Call us: (07) 5530 2860
Select Page


by Robyn Chuter

Not just for my Aussie subscribers; this is a blueprint for how the land-grab/reparations game will be played, all over the world.

Back in 1999, Australians were required to vote in a referendum (plebiscite) to amend the country’s Constitution, to change the model of government from a constitutional monarchy to a republic. Although there was widespread electoral support for Australia becoming a republic, the proposal was comprehensively rejected, largely because the model stipulated that the President would be appointed by Parliament, not by popular vote.

Before the referendum, each household was sent a comprehensive 38-page document by the Australian Electoral Commission, which laid out the arguments both for and against the proposal. The ‘yes’ and ‘no’ cases were given equal space, to ensure that voters could make a fully-informed decision in line with their own principles and values.

In stark contrast, the Australian government is using taxpayer money to blitzkrieg the public with a relentless propaganda campaign that only presents the ‘yes’ case for the upcoming referendum on amending the Constitution “to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia through an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice enshrined in our Constitution”.

The 8-pageinformation booklet prepared by the government gives no details about how the proposed Voice would actually function, how much it will cost, how Members of the Voice would be appointed, how long their terms would be, or any other important details.

Read More


Our non-Australian readers may not realise this, but our Prime Minister is asking Australians to vote on a new bureaucratic apparatus to be inserted into our Constitution.

It will be called “The Voice to Parliament” and is intended to be staffed by Aboriginal Australians who will “advise” politicians in areas which affect Aboriginals (which means just about everything if you think about it).

Lots of people have commented on this proposal so far and made some very valid criticisms.

Read More


by Robyn Chuter

The ‘Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation’ bill is an attack on the fundamental principles of democracy. Have your say, before it’s too late.

As I hope all my Australian readers already know, a bill is currently before the Australian parliament to grant the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) “powers to combat misinformation and disinformation” that “is reasonably likely to cause or contribute to serious harm” on digital platform services, including social media and video sharing sites.

It won’t shock you to learn that the bill leaves the definitions of ‘misinformation’, ‘disinformation’ and ‘harm’ intentionally vague, giving the government, via ACMA, maximum latitude to classify anything that opposes its own policies as harmful mis- or disinformation, and to demand that the platform take it down on pain of huge financial penalties.

Substack, which has become my principal platform for disseminating evidence-based information on health, falls within ACMA’s definition of a digital platform service. If this bill is passed, anything that I write which contradicts the government’s preferred narrative is at risk of being classified as harmful mis- or disinformation. And that means that you won’t be allowed to read it, because the government doesn’t trust you to consult a variety of sources, and then decide for yourself what you believe, and what actions you will take as a consequence.

Read More