TARGETING ONLINE PRIVACY TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN: "For the Good Of... Evil"
How Age-Assurance Technology to "protect the children" is truly intended to coerce the uptake of Digital ID, and to remove all online anonymity and user privacy.
“We are finding ourselves in a place where we have increasing polarisation everywhere, and everything feels binary, when it doesn’t need to be, so, I think we are going to have to think about a recalibration of a whole range of human rights that are playing out online, from freedom of speech, to the freedom to be free of online violence.”1 —Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, World Economic Forum in May 2022
On the morning of December 27th, 2025, Australians will receive a rude awakening. With phone in hand, the first coffee will be particularly pungent, and undoubtedly bitter. Amidst the myriad distractions of the Festive Season —a mere day after Boxing Day with most still languishing in post-Christmas excess— many will be jarred by what has transpired while they slept.
They will be forced to smell the coffee.
Unlike the proceeding days, from this day onward, every unique attempt to access Google or Bing search engines will require an age-assurance check —over, and over again.2 Biometric information will be scrutinised, verified and tracked to permit online access.3
All anonymity, erased.
No Australian wanted this.
By this deadline, both Google and Microsoft (and soon all alternative search engines, and beyond4) must impose some form of “age-assurance technology” on all users when they sign-in, or incur fines approximating $50-million per breach.5
The onus has been placed upon the various Big Tech platforms to “take reasonable measures” to comply; however, this will all be redirected to impose compliance upon each individual user.
The notion that this was independently enacted by the Australian Government to “counter harms,” or to proactively impose reform upon an otherwise recalcitrant Big Tech industry is pure fiction. The proposed fines are as preposterous as they are fictitious —Big Tech wanted and directed this.
Emboldened by the Social Media Minimum Age Bill, a further nine Industry Codes were regulated in June
Without any Parliamentary oversight and exempt from public discourse, this new Industry Code (mandating age-assurance for Search Engines) was quietly registered in June, 2025.6 It is one of nine new Industry Codes7 added to the Online Safety Act to ostensibly “keep children safe.”
Each Industry Code represents a further augmentation of the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) of our Federal Government and supranational Big Tech Corporations helmed by oligarchical billionaires. At the apex, they are indivisible: our Government has been purchased at their employ. Truly operating in synergy, they are pursuing their shared objective of installing a permanent digital-control grid that will enable mass data-harvesting, and absolute surveillance of all.
The overarching objective: Full Spectrum Dominance over every aspect of human life.
Julie Inman Grant: The WEF “Agenda Contributor”
Our Australian eSafety Commissioner, the American-born Julie Inman Grant, unilaterally passed these new Industry Code regulations on behalf of twenty-seven million Australians.8 Shamelessly listed as an “Agenda Contributor”9 on the official World Economic Forum’s website, this unelected bureaucrat is rapidly assembling the infrastructure of a Digital Surveillance State.
In truth, Julie Inman Grant is merely a regional node in the global Beast System. She has been activated to fulfill her role in lockstep with other countries (especially The United Kingdom,10 France,11 Canada,12 New Zealand,13 Denmark,14 Norway15 and bizarrely Papa New Guinea,16 with others soon to follow) as they each accelerate online censorship, and control. All that has been done in this regard, has been done at the behest of Geneva-based Technocrats. A Globalist Cabal is impatiently attempting to materialise the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Dark Age of Transhumanism that it ushers: perpetual digital enslavement for all humanity.
The Under-16s Social Media Ban and imposing Age-Assurance checks
Seventeen days earlier, on December the 10th, the legislation for the “world-first” Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age)17 will have taken effect.
Lauded as a much needed intervention to “protect children from an assortment of online harms,” the true purpose of the Social Media Minimum Age Bill was always nefarious.
The stated agenda is to protect children from accessing “pornography, high-impact violence, material promoting eating disorder and a range of other content,” especially “misinformation.” Our captured legacy media has portrayed this as “noble” and “innovative,” and perhaps a template to be adopted across all Western-democracies.
It is all a WEF-engineered assault on free-speech and online anonymity.
The true objective is to systematically erode free-speech, censor, impose self-censorship, nullify Social Media channels of dissent, and to isolate, police and punish “problematic” individuals by harvesting user-specific incriminating data.
Passed in November, 2024, the Social Media Ban was suppose to comprise one-half of a two-pronged assault on the freedom of all Australians to liberally engage, post, and share content online. The second-half was contained in the now abandoned legislation of the flagrantly authoritarian Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill.18
The two-prong assault was conceived as follows:
Firstly, The Social Media Minimum Age Bill would remove all online anonymity from Australian Social Media accounts, forcing the identity and activity of all users to be exposed, recorded and scrutinised by the Government.
Secondly, The Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill would isolate those who disseminate truth and challenge the propaganda of the Official Narratives, banning accounts, blacklisting dissidents, and potentially exacting punitive measures upon repeat offenders.
Once they know who you are, they will know who to punish.
In combination, the synergetic effect of both Bills would have instilled a paranoic attitude toward the online questioning of all Official Government Narratives (Climate Crisis, Net Zero, The Voice to Parliament, Progressivism, Transgenderism and child mutilation, COVID measures, etc), and would effectively suppress any Social Media discourse that might offer “binary” opinions, or “polarised” view points: basically, restricting the communication of truth to preserve their propagandised lies. This would compel an atmosphere of self-censorship amidst the unending external censorship efforts by algorithms —forced compliance, narrative control.
“We are finding ourselves in a place where we have increasing polarisation everywhere, and everything feels binary, when it doesn’t need to be…”19 -Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, World Economic Forum in May 2022
In their giddy arrogance they pushed too hard, too fast, and much too obviously. Aware of the looming agenda, many thousands of Australians united to campaign and petition, and were successful in thwarting the passage of The Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill. Undeterred by the derailed component of their dual-legislation, the Federal Government (a true WEF-infested Uni-Party) have consolidated their agenda behind the The Social Media Minimum Age Bill and the multiplicity of sly Industry Codes that are now being weaponised against online freedoms.
A future attempt at ratifying the twice failed The Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill is almost certain —an essential part of their agenda depends upon it.
First they came for the teenagers, and most adults did not speak out —because they were not teenagers
Despite the $14-million invested in propagandising the “For the Good Of…”20 campaign to assuage public sentiment with appeals to “protecting the children,” it will soon become apparent that it was all for the good of censorship, for the good of surveillance, for the good of narrative control, and, ultimately, for the good of… evil.
Not only will it ban those teenagers under-16 from accessing all Social Media platforms, but it will also eradicate the privacy of all those who have interacted on Facebook, X, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram behind avatars and pseudonyms. Basically, it will ban the safeguard afforded by anonymity. That is its primary purpose— to focus the omnipresent eyes of the digital surveillance panopticon upon each user, and to see (and record) every behavioural and cognitive aspect of the individual.
Soon, dumbfounded faces everywhere will be scanned while making faces.
Australians of all ages will be instructed to stare into cameras and pivot left and right with mouths agape like carnival clown-heads— just for permission to access the Internet. It will be an intentional hassle; a degrading act of submission.
There are seven age-verification methods listed in the new regulations:21
Photo ID checks
Face scanning age estimation tools
Credit card checks
Digital ID
Vouching by the parent of a young person
Using AI to guess a user’s age based on the data the company already has
Relying on a third party that has already checked the user’s age
Australian adults will soon discover that every Australian, irrespective of age, will be required to submit to an intrusive Age-Assurance Check to not only reveal their age, but also to expose their true identity to the Australian Government, Big Tech and shadowy third-party affiliates.
The majority will be reluctant to submit passports and driver’s licences or credit cards, and this has certainly been factored into the psychological priming. In order to streamline the deliberately clumsy process, a solution has already been devised: just register and submit a “non-mandatory” Digital ID to conveniently bypass —quick and easy.
Should the unwary individual trigger the trap: all previous online anonymity and presumed privacy will have been eradicated.
Children were the excuse.
It is all about the Digital ID: The Mark of the Beast.
“…it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name…” - Revelation 13:16-18
Once all online activities, persuasions and interactions can be successfully monitored and verifiably attributed to an individual (via Digital ID)— a personalised dossier of AI-scraped data can be established. Such a database will undoubtedly be used to determine the Compliance-Defiance Ledger of any forthcoming Social Credit Score system.
The Government will know who you are, what you think, and what you might think, and what you might do. A citizen will be rated and ranked according to their propensity for Right-Think, or Wrong-Think, and they will be duly rewarded, or punished.
A One World AI-Government is utterly dependant on the planetwide adoption of Digital ID. The authoritarian realities of programmable Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs); Vaccine Passports and mandated vaccines; Carbon Credit allowances; dietary rations (meat and dairy restrictions); Geo-fenced 15-Minute City containment perimeters; and Pre-crime AI-monitoring are only possible if everyone has been assigned a Digital ID.
Indeed, it is the very lynchpin of the emerging Biomedical Technocracy —without it, it all fails.
If populations do not adopt Digital ID by trickery, they will enforce it —unless we reject it, and we all must.
Australians are currently at the trickery stage, and we must resolutely resist the enforcement that is coming —our liberty, humanity, and the very continuation of our species depends upon it.
Do not comply, do not consent, and seek every available measure to circumvent and render useless the Age-Assurance Check.22*
Our Aussie complacency of “She’ll be right, Mate!” will no longer do; now, it must be: “We’ll fight, Mate!”
*USE A VPN: To circumvent the geo-specific Age-Assurance Check for Australia it is necessary to invest in a VPN, or Virtual Private Network. There are free VPNs, but the trusted ones typically require a yearly subscription. This is a service that creates a secure, encrypted tunnel for your internet traffic to protect your online privacy and security.
Related pieces on the encroaching Biomedical Technocracy and the push for Digital ID in Australia:
NATIONAL DIGITAL ID: Why Every Australian Must Reject It
A National Digital ID is the precursor to introducing Social Credit Scores, Carbon Credit, Vaccine Passports and cashless CBDCs. It is the crucial component to establishing an AI-Surveillance State.
BLAMING “MALE VIOLENCE” TO CENSOR THE INTERNET: How Gender-based Propaganda is Being Used to Impose Digital ID
Our WEF-captured Australian Government is attempting to use the device of “violent men” to impose “age-assurance technologies” to surveil and censor, and to remove all anonymity from the internet.
SPYING ON VICTORIANS: Examining the Implications of Dan Andrews’ Secret Data Agency
https://x.com/AndrewLawton/status/1528779966644731906
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256
There are seven main methods listed in the new regulations:
Photo ID checks
Face scanning age estimation tools
Credit card checks
Digital ID
Vouching by the parent of a young person
Using AI to guess a user’s age based on the data the company already has
Relying on a third party that has already checked the user’s age
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256
Three industry codes were registered in June, with an additional six codes being drafted, and almost certain to be registered by the Australian eSafety Commissioner
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256
A further two codes were also registered (yet to be disclosed) with an additional six industry codes currently being drafted and almost certain to be registered.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-08/chatbots-banned-from-talking-sex-or-suicide-with-australian-kids/105750012
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256
https://www.weforum.org/stories/authors/julie-inman-grant/
https://theconversation.com/online-safety-act-what-are-the-new-measures-to-protect-children-on-social-media-261126
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250911-french-lawmakers-urge-social-media-ban-for-under-15s
https://globalnews.ca/video/11477363/canadian-organization-pushes-for-social-media-ban-for-those-under-16
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/06/new-zealand-pm-luxon-social-media-ban-children
https://www.dw.com/en/denmark-to-ban-social-media-for-children-under-15/a-74666210
https://www.regjeringen.no/en/whats-new/norway-moves-forward-with-age-limit-for-social-media/id3108682/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/03/papua-new-guinea-considers-age-restrictions-on-social-media-fears-voices-will-be-silenced
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7284
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/nov/24/labor-dumps-misinformation-bill-after-senate-unites-against-it
https://x.com/AndrewLawton/status/1528779966644731906
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/australia-teen-social-media-ban-campaign-b2844988.html
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256
https://www.cyberdaily.au/culture/12464-expert-opinion-vpn-providers-are-the-real-winners-in-the-wake-of-uk-s-under-16-social-media-ban
I have to ask, why has not one of our politicians not suggested a simpler method? Would it not suffice to have any/all material deemed to be unsuitable for children marked as such, and 'locked'. Then those wishing to view it could simply verify their age.
I heard that platforms will do basic checks first, e.g. checking when you created the account, so many people won't be asked for age verification ID, (I hope this is the case because the majority of my facebook info for example, including photos is set to 'friends only' or 'me only' - so surely AI won't be able to check my facebook posts/photos (though there are possibly public posts I have been tagged in)....?.
But this (minimal, commonsense checks first) doesn't match what the true intentions of this bill are. Unless this process is going to be done in sneaky steps.
Regardless, are these platforms accessing our data (in order to check our age) at a greater level than they previously could? As that's bad enough in itself. Particularly when AI has to scan people's (public, I assume) existing photos, videos and posts in order to check their age (for example, when a social media account was only created this year).
At what point are we stuffed, regarding anonymity? Is it only if you choose the digital ID option?
Is anonymity lost also when you upload other forms of ID? (Btw I realise uploading any form of ID is not a good idea, simply for data protection reasons).
I do know that these social media platforms, google and microsoft are already collecting, storing and sharing data, profiling etc
Also what about people that already have a digital ID but don't use it as their ID check for these platforms? Are they stuffed because they simply already have a digital ID?