JC

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@theTiser Go ahead China protect your local farmers, who the hell wants Chinese beef. Keep the good Aussie stuff here at a fair low price!

[Sall Grover @salltweets]

“In a free society, people can believe whatever they want. If you want to believe men can be women or you’re a man who wants to call himself a woman, that is your business. What you cannot do in a free society is force anyone else to accept it. What is at stake here is the ability to lawfully acknowledge reality.

If you care so much about “trans rights” you can work out a way to get them without destroying the category of women in law, female spaces, sport, services, the entire reality of lesbianism, and punishing citizens for acknowledging reality. The fact that you haven’t even tried makes it appear that destroying the rights of women is the goal.

Any politician who will look an Australian citizen in the eye and tell them that a man can be a woman is admitting that they will lie about anything and everything because the most obvious lie has already been told.

If no one in this room can acknowledge reality and fix an obvious problem you are either malicious or incompetent. The days of dismissing this issue are over. This is not a culture war. It’s reality.”

- my words, read by Alison Penfold MP, in parliament today.

Contact politicians are tell them to BACK THE BILL - “Sex Discrimination Amendment- sex based rights bill 2026”

[Sall Grover @salltweets]

** An open letter to @AlboMP **

Dear Prime Minister Albanese,

Let’s get one thing clear: women are adult human females. You know it, I know it, you even said it in the lead up to the last election when asked “what is a woman” by Piers Morgan.

But we have a big problem.

I’m sure you have heard, last week, the Federal Court delivered its judgment in Giggle v Tickle, the “what is a woman” legal case that has been fighting in federal court for the past four years. To put it very simply, there are two sides to this case: women, adult human females, who want to ensure that woman is a single-sex category in law and women & girls have access to single sex spaces. The other side, which includes your human rights commission, insists that men who claim to be women are women in the eyes of the law. The full Federal Court sided with the man who claims to be a woman. Yes. A male won the “what is a woman” court case. Giggle v Tickle has turned Australia into an international laughing stock.

This decision is seismic. It means women cannot run women-only businesses for women. It confirms that the ordinary meaning of sex has been twisted beyond recognition. It means men can be women in law. The Australian Human Rights Commission, captured by ideology, has weaponised the sex discrimination act against women, the very demographic it was enacted to protect. They’ve even argued in court that men who claim to be women need pregnancy protections. They’ve pushed the view that sex is a spectrum, changeable, and that anyone objecting is the bigot. Is this something you agree with? Do you, Mr Prime Minister, think men need pregnancy protections in the law?

And there are real-world stakes here: Girls at school are holding their bladders all day, refusing to drink water, because boys who claim to be girls are in their bathrooms and they don’t want them there. Women prisoners are locked in cells with male sex offenders who simply “identify” as women. Female athletes are losing podiums, matches and safety. This isn’t inclusion - it’s the demise of women’s rights.

Prime Minister, some of your ministers say, “we need to protect trans rights”. With all due respect, sir, your government can protect so called trans rights without stripping rights from women and girls. Every other citizen manages to exist without demanding access to the opposite sex’s protected spaces. Why not try to get “trans rights” without destroying the rights of women and girls? Have you ever even tried? 

The fact that Labor hasn’t even mentioned Giggle v Tickle and women’s rights - while Liberals, Nationals, and One Nation politicians speak out - tells us everything. This week has been silence from the Labor Party. No trans visibility day parades on this one. No pride posts. Why? What don’t you want Australians to know?

You boast about your 50 per cent women in cabinet. Good for you - you can accurately recognise what a woman is when it suits you. But the rest of us aren’t allowed to without fear of punishment. And can I ask, if you filled that cabinet with 50 per cent trans women, would you still call it equality between men and women? Think about that.

While the UK, the United States and even New Zealand are waking up, rolling back the nonsense and restoring sanity and realizing that gender ideology is a failed experiment, your government is turning Australia into the laughing stock of the world. “Giggle v Tickle” isn’t just a punchline overseas - it’s proof Australia is upside down.

I want to tell you something really important: If you will lie about something as obvious as men being women, we can assume you will look us in the eye and lie about everything. 

Tell the truth. Fix the Sex Discrimination Act. Reinstate clear biological, accurate definitions of man and woman. Protect women, girls and single-sex spaces. Actually do something.

Because, at the moment, Mister Prime Minister, I’m doing your job for you.

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@CalTwomey

[John Larter @JohnLarter000]

I’ve just been advised by an RAAF whistleblower that @AlboMP and his disgraceful government have allegedly just cancelled 205 ceremonial flights to commemorate ANZAC day to save fuel. The same entitled grubs that just flew the RAAF 737 with its Italian marble, carpets and French wines to Singapore and beyond to secure one day worth of fuel. The same government that a fortnight ago turned back a Qantas plane mid flight because it was going to land outside the curfew in Adelaide. They burn about 2400kg an hour. Then had to put everyone up in motels. The same government that doesn’t want to politicise the treatment of our veterans and support BRS. The same government that’s letting Gina Reinhardt do the heavy lifting keeping veterans housed, clothed and fed. They couldn’t run a hot bath. The Governor General should sack the lot of them. Lest we Forget

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@ALeighMP A couple of really good policies there.
“One Nation, One Nation, we’ve got the guts to say what you’re thinking”

[Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼 @DrewPavlou]

NDIS EXPOSED: Massive 52 minute investigation with @PeteZogoulas into Australia's immense disability fraud crisis.

This is Minnesota on a national scale. The NDIS budget - now approaching $50 billion a year - is closing in on Australia's entire military budget, and there is so much fraud in the system that the official government regulator told the Australian Senate there are not enough judges in Australia to try all known cases of fraud. The entire Australian legal system would collapse if they tried.

Up to 99% of alleged NDIS fraud goes unprosecuted. Out of over 7,000 tip-offs alleging fraud in the March quarter of 2025, just 16 cases (0.22%) were prosecuted.

So alleged scammers don't even bother to hide abuse.

To give you just one example: we visited a West Sydney NDIS provider operating out of the exact same address as a previous NDIS business the Australian government shut down for fraud four months ago. They were using the same accountant and THE EXACT SAME PHONE NUMBERS!

When we confronted them on camera, the owners physically assaulted us, smashed $800 worth of @PeteZogoulas's equipment, and staff screamed "RETARD" at us.

These people work in disability care.

Very legitimate and professional disability service business.

Watch the whole thing now. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Celine against The Machine @celinevmachine_]

A win for free speech, a win for parental rights, and a win for Australia.

🫡🇦🇺♥️

[Cafe Locked Out @cafelockedout]

We were in Freemantle when Alex entered our bus and shared her story.

Following this, the ABC did a 'hit piece' on her.

Following that, we invited Alex back on to let her speak freely, and the next day, Facebook shut down Cafe Locked Outs main facebook page with over 100,000 followers, giving us a 3649 day restriction.

So what did she claim that was so dangerous to them?

Michael

[Australian Lobby Group @AusLobby]

https://t.co/nmnojLns9u

[Rational Aussie @rationalaussie]

This is genuinely unbelievably dangerous, and I'd like to explicitly make it clear to everyone exactly why.

If this Bill passes, Australia is an autocracy, not a democracy.

Under this Bill, the AFP Minister can designate an organisation as a prohibited hate group based on past conduct, including past online statements.

Once designated, membership or support of that group becomes criminal going forward.

Section 80.2BF(7) defines "engages in conduct in a public place" to include "communicating through social media and other electronic methods".

The bill also explicitly states it's "irrelevant whether hatred actually occurs or whether anyone truly felt fear" (s80.2BF(3)).

WTAF.

What clown world bullshit is this?

It gets worse:

No procedural fairness is required before the Minister makes these decisions (s114A.4(5)).

Again, WTAF.

Do people understand what this means?

You can be unilaterally declared a hate group from past tweets, then have future tweets designated as hate, even if they don't cause any actual fear, and THE MINISTER ALONE CAN DECIDE THIS.

WTF.

This is completely undemocratic.

Anyone who supports this does not believe in the rule of law, does not believe in the Westminster system of government, does not believe in anything our ancestors have fought and died for.

It's a fucking disgrace, to say the least.

And they are rushing this bullshit through with 2 days of submissions for review.

This is absolutely outrageous behaviour by a government that has continually shown it does not respect Australian citizens nor the rule of law.

It is autocratic in every respect.

[Fusilier @firstfusilier]

She’s not wrong

[Senator Matt Canavan @mattjcan]

This evening I have read the Government's proposed antisemitism, hate and extremism laws. The proposed laws are undemocratic, unconstitutional and so vague that they could easily be used to unjustly silence legitimate criticism of government policy.

I can not support these laws.

We do not need new laws like this to defeat the radical Islamist extremism that have killed Australians. We already have laws against inciting violence. They should be enforced.

These proposed laws were only released today and the Government plans to force them through Parliament in just a week. Labor is giving people just three days to comment on the laws. It is a mockery of our democratic process.

I have written an article for CQToday on why I oppose the laws. This would normally print on Saturday but I am publishing it below so people can read now because of the truncated legislative process.

---

In 1950, the Menzies Government introduced laws to ban the Australian Communist Party. Prime Minister Menzies told the Parliament that communists must be banned because they had "perfected the technique" of "peace demonstrations ... not to promote peace but to prevent or impair defence preparations in the democracies."

The Parliament voted for the laws but the High Court struck them down as unconstitutional and the Australian Communist Party was allowed to continue.

Just like the 1950s, politicians are seeking to pass draconian and unconstitutional laws so they can be seen to be doing something about an ideological threat. The last few years have seen mass protests to "Free Palestine". Some of these protestors have expressed repulsive views. Some blame these protests for creating the fertile ground upon which the tragic Bondi attacks occurred.

Next week the Australian Parliament is being recalled to pass laws against "antisemitism, hate and extremism". Politicians are once again acting under the delusion that we can defeat ideas (even repulsive ones) by criminalising them. Just like the Menzies Government's attempts in the 1950s, it is the wrong approach.

The Government's laws provide unprecedented powers to the government to control the speech and communication of the Australian people. The laws define a "hate crime". A hate crime can be anything that causes, or would cause, "serious harm to a person" based on conduct that targeted a person's "race or national or ethnic origin".

Groups that are suspected of conducting such hate crimes can be banned.

People that "promote or incite hatred of another person ... because of [their] race, colour or national or ethnic origin" can face five years in jail if their speech causes someone "to be intimidated". The law says that it is "immaterial wheter ... the conduct actually results in any person feeling intimidated."

The proposed laws are so vague that a wide variety of legitimate political communication could be banned.

The current government is facing significant criticism of its immigration policies that have allowed 1.3 million migrants into Australia in just three years. I have argued that we should not take so many people in from countries that have different cultures and customs than us so quickly. We must make sure people that do move here adopt our values and lifestyles. Taking in so many people so quickly simply overwhelms our ability to assimilate people while maintaining a harmonious country.

My argument against mass migration could easily fall foul of the above definitions because what makes someone "intimidated" is left vague and undefined. The proposed laws provide no protections for political communication which is a right due to all Australians under the Australian Constitution.

These laws could easily become a trojan horse to silence criticism of politicians, not to protect people from hate. It should never be a crime in a democracy (let alone in Australia) to express hate towards politicians.

The laws also allow authorities to tap your phones if they suspect you of committing hate crimes. The laws are retrospective so that even things done before the laws come into effect can be deemed hate crimes.

The Australian Government would rely on an international agreement against racism as the basis on which it has the power to pass these laws.

Just because a politician says something is racist does not make it so. As Justice Fullagar said in striking down Menzies attempt to ban the Communist Party:

> A power to make laws with respect to lighthouses does not authorize the making of a law with respect to anything which is, in the opinion of the law-maker, a lighthouse.

The Government's proposed laws are not about outlawing hate against other persons, they are aimed at outlawing criticism of governments.

We defeated communism not by passing laws but by pointing out how silly a dictatorship of the proletariat was.

We should heed that lesson to defeat the radical Islamic ideology that inspired the murder of 15 innocent Jewish Australians last year. We already have laws that make it illegal to promote violence. They should be enforced instead of passing new laws that restrict the free speech of all Australians and not tackle the division that we have unnecessarily imported into Australia.

[Miss Madeleine @MadsMelbourne]

What kind of totalitarian shit is this!?

The new Hate Speech Bill literally states that ‘no procedural fairness is required’ for the AFP Minster to decide you have engaged in a hate crime.

No procedural fairness?! No justice?! No investigation ?!

Just whatever the bias government Minster decides

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@DrewPavlou Might just have to be very particular about how a post is made.
Start it by labelling it Religious Discussion.
Then quote a section of the religious text.
Then criticise the text with your interpretation and how society should respond.
That surely is staying within their rules

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@AFL This mob take players from all over the league (well done by them) but then they want the world when they don’t pay their own players who are out of contract. Starcevich is a free agent, if he moves as one Lions get no compo as they are bringing in 2 free agents. Take the pick 23

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@CalTwomey @AFLcomau We knew this 2 days ago. Crows told Petracca we are only willing to give up some picks, no best 22 players and that Melbourne might be difficult to trade with.
He went with the option who was willing to pay over the market price.

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@traderadio Victorian fools. We wouldn’t even do Rachele straight for Petracca

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@tommorris32 @FootyonNine @9NewsMelb @1116sen Boooooooo
Hope all who are virtue signaling especially those in the media call out every single club’s supporters that boo Rankine when he comes back.
Plus Collingwood, don’t you ever forget what you did to Adam Goodes!

[JC @CreepingDeath16]

@1395FIVEAA @FIVEAABreakfast Booooooooooooo