Why Is Only One Nation Opposing Australia’s Free Speech Summit?

The Free Speech Summit, to be held on July 19–20 on the Gold Coast, Australia, has stirred both excitement and controversy. Hosted by the independent media outlet Australian National Review, the summit has become a focal point for debate—not just in Australia, but globally.

In an unusual twist, only one nation has openly lobbied to have the event banned: Israel.

A Global Event That’s Too Controversial for some

With over 22 speakers scheduled to appear, the Summit is one of the largest independent media & civil liberty events ever held in Australia. It brings together doctors, journalists, influencers, whistleblowers,& activists to discuss government overreach, media censorship, health freedom, geopolitical manipulation,& more.

And yet, despite invitations sent to leaders from many nations, only Israel, through its lobbying network and advocacy groups, has reportedly pressured event organizers and contacted multiple speakers directly—urging them not to attend or withdraw from the event.
This begs the question: Why is Israel the only country trying to shut down a free speech summit in a democratic nation like Australia?

The Irony: A Violent State Worried About “Inciting Violence”

The primary reason given by lobbyists tied to the Israeli state is that the Free Speech Summit “may incite violence or hate speech.” However, critics are quick to point out the glaring irony in that accusation.

Israel is currently engaged in a controversial military campaign that has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza—many of them children. The United Nations, Human Rights Watch, and even some Israeli citizens and journalists have condemned the indiscriminate bombings and alleged war crimes.

To many Australians and global citizens alike, it appears deeply hypocritical for a government engaged in widespread, state-sanctioned violence to claim that a peaceful summit on free speech might somehow be the real danger.

Suppression Tactics: A Coordinated Lobbying Campaign

Multiple speakers have confirmed they were contacted—some even harassed—by lobbying organizations demanding they withdraw from the summit. One speaker stated anonymously:

“They said attending would be seen as an endorsement of hate speech. But no one from the summit has ever promoted hate speech—just uncomfortable truths and open debate. That’s the point of free speech.”

Efforts have also been made to pressure venues, ticketing platforms,& even travel agencies connected to the event. Mainstream media, notably Australian national broadcasters, have refused to cover the event, or worse, have subtly worked to discredit it without directly naming it—an apparent coordinated silence.
Why It Matters:

The suppression of the Free Speech Summit isn’t just a domestic Australian issue. It reflects a larger, global trend where uncomfortable opinions are shut down not by reasoned debate—but by lobbying, intimidation, and censorship.

One of the key themes of the summit is the erosion of civil liberties, not just from governments, but from foreign influence that seeks to dictate what Australians can and cannot discuss in their own country.
Many are asking: If Israel believes it can decide who speaks in Australia, what does that say about Australian sovereignty and freedom of speech?
Record Global Attendance and Support
In response to the attempted censorship, the public is rallying. Over 10,000 free live-stream tickets have been snapped up globally, thanks to sponsors like http://BaliFreeReport.com, the major sponsor of the event.
The people are speaking, & they want their voices heard.
Free speech isn’t about agreeing with everything that’s said. It’s about protecting the right to say it. If powerful nations and lobbying groups are trying to shut down peaceful dialogue in a country like Australia, it should raise alarms for everyone.
The event is going ahead—not despite the opposition, but because of it.

Read More: https://x.com/jamiemcintyre21/....status/1944597563954

Why Is Only One Nation Opposing Australia’s Free Speech Summit?

The Free Speech Summit, to be held on July 19–20 on the Gold Coast, Australia, has stirred both excitement and controversy. Hosted by the independent media outlet Australian National Review, the summit has become a focal point for debate—not just in Australia, but globally.

In an unusual twist, only one nation has openly lobbied to have the event banned: Israel.

A Global Event That’s Too Controversial for some

With over 22 speakers scheduled to appear, the Summit is one of the largest independent media & civil liberty events ever held in Australia. It brings together doctors, journalists, influencers, whistleblowers,& activists to discuss government overreach, media censorship, health freedom, geopolitical manipulation,& more.

And yet, despite invitations sent to leaders from many nations, only Israel, through its lobbying network and advocacy groups, has reportedly pressured event organizers and contacted multiple speakers directly—urging them not to attend or withdraw from the event.
This begs the question: Why is Israel the only country trying to shut down a free speech summit in a democratic nation like Australia?

The Irony: A Violent State Worried About “Inciting Violence”

The primary reason given by lobbyists tied to the Israeli state is that the Free Speech Summit “may incite violence or hate speech.” However, critics are quick to point out the glaring irony in that accusation.

Israel is currently engaged in a controversial military campaign that has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza—many of them children. The United Nations, Human Rights Watch, and even some Israeli citizens and journalists have condemned the indiscriminate bombings and alleged war crimes.

To many Australians and global citizens alike, it appears deeply hypocritical for a government engaged in widespread, state-sanctioned violence to claim that a peaceful summit on free speech might somehow be the real danger.

Suppression Tactics: A Coordinated Lobbying Campaign

Multiple speakers have confirmed they were contacted—some even harassed—by lobbying organizations demanding they withdraw from the summit. One speaker stated anonymously:

“They said attending would be seen as an endorsement of hate speech. But no one from the summit has ever promoted hate speech—just uncomfortable truths and open debate. That’s the point of free speech.”

Efforts have also been made to pressure venues, ticketing platforms,& even travel agencies connected to the event. Mainstream media, notably Australian national broadcasters, have refused to cover the event, or worse, have subtly worked to discredit it without directly naming it—an apparent coordinated silence.
Why It Matters:

The suppression of the Free Speech Summit isn’t just a domestic Australian issue. It reflects a larger, global trend where uncomfortable opinions are shut down not by reasoned debate—but by lobbying, intimidation, and censorship.

One of the key themes of the summit is the erosion of civil liberties, not just from governments, but from foreign influence that seeks to dictate what Australians can and cannot discuss in their own country.
Many are asking: If Israel believes it can decide who speaks in Australia, what does that say about Australian sovereignty and freedom of speech?
Record Global Attendance and Support
In response to the attempted censorship, the public is rallying. Over 10,000 free live-stream tickets have been snapped up globally, thanks to sponsors like http://BaliFreeReport.com, the major sponsor of the event.
The people are speaking, & they want their voices heard.
Free speech isn’t about agreeing with everything that’s said. It’s about protecting the right to say it. If powerful nations and lobbying groups are trying to shut down peaceful dialogue in a country like Australia, it should raise alarms for everyone.
The event is going ahead—not despite the opposition, but because of it.

Read More: https://x.com/jamiemcintyre21/....status/1944597563954

EXCLUSIVE: Aborted Babies Flushed Into America’s Drinking Water

They told women to flush the remains. Now it’s in our water, and no one is stopping it. The EPA won’t even talk about it.

WARNING: This broadcast contains graphic details that some viewers may find deeply disturbing.

Aborted fetuses up to two inches long are being flushed down toilets, clogging pipes, and traumatizing wastewater workers who find them trapped in treatment screens.

Meanwhile, millions have no way to avoid bathing in and drinking water tainted with these human remains.

How did officials let this horror happen, let alone continue for 25 years?

We were contacted this week with some extremely disturbing information that the public needs to be made aware of immediately.

But first, we must issue a disclaimer. The topic of discussion in this broadcast could be distressing for some of our viewers.

An 88-page research paper was released recently, raising an urgent national alarm over the environmental consequences of chemical abortions.

Nearly 700,000 times a year in the U.S., women take abortion pills, flushing the resulting remains straight down toilets and into our public water systems.

Abigail Forman described this disturbing reality, explaining how these human remains are chemically tainted with mifepristone metabolites (drug leftovers) that can retain their progesterone-blocking effect even after wastewater treatment.

“It can still be active,” she warned, meaning it could make its way into our drinking water and pose unknown risks to human fertility and aquatic life.

She emphasized that wastewater and drinking water treatment plants aren’t built to remove these contaminants, and tests have already found mifepristone in both fresh and saltwater.

With over a million abortions last year, Abigail is urging the government to investigate whether this hidden pollution is fueling America’s growing fertility crisis.

“Could this potentially be part of why we’re seeing a fertility crisis in our nation?” she asked.

It’s a haunting question that no one in power seems willing to acknowledge.

“This isn’t just drinking water. This would be shower water, water you wash your hands with as well, correct?” Maria asked.

“CORRECT,” Abigail answered. “It’s disturbing on many levels.”

She reported that aborted fetuses, some up to two inches long, are being flushed down toilets and are ending up in America’s wastewater treatment plants that are not designed to handle such material.

Abigail explained how these human remains are clogging pipes, causing sewer backups, and getting caught in treatment screens, leaving workers horrified by what they find.

She described a grim reality. Women are told to handle this entire process themselves, unlike surgical abortions, where strict medical waste laws apply.

The system treats aborted babies as disposable, forcing women to confront the unexpected and painful trauma of seeing fully formed fetuses in their toilets while they scream and sob in shock, often while in significant pain.

“This is incredibly horrific,” Maria lamented.

“I’m really struggling to listen to this… It’s actually worse than I imagined,” she added.

The EPA regulates dangerous chemicals at parts-per-trillion but has turned a blind eye to the abortion pill’s toxic legacy.

Abigail called out this hypocrisy, explaining that mifepristone acts as an endocrine disruptor, blocks vital hormones, and is designed specifically to end pregnancies, yet it was approved without any real environmental review.

“No other drug on the market causes the end of a pregnancy this way. There’s no other drug that was designed to intentionally end the life of a human in the womb,” she explained.

Abigail detailed how regulators ignored the fact that chemically tainted fetal remains would be flushed into wastewater, violating both the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

Instead of studying its effects on humans and wildlife, they focused only on packaging emissions before approving it.

Even worse, the entire environmental assessment was conducted by the Population Council, an openly pro-abortion group with roots in the eugenics movement.

Meanwhile, about 700,000 women each year are told to flush these remains, adding roughly 40 tons of chemically tainted medical waste to America’s unprepared water systems annually.

It’s a damning indictment of a system that protects the abortion industry while putting public health at risk.

Abigail then exposed a spiritual crisis that few seem willing to address.

She argued there’s a deeply religious dimension to abortion pill pollution. Americans with strong moral convictions can’t simply “opt out” of bathing in or drinking water contaminated with the chemically tainted remains of dead babies.

“This is disturbing on so many levels,” she said, describing it as spiritual desecration ignored by federal regulators.

She highlighted the hypocrisy in environmental law, pointing out that while the EPA and states forbid flushing most medical waste, abortion providers have been instructing women to do exactly that—for decades.

Abigail urged people of faith to confront this graphic reality and even pray for our water to be cleansed, because pretending it isn’t happening won’t make it go away.

There’s at least some good news: lawmakers are starting to push back against abortion pill pollution.

Abigail described growing support at both state and federal levels, noting that 25 members of Congress have already demanded that the EPA investigate the environmental impact of mifepristone and the fetal remains ending up in our water supply.

But she made it clear that’s nowhere near enough. “We need about 400 more members of Congress to be aware of this and to act on it,” she said, calling for congressional hearings and tighter oversight of the FDA and EPA.

She also urged states to enforce existing medical waste laws that prohibit flushing fetal remains, pointing out that some states have bans on the books but have failed to enforce them.

Ultimately, Abigail didn’t waver on the real goal: pulling the abortion pill from the market until a full, unbiased environmental assessment is completed.

By the end, the conversation laid bare a national scandal hiding in plain sight.

Abigail called for nothing less than a nationwide ban on chemical abortion pills.

She warned that this isn’t only about women’s trauma; it’s about hidden pollution that puts everyone at risk. Without meaningful oversight, chemically tainted fetal remains will keep being flushed into our water systems, exposing millions who never gave their consent and don’t even know it’s happening.

“This really, really has to stop,” Maria urged, framing it as a fundamental question of informed consent. Why should anyone be forced to bathe in or drink water polluted by someone else’s abortion?

They encouraged viewers to visit abortioninourwater.org to learn more, share resources, and demand that Congress and the EPA finally act.

Abigail argued that there may never be a better moment to pressure leaders, insisting now is the time to fight for crystal, clean water.

It was a powerful and urgent appeal to confront a national scandal that too many would rather ignore.

Thanks for tuning in. If this conversation opened your eyes, don’t miss the full video below, and be sure to share with a friend.

We’ll be back Monday with another new episode, highlighting what the media refuses to cover. See you then.

Source: https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/....exclusive-aborted-ba

What If Ukraine Falls? This is no Longer a Hypothetical Question – And It Must be Answered Urgently

Europe offers platitudes, Trump dithers, and Ukraine and its extraordinary people stand on the brink. NATO must step up

For 40 cruel and bloody months, Ukraine has fought the Russian invader. Since February 2022, when Moscow’s full-scale, countrywide onslaught began, its people have faced relentless, devastating attacks. Tens of thousands have been killed or wounded, millions have lost their homes. Ukraine’s industries, shops, schools, hospitals and power stations burn, its fertile farmlands are laid waste. Its children are orphaned, traumatised or abducted. Despite repeated appeals, the world has failed to stop the carnage. And yet Ukraine, outnumbered and outgunned, has continued to fight back.

Ukrainian heroism amid horror has become so familiar, it’s almost taken for granted. But as Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, escalates the war, raining nightly terror on Kyiv and other cities using record waves of armed drones, as US support and peace efforts falter, and as Ukraine’s overstretched frontline soldiers face exhaustion, such complacency looks increasingly misplaced. A no longer hypothetical question becomes ever more real and urgent: what if Ukraine falls?

Answer: Ukraine’s collapse, if it happens, would amount to an epic western strategic failure matching or exceeding the Afghanistan and Iraq calamities. The negative ramifications for Europe, Britain, the transatlantic alliance and international law are truly daunting. That thought alone should concentrate minds.

It has been evident since the dying days of 2023, when its counteroffensive stalled, that Ukraine is not winning. For most of this year, Russian forces have inexorably inched forward in Donetsk and other eastern killing grounds, regardless of cost. Estimated Russian casualties recently surpassed 1 million, dead and wounded. Still they keep coming. While there has been no big Russian breakthrough, for Ukraine’s pinned-down, under-supplied defenders the war is now a daily existential struggle. That they manage to keep going at all is astonishing.

How much longer Ukraine can hold the line, on the battlefield, in the skies, and diplomatically and politically, is in serious doubt. It is short of manpower, ammunition and interceptor missiles. It can still strike back hard. Its occupation of Russia’s Kursk region, and last month’s destruction of strategic bombers based deep inside Russia, were remarkable. But such temporary successes do not alter the basic imbalance of power or general direction of travel.

Increasingly, too, Ukraine is short of reliable friends, though maybe that has always been the case. Putin has assembled his own “coalition of the willing” – China, Iran, North Korea and others – to support his war machine. The west’s equivalent, led by Britain and France, is in limbo. Deployment of a military “reassurance force” cannot proceed. Due to Putin’s intransigence and Donald Trump’s incompetence, there is no ceasefire to uphold and none in prospect.

Speaking in London last week, France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, and Britain’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, regurgitated familiar pledges of unflinching support. That’s easy. Effective military assistance is harder. Like other European countries, the UK and France lack the advanced weapons and materiel, in the quantities required, that only the US can supply.

Attempting to fill the gap, Friedrich Merz, Germany’s chancellor, proposes to buy US Patriot batteries and gift them to Kyiv. Yet like the EU as a whole and last month’s Nato summiteers, Merz’s priority is national self-defence. As he measures out missiles for Ukraine, he’s trebling Germany’s defence spending. The UK is doing much the same.

Trump, the US’s surrender monkey, remains Kyiv’s biggest diplomatic headache. His lopsided 30-day ceasefire plan was rejected by Moscow, his proffered US-Russia commercial deals spurned. After months of slandering Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and sucking up to Putin, the “very stable genius” has concluded the Russian leader, an indicted war criminal, talks “bull****” and cannot be trusted. Well, fancy that.

Trump now says he will resume limited supplies of defensive weapons to Kyiv and may back additional sanctions. But this is not about policy or principle. His ego is damaged. His feelings are hurt. One flattering word from his smirking Kremlin bro could turn him around in a flash. Like all bullies, Trump instinctively favours the stronger party. Little wonder Putin calculates he can wear down Ukraine, outlast the west and win the war.

All is not lost. With or without Trump, Nato could take a tougher line, as repeatedly urged here, by imposing air exclusion zones over unoccupied Ukraine and targeting incoming missiles and drones. The military position is clearcut, the legal and humanitarian case is unassailable. Russia frequently infringes the sovereignty of Nato neighbours. Putin’s attempts at nuclear blackmail, which so unnerved Joe Biden, are contemptible. If it only had the balls, Nato could put him back in his box.

Failing that, new US and EU sanctions targeting Russian oil exports should be imposed without further delay. Billions of Kremlin dollars held by western banks should be expropriated to pay for arms and reconstruction. Fence-straddlers such as India that refuse to sanction the Kremlin and profit from the war should be invited to read the European court of human rights’ shocking new report on Russian war crimes savagery – and told to pick a side.

Two outcomes now seem most probable: a stalemated forever war, or Ukraine’s collapse. Defeat for Ukraine and a settlement on Putin’s hegemonic terms would be a defeat for the west as a whole – a strategic failure presaging an era of permanent, widening conflict across all of Europe. For Russians, too, neither outcome would constitute lasting victory. Greater efforts are needed to convince Russia’s politicians and public that this war, so costly for their country in lives and treasure, can be ended through negotiation, that legitimate security concerns will be addressed, that the alternatives are far worse.

But first, they must give him up. The chief architect of this horror, the principal author of Russia’s disgrace, must be defanged, deposed and delivered to international justice. Putin, not Ukraine, must fall.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/co....mmentisfree/2025/jul

Best OpenAI Models for AI Applications

Consider this your complete guide to AI models and how to choose the right one. In this blog, we discuss how to use Open AI Models for building effective language applications through APIs. You'll learn about data preparation, model selection, fine-tuning, deployment, and monitoring. The guide also explains how to train AI models step by step. It's a helpful resource for anyone looking to implement AI language models in real-world applications.

Visit: https://shorturl.at/IoWBN

10,000 FREE Livestream Tickets – Claim Yours Now!
To the Free Speech Summit & Independent Media Awards, 2025

The Australian National Review, with the support of major sponsors http://MarinaBayCity.com and http://BaliFreeReport.com, is giving away 10,000 FREE livestream tickets to a global audience – so you can be part of history from anywhere in the world.

Over 18 powerful speakers flying into the Gold Coast, Australia for the July 19–20 event.

Stand up against fake news media — join the movement.

Free in-person tickets are limited — 95% already claimed!
Livestream tickets are now FREE, thanks to http://MarinaBayCity.com and http://BaliFreeReport.com

Register now for free tickets & livestream access at:
http://freespeechsummit.com.au

Trump Imposes 35% Tariffs on Canada Starting August 1

It was the latest of more than 20 such letters issued by Trump since Monday, after he repeatedly threatened to simply decide a tariff rate for countries as negotiations continue over his “reciprocal” tariffs

US President Donald Trump on Friday announced 35 per cent tariffs on Canadian exports, to take effect from August 1. Canada is the latest country to receive a letter from Trump addressed to Prime Minister Mark Carney.

“Instead of working with the United States, Canada retaliated with its own Tariffs. Starting August 1, 2025, we will charge Canada a Tariff of 35% on Canadian products sent into the United States, separate from all Sectoral Tariffs,” Trump said in the letter, which he posted on his Truth Social platform.

It was the latest of more than 20 such letters issued by Trump since Monday, after he repeatedly threatened to simply decide a tariff rate for countries as negotiations continue over his “reciprocal” tariffs.

Source: https://www.firstpost.com/worl....d/trump-imposes-35-t