eSafety: Julie Inman Grant ‘dog whistle’ claims ploy to push legislative expansion. Concerns over US government ties discussed.
After flagrantly wasting taxpayer money seeking an outcome that any objective or legally minded person would know was doomed to fail, Julie Inman Grant played the victim, accusing Elon Musk of abusing his power resulting in her being subjected to death threats and doxxing.
Dropping her failed court claim against X, Imran Grant sought refuge with national broadcaster ABC and organised a press conference at Parliament, lobbying for support from the government, which unsurprisingly she garnered. Paul Dutton, leader of the opposition Liberal Party, offered his full support to eSafety, despite reinforcing concerns about a uniparty government.
Due Process International founder and expert witness, Radha Stirling, has opposed the proposed eSafety expansion as a dangerous and authoritarian risk to the population. Stirling wrote a detailed response to the government’s request for public consultation and has expressed concerns over the escalation of government endeavours to censor public debate and freedom of expression.
Stirling has also expressed concerns about Inman Grant’s objectivity given her ties to the US government. “Julie Inman Grant is a US citizen subject to US law even while abroad. The regulator has made no secret of her ties to the CIA and has been deliberately unclear when pushed on details pertaining to her communications with international agencies.
“When a US citizen who was headhunted by the CIA works with American politicians, Microsoft and Twitter during the days of partisan censorship & the Twitter Files, you can expect Australians to be deeply concerned about such a person wielding immense power over the private sector and individuals; Someone with the power to censor, fine and sanction those who oppose her decisions.
“Inman Grant has not been forthcoming when questioned on her communications with foreign agencies. In her prior positions, the Commissioner cooperated with US agencies for years before her appointment in Australia and there is no way that cooperation has stopped.
“Social media giants and their backdoor channels to government and intelligence agents have been well exposed over the past few years, but the exposure has normalised it and anyone who isn't cooperative, like X, becomes a target. The response towards Elon Musk by Australian politicians was disgraceful, branding him a narcissist and calling for him to be jailed because he wouldn’t adhere to an unlawful request from the “commissar”.
“Inman Grant intends to test the boundaries of her power and her failure against Elon Musk is being used by her department as evidence that her powers were insufficient to be able to override pre-existing law. She is now rallying support for overreaching authoritarian powers to be used against private companies and individuals as and when it suits.
“I urge Australians to fight against authorities seeking to change laws that protect the rights of citizens and the private sector against the government”.
