>>23968188
>>23968235
>>23968230
https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1998999152332779661
Australia’s Social Media Ban has failed
Thousands of U16’s took to social media to troll the Australian PM TikTok account having clearly found a way to circumvent the ban.
Australian senator Malcolm Roberts has gone viral after claiming the COVID-19 pandemic was “planned and globally coordinated decades in advance,” promising to “expose your global agenda.”
His comments echo broader allegations seen online throughout the pandemic era, though such claims have been repeatedly rejected by public-health agencies and independent experts. Supporters say Roberts is raising legitimate concerns about transparency and global decision-making, while critics warn the statements could amplify misinformation during a time when trust in institutions is already strained.
As his remarks circulate worldwide, the debate over pandemic planning, government authority, and international health coordination continues to intensify.
Global online forum Reddit is preparing to mount a high-stakes legal challenge to the Australian government’s world-first social media age limits, in a direct threat by a major tech company to one of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s headline policies.
The potential for a blockbuster legal showdown has emerged less than 24 hours before the Albanese government’s youth social media ban comes into effect on Wednesday.
The $US44 billion ($67 billion) technology platform has enlisted barrister Perry Herzfeld, SC, to run its case, backed by top-tier law firm Thomson Geer, according to two sources with knowledge of the challenge who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Reddit’s lawsuit, which could be lodged within days, is expected to be through the High Court of Australia, challenging the restrictions the social media ban imposes to teenagers’ implied right of freedom of political communication.
Herzfeld is a highly regarded silk and a top advocate on constitutional law. Thomson Geer, meanwhile, has repeatedly represented X (formerly Twitter) when challenging rulings by the eSafety Commissioner.
Reddit’s lawsuit would be the second challenge to the youth social media ban. The Digital Freedom Project, a campaign group led by NSW Libertarian Party MLC John Ruddick, lodged a case fronted by 15-year-olds Noah Jones and Macy Neyland with the High Court two weeks ago. It named the Commonwealth of Australia, eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman-Grant and Communications and Sport Minister Anika Wells as defendants.
The eSafety Karen Is Having a Rough Day
Australia’s online censorship regime hit unexpected resistance this week after a U.S. law firm flatly rejected an enforcement demand issued by eSafety Commissioner, triggering an international legal ripple that Canberra did not appear to anticipate. The response was not timid. It was surgical, humiliating, and copied directly to U.S. government officials.
The letter, authored by American attorney Preston Byrne, dismantled the jurisdictional reach of Australia’s eSafety regime in brutal terms. Byrne made it clear that his client is an American citizen, protected by the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, and not subject to enforcement threats issued by a foreign regulatory agency. He reminded Australian authorities that capital letters do not override international treaty law, nor do they replace formal Hague Convention procedures.
The tone of the response was scathing. Byrne compared Australia’s tactics unfavourably to those used by the UK’s Ofcom, which reportedly received similar treatment and legal pushback. He openly mocked the demand, published the correspondence publicly, and copied multiple U.S. government departments for visibility. The message was unmistakable. This was not a quiet compliance exercise. It was a jurisdictional collision.
The exchange exposed a deeper flaw in Australia’s expanding digital enforcement posture. Domestically, platforms face threats of penalties reportedly reaching into the tens of millions. Internationally, those same threats collapse on contact with constitutional law, sovereign limits, and treaty procedure. What works through regulation and intimidation at home does not travel well across borders.
For an agency built on the premise of control, visibility, and deterrence, this public rebuke cut deep. The optics were catastrophic. A regulator accustomed to silence and compliance was met instead with constitutional law, procedural law, and global scrutiny.
The eSafety Karen did not expect resistance. She got a masterclass instead.
https://rumble.com/v72vakq-why-are-we-defending-mass-murder-in-gaza-because-our-greatest-ally-demands-.html?e9s=src_v3_sa_o%2Csrc_v1_sa%2Csrc_v1_ucp_v
>>23968438