Tag: australia

Australian government open to sending troops to Ukraine as U.S. pulls the plug

Anthony Albanese has reaffirmed Australia’s support for Ukraine, saying his government is open to considering sending troops if requested, despite the U.S. pulling the plug on military aid.

It comes as U.S. President Donald Trump has made clear his intent to secure a ceasefire in Ukraine, to end the bloodshed and negotiate a peace deal.

“What they’re fighting for is the international rule of law (and) Australia stands ready to assist,” Albanese told media in Sydney.

“There’s discussion at the moment about potential peacekeeping, and from my government’s perspective, we’re open to consideration of any proposals going forward, as Australia has historically played an important role in a range of peacekeeping areas.

“We want to see peace in Ukraine, but we want to make sure the illegal, immoral actions of Russia are not rewarded, and that Vladimir Putin and his designs, which are imperialistic, are not rewarded or encouraged.

“But we’ve worked with the United Kingdom and we’ll continue to do that as well and with European partners and look at the best way in which we can provide support.”

Australia has provided more than $1.5 billion in aid to Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion more than three years ago. The Coalition has also reaffirmed its commitment to supporting Kyiv.

Keep reading

Australian Spy Agency Collected “Signals Intelligence” On China COVID Origins: Former State Department Investigator

David Asher, a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and the lead investigator of the State Department’s Covid-19 origins investigation during President Trump’s first term, appeared on Sky News on Tuesday. Asher disclosed that Australian spy agencies had previously collected signals intelligence concerning the origins of the virus in Wuhan, China. 

What Asher means by signals intelligence is the interception of voice, text, and other communications (e.g., phone calls, emails, and radio transmissions). Australian spy agencies conducted much of this in Asia, which the CIA later obtained. 

“I never thought the intel picture based on human intelligence, which is what the CIA has, but it was reasonably clear based on the reactions of senior Chinese leaders that something terrible had gone wrong inside Wuhan, specifically inside the Wuhan Institute of Urology and perhaps also the Wuhan University and the CDC … they shared certain programs together,” Asher told Sky News host Sharri Markson. 

He said, “I think there will be much more coming out – with CIA Director John Ratcliffe – who you interviewed previously – is adamant about declassifying information or releasing information that is already declassified. There is going to be signals intelligence and how much of that makes its way out – just trust me – there was a lot of it.” 

Sky News Markson asked Asher: “What do you mean by signals intelligence that hasn’t come out yet?” 

“Just picking up phone calls, picking up the emails, things like that … just messages between different people, I can’t comment on what they are, but it’s no secret we do this. Much of our collection is actually done in Australia, as you know,” Asher responded. 

He continued: “So your government is fully aware, which is another reason why they are really puzzled and dismayed that the Australian government, which has the same information … as we do, has been so passive, especially given the fact that your Prime Minister originally came out and said that we had to have an investigation.”

“It’s just sort of pathetic if you ask me,” Asher noted, who was referring to Western governments burying the Covid lab leak theory during the Biden-Harris administration. 

Asher’s interview with the Australian media outlet came shortly after the CIA released an assessment identifying the Wuhan lab as the most likely origin of Covid. It only took a change in administration for this conclusion to be made public. Our view is that the CIA knew all along – with high confidence – about lab origins. Meanwhile, former FBI Director Christopher Wray stated in 2023 that the virus “most likely” originated from the Wuhan lab.

Yet during President Biden’s first term, the radical leftists in the administration deployed the taxpayer-funded censorship blob to combat lab origins and maintain the official gov’t narrative that Covid originated naturally. 

Keep reading

Song About Fauci and Genocide Gets COVID-19 Doctor Turned Musician Cancelled

An Australian medical doctor who worked on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemeic, who later turned to become a rising musician, Iyah May, recently released the 2024 political version of Billy Joel’s 1989, “We Didn’t Start the Fire,” entitled Karmaggedon. She was fired by her manager and record label for not changing the lyrics of her controversial song which accurately and truthfully depict today’s state of society.

Per the Iyah May’s website, “The song doesn’t shy away from addressing the pandemic narrative, corruption within political, pharmaceutical, and health institutions, the Israel-Palestine conflict, violence against women and the social chaos that has swept through the world in the past few years.”

“Fuelled by my own despair over a divided world and deceitful corporations, I channelled my frustration into Karmageddon. My career as a doctor has been greatly impacted, and I was affected on a deep and personal level,” states Iyah May.

Keep reading

VICTORY: Dr William Bay wins doctors’ right to criticise covid gene-vaccines

Friday marked the biggest victory yet for doctors against political persecution after the Queensland Supreme Court issued a scorching judgement against Australia’s medical regulators on Friday.

Queensland GP William Anicha Bay celebrated outside court after successfully overturning a politically motivated medical ban put on him for protesting against the covid gene-vaccines on safety grounds.

The Court did not enter into any debate about the safety of the controversial products but ruled only on whether the regulators’ decision or conduct was free from error.

The Medical Board of Australia suspended Dr Bay’s registration on August 17, 2022, less than three weeks after he accosted the Australian Medical Association (AMA) National Conference and asked the delegates to stop forcing the jabs on people in response to an infection where “there is only a 0.27 percent fatality rate”.

Dr Bay apologised for interrupting proceedings before saying the covid “vaccines” were killing people.

Keep reading

Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) Projects Are Foundering in Five-Eye Nations. What Gives?

Canada and Australia shelve plans for retail CBDCs while the US could soon become the first country to explicitly ban the central bank from issuing a CBDC.   

As we warned in May 2022, a financial revolution is quietly sweeping the world (or at least trying to) that has the potential to reconfigure the very nature of money, making it programmable, far more surveillable and centrally controlled. To quote Washington DC-based blogger and analyst NS Lyons, “if not deliberately and carefully constrained in advance by law,… CBDCs have the potential to become even more than a technocratic central planner’s dream. They could represent the single greatest expansion of totalitarian power in history.”

At the time of writing that post, around 90 countries and currency unions were in the process of exploring a CBDC, according to the Atlantic Council’s CBDC tracker. Today, just two and a half years later, that number has increased to 134, representing 98% of global GDP. Around 66 of those countries are in the advanced stage of exploration—development, pilot, or launch.

But they do not include the United States. In fact, the US is not just trailing most countries on CBDC development; it could soon become the first country to explicitly ban the central bank from issuing a CBDC, to the undisguised horror of certain think tanks.

“CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act.”

In May, the US House of Representatives passed HR 5403, also known as the “CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act.” The bill, first introduced in September 2023 and sponsored by US Senator Ted Cruz, proposes amendments to the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit the US Federal Reserve from issuing CBDCs. It also seeks to protect the right to financial privacy and prevent the U.S. government from “weaponizing their financial system against their own citizens.”

If passed, HR 5403 will prevent the Fed from:

  1. Offering products or services directly to individuals.
  2. Maintaining accounts on behalf of individuals.
  3. Issuing a central bank digital currency or any digital asset that is substantially similar under any other name or label directly to an individual.

To become law, the bill still needs to clear the Senate, which is by not means guaranteed. But it is likely to receive added impetus from a new Trump administration, assuming Trump wins the election and isn’t assassinated before taking office or thwarted by a colour revolution, as Lambert posited yesterday. In January, Trump announced, to thunderous applause, at a New Hampshire that as president, he would “never allow the creation of a central bank digital currency.” Such a currency, he said, “would give a federal government, our federal government, absolute control over your money.”

Even a Kamala Harris administration is unlikely to fast-track a digital dollar, with progress set to continue to lag other jurisdictions, according to an article in The Banker. US voters — particularly Republican ones — are increasingly aware — and wary — of the threat posed by CBDCs, as demonstrated by the crowd’s reaction to Trump’s announcement. This, if nothing else, stands as testament to the power of social and independent media, and goes a long way to explaining why governments across the West are trying desperately to muzzle them.

Keep reading

THE LAST KING? Britain’s Charles III Will Not Oppose Australia Becoming a Republic, as the Future of the Windsor Monarchy Appears Uncertain

Many feared (or hoped) that when the late Queen Elisabeth passed away, the British Monarchy of the Windsor dynasty would have its days numbered.

And in many ways, these ‘worst-case scenario’ fears (other people’s hopes) seem to have become an actual possible outcome, as the relentless infighting in the Royal family and the apparent lack of relevance of their work to the present-day reality of Britain are a constant object of debate.

Now, reports arise that ailing King Charles has stated that ‘he will not stand in the way’ if Australia wishes to replace him as the country’s head of state.

Ahead of his visit down under later this month, the Monarch is said to be adopting a soft, ‘anti-confrontational approach’ to the Australian republican campaigners.

“In response to the Australian Republican Movement’s (ARM) request for a meeting with the monarch, the king’s assistant private secretary is understood to have emphasized his ‘deep love and affection’ for Australia.

Nathan Ross reportedly told the anti-monarchists: ‘His majesty, as a constitutional monarch, acts on the advice of his ministers and whether Australia becomes a republic is, therefore, a matter for the Australian public to decide’.

The ARM says it is ‘the peak body advocating on behalf of the Australian people for an Australian republic with an Australian as our head of state’. Australia held a referendum in 1999 on the issue of becoming a republic, in which 54.9% voted against.”

Keep reading

Don’t Let the ‘Infaux Thugs’ Close Down Debate

Today’s censors wield cudgels with the word ‘information.’ Content they don’t like they call ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation.’ The justification is fake. The protection is faux protection. Pretending to protect people from bad information by means of censorship may be called infaux thuggery.

The cudgels are hidden, of course, but it is not hard to see through the pretence and discern the underlying message: knuckle under or we will hurt you.

The UK’s Online Safety Act exemplifies infaux thuggery, as does Brazil’s recent action against X (formerly Twitter). The Australian government is dominated by another gang of infaux thugs. The UK, sadly, not only practices infaux thuggery at home, it tutors the world in infaux thuggery.

The same goes for where I live, the United States. Kamala Harris threatens: ‘If you act as a megaphone for misinformation… we are going to hold you accountable.’ Hillary Clinton calls for criminalization of speech not to her liking. Harris’ running mate Tim Walz threatens: ‘There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation and hate speech.’

Thankfully, that’s not true, at least in the US. As Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. responded, the US Constitution ‘is exactly what prevents the government from stifling dissent by labeling something “hate speech” or “misinformation.”’ Alarmingly, former Secretary of State John Kerry recently lamented that the First Amendment ‘stands as a major block to…hammer it [“disinformation”] out of existence,’ and implied that that ‘is part of what this race, this election is all about.’

Of course, malicious actors, including enemy states, may spread lies to sow discord – especially online. So too can those who are simply ill-informed. Yet in the absence of censorship, big lies will be torn to shreds. In this battle, the infaux thugs are on the wrong side.

The infaux thugs use ‘information’ to confuse matters. The content they suppress is more aptly termed narratives, interpretations, opinions or judgments. Those terms are more capacious, befitting frank and open debate and controversy.

In their hostility to open debate, the infaux thugs are mounting an attack on modern civilisation. They evoke our crude instincts from pre-modern life, instincts for a small, simple society, in which the leader’s narrative must be believed by all and enforced upon the members of the band. If you don’t share the leader’s narrative, you are a miscreant. You are to be corrected, expelled or destroyed. At the very least, you are to shut up.

Keep reading

Scientists Say “Substantial Risk” of Cancer from mRNA Vaccines

The Australian Government should immediately suspend the use of Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines due to accumulating evidence of high levels of synthetic DNA contamination in the shots.

which present a “substantial risk” of genomic integration and long-term health impacts, including cancers, say leading scientists and academics.

In a letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Russell Broadbent, independent MP for the federal seat of Monash, said that “immediate action through a suspension of these products is critical to mitigate further risk”,.

After independent testing of Australian vials of modified RNA (mod-RNA) Covid vaccines detected residual synthetic DNA at levels up to 145 above the legal limit.

The letter, circulated to all Australian MPs and Senators, is co-signed by 52 scientists and academics, many at the top of their fields, including Professor of Oncology Angus Dalgleish.

Emeritus Professor Wendy Hoy, an expert in chronic disease, Emeritus Professor Robert Clancy, an immunologist who developed a bronchitis vaccine, geneticist Professor Alexandra Henrion Caude and microbiologist Professor Sucharit Bhakdi MD.

An accompanying science summary describes the concerns of Broadbent and co-signatories, who are asking the PM to adopt a “precautionary approach”, with the recommendation that “the Minister for Agriculture initiate a Biosecurity Import Risk Analysis of these products, potentially leading to the suspension of these products due to the risks they pose to human health”.

“Excessive synthetic foreign DNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles can integrate into human cells, potentially leading to genomic instability, cancers, immune system disruption and adverse hereditary effects,” explains the summary, which details the results of independent testing of the vaccines to date.

Residual synthetic DNA, a byproduct from the mod-RNA vaccine manufacturing process, is allowed under TGA regulations in levels of up to 10 nanograms (ng) per vaccine dose, a regulatory limit that was set for traditional vaccines and was not amended for mod-RNA products using lipid nanoparticles (LNPs).

The summary goes on to explain why the LNP packaging of residual synthetic DNA makes these products different to traditional vaccines that may contain “naked” residual DNA.

“Crucially, naked DNA has no ability to cross cell membranes and enter cells. In contrast, synthetic DNA encapsulated in LNPs possesses a high transfection efficiency, meaning, the LNP-modDNA complexes are efficient at delivering synthetic DNA into human cells,” the summary states.

The summary cites research indicating that the presence of foreign DNA within the cell alone can induce cancer, but the risk is increased if the DNA enters the cell nucleus.

This can occur in dividing cells, and the presence of an SV40 enhancer sequence (in Pfizer only), which is “long known to assist entry into the nucleus, even when cells are not undergoing cell division”, increases the risk further.

Once synthetic DNA is inside the cell nucleus, genomic integration is possible, the summary explains.

Keep reading

The Australian Government Reboots the Misinformation Bill

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 12, “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 a Hunter Biden laptop. The story didn’t break publicly until October, so how did the Aspen Institute know two months in advance?

Keep reading

Proposed Australian plans for “energy efficient” homes will destroy private home ownership

The ClimateWorks Centre has devised a “renovation wave” plan for household upgrades and preparing occupants for more frequent extreme temperatures, heatwaves and climate-related events.

It is claimed that upgrading homes built before 2003 to be more energy efficient with better insulation, electrifying appliances and heating, and adopting rooftop solar can save Australian households up to $2,200 annually on energy bills. The majority of existing residences across Australia (11 million homes) can benefit from thermal efficiency upgrades, making a renovation wave a feasible and impactful initiative, so it is claimed.

It is also claimed that by designing or renovating homes to account for expected climate impacts, such as increasing temperatures and extreme heat events, can mitigate the effects of climate change.

ClimateWorks Centre’s report identifies 16 archetypes of homes that cover approximately 80% of single-storey detached homes and townhouses, and over 50% of apartments. These archetypes provide a framework for homeowners, policymakers, and industry stakeholders to prioritize renovation efforts.

By investing in climate-ready homes, Australia can create a more resilient and sustainable built environment, while also addressing the cost-of-living crisis and mitigating the impacts of climate change, so they say.

Keep reading