Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made a defamation complaint to YouTube regarding a video I published on Sunday (21/9/25) titled “Jeffrey Epstein’s connection to US Ambassador Kevin Rudd and his boy Friendlyjordies” and YouTube have blocked the video for viewers in Australia.

If Kevin Rudd had a legitimate defamation claim, he should have contacted me directly or via a lawyer with a Concerns Notice, and neither has happened.

The irony is that the video is a podcast version of an article I also published on Sunday (21/9/25) titled “Jeffrey Epstein’s connection to US Ambassador Kevin Rudd and the cover-up with his sugar baby Jordan Shanks” and the article is still on this website, with the exact same information as the video podcast, and freely available to Australian readers. (Click here to read the article)

The blocked video is below. Overseas readers should be able to watch it but Australian readers are blocked according to YouTube.

What is also ironic is that on the 31st of August I published an article titled “Sugar Daddy Kevin Rudd running a Labor Party smear unit with his sugar baby Friendlyjordies” with the video version titled “Kevin Rudd and his boy Friendlyjordies” as per the video below. The article is still on this website, the video is still on YouTube and no complaints have been received by me.

Given the video above, which lays out the evidence supporting Kevin Rudd is Jordan Shanks’ sugar daddy is still on YouTube, can we take it as admission by Kevin Rudd that it is true and correct?

It raises many questions especially when politicians around the world are trying to silence journalists, one way or another.

Both the above videos are clearly political communication given Kevin Rudd is a former politician, former Prime Minister and is the current US Ambassador. So, the videos are protected from defamation claims as per the 1997 High Court of Australia judgement Lange v ABC.

I received the below email from YouTube at 2.19am Wednesday (24/9/25) morning:

Hi Kangaroo Court of Australia,

We have received a defamation complaint regarding your content. After review, the following content has been blocked from view on the YouTube country site(s) listed below:

Video: Jeffrey Epstein’s connection to US Ambassador Kevin Rudd and his boy Friendlyjordies

The content has been blocked from view on the following YouTube country site(s):

• Australia

If you believe that your content was restricted in error, please let us know. You can submit the form only once per video url. Email end

I responded and said the compliant was frivolous and vexatious and I had not received any complaint and I asked for a copy of the complaint. 

YouTube never gave me a copy of the complaint, so who sent it or what parts were alleged to be defamatory I don’t know. I was denied natural justice.

YouTube responded and said “Your content has been restricted due to one or more legal complaints that we received. We have reviewed your request and determined that we are unable to remove the restriction on your content.”.

There were only three people who could have made the complaint, Kevin Rudd, his wife Therese Rein or Jordan Shanks aka Friendlyjordies.

I have no doubt Jordan Shanks would not have made a compliant, unless it was at the direction of Kevin Rudd, otherwise Shanks would have also complained about the Sugar Daddy video and there has been no complaint about that video.

Kevin Rudd is a known control freak, which rules out Rudd’s wife, and given the Sugar Daddy video has not been blocked I believe it was Rudd’s links to Epstein that motivated Rudd to make the complaint. So, I sent Kevin Rudd the below email:

I also sent the above email to Kevin Rudd on his Twitter, Facebook and Threads accounts. I have not had a response from Kevin Rudd or his office at this point in time.

What has brought Kevin Rudd undone here, at least partly, is that I publish articles and then do video podcasts for YouTube reading out the articles, and sometimes the podcast first and then the article. 

I have not received a Concerns Notice, and Kevin Rudd cannot file a defamation claim for 28 days after he has served me with a Concerns Notice, as per the DEFAMATION ACT 2005 – SECT 12B, so I think the likelihood of one being sent is near zero. That in itself is evidence that Kevin Rudd’s complaint to YouTube was frivolous and vexatious.

Kevin Rudd is obviously worried about something, and the answer is in the video and article.

I have to wonder, was YouTube pressured, or did they feel pressured to block my video, given Kevin Rudd’s position as US Ambassador, and given the government’s pressure on YouTube and it’s owner Google over the social media ban for kids and the News Media Bargaining Code where Google is forced by the government to pay $millions to media companies.

I’ll record a video podcast of this article and publish it on the Kangaroo Court of Australia YouTube channel on Thursday (25/9/25) afternoon about 3pm and see what happens.

Please use Twitter, Facebook, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is independent media and is 100% crowdfunded by readers like yourself so please support on the links below. Click on the PayPal button below to donate or for other donation options click here to go to the Donations page.

Thank you for your support.

For the KCA t-shirt shop click here.

For the Fugitive Clothing t-shirt shop click here

Join the free email subscription below and you will be notified immediately I publish new articles which is normally twice a week.