By MICHAEL SLOVANOS
AS Cairns News playfully suggested earlier this year, the CIA would be deeply regretting not enlisting Julie Inman Grant (nee Inman) as a case manager after she graduated from university. After all, that talented young lady went on to grab some of the top government relations jobs in Big Tech and is now the Australian e-Safety Commissioner.
The Courier Mail at the time repeated the neat little story with its own special spin: “Australia’s top cyber watchdog has revealed she was almost a spy for the CIA, but the insane job restrictions turned her off accepting the gig.” Every other Australian media outlet in 2017 repeated this neat little “side-story” about the new e-Commissioner.
It is now no secret that the CIA buys into and sends agents of influence into Big Tech. Some individual players have even been exposed online. Ms Inman, it appears, was one of their prime female candidates, although realistically she is highly unlikely to be a CIA operative. What she certainly is, is a CIA asset playing their global “anti-disinformation” (read political censorship) tune.
Inman Grant is directly linked to the global political control and censorship operation through her affiliation with the World Economic Forum’s Global Coalition for Digital Safety and NGOs such as the the Child Dignity Alliance and WeProtect Global Alliance, which, significantly, has done much “work” in Brazil.
The latter country’s socialist government, allegedly elected in 2022, has been in a censorship war with Elon Musk’s X platform over Brazilians who believe election fraud took place. The government’s Voldemort-like Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes, like his Australian leftist comrade Inman Grant, has made Musk Enemy No. 1. But the judge has gone further, announcing a criminal investigation into Musk.
Moraes demands that Musk ban certain influential and dissident conservative Brazilians from the platform, but Musk says the demand violates Brazilian law. Those targeted include a pastor, a current parliamentarian, and wife of a former parliamentarian.
President Lula da Silva’s government also manufactured its version of the so-called US January 6th Insurrection and like Biden’s FBI, went after conservatives identified as being part of that almost certainly provocateured 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’s a fact that the CIA was involved in the Brazilian election.
Bolsonaro has been banned by Brazil’s so-called Electoral Court from contesting an election for eight years, finding him guilty of abusing the electoral process.
This week, Musk hit back, posting “There is growing evidence that fake judge @Alexandre engaged in serious, repeated & deliberate election interference in Brazil’s last presidential election. Under Brazilian law, that would mean up to 20 years in prison. And, I’m sorry to say that it appears that some former Twitter employees were complicit in helping him do so.”
Posting in response to Musk’s request for more information on the matter, a young English woman named Naomi Seibt (expat Brazilian?) accused the judge of hunting down dissidents on X and illegally ordering the country’s Electoral Court to “file reports against individuals”. She said the socialist President Lula’s government has outlawed questioning the previous election result because it’s “misinformation”.
Here we see the ugly underbelly of the global coalition not only seeking to censor political speech but to control governments and corporations in through the backdoor organising work of the CIA, the US State Department the UK Foreign Office and EU bureaucrats.
It was Inman Grant’s office that early in 2023 launched lawfare against Musk when she issued a “non-periodic reporting notice”, aka transparency notice, under the Online Safety Act.
In September 2023 she issued an “infringement notice” with a staggering $610,500 fine when commencing civil penalty proceedings in the 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.
Unsurprisingly X Corp did not pay the infringement notice and sought a judicial review of eSafety’s reliance on the transparency notice and the giving of the service provider notification and the infringement notice. Inman Grant eventually dropped the Federal Court case.
Earlier this year she went to war against Musk again for refusing to take down the widely distributed video clip of the Bishop Mar Mari stabbing attack and another alleged “online offences” of allowing a Canadian child protection advocate to criticise the foul and disgusting antics of a transgender activist. She also went after a young Melbourne woman for merely criticising a Melbourne primary school for setting up a gay club.
These actions alone demonstrate the nasty, cultural Marxist political slant of the eCommissioner. Her own government bio brags: “Under her leadership, eSafety has joined forces with the White House Gender Policy Council and Government of Denmark on 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 spree, suspending or banning more than 62,000 accounts. They even banned Trump’s account and other hugely popular accounts such as that held by Andrew Tate.
Inman Grant went sooking to her ABC friends in June last year, whining that the 62,000 accounts had been reinstated, including, shock-horror, Tate’s. “These aren’t just garden-variety Twitter account holders — we’ve got Andrew Tate back on there,” she said. Tut, tut, fancy that, a ring fighter who champions masculinity being given a public platform!
This woman, the corporate ladder climber that she is, also epitomizes the brainwashed Anglo-American leftist university graduates who infest 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 money elite.
Inman Grant’s so-called 2023 transparency notice – in reality a bureaucratic tool to leverage control and censorship over social media platforms – required information about how Musk’s team was meeting the eSafety “Basic Online Safety Expectations” in relation to child sexual exploitation and abuse material and activity on the platform (subsequently renamed ‘X’).
In effect, what Inman Grant was doing was implementing the early-stage attack by globalist forces on free speech platforms. Former US State Department employee Mike Benz, in an interview with Tucker Carlson posted on this site, described the department’s Global Engagement Center as “the main censorship artery of the US State Department” and which now “works with a million of these censorship NGOs”.
Benz said State Department policy had changed from one of “exporting the First Amendment”, that is promoting free speech globally, to censorship. This change took place under State Department Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs boss and former Time managing 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 says when Donald Trump was elected in 2016 Stengel wrote an opinion piece in the Washington Post “practically calling for an end to the First Amendment”. Stengel, the globalist, was apparently spooked by this sudden rise of an American nationalist President Trump. Carlson noted that Stengel published a book advocating the same idea of controls on free speech.
“The point I’m making here is that the free-speech absolutist who was in charge of US government projection of free speech, all it took was one election for the entire diplomacy architecture that this principle of free speech was based on, to get completely bottomed out.”
Benz went on to describe how the State Department blamed free speech for the Philippines election loss in 2016 and for the UK’s Brexit vote. “This is why the US State Department funds 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 country after country has seriously challenged the role of USA-backed media and in effect the State Department had lost control of those countries. (We suggest this has not yet happened in Australia)
“And what happened after 2016 was that the technology and the networks were established to be able to add a new toolkit to American diplomacy, which is diplomacy by censorship. And we have formal government programs at the State Department dedicated to getting foreign countries to pass domestic censorship laws to stop the rise of right wing populist parties in those countries.”
So whether by design or accident, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner was in place at an early stage to launch the so-called global campaign against disinformation, which in reality 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 Pavel Durov of Telegram and the attempted assassination of Trump in Butler Pennsylvania. There is also Britain’s tyrant Labor PM Keir Starmer’s campaign of judicial terror against working class Britons angry about unrestricted immigration. Starmer is also jailing people for “racist” comments on social media.