Australian National Review – e-Safety Commissioner is standard player in dirty CIA-State Dept global surveillance operation – www.cairnsnews.org

By MICHAEL SLOVANOS
As Cairns News playfully suggested earlier this year, the CIA may regret not hiring Julie Inman Grant (née Inman) as a case manager after she graduated from university. After all, that talented young lady has managed to secure some of the best government connections in Big Tech and is now Australia’s e-Safety Commissioner.

The Courier Mail repeated the amusing little story at the time, with its own twist: “Australia’s top cyber watchdog has revealed she was almost a spy for the CIA, but insane restrictions on her job stopped her from taking the job.” Every other Australian media outlet in 2017 repeated this amusing little “side story” about the new e-commissioner.

It is no longer a secret that the CIA is embracing Big Tech and sending influential operatives to Big Tech. Some individual players have even been exposed online. Ms. Inman was apparently one of their leading female candidates, although realistically it is highly unlikely that she is a CIA agent. What she certainly is, is a CIA agent playing their global “anti-disinformation” (read: political censorship) tune.

Inman Grant is directly tied to the global political control and censorship operation through its ties to the World Economic Forum’s Global Coalition for Digital Safety and NGOs such as the Child Dignity Alliance and WeProtect Global Alliance, which, remarkably, have done extensive “work” in Brazil.

The latter country’s socialist government, reportedly elected in 2022, is engaged in a censorship war with Elon Musk’s X platform over Brazilians who believe there was electoral fraud. The government’s Voldemort-like Supreme Court justice, Alexandre de Moraes, has declared Musk, like his Australian leftist comrade Inman Grant, enemy number one. But the judge has gone even further, announcing a criminal investigation into Musk.

Moraes is demanding that Musk ban certain influential and dissident conservative Brazilians from the platform, but Musk says the demand violates Brazilian law. The targeted individuals include a pastor, a current lawmaker and the wife of a former lawmaker.

The government of President Lula da Silva also fabricated its version of the so-called American uprising of January 6 and, like Biden’s FBI, went after conservatives identified as part of that almost certainly provoked riot at the Brazilian Assembly. Jair Bolsonaro, the previous populist, pro-Trump president, has since faced concerted political persecution, along with his supporters. Tucker Carlson says it is a fact that the CIA was involved in the Brazilian election.

Bolsonaro has been banned from running for eight years by Brazil’s electoral court, after being found guilty of abusing the electoral process.

This week, Musk hit back, posting: “Mounting evidence suggests that fake judge @Alexandre engaged in serious, repeated, and intentional election interference in Brazil’s last presidential election. Under Brazilian law, that would carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. And I’m sorry to say, it appears some former Twitter employees were complicit in helping him do it.”

In response to Musk’s request for more information on the matter, a young English woman named Naomi Seibt (a Brazilian expat?) accused the judge of tracking down dissidents on X and illegally ordering the country’s electoral court to “file reports against individuals.” She said the government of socialist President Lula has banned questioning the previous election results because it is “misinformation.”

Here we see the ugly side of the global coalition that seeks not only to censor political speech, but also to control governments and corporations through the back door of the CIA, the US State Department, the British Foreign Office and EU bureaucrats.

It was Inman Grant’s office that filed a lawsuit against Musk in early 2023 when she issued a “non-periodic reporting notice,” also known as a transparency notice, under the Online Safety Act.

In September 2023, she issued an infringement notice threatening a staggering $610,500 fine when she initiated civil penalty proceedings in federal court for X’s alleged failure to comply with the non-periodic reporting notice. In an equally staggering display of bureaucratic extortion, further daily fines of $780,000 were threatened for non-payment.

Not surprisingly, X Corp did not pay the infringement notice and initiated a judicial investigation into eSafety’s reliance on the transparency notice and the provision of the service provider notice and the infringement notice. Inman Grant eventually dropped the case in the Federal Court.

Earlier this year, she went to war with Musk again over her refusal to remove the widely circulated video clip of the stabbing of Bishop Mar Mari and another alleged “online violation” of allowing a Canadian child protection lawyer to criticize the vile and disgusting antics of a transgender activist. She also went after a young Melbourne woman for simply criticizing a Melbourne primary school for setting up a gay club.

These actions alone demonstrate the eCommissioner’s nasty, cultural Marxist political bent. Her own government biography boasts: “Under her leadership, eSafety has joined forces with the White House Gender Policy Council and the government of Denmark in the Global Partnership for Action on Gender-Based Harassment and Abuse.”

Inman Grant, probably not coincidentally, worked at Twitter in 2014-16 as Asia-Pacific public affairs manager. After Trump’s election, the platform went on a censorship rampage, suspending or banning more than 62,000 accounts. They even banned Trump’s account and other hugely popular accounts, such as Andrew Tate’s.

Inman Grant went to her ABC friends last June to whine about the reinstatement of 62,000 accounts, including, shockingly, Tate’s. “These aren’t just your average Twitter account holders — we’ve got Andrew Tate back,” she said. Tut, tut, imagine this, a masculine ring fighter getting a public platform!

This woman, corporate ladder climber that she is, also embodies the brainwashed Anglo-American left-wing university graduates who plague the institutions of Washington and beyond in the global corporate world. Davos is their holy city of annual pilgrimage where they kiss the feet of the global moneyed elite.

The so-called Inman Grant Transparency Notice of 2023 – in reality a bureaucratic tool to exert control and censorship over social media platforms – required information about how Musk’s team was meeting the eSafety “Basic Online Safety Expectations” regarding child sexual exploitation and abuse material and activities on the platform (later renamed “X”).

In fact, Inman Grant was instrumental in implementing the early attack by globalist forces on free speech platforms. Former State Department official Mike Benz, in an interview with Tucker Carlson on this site, described the State Department’s Global Engagement Center as “the main censorship artery of the State Department” and one that now “works with a million of these censorship NGOs.”

Benz said the State Department’s policy had changed from “exporting the First Amendment,” that is, promoting free speech worldwide, to censorship. The change occurred under State Department Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs director and former Time editor Richard Stengel, a Jewish “liberal” who put Barack Obama on the cover of Time magazine 14 times in 2008, including as Person of the Year.

Benz notes that when Donald Trump was elected in 2016, Stengel wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post that “essentially called for an end to the First Amendment.” Stengel, the globalist, was apparently alarmed by this sudden rise of an American nationalist President Trump. Carlson noted that Stengel published a book advocating the same idea of ​​free speech controls.

“What I’m saying is that the free speech absolutist who was responsible for the projection of free speech by the US government needed only one election to completely destroy the entire diplomatic architecture on which this principle of free speech was based.”

Benz went on to describe how the State Department blamed freedom of speech for the loss of the 2016 Philippine election and the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom. “This is why the U.S. State Department is funding so many London-based NGOs and university centers and influence operations to stop Nigel Farage and the Brexit movement. It was blamed for the rise of Trump in 2016, it was blamed for the rise of Bolsanaro (of Brazil), it was blamed for the rise of Modi in India.”

Benz says the rise of independent media and citizen journalists on the internet in one country after another has severely challenged the role of US-backed media and effectively caused the State Department to lose control over those countries. (We suspect this has not yet happened in Australia.)

“And what happened after 2016 was that the technology and the networks were put in place to add a new toolkit to American diplomacy, which is diplomacy by censorship. And we have formal government programs at the State Department that are aimed at persuading foreign countries to pass domestic censorship laws to stop the rise of right-wing populist parties in those countries.”

So whether intentionally or accidentally, the Australian eSafety Commissioner was appointed early on to launch the so-called global campaign against disinformation. In reality, this is a global campaign against free speech and anti-globalist, right-wing/conservative populist movements and governments.

But the globalists are becoming increasingly desperate, hence the arrest of Telegram’s Pavel Durov and the attempted assassination of Trump in Butler Pennsylvania. There is also the tyrannical British Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer who is waging a campaign of judicial terror against British workers angry about unrestricted immigration. Starmer is also jailing people for ‘racist’ comments on social media.