https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/un-declaration-rights-indigenous-people

This'll get interesting since we've arbitrarily - in keeping with such things as handing out land claims and similar by government departments under their party mate appointed heads obeying orders direct while being online with The Agenda anyway or they wouldn't cop the gig with the freebies for life, eh? -  determined that multi-generational Australians are Indigenous and Aborigines are Aborigines.

Aside:-  ain't it just a bastard when some prick comes along and just says - "Nah - that's how it is from now on, and don't bother with your representations - it's already decided the other way."  Right you 148 land owners on Fraser Island - piss off with your  representations against this absurd takeover nonsense by a group of non-local Aborigines.... we'll let you know when we've decided against you .... so piss off...

This will be fun - so many words here - and so little that indicates anything really special for our Aborigines as they were hunting for with the voice.... land title.... (heh, heh, heh)....

Let's see now - I'll be able to launch an attack North in two days....... with two divisions....  George S Patton.

Article One needs no comment - they've already got all equal rights here and then some, just like women.... similar attitudes, too... gimme, gimme, gimme ...

Article Two is fine in theory - the very few REAL occasions where our Aborigines are pointed out as bad-asses etc they are just being bad-asses etc... no problem.  76 out of 81 can't be wrong, eh?  When discussing 'rights' such as employment fairly etc, you need to look at every individual case... and that would be a forever war.

Article Three - yup they can determine who they vote for and why, and do like everyone else and pursue their own prosperity and such here under the limitations.  Not that much work - not for everyone - up here for example... plenty of 'em up here who are civilised etc have jobs.

Article Four - now this gets a bit tricky - it sounds like this is saying they don't have to abide by the laws of the land but make up their own ... well - that dingo ain't gonna hunt anywhere... they can hold a council meeting - and already do - and put their views forward - but they cannot remain citizens and be independent and they can't refuse to abide by the law of the land.  That dingo don't hunt, neither... you're either in or out, but you don't get to pick the best bits and leave the rest.  Australian or Not??  Decide now and forever.

Article Five - sure - they can have their political affiliations and even their own party(ies), same as anyone else - they can participate as much as their circumstances allow - if someone lives in Yukapandapoo in Faraway Province, far from the madding services and jobs... they cannot expect to be slotted into the best paid jobs in the land...unless elected to Parliament of course - but when jobs etc are not available that's it.... you can always move... including away from the Seven Intersectional Groups Violence at Wadeye... why stay if it's that bad?  You reckon one day one group will win the fight?

Nobody forces anyone to move or change - circumstances do and must, same as for everyone else - you don't see cities springing up at Maralinga, do you .... or nothing will change for the better - and with their personal sovereignty, it is up to them to make the moves..... and make them the right moves.

Article Six - They are Australians or they are not - time to choose... but you don't get to choose half way or the best of both worlds.


Gotta go - be back to slice and dice yez over the rest later...... this should give you a little bit to hoist your absurd arguments on - I'll just do an Aboriginal Affairs department thing and simply reject your views unless you are onside with mine... nasty stuff, eh?  Terrible when people do that to you - The Albo Way - the people voted it down - they'll push it in the states .... maybe you'll learn if I do it often enough.  We'll soon see about that!!

Article Seven:-

Well - they're doing just fine there as long as they can stop trying to kill one another in various ways.


Article Eight:-

Well - circumstances may force them to alter their ways - they can't expect to just be handed the big house on the hill looking over the ocean etc without doing something for it... they can't just expect a$200k pa income without working for it, can they?  So change is forced on them - not by individuals or governments, but by their own increased requirements for the same as others.  Can't just rely on some cargo cult to come along and do a dividie and pay them to mow their own lawns... the end of that is that everyone will be on a state salary, all the same for whatever work they do, unless they are part of the 'ruling elite clique' - a return to Feudalism and the kind of despotism that went with it.  That's why there is such an assault on the rules of law here and has been since the advent of affirmative action.....

Interesting part here:- "Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;" ... WELL, so it's all right to dispossess the majority re national parks and Open Range land under the Crown, but not the minority... in their eyes only (not Sheena Eeston - For Your Eyes Only).... and a pig's ear ...

Article Nine:-

No problem exists there - nobody is stopping them unless their way does harm to others or otherwise contravenes the law of the land..

Article Ten:-

Doesn't happen.

Article Eleven:-

Ongoing process for years.... but at some point a line must be drawn - you can't just say everything is a 'sacred site' to gain control over it.  Yabbying in the creek doesn't make that creek a sacred site... saying there are spirits in it doesn't do that either.... not your business to tell the spirits when to be upset or anything... they can handle it themselves.

Article Twelve -

No problem these days and for a long time ... not ever in most cases... but they can't just say it's all ceremonial spots etc.. you can't just claim the whole land as sacred.  Since Parrot's Tits closed off White etc access to Mt Warning - what 'ceremonies' have ever taken place anywhere there?  What about Ayers Rock?  No climbing so no "hey - what a view" ceremony from the summit, eh?  You can't just call everything in sight a sacred site - specify them NOW or that's it.... cite how, when and where you do these 'ceremonies' and prove to us that you do.  A ceremony isn't just one person saying - "What a climb!  Phew - but what a view!"  (YARDLE, YARDLE)

Article Thirteen -

No problem - they can pass on their lingo - same as we do.... nobody is stopping them.... most of us would take a shillelagh to them if anyone tried to .... damn - that's Irish Gaelic.... same as sreed (street), loch (lake),  scallywag ... you know....

Just another one of those whinges that nobody is standing in the way of.

Article Fourteen -

No problem - they can teach their kids outside normal school hours etc... a small part of school time could be utilised to teach them those things and to bring other kids up to speed on the differences... no problem at all.  Nobody is stopping them... the Alice
Springs Method - OK, you kids - you've missed school for the day so go into town and learn the outlaw ways.... go on - give me some peace ...

Article Fifteen -

No problem - every second street and town is named using one of their words.... etc... etc... etc... you bloody pack of Gulargambones, as an example ...Coonamble (Cheeramble) ... Coonabarabran (Cheerabarbran), Koonawarra (Cheerawarra) ... you know....

Article Sixteen -

Again nobody is stopping them.

Article Seventeen -

No problems again - nobody is exploiting Aboriginal children as child labour etc - they're ot abused in jobs any more than anyone else - when you can get them to go to one or travel to a major centre to even find one .... Bugarabagapoo, remember - in Isolaland ...at least until dividie gets his hands on the reins....

Article Eighteen -

No problem - countless bodies offer their views - others get none.... Black Privilege, eh?

Article Nineteen -

Same as governments consult fully with us, eh?  Equality, innit - this sounds like a demand for special privilege - Black Privilege again.

Article Twenty -

No problem - they can dot paint all they like and sell 'em... whatever ....  When was the last time one was deprived of any traditional way of earning a living here in Australia?

Article Twenty One -

They have opportunities for schooling etc same as everyone else..... and then some ... nothing more needs to be said.

Article Twenty Two -

Disabilities - that applies to everyone, not just one group.  States do their best to control the internal violence in that community...... despite the opposition from those they are trying to help .... and from their running dogs .. just like here....

Article Twenty Three -

Anyone here reckon they are not consulted when a nurse arrives in town to set up a clinic etc?  Not consulted about their specdific needs?  Do they want a witch doctor in the surgical suite during operations?

Article Twenty four -

Nobody here stops them from using their traditional medicines and cures.

Article Twenty Five

No problem there - nobody stands in the way of their spiritual connection to the land, any more than they stand in the way of anyone else's spiritual connection to the land etc.

Article Twenty Six

Reads like a declaration of war by the UN - far too vague ... having the 'right' to the lands etc.  This one needs a long look since it sounds like a demand to just hand it all back to a group of wandering nomads.  Let's just say that the proviso here is 'under the new rules pertaining'.  So they have the right to use land they actually own etc, and simply enjoy the rest of Open Range.

Article Twenty Seven

Well - due recognition is given to their laws - subject to the common laws of the land.  They get plenty of representation.... all this guff needs to be settled once and for all and then all those paid for bodies abolished and the money put to better uses.

Article Twenty Eight

Redress for any fixed camp taken over?  Already paid for over and over again.  You can't claim redress for losing the ability to just walk around.

Article Twenty Nine

No worries there..... the mistake is in the assumption that what they reckon was their past stamping ground is 'their land'.

Article Thirty

Careful - this one could mean military intervention into the Alice.  Anyway - if a mad Arab Mullah or African chieftain decides to charge across 'traditional lands' and wage war ... who exactly is going to stop him?  UN didn't do too good so far with Gaza and the vile invasion of Israel, or anywhere else much for that matter.  Give 'em another broadside of harsh language...
Does this included lawfare?

Article Thirty One

No problems - but this could require isolation in a zoo or something.  Nobody goes out of his/her way to change any 'Aboriginal culture' - circumstances change is all.  2024 - not 1787.

Article Thirty Two

Already happens.  The only problem is the assumption that the old Imperial lands held vastly in the past by Abomandias still apply.  Tell it to the Persians etc.... does the British Empire still apply?  The French?  The German? the Roman?  You can't hold back the flood tides of historical change.  2024 - not 1787.

Article Thirty Three

No problem with their identity here.  At the same time they are required to function in the general society and by the laws of the land.

Article Thirty Four

Fine as long as its within the laws of the land... no cannibal parties and such... no ritual killings of women who don't listen etc... no exposing sickly babies to the elements..... you know.

Article Thirty Five

No problem

Article Thirty Six

No problem here

Article Thirty Seven

No problem - we have no treaties here and that is the thorn of the argument at this time - or more appropriately - what should be INCLUDED in and what should be EXCLUDED from 'treaties'.  Make the Australian people a FAIR offer and stop going behind their backs with stupid government assistance to go for some ridiculous and short-live one-sided 'we want it all' 'treaty'.  Like all those Aboriginal groups who felt the 'voice' did not represent them - we the people are not represented by stupid government lackeys signing up to deals behind our backs.


That'll get 'em going for a while, Igor - Oh - Frankenstein's assistant wasn't Igor ... nor was his name Viktor.i

So far the only problem seems to be the UN's vague and undefined idea of what constitutes land ownership... so the activists figured that meant the UN would enforce their demand for total ownership of Australia - while everyone else said NO - but if you ask nicely we might give you a piece of it for free... just not huge swathes you demand without reason....  the good old days of caveman style Aboriginal Imperialism are gone - it's 2024 - not 1787.


Word for Today:-

'activisit' - an event of a FIFO agitator coming in and getting out of Dodge while the shot-storm erupts..

'activisitor' - a FIFO agitator ... see Albo .... Ross Mayo... Fish Eyes Langton... Burney-Out....

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Jul 29^th, 2024 at 4:08pm:

So far the only problem seems to be the UN's vague and undefined idea of what constitutes land ownership... so the activists figured that meant the UN would enforce their demand for total ownership of Australia - while everyone else said NO - but if you ask nicely we might give you a piece of it for free... just not huge swathes you demand without reason....  the good old days of caveman style Aboriginal Imperialism are gone - it's 2024 - not 1787. Word for Today:- 'activisit' - an event of a FIFO agitator coming in and getting out of Dodge while the shot-storm erupts.. 'activisitor' - a FIFO agitator ... see Albo .... Ross Mayo... Fish Eyes Langton... Burney-Out....

Should that be Thomas Mayo?

"UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples"

Yes, and I'm sure the Australian Government takes as much notice of that (i.e. ignores it) when it suits them (i.e. has a negative impact on the economy) as they do of this (which Australia has been a signatory to for over 50 years):

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Especially...

Article 12 Section 2 (c) and (d).

... in regards to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic (and even the 'yearly' flu).

And don't get me started on Article 11.

These UN "Declarations" and "Covenants" are not worth the paper they're written on.

Carl D wrote on Jul 30^th, 2024 at 10:22am:

"UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" Yes, and I'm sure the Australian Government takes as much notice of that (i.e. ignores it) when it suits them (i.e. has a negative impact on the economy) as they do of this (which Australia has been a signatory to for over 50 years): International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Especially... Article 12 Section 2 (c) and (d). ... in regards to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic (and even the 'yearly' flu). And don't get me started on Article 11. These UN "Declarations" and "Covenants" are not worth the paper they're written on.

Do you mean -  they are not achievable, or they are not desirable?

Let's have a look:

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

16th Dec 1966.  General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI)

PREAMBLE

Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Recognizing that these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person,

Recognizing that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights,......


Are we all on board with the ideal so far?

(I'm pleased I inspired graps to broach the topic , via his despised 'indigenous rights").

Ah, yes, the "ideal".

Certainly desirable and probably achievable if governments wanted to (or even cared).

Which they don't, of course. Especially if it means "the economy" takes a big hit.

As I said, these "Declarations" and "Covenants" are basically worthless, they're just 'feel good' exercises in futility from an organization (the UN) that is pointless and useless, especially these days when money is the most important thing on governments' (and most peoples') minds.

And here is Article XI which Carl D "doesn't want to get started on":

Article 11
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent.

The under-lined: this is why the UN is dysfunctional - you can't have co-operation based on "free consent", among instinctively self-interested individuals.

Cicero told us that 2000 years ago;

"All must submit to rule of law, for all to be free". 

I can hear the screaming from here.....

2. The States Parties to the present Covenant, recognizing the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger, shall take, individually and through international co-operation, the measures, including specific programmes, which are needed:

Trump is demanding America First, to MAGA; bugger the rest of the world.

(a) To improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources;

(b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.

Yes, but that will need global financial reform, so the countries with excess food capacity can fund "equitable distribution"...

Carl D wrote on Jul 30^th, 2024 at 1:39pm:

Ah, yes, the "ideal". Certainly desirable and probably achievable if governments wanted to (or even cared). Which they don't, of course. Especially if it means "the economy" takes a big hit. As I said, these "Declarations" and "Covenants" are basically worthless, they're just 'feel good' exercises in futility from an organization (the UN) that is pointless and useless, especially these days when money is the most important thing on governments' (and most peoples') minds.

Thanks for your clarification, and well said. 

Indeed "the economy" (money) is reckoned to be more important than people.

Even though money is created out of thin air.

The money-lenders have pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. 

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Jul 26^th, 2024 at 1:56pm:

Article One needs no comment - they've already got all equal rights here and then some, just like women.... similar attitudes, too... gimme, gimme, gimme ...

Actually the problems begin appearing in the preamble to Article 1, and the Article itself.

Article 1

Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law.

My comment: so indigenous peoples have the same rights as everyone else, as identified in the UNUDHR.

That should be the end of the story.... but, Article 1 is preceeded by this contradictory nonsense:

Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,

Individuals being different is not the same as individuals claiming allegiance to, and sovereignty of, different anachronistic cultures, something many indigenous people do, from a desire to preserve ancient, outmoded ways of life.

Affirming also that all peoples contribute to the diversity and richness of civilizations and cultures, which constitute the common heritage of humankind,

Hunter-gatherer cultures don't contribute to solving the problems of the modern world (and nor do 'modern' neoclassical mainstream economists, another story...)

Affirming further that all doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin, racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust,

It's not a matter of the "superiority" of cultural differences (the other differences listed are not relevant for indigenous people), it's acknowledging pre-civilization ancient cultures belong in the past, not the present and future. 

.......

And that's just Article one.

Note how the confused  "freedom rights" people at the UN have tried to improve social  conditions, by agreement as opposed to by implementation by law. 

First,  the UNUDHR in 1948; then the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 1966; then this Indigenous Rights nonsense in 2002. 

The original 1948 UNUDHR (though also  containing contradictions) covered everything, but of course little of it was ever implemented, because "freedom" trumps co-operation.

Sad. 

At least Albo, speaking at the Garma festival,  is moving beyond the "indigenous rights" crap, and now talking about "economic empowerment" to close the gap.

Will be interesting to see if the government can realize that goal; industries related to climate change  have been identified as a possible source of employment,  without much detail provided so far.

But the black (and white) 'cultural' activists are condemning Albo for removing the Federal government from consideraion of  divisive 'land rights', "truth telling"   and 'sovereignty' issues.

'economic empowerment' has been tried - like any cargo cult to the Third World, it mostly vanishes into the accounts of the El Presidente's and the Primo Ministers (El Jefe) etc.... sound familiar?  Open your eyes and ears.... leave the bleach in the cupboard.

What is Albo going to build in Arnhem Land?  Crocodile shoe and bag manufacturing plant?  I know - what about we make it into a self-sustaining Homeland.... one-off start-up funding and then turn 'er loose .... oh - wait a minute..... the locals wouldn't like any Invaders coming in and trying to raise the colonial banner over 'their land', would they..... Wadeye on steroids. 

Arnhem Land, being a reservation (The Res) IS their land.... let them develop economic empowerment... no Invasions and Intrusions here!!

Footnote:-  You ALL need to get your heads out of your arses about this idea of 'cargo culting' the Aborigines' way out of trouble... it will not work and only makes them more dependent.  Aborigine - Heal Thyself!!

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Aug 4^th, 2024 at 12:47pm:

'economic empowerment' has been tried -

Your mistake first up (well done...); "economic empowerment" means prosperous  participation in the economy.

It's not something a nation "tries", it's something a nation achieves, to close the gap.  Do try to keep up.   

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 4^th, 2024 at 1:07pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Aug 4th, 2024 at 12:47pm: 'economic empowerment' has been tried - Your mistake first up (well done...); "economic empowerment" means prosperous  participation in the economy. It's not something a nation "tries", it's something a nation achieves, to close the gap.  Do try to keep up.

Aye - so get forcing them to prosperously participate in the economy.  Another empty phrase - what will you do to create this Nirvana in Arnhem Land where Albo is preaching to the Bonga-Bonga crowd?  (careful you don't step in the Bonga Bonga, Mr Albo...)

What are the plans --- well - no plans  - what are the concepts?  The possibilities?  None in the pipeline.... hmmmm ... any idea where you'd like to start?

I mean - I suggested a crocodile hand-bag and shoe industry ....  WTF else can they do?  Whinge?

"Ere, Albo - my 'ouse given for free ain't got air conditioning.... watcha gonna do about that?".

"Easy, bro - I'll take some opportunity from the Tent City Slickers again.... hand it over, eh?"

Reminds me of the JFK election story - sheila sends in a note saying she'd vote for Kennedy if she had a television set - Kennedy emporium sends her one free - she writes back complaining it is black and white....   ::)  ::)  ::)

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Aug 4^th, 2024 at 2:10pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 4th, 2024 at 1:07pm: Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Aug 4th, 2024 at 12:47pm: 'economic empowerment' has been tried - Your mistake first up (well done...); "economic empowerment" means prosperous  participation in the economy. It's not something a nation "tries", it's something a nation achieves, to close the gap.  Do try to keep up.    Aye - so get forcing them to prosperously participate in the economy.

Your next mistake: people WANT prosperous participation in the economy, they don't have to be "forced" to want to escape poverty.

Admittedly, the "truthtellers" and "sovereigty" activists have their own ideas on properous participation, but even so, no one WANTS to live in poverty.


Quote:

Another empty phrase - what will you do to create this Nirvana in Arnhem Land where Albo is preaching to the Bonga-Bonga crowd?  (careful you don't step in the Bonga Bonga, Mr Albo...)

Albo is heading in the right direction, after losing the silly Voice referendum.

(Interesting to see Albo distancing himself from the NT Police Chief who had his face painted and got down in the dust for a smoking ceremony, part of his apology for past Police wrongs). 

Governments can choose to eradicate poverty, in a land of plenty.


Quote:

What are the plans --- well - no plans  - what are the concepts?  The possibilities?  None in the pipeline.... hmmmm ... any idea where you'd like to start?

Food production, training for green transition industries,  heath care industries, house building and maintenance. 


Quote:

I mean - I suggested a crocodile hand-bag and shoe industry ....

NOW you are on the right track, though consumer goods need to be able to compete on price. 


Quote:

WTF else can they do?  Whinge?

See above.


Quote:

"Ere, Albo - my 'ouse given for free ain't got air conditioning.... watcha gonna do about that?".

Your error: if a man has a job and a house,  he can afford airconditioning.


Quote:

"Easy, bro - I'll take some opportunity from the Tent City Slickers again.... hand it over, eh?"

You are stuck in the welfare dependency scenario; at least Albo is now looking at job creation - his responsibility - instead of silly "truth-telling" (...we already know of the past genocides, etc),  and silly "sovereignty"/"land rights"  issues.   


Quote:

Reminds me of the JFK election story - sheila sends in a note saying she'd vote for Kennedy if she had a television set - Kennedy emporium sends her one free - she writes back complaining it is black and white....   ::)  ::)  ::)

You getting lost in race issues again; you are as confused as the (black and white) activists.

Happy Indigenous People’s Day!

https://x.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1845945696471425444

What would Blair Cottrell say?


https://www.bitchute.com/video/ChuDnICOdgI9

Such as when is it gunna be enough?
how much money do these people need?
how much blood do these people need?
how much sacrifice on our behalf is gunna be enough for them
for them to finally feel like they're satisfied? -
and the answer is it will never be enough
it's never gunna be enough -
if you support this Voice referendum thing -
that's not gunna be enough -
there's gunna be something after that
and then there's gunna be something after that -
as Joel explained they're gunna be pushing
and pushing and pushing as much as possible
so you have to say no from the beginning - yeah -
you have to say no to everything these people ask for
and everything they demand -
they have no right to demand anything.

Are too easily misread - some of the words used are sweeping and seem to demand 'return' of whole countries to the 'Indigenous' - but only in situations where they fit the approved victimhood status established by the UN without too much thought.

I wouldn't pay much attention to it until they decide that the Irish should re-take Ireland, the Germans re-own all of Germany, all the furruners should be driven out of England, and all other such things.

It's a smarmy pack of nonsense in the modern age, which is why I have decided, for your benefit and for the ease of discussion, that all those born here are to be called Indigenous, and our 'natives' may be called Aboriginal Australians - but if they choose NOT to be Australians, citizenship is withdrawn, they can get an Aboriginal passport, all benefits of Australia cease and they revert to their 'traditional' lifestyle.

You all OK with that?

Bonus question:-  At what point does an individual become Indigenous to the country in which they were born .... and/or how many generations are required to make a person Indigenous?  Aborigines are not Indigenous to Australia by the old standard - they floated here - we boated here.... same-same ....

Indigeneity is a dead rubber......(ouch)  :o

Bobby. wrote on Oct 16^th, 2024 at 6:10am:

What would Blair Cottrell say?

Is he the source you should be be going to, re UN- determined  indigenous 'rights' (as if they are different from other groups'  'rights') - even given the apparent confusion re the concept of 'rights' at the UN  (the same body that posits the concept of "legal" war...).   


Quote:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ChuDnICOdgI9 Such as when is it gunna be enough? how much money do these people need? how much blood do these people need? how much sacrifice on our behalf is gunna be enough for them for them to finally feel like they're satisfied? - and the answer is it will never be enough it's never gunna be enough - if you support this Voice referendum thing - that's not gunna be enough - there's gunna be something after that and then there's gunna be something after that - as Joel explained they're gunna be pushing and pushing and pushing as much as possible so you have to say no from the beginning - yeah - you have to say no to everything these people ask for and everything they demand - they have no right to demand anything.

The UNUDHR says they, like everyone,  have a right to above-poverty participation in the economy (Article 23).

On that much, the UN is correct, and you - with your 'personal responsibility' mantra - are wrong.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 16^th, 2024 at 8:56am:

Bonus question:-  At what point does an individual become Indigenous to the country in which they were born .... and/or how many generations are required to make a person Indigenous?  Aborigines are not Indigenous to Australia by the old standard - they floated here - we boated here.... same-same .... Indigeneity is a dead rubber......(ouch)  :o

I agree; and in fact the UNUniversalDHR doesn't touch the issue of indigeneity, which is an afterthought caused by the failure of the modern economy to accommodate/ease former members of hunter-gatherer cultures into the modern world.

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 16^th, 2024 at 12:35pm:

The UNUDHR says they, like everyone,  have a right to above-poverty participation in the economy (Article 23). On that much, the UN is correct, and you - with your 'personal responsibility' mantra - are wrong.

Read FD's rant on the front page:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/articles/racism-government-imposed-sacred-cows-wrapped-woolly-fuzz-political-correctness.html

White people will be banned from Uluru. All non-aborigines will be, and presumably those aborigines who are from the wrong tribal group. Clearly, this is racist. Chances are, women won’t be allowed up there either, even if they have the correct skin colour. Even more concerning is that this is justified on spiritual grounds. One group’s spiritual views are so much more important than everyone else’s that the government has enshrined them in legislation so that our most iconic natural monument can be fenced off.

This is not about the legitimacy of the spiritual views of aboriginal people. This is about imposing those views on people who do not share them, and doing so on racist lines. You don’t need to impose your religious beliefs on other people as a test of whether they are sufficiently respected, unless you are a terrorist, or apparently, aboriginal. It is no less absurd than putting a fence around Bondi beach and only allowing white Christians to go for a swim. The rest of you can come and visit and stay in our hotels, but you can only take photos from a respectful distance. We get really upset if you make a big deal about it, so please politely acknowledge our spiritual rights.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 16^th, 2024 at 12:52pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 16th, 2024 at 12:35pm: The UNUDHR says they, like everyone,  have a right to above-poverty participation in the economy (Article 23). On that much, the UN is correct, and you - with your 'personal responsibility' mantra - are wrong. Read FD's rant on the front page: https://www.ozpolitic.com/articles/racism-government-imposed-sacred-cows-wrapped-woolly-fuzz-political-correctness.html White people will be banned from Uluru. All non-aborigines will be, and presumably those aborigines who are from the wrong tribal group. Clearly, this is racist. Chances are, women won’t be allowed up there either, even if they have the correct skin colour. Even more concerning is that this is justified on spiritual grounds. One group’s spiritual views are so much more important than everyone else’s that the government has enshrined them in legislation so that our most iconic natural monument can be fenced off. This is not about the legitimacy of the spiritual views of aboriginal people. This is about imposing those views on people who do not share them, and doing so on racist lines. You don’t need to impose your religious beliefs on other people as a test of whether they are sufficiently respected, unless you are a terrorist, or apparently, aboriginal. It is no less absurd than putting a fence around Bondi beach and only allowing white Christians to go for a swim. The rest of you can come and visit and stay in our hotels, but you can only take photos from a respectful distance. We get really upset if you make a big deal about it, so please politely acknowledge our spiritual rights.

I see no relation between the desirability of the 'universal rights' enumerated in the UNUDHR, with this very reasonable paragraph from FD (...and I didn't think I would ever find something reasonable from FD...)   

Note: the UN UDHR is concerned with the 'rights' of human beings, regardless of race and culture and beliefs. 

[But as I have argued with FD before, 'rights' don't exist in nature, rather they are expressions of human desires based on human concepts of morality, justice and fairness, and must therefore be enshrined in law.]   

They have the right to above-poverty participation in the economy .........................

A right is not translatable into an absolute guarantee of the results from that right.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 16^th, 2024 at 12:35pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 16th, 2024 at 6:10am: What would Blair Cottrell say? Is he the source you should be be going to, re UN- determined  indigenous 'rights' (as if they are different from other groups'  'rights') - even given the apparent confusion re the concept of 'rights' at the UN  (the same body that posits the concept of "legal" war...).    Quote: https://www.bitchute.com/video/ChuDnICOdgI9 Such as when is it gunna be enough? how much money do these people need? how much blood do these people need? how much sacrifice on our behalf is gunna be enough for them for them to finally feel like they're satisfied? - and the answer is it will never be enough it's never gunna be enough - if you support this Voice referendum thing - that's not gunna be enough - there's gunna be something after that and then there's gunna be something after that - as Joel explained they're gunna be pushing and pushing and pushing as much as possible so you have to say no from the beginning - yeah - you have to say no to everything these people ask for and everything they demand - they have no right to demand anything. The UNUDHR says they, like everyone,  have a right to above-poverty participation in the economy (Article 23). On that much, the UN is correct, and you - with your 'personal responsibility' mantra - are wrong.

Well, PARTICIPATE, then.
Getting pissed by noon and abusing your wife and kiddies is not participation.

Now boys - this IS an important point - it does, however, require a functioning mind to work it out:-

"They have the right to above-poverty participation in the economy .........................

A right is not translatable into an absolute guarantee of the results from that right....."

I first heard that from reading someone's view on 'the right to the pursuit of happiness' in the US Constitution.... he stated that the 'right to pursue happiness' was by no means or interpretation an actual right to succeed in that pursuit.

Same here... an Aboriginal living in Cape Remotaria has the same right to above-poverty participation in the economy as anyone else..... he may not get it due to a variety of circumstances, not least living in Cape Remotaria where there is no work.... his Right has been in no way abrogated by anyone.

That poppets - is the very vast chasm between shoving an emotional interpretation onto a concept, and considering that concept in terms of simple reality.  You see a lot of that with the UN at this time over Israel... facile comments that mean nothing in reality, but are more 'motherhood' statements - and even at that biased to prefer one child over another.

So it's UN this
And UN that,
All others get behind,
But it's please to walk in front, others
When jihad's on the wind....

I wouldn't bother with what the UN says... they are 99.9% simple statements of some feeling about something, and far too often couched in terms that are wide open to interpretation - just like this.  One of those 'rights of the indigenous (as undefined)' is possession and control of 'their land' ... whatever that's supposed to mean in the modern age.

Jesus - every property owner bought and paid for would like a cast-iron guarantee that his 'government' will not compulsorily acquire his property at any time.... so what is this special 'right' about?  Whatever they claim to be 'their land' that they never SETTLED on but wandered about on for dinner and every square inch they ever wandered across?

FFS ......

Re: participation


A man alleged to have fatally stabbed his wife to death in the Northern Territory had a violent history against women and in 2018 kicked his wife in the face and used a ‘nulla nulla’ to fracture her legs, resulting in her being flown to hospital.

On Monday the 46-year-old man was arrested by police after allegedly stabbing his long-term partner in a remote Indigenous community on the edge of the Tanami Desert in the Northern Territory. He has an extensive criminal record dating back to 1995 with a history of multiple attacks against women.

Police say the man, who has not yet been charged, was assaulted by ‘unknown community members’ as part of a ‘reprisal’ following his alleged attack on the woman, who has become the seventh person in the Top End to be killed in an alleged domestic related incident since the start of June.

Court documents obtained by The Australian reveal his partner - who he had previously seriously assaulted - told the Northern Territory Supreme Court how she was scared of him, and feared she would be hurt by him again.

He had been released from custody in April this year following an 18 month stint in jail after being convicted of aggravated assault against the woman he has now been arrested for allegedly stabbing to death.

In a separate criminal case, he was sentenced to an 18 month non parole in prison in March 2019 - despite the maximum sentence available being 14 years - after pleading guilty to beating his partner with a ‘nulla nulla’ - an Aboriginal club or hunting stick used as a weapon or tool for hunting - fracturing both legs. A nulla nulla is often made from the timber of very hard trees and is just as hard as steel, averaging about 3.5cm thick 1.5m long.

The woman had to be flown to Darwin, where she was hospitalised for six days. In a victim impact statement she said she was scared of her partner, and worried about returning to their community fearing she would be hurt again.

Despite a significant criminal history ranging from aggravated assaults to theft, criminal damage, unlawful entry, breaching bail and driving offences and multiple assaults on women, he was sentenced to a non-parole period of 18 months jail, just six months more than the minimum required by legislation.

In 2008 he was sentenced to 14 days imprisonment for assault on a female; a month’s imprisonment in 2011 for the same offence; and 12 months in 2014 for the same offence.

“It seems that none of those penalties and none of those times in prison has caused you to stop offending,” acting-NT Supreme Court Justice Trevor Riley said in his sentencing remarks. “The present offending constitutes an escalation or an increase in seriousness of the criminal conduct of yourself in relation to others.”

“Given your history of offending, your conduct while you were drunk and the circumstances of the present offending, I assess your prospects for rehabilitation as being poor to moderate.

“Somehow the message must be heard that it is conduct which is completely unacceptable.

That message, as the Crown prosecutor has indicated, does not seem to be getting through,” Justice Riley said.

After the man was released on parole in November 2019, it was less than a year before he appeared in court on another aggravated assault and breach of domestic violence order charge, where he was again sentenced to three months jail for the aggravated assault charge and seven days for contravening a DVO.

His most recent arrest has raised further questions surrounding weak sentencing for violent offending against women in the Territory, after The Australian revealed last month another man - with a three decade history of assaulting women - was sentenced to less than one-third of the maximum sentence by the Northern Territory’s chief justice after cutting through his partner’s achilles tendon, and is now also charged with murdering his previous victim.

That man, who cannot be named, was earlier this year charged with the murder of that victim.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/extensive-criminal-history-of-man-accused-of-stabbing-partner-to-death-in-remote-northern-territory-community/news-story/2d3f6a9d4cb94409df44f5615ce1fdc8

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 16^th, 2024 at 6:19pm:

Now boys - this IS an important point - it does, however, require a functioning mind to work it out:-

 

...which, sadly,  guarantees your analysis will be faulty....let's look:


Quote:

"They have the right to above-poverty participation in the economy ......................... A right is not translatable into an absolute guarantee of the results from that right....." I first heard that from reading someone's view on 'the right to the pursuit of happiness' in the US Constitution.... he stated that the 'right to pursue happiness' was by no means or interpretation an actual right to succeed in that pursuit.

Your error (sorry if I offend Unsub re "smugness"):

1. No bill of rights - including the UNUDHR - has ever mentioned  a 'right' to happiness; the US phrase "pursuit of" merely emphasizes the 'right' of individuals to pursue it, while  implying freedom from government regulation. 

But government is needed to establish rule of law, to achieve the common welfare, and avoid chaos/anarchy among self-interested,  competitive individuals.   


2. The 'right to pursue happiness' is compatible with justice only if access to above poverty employment is guaranteed - you can't be happy in systemic (generational) involuantary poverty.

[You continue to  confuse self-imposed poverty which affects sick individuals, with systemically imposed  poverty which unjustly affects healthy individuals.

Like the half of the US population who are living from paycheck to paycheck (or on welfare) - the definition of unjust financial stress,  in a land of plenty. 


Quote:

Same here... an Aboriginal living in Cape Remotaria has the same right to above-poverty participation in the economy as anyone else..... he may not get it due to a variety of circumstances, not least living in Cape Remotaria where there is no work.... his Right has been in no way abrogated by anyone.

Everyone who is involuntarily unemployed is suffering an injustice.  Governments can - indeed have the responsibility to - move people (from "Remotoria)" if they don't want to create employment there; and the unemployment problem in the Alice and other regional  centres remains to be solved.


Quote:

That poppets - is the very vast chasm between shoving an emotional interpretation onto a concept, and considering that concept in terms of simple reality.

Your error: simple justice and fairness - as expressed in UNUDHR article 23 (the 'right' to above- poverty employmnet/participation), isn't   "shoving an emotional interpretation onto a concept", it's simple justice, as conceived by men who were seeking to "save mankind from the scourge of war"(UN Charter) who are open to the concepts of morality, justice and fairness, as opposed to survival of the fittest and the delusion of 'personal responsibility'.


Quote:

You see a lot of that with the UN at this time over Israel... facile comments that mean nothing in reality, but are more 'motherhood' statements - and even at that biased to prefer one child over another.

 

Not "one child over another", but ALL children....which is why the ICC has an arrest warrant for both Netanyahu and Hamas.


Quote:

I wouldn't bother with what the UN says... they are 99.9% simple statements of some feeling about something, and far too often couched in terms that are wide open to interpretation - just like this.  One of those 'rights of the indigenous (as undefined)' is possession and control of 'their land' ... whatever that's supposed to mean in the modern age.

You arguing with someone  else?

I already addressed the mistake in the UN's attempt  to differentiate between universal rights cf rights of different groups.


Quote:

Jesus - every property owner bought and paid for would like a cast-iron guarantee that his 'government' will not compulsorily acquire his property at any time....

We are talking about the primary right (necessity) of all to housing, not secondary rights of property ownership.


Quote:

so what is this special 'right' about?  Whatever they claim to be 'their land' that they never SETTLED on but wandered about on for dinner and every square inch they ever wandered across? FFS ......

Diversion; the topic is the right to above poverty participation. (article 23). 

Do stay on track, now that we have sorted out the difference between the (non existant) 'right' to happiness,  the right to pursue happiness, and the right to food, housing and employment. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 17^th, 2024 at 6:57pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 16th, 2024 at 6:19pm: Now boys - this IS an important point - it does, however, require a functioning mind to work it out:-   ...which, sadly,  guarantees your analysis will be faulty....let's look: Quote: "They have the right to above-poverty participation in the economy ......................... A right is not translatable into an absolute guarantee of the results from that right....." I first heard that from reading someone's view on 'the right to the pursuit of happiness' in the US Constitution.... he stated that the 'right to pursue happiness' was by no means or interpretation an actual right to succeed in that pursuit. Your error (sorry if I offend Unsub re "smugness"): 1. No bill of rights - including the UNUDHR - has ever mentioned  a 'right' to happiness; the US phrase "pursuit of" merely emphasizes the 'right' of individuals to pursue it, while  implying freedom from government regulation.  But government is needed to establish rule of law, to achieve the common welfare, and avoid chaos/anarchy among self-interested,  competitive individuals.    2. The 'right to pursue happiness' is compatible with justice only if access to above poverty employment is guaranteed - you can't be happy in systemic (generational) involuantary poverty. [You continue to  confuse self-imposed poverty which affects sick individuals, with systemically imposed  poverty which unjustly affects healthy individuals. Like the half of the US population who are living from paycheck to paycheck (or on welfare) - the definition of unjust financial stress,  in a land of plenty.  [quote]Same here... an Aboriginal living in Cape Remotaria has the same right to above-poverty participation in the economy as anyone else..... he may not get it due to a variety of circumstances, not least living in Cape Remotaria where there is no work.... his Right has been in no way abrogated by anyone.

Everyone who is involuntarily unemployed is suffering an injustice.  Governments can - indeed have the responsibility to - move people (from "Remotoria)" if they don't want to create employment there; and the unemployment problem in the Alice and other regional  centres remains to be solved.


Quote:

That poppets - is the very vast chasm between shoving an emotional interpretation onto a concept, and considering that concept in terms of simple reality.

Your error: simple justice and fairness - as expressed in UNUDHR article 23 (the 'right' to above- poverty employmnet/participation), isn't   "shoving an emotional interpretation onto a concept", it's simple justice, as conceived by men who were seeking to "save mankind from the scourge of war"(UN Charter) who are open to the concepts of morality, justice and fairness, as opposed to survival of the fittest and the delusion of 'personal responsibility'.


Quote:

You see a lot of that with the UN at this time over Israel... facile comments that mean nothing in reality, but are more 'motherhood' statements - and even at that biased to prefer one child over another.

 

Not "one child over another", but ALL children....which is why the ICC has an arrest warrant for both Netanyahu and Hamas.


Quote:

I wouldn't bother with what the UN says... they are 99.9% simple statements of some feeling about something, and far too often couched in terms that are wide open to interpretation - just like this.  One of those 'rights of the indigenous (as undefined)' is possession and control of 'their land' ... whatever that's supposed to mean in the modern age.

You arguing with someone  else?

I already addressed the mistake in the UN's attempt  to differentiate between universal rights cf rights of different groups.


Quote:

Jesus - every property owner bought and paid for would like a cast-iron guarantee that his 'government' will not compulsorily acquire his property at any time....

We are talking about the primary right (necessity) of all to housing, not secondary rights of property ownership.


Quote:

so what is this special 'right' about?  Whatever they claim to be 'their land' that they never SETTLED on but wandered about on for dinner and every square inch they ever wandered across? FFS ......

Diversion; the topic is the right to above poverty participation. (article 23). 

Do stay on track, now that we have sorted out the difference between the (non existant) 'right' to happiness,  the right to pursue happiness, and the right to food, housing and employment. 
[/quote]

Do you actually have any idea what you are talking about?

Aborigines ARE participating in the economythat functions above poverty - they are just not contributing enough to themselves BE above poverty.

Go give them jobs ....  here we go again... round and round.

Idiot - I just said that the right to pursuit of happiness did not guarantee happiness - and you come in and pontificate as if I said something different.

Jasin is right!!

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 17^th, 2024 at 7:31pm:

Do you actually have any idea what you are talking about?

Yes, which is why I studiously replied to every point you made, in an attempt to open your eyes.

I see your reply is VERY limited, I will break your first sentence into its parts because it doesn't  make sense when read straight through from start to finish:   


Quote:

1. Aborigines ARE participating in the economy..

Yes,  like everyone, either in the paid workforce, or subsisting on poverty-level 'welfare' (aka 'sit down money' among blacks)   


Quote:

2.... that functions above poverty

The Henderson poverty line is ABOVE the dole; even the BCA says Job Seeker is too low. 


Quote:

3. - they are just not contributing enough to themselves BE above poverty.

(I'll assume it should read "TO BE above poverty").

People in generational poverty generally have poor role models in dysfunctional families, making it difficult to "contribute to themselves", while often not even being able to afford good food, let alone practice good living habits.   


Quote:

Go give them jobs ....  here we go again... round and round.

That's the last bit; dealing with the social dysfunction resulting from generational poverty is the the first step, to get them off the 'merry-go-round'. 


Quote:

Idiot - I just said that the right to pursuit of happiness did not guarantee happiness - and you come in and pontificate as if I said something different.

I explained the inadequacy of your conception of "the right to pursue happiness"; you can't 'pursue happiness' while entangled in social dysfunction reinforced by poverty. 


Quote:

Jasin is right!!

Nah - Jasin accepts the ineffectiveness of the current attempt at establishing international law (post WW2), and hence is complicit in all the horrors that stem from acceptance of that ineffectiveness.

Good to see you've hit on the 'role modeling' - the cultural aspect of Generationals.

Solution:-  Steal them generations???

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 22^nd, 2024 at 11:03am:

Good to see you've hit on the 'role modeling' - the cultural aspect of Generationals. Solution:-  Steal them generations???

Gawd, the sloppy - or sneaky - thinking on your part is egregious.

I said People in generational poverty generally have poor role models in dysfunctional families

So you attempt to convert an economic problem  - entrenched generational poverty - to a wholly 'cultural' problem.

Newsflash: poverty - generational or not - has egregious social consequences among whites as well.

The UN is currently supporting terrorists.

NEED I SAY MORE.

Valkie wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 3:26pm:

The UN is currently supporting terrorists. NEED I SAY MORE.

Yes, you need to say more.

The ICC (an agency of the UN) has issued arrest warrants for the suspected war criminals Netanyahu and Putin. 

Valkie wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 3:26pm:

I HAVE A DREAM A WONDERFUL, PEACEFUL, BEAUTIFUL DREAM. A DREAM OF A WORLD THAT HAS NEVER KNOWN ISLAM A DREAM OF A WORLD FREE FROM THE HORRORS OF ISLAM.

A world without Islam is one thing; but entrenched poverty, soaring inequality, and disputes between nations resulting in endless wars remains......

.. be all right when the vaunted internationalist 'socialists' spread the poverty equally around and the entire world grinds to a halt ... meanwhile, of course, down in Cambra - those self-same 'internationalist socialists' are building up huge nest eggs while being paid to ruin this country economically and socially ...  the looming world disaster will not affect them.... their fellow travelers in 'the opposition' saw to that when Howard and Costello stole $232Bn from treasury to hide in a tax haven and use to generate endless funds for their own retirement and those of their confreres..... and then set about destroying the economy and the livelihoods of the 'lesser classes' so as to install Neo-feudalism and rule by having desperate peasants clawing for a feed and thus totally subservient to and dependent on the good will of their Lords.

But let's not think about that .... let's concentrate on the poor struggling hungry unclothed and abused Abo kid who won't go to school and is shipped off to the re-education camp for repeat serious serial crimes, and then has no real future apart from substance abuse, continuing the cycles of neglect and abuse, and revolving door prison for crimes as an adult and how this is some mythical 'new stolen generation created by entrenched disadvantage etc, etc'..... while his 'betters' - those who are the Silverbacks and are handling all the dough, are living the high life and feathering their own nests in true Cambra Style.....

The African King......

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 25^th, 2024 at 12:25pm:

.. be all right when the vaunted internationalist 'socialists' spread the poverty equally around and the entire world grinds to a halt ...

You keep repeating that Conservative lie, do try to learn:  eradication of poverty doesn't mean equality of outcome (whether national or international).

I just read this:

(9News.com.au)

What it's really like to live in the happiest country in the world

I live in the happiest country in the world.

Finland is the happiest country in the world, but I found happiness to Finns isn't about smiling and feeling joy.

Most of the time when you mention Finland's happy title to the locals, they say, "who did they survey?"

I moved to Finland at the end of 2022 and often people ask why I would want to leave Australia and move anywhere else, and of all places, Finland.

Well, for love, of course.

I met my Finnish wife, Annika, almost four years ago playing video games online during the coronavirus lockdown.

Our friendship grew and we waited patiently for Australia's international borders to reopen, and I was on one of the first planes out of the country, bound for Finland.

Over that holiday, I fell in love with the country, its nature, its people, its culture and, of course, Annika.

Within a year we were married, I packed up my life, and I was on my way to my new life in Finland.

Today is The International Day of Happiness and there is no better time to tell you why I think Finland is the happiest country in the world.

Finland has so much to offer, and a high quality of life is one of the foundations to Finnish society with a strong social welfare system that supports the population.

Free education, affordable healthcare and childcare, reliable infrastructure and public transport are just a few policies rooted in society - all paid for by high taxes.
But that tax is paid knowing the benefits received in return.

A healthy work-life balance is an integral part of Finnish society, when the workday ends, it ends.

Free time and family time begin.

By law, every child in Finland is entitled to municipal daycare enabling both parents to participate in the workforce.

Finns enjoy order and respect the law leading to a mutual respect between the Finnish government and its citizens.

A free democratic society that has the right to choose.

Finland also has a relatively low crime and corruption rate as well as one of the top countries in the world for press freedom, resulting in one of the safest countries in the world.

It was hard to fit in at first, my English could only get me so far.

It was very difficult to make new friends.

Finns usually don't make eye contact with strangers and small talk is non-existent.

If someone is waiting in a bus shelter, they would rather stand in the rain than share it.

Finns respect each other's privacy and personal space like nothing else and expect the same in return.

There is only one thing Finns love more than their personal space, and that's coffee.

Finns are a proud bunch, but you'll never see them boast about themselves.

They are humble in every sense of the word. Unless their favourite team is playing.

It was a big change from what I was used to at home.

But it didn't take long before I felt I was no longer a stranger and out came the most welcoming, friendly, and loving people I have ever met.

Always up for a chat and willing to help.

Finland is beautiful. Its winters are long and freezing, and its summers are warm and filled with life, but you really can't appreciate one without the other.

Every winter, almost daily, an army of snowploughs and workers ensure that the roads remain open, and many fields are turned into ice rinks.

The Everyman's Rights law gives everyone who visits and lives in Finland the freedom to use and roam its forests and lakes, keeping them free and accessible all year round.

Where you can fill your pockets with berries and mushrooms, catch fish with a simple rod and line and enjoy all the recreational areas they have to offer.

In Finland, the air is fresh, and the water is clean.

While Australians have their beaches, Finns have their summer cottages.

No matter the weather, you can jump in the sauna and sweat the day away!

The last year and a half has been an amazing learning experience.

Though it hasn't been easy.

Finland is an expensive country, and the job market is brutal and increasingly harder for foreigners to find work, especially without Finnish language skills.

I have spent the last eight months as a full-time student studying the Finnish language to help me find work.

But thanks to a strong social welfare system, that education has been free, and I have been supported the entire time, even as an immigrant.

Being the happiest country in the world doesn't mean everyone is happy.

To me, waking up next with my beautiful wife, Annika, having access to welfare and affordable healthcare, feeling safe to walk alone at night, and importantly, knowing that my children – with our first one due in June - are growing up with free education.

It's not only the responsibility of the individual to be happy but it also takes a government and a society to create an environment where its population can thrive.

graps take note...."socialism" or not....

Eradication of poverty doesn't mean equality in any way... it merely means eradication of poverty - which is a pipe dream - and until you come to grips with Comparative Poverty as your yardstick, you will never understand reality in that regard.

A Thai car builder makes ฿282,610 (THB)/yr .... the AYE for Thailand is  ฿184,920....... so is the Thai car worker not relatively more prosperous than the overall average?  With over a third more pre-tax income he/she should be able to purchase well... and live a relatively comfortable life...  if the Average is sufficient for all to live reasonably well.... clearly it is the lower end who suffer from poverty.

What is your proposal to remedy that?  More free bags of rice?

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 25^th, 2024 at 4:21pm:

Eradication of poverty doesn't mean equality in any way...

You just contradicted your previous statement, namely:

" 'socialists' spread the poverty equally"

- which means equality of poverty, surely.


Quote:

it merely means eradication of poverty - which is a pipe dream - and until you come to grips with Comparative Poverty as your yardstick, you will never understand reality in that regard.

1. In a world which has sufficient resources to supply everyone with the essentials, poverty is a crime committed by the governing authorities (who are blindly beholden to obsolete neoclassical 'scarcity' dogma). 

2.  In Oz, the Henderson Poverty Line defines relative (or comparative) poverty,(in Oz).

(google)

The Henderson Poverty Line is a benchmark income that indicates when a family's income is too low to support their basic needs.


Quote:

... if the Average is sufficient for all to live reasonably well.... clearly it is the lower end who suffer from poverty.

Yes. And?

The "lower end suffering in poverty" is exactly what Henderson says; do try to keep up. 

Note:  the 'average' income - which is distorted by a relatively few millionaires and billionaires - is not the same as the  'median' income - ie the wage which most people receive.


Quote:

What is your proposal to remedy that?  More free bags of rice?

(or rather, lower-price bags of rice at Woolies...)

Yes, plus adequate public housing, transport, education, healthcare, and essential utilities,  for those who can't afford private.

Paid for by 1.

higher taxes,   

or 2.

Essentials for 'the lower end' to be subsidized by Treasury (who can create money ex nihilo...), limited only by  the nation's productive capacity, not by debt and deficts as in the current  obsolete neoclassical monetary orthodoxy.

And don't forget the responsibility of everyone to particpate in useful work...

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 26^th, 2024 at 2:12pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 25th, 2024 at 4:21pm: Eradication of poverty doesn't mean equality in any way... You just contradicted your previous statement, namely: " 'socialists' spread the poverty equally" - which means equality of poverty, surely. Quote: it merely means eradication of poverty - which is a pipe dream - and until you come to grips with Comparative Poverty as your yardstick, you will never understand reality in that regard. 1. In a world which has sufficient resources to supply everyone with the essentials, poverty is a crime committed by the governing authorities (who are blindly beholden to obsolete neoclassical 'scarcity' dogma).  2.  In Oz, the Henderson Poverty Line defines relative (or comparative) poverty,(in Oz). (google) The Henderson Poverty Line is a benchmark income that indicates when a family's income is too low to support their basic needs. [quote]... if the Average is sufficient for all to live reasonably well.... clearly it is the lower end who suffer from poverty.

Yes. And?

The "lower end suffering in poverty" is exactly what Henderson says; do try to keep up. 

Note:  the 'average' income - which is distorted by a relatively few millionaires and billionaires - is not the same as the  'median' income - ie the wage which most people receive.


Quote:

What is your proposal to remedy that?  More free bags of rice?

(or rather, lower-price bags of rice at Woolies...)

Yes, plus adequate public housing, transport, education, healthcare, and essential utilities,  for those who can't afford private.

Paid for by 1.

higher taxes,   

or 2.

Essentials for 'the lower end' to be subsidized by Treasury (who can create money ex nihilo...), limited only by  the nation's productive capacity, not by debt and deficts as in the current  obsolete neoclassical monetary orthodoxy.

And don't forget the responsibility of everyone to particpate in useful work...


[/quote]
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 26^th, 2024 at 10:50pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 26th, 2024 at 2:12pm: Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 25th, 2024 at 4:21pm: Eradication of poverty doesn't mean equality in any way... You just contradicted your previous statement, namely: " 'socialists' spread the poverty equally" - which means equality of poverty, surely. Quote: it merely means eradication of poverty - which is a pipe dream - and until you come to grips with Comparative Poverty as your yardstick, you will never understand reality in that regard. 1. In a world which has sufficient resources to supply everyone with the essentials, poverty is a crime committed by the governing authorities (who are blindly beholden to obsolete neoclassical 'scarcity' dogma).  2.  In Oz, the Henderson Poverty Line defines relative (or comparative) poverty,(in Oz). (google) The Henderson Poverty Line is a benchmark income that indicates when a family's income is too low to support their basic needs. [quote]... if the Average is sufficient for all to live reasonably well.... clearly it is the lower end who suffer from poverty. Yes. And? The "lower end suffering in poverty" is exactly what Henderson says; do try to keep up.  Note:  the 'average' income - which is distorted by a relatively few millionaires and billionaires - is not the same as the  'median' income - ie the wage which most people receive. [quote]What is your proposal to remedy that?  More free bags of rice?

(or rather, lower-price bags of rice at Woolies...)

Yes, plus adequate public housing, transport, education, healthcare, and essential utilities,  for those who can't afford private.

Paid for by 1.

higher taxes,   

or 2.

Essentials for 'the lower end' to be subsidized by Treasury (who can create money ex nihilo...), limited only by  the nation's productive capacity, not by debt and deficts as in the current  obsolete neoclassical monetary orthodoxy.

And don't forget the responsibility of everyone to particpate in useful work...


[/quote]
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif[/quote]

You trying Brian's (non) response?

At least many of his points have substance, you are a merely a blind 'survival of the fittest' ideologue, incapable of defending your stance.

Deplorable. 

None so blind - no wonder nobody bothers much with your specious non-arguments.... dear old Skanka lapsed near instantly into personal ad homs and such... the wee champ ... and is still spinning wildly out of control and on fire as hshe plunges to earth....

State after State ..... one at a time..... look at Queenslund..... Greens 0 .... One Nation 0  ...people are frightened of what the fringes will do given the excesses of the mainline parties.... so are desperately stuck with trying to make sense of two equally bad parties and their 'policies' ... nobody knows for certain what the policies of the LNP are going to turn out to be - but they sure as hell knew the didn't want any more of Labor's.

Now then - what about YOUR 'free ride for Aboriginal Supremacists'?  Lay out your entire platform for us.  Don't do a Leftie - sorry - Skanka - both socks - and flood the page leaving no room for response.... just take it slowly one idea at a time for us to dismantle for you.

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 27^th, 2024 at 12:21pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 26th, 2024 at 10:50pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 26th, 2024 at 2:12pm: Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 25th, 2024 at 4:21pm: Eradication of poverty doesn't mean equality in any way... You just contradicted your previous statement, namely: " 'socialists' spread the poverty equally" - which means equality of poverty, surely. Quote: it merely means eradication of poverty - which is a pipe dream - and until you come to grips with Comparative Poverty as your yardstick, you will never understand reality in that regard. 1. In a world which has sufficient resources to supply everyone with the essentials, poverty is a crime committed by the governing authorities (who are blindly beholden to obsolete neoclassical 'scarcity' dogma).  2.  In Oz, the Henderson Poverty Line defines relative (or comparative) poverty,(in Oz). (google) The Henderson Poverty Line is a benchmark income that indicates when a family's income is too low to support their basic needs. [quote]... if the Average is sufficient for all to live reasonably well.... clearly it is the lower end who suffer from poverty. Yes. And? The "lower end suffering in poverty" is exactly what Henderson says; do try to keep up.  Note:  the 'average' income - which is distorted by a relatively few millionaires and billionaires - is not the same as the  'median' income - ie the wage which most people receive. [quote]What is your proposal to remedy that?  More free bags of rice? (or rather, lower-price bags of rice at Woolies...) Yes, plus adequate public housing, transport, education, healthcare, and essential utilities,  for those who can't afford private. Paid for by 1. higher taxes,    or 2. Essentials for 'the lower end' to be subsidized by Treasury (who can create money ex nihilo...), limited only by  the nation's productive capacity, not by debt and deficts as in the current  obsolete neoclassical monetary orthodoxy. And don't forget the responsibility of everyone to particpate in useful work...

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif[/quote]

You trying Brian's (non) response?

At least many of his points have substance, you are a merely a blind 'survival of the fittest' ideologue, incapable of defendong your stance.

Deplorable. 


[/quote]

Brian doesn't have or make any points.....

he just posts links to articles about feel good Aboriginal events or programs ....

says nothing ... and waits to either do his yawning emojie or call anyone countering the articles content racist, bigot, Islamaphobe or Transphobe.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 27^th, 2024 at 12:30pm:

None so blind - no wonder nobody bothers much with your specious non-arguments....

...while faith in  democracy itself is fast evaporating ...we await Nov. 6th with bated breathe;  don't shoot me I'm merely the messenger. 


Quote:

State after State ..... one at a time..... look at Queenslund..... Greens 0 .... One Nation 0  ...people are frightened of what the fringes will do given the excesses of the mainline parties.... so are desperately stuck with trying to make sense of two equally bad parties and their 'policies' ...

Occasionally you make a correct statement, but without understanding the REASONS for the electorate's desperation. 


Quote:

for the  nobody knows for certain what the policies of the LNP are going to turn out to be - but they sure as hell knew the didn't want any more of Labor's.

Correct, while the pollies play ther silly games: "the people want change, and we will give it to them..." ...hoping the people have poor memories....


Quote:

Now then - what about YOUR 'free ride for Aboriginal Supremacists'?

Achieve the goal: close the gap; and resist nonsense re black (or white) sovereignty.


Quote:

Lay out your entire platform for us.

Establish above poverty participation in the economy for all;  apparently it will require nothing less than the re-education of neoclassical economists, but so be it.

The collapse of national economies under the pressure of climate change might do the trick, if, in the meantime,  the US manages to avoid civil war caused by obsolete neoclassical economic orthodoxy.   

   

... are far too open to (mis)interpretation..... simple as that.  Wide-open high-sounding thought bubbles with no merit on the ground... they don't even know what Indigenous means!

Down Here we are taking back the language - EVERYONE born here is Indigenous - native to the land - so you'll have to discuss the 'UN RIGHTS OF THE ABORIGINES'. 

Is there any such document?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW8S0A--2CM

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 28^th, 2024 at 6:11am:

... are far too open to (mis)interpretation..... simple as that.

Problems  requiring widespread knowledge of economics, in order to fix those problems,  are of course open to the egregious effects of blind, self-interest-based  ideology. 


Quote:

Wide-open high-sounding thought bubbles with no merit on the ground... they don't even know what Indigenous means!

High-sounding?  Like the general welfare: I'd love to see Trump's efforts to achieve it (but the 'green new deal' is a scam according to Trump; if he's wrong, we are all stuffed).

And 'Indigenous'  means pre-colonization cultures; the UN itself is confused re preserving these cultures and their "rights"  in the modern world.


Quote:

Down Here we are taking back the language - EVERYONE born here is Indigenous - native to the land - so you'll have to discuss the 'UN RIGHTS OF THE ABORIGINES'.  Is there any such document?

No, the UN lumps Oz blacks with all "indigenous people".

https://starwarsintrocreator.kassellabs.io/#!/FOAR9tvNqzhxMyL4xIB4

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Oct 30^th, 2024 at 4:47pm:

https://starwarsintrocreator.kassellabs.io/#!/FOAR9tvNqzhxMyL4xIB4

'Click to play'?

No thanks.

You can't even address posts replying to the (often obscure) points you raise. (eg, see #46).  

It's rather brilliant and rather harmless - when flying in the dark and cloud, as you do, you should rely on your instruments - in this case your security system... if you fear to open links - you are of no value to anyone.

https://starwarsintrocreator.kassellabs.io/#!/FOAR9tvNqzhxMyL4xIB4

Sir Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Nov 1^st, 2024 at 8:12am:

It's rather brilliant and rather harmless - when flying in the dark and cloud, as you do, you should rely on your instruments - in this case your security system... if you fear to open links - you are of no value to anyone. https://starwarsintrocreator.kassellabs.io/#!/FOAR9tvNqzhxMyL4xIB4

Classic.

"dark and cloud" -  the epitome of neanderhal "freedom or death" ideology (especially if you are the stronger party).

Your mental incompetence means you can't address  the "freedom values" delusion, so you resort to posting links  without outlining the argument.

Deplorable.