australia better concentrating on people's & nations needs rather than misinformation /censorship idea Most Disinformation appears from inner govt circles where co-operation is of poor quality demanding clearer leadership
"If you are on the Palestine side of the Israel-Gaza conflict, make no mistake, these laws will come for you."
WRONG! The assumption here is that our corrupt media and political elites are unequivocally pro-Israel. However, my piece at:
https://vincebarwinski.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/hamas_attack_on_israel_october_7th_2023_and_its_aftermath_11th_november_2023.pdf
... obliterates that myth and proves the exact opposite is true, For one thing, the skyrocketing anti-Semitism globally.
On page 33, I document the case when a terminally ill man in England, just weeks following October 7th, was arrested for posting a video on Facebook of himself raising issues he had as he filmed numerous Palestinian flags being displayed in his street in the wake of the heinous Hamas perpetrated massacres of October 7th.
In endnote 328 on page 50, I give the following sources:
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1719510893979988110 AND
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1719509199162413334 AND https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/viral-videoman-arrested-for-criticizing-sea-of-palestinian-flags-in-his-london-neighborhood/ar-AA1jiCLo AND
https://www.westernjournal.com/viral-video-man-arrested-criticizing-sea-palestinian-flags-neighborhood-questioningborder-policies/
Pushing the pro-Hamas line is much safer than pushing the pro-Israel line. To which I might add, the violent anti-Semitic-pro-Hamas demonstrations at University campuses throughout the Western world. Not to mention, the likewise brainwashed "Catastrophic Climate Change" Alarmist Greta Thunberg transforming herself into a "Middle East expert". Just search for "Greta" or "Thunberg" who must think the road to climate justice passes through a free "Palestine", as these fellow raving leftist Climate Catastrophists of hers attest to at:
https://climatejusticealliance.org/palestine/
And just to add, there never has been a nation of Palestine. It was an early 1960s construct of the old Soviet KGB. I deal with this in depth. On page 15 for example I quote Zuheir Mohsen; the Military Department head of the PLO from 1971 to 1979:
“There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity.... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel."
See https://www.newspapers.com/article/daily-news-sum/134599859/ AND
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/484042558/ from the New York Daily News Sunday 19th August 1979