Australia Bans Free Speech


Posted originally on Jan 14, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |  

Hate Speech

Australians could face up to 15 years imprisonment for comments deemed offensive by the government. The Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill introduced this month establishes federal offenses for “publicly promoting or inciting hatred.” Speech, writing, or “other forms of public gestures” will be monitored and controlled.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the prop “I encourage you to read the Old Testament and see what’s there and see if you outlaw that, what would occur,” he said. “I encourage you to read the Old Testament and see what’s there and see if you outlaw that, what would occur,” he said. “So we need to be careful — we consulted with faith groups, not just with the Jewish community. We want to make sure there’s the broadest possible support for this legislation but we also want to make sure that there isn’t unintended consequences of the legislation.”

“Unintended consequences” come down to losing voters, but for citizens, their freedom is at risk at every turn. The Old Testament example is quite interesting as that would chalk up Judaism and Christianity to “hate speech” for questioning the LGBTQ community.

The law will also further prevent the public from accessing firearms. Intelligence agencies will have the ability to reconsider gun licenses. “The terrorists at Bondi Beach had hatred in their minds but guns in their hands. This law will deal with both, and we need to deal with both,” the prime minister said.

Courts will look at three items to identify criminal hate speech: public incitement, superiority claims, and serious vilification. The Reasonable Person Test is the official standard courts use, which broadly allows anything to be taken out of context. In fact, Australian legislators believe that NO VICTIM IS REQUIRED! Prosecutors do not need to prove that anyone was harmed or felt intimidated. Context will be considered over intent. The government will now have full range to claim that any “reasonable person” of a certain group would feel intimidated or harassed by direct or indirect comments.

Image

“Let me be clear – once these laws are passed, they will be the toughest hate laws Australia has ever seen,” Michelle Rowland, Attorney General, said. “They will specifically target those who seek to spread hatred and disrupt social cohesion in our community. And it will send a clear message that this conduct will not be tolerated.”

The government has full control over speech. Religious leaders, especially Christians who are unprotected, are especially vulnerable to this new law. They may quote religious scripture only for teaching or discussion, but any additional commentary or sermons could result in federal prosecution.

The Minister for Home Affairs can cancel or refuse visas to anyone deemed a “risk of harm” for promoting hate speech. Social media platforms will be scanned and monitored by the government. Anyone involved in a “hate group” will face 15 years imprisonment, and anything deemed “offensive to a reasonable person” will be considered a hate group. Will Australia ban religion next? Will political opponents be considered “hate groups?” Can people freely speak out against open borders or other policies that they disagree with?

Australian Tyranny

If you say or type anything deemed offensive, the government will charge you with “racial vilification” and throw you in prison for five years. Australia showed the extent of its authoritarian brutality during the COVID crisis when it prohibited citizens and journalists alike from questioning the narrative. The government is providing itself with legal grounds to round up the disobedient who will serve as an example to others. Self-censor, obey, comply—the path toward the new world order will be treacherous.

Grokpedia


Posted originally on Oct 29, 2025 by Martin Armstrong |  

Elon Musk singlehandedly resurrected social media after purchasing Twitter (X) and providing all with a platform for free speech. Musk is using his influence to create an alternative to Wikipedia dubbed Grokpedia that he deemed as “a necessary step toward the xAI goal of understanding the Universe.”

Wikipedia has become one of the most viewed websites in the world, but can it be trusted as a reliable source? Co-founder Larry Sanger is now warning the public not to trust the website he helped to create. “You can trust it to give an establishment view,” Sanger admitted as he explained that the website’s original design has been destroyed.

Wikipedia was initially created as an open online resource that was committed to neutrality. Between 2004-2009, Sanger said Wikipedia was a pioneer in delivering news from a non-biased perspective but that quickly changed. Users had the ability to edit various pages and debate the information from both sides of the platform, but now it is nearly impossible for the average person to participate. “If you make any edit at all you will be sternly warned or kicked out,” Sanger said, noting this often happens on articles that are “unimportant.”

Wikipedia is often the first search result on any given search engine. Ever since the ECM turned in 2015.75, Wikipedia has been usurped as a political propaganda machine by the Deep State. Wikipedia circumvents the law because nobody really owns Wikipedia. They claim that all editors are anonymous, so you have to go to court to try to find out who is posting. Even their moderators, whom they call “SysOps,” are anonymous, which breeds secrecy and encourages fraud. They know they can do anything and cannot be sued, for you do not even know who they are — the ultimate propaganda machine (black box).

All of the intelligence agencies are participating. The only thing Wikipedia tracks is your IP, and that can be faked. After these anonymous people make 500 edits without proving that they are even qualified on the subject, they become an “Extended Confirmed User”  and can become an “administrator,” aka SysOps. Then this anonymous person can undo changes, block users, delete pages, and even edit pages that are supposed to be fully protected.’

The Deep State is attempting to control the narrative by controlling information accessible on the internet. In recent months, Wikipedia editors repeatedly attempted to remove the story on the murder of Iryna Zarutska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee. “Nothing is remarkable about this,” the editors at Wikipedia claim. Wikipedia was eager to cover the death of George Floyd and has enshrined his memory with a page that recognizes the global outrage that followed his death. The mainstream media has a particular agenda and selectively chooses what narratives it wants the masses to believe.

Musk’s alternative website could reform the internet and circumvent the digital information blackout.