ProudKangaroo wrote on Jun 30^th, 2024 at 4:05pm:


Oh, pal - so YOU get to decide what should be considered?                         You are delusional in your echo chamber, dude..... champ... junior.... delusions of grandeur now!!!   Next you'll try to tell us that handing freehold over Fraser Island to a few maybe local aborigines is the only way to progress!!!  What a hoot!!  .... tiger ......          

Maybe democracy and open discussion are just not your game....

"The Voice is being implemented by stealth using lawfare.'

Finally - your frank admission - one part at a time.... that's what stealth is all about, tiger .... you'll get there yet!!

Now then - about that demand for freehold control over Fraser Island - total control over the lend, eh - jest like the voice demand, champ... little bit at a time, eh ....  where is the need and where is the right?  They have native title and free shared usage, same rights as everyone else, and the right to proper 'ceremonies' at specified times - just not 24/7, you dig, tig?  None of this - "We used to skin fish there - that's a secred site!".

So where is their NEED for total Freehold control over all of Fraser Island and shutting in all other freeholders so as to make their residence untenable and excluding the 500,000 annual visitors .... and where is the Right to do so?

Not a hard question... get it right and I'm sure you'll have no trouble selling it to the majority freeholders on Fraser, buddy ... there are only about 147 or so - a clear majority - of them who aren't the 5 Abos..... they can scarcely count, eh?  What's 147 peaceful, quiet-living, honest citizens' rights compared to The Great Socialist Revolution, eh? .... here is your chance to not only justify your position but get it all together for your class presentation on Monday!!   Slick .... you can just bulldoze those people into the sand, eh?

That should be fun!!!!  The other kids at school won't oppose you like the real world does.... they're all little indoctrinated chicken shts, too!!  Unlike them, around 99% of those who respond with comments to these things oppose them utterly..... slick ...

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2024 at 6:36pm:


Interesting.

Will they use this housing as the headquarters of an advisory group enshrined in the constitution, to advise parliament on laws impacting Indigenous Australians?

Gnads wrote on Jul 4^th, 2024 at 12:51pm:


I'm not the one who started this thread and all the others with the intention of showing the use of Lawfare to implement the voice by stealth.

They're not my goalposts that keep being laughably missed or moved around.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jul 4^th, 2024 at 5:42pm:


Which components of the voice are those?

The advisory group to Parliament?

The enshrining of such a group in the constitution?

The... Well, that's it.  There was nothing else to The Voice.

Where does better housing for Indigenous Australians fall in there?

Is it like Pizzagate, is "housing" code for "constitution"?

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jul 5^th, 2024 at 7:42pm:


Path to Treaty isn't a constitutionally enshrined Indigenous representative body that would advise parliament on matters relating to Indigenous Australians.

Nice try though.

The truth-telling portion of the path to treaty is a good idea though.

So much of what was done to Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander people was never taught in schools.  We should learn from our history, not just pretend it didn't happen.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jul 6^th, 2024 at 12:33pm:


Stop being stupid.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jul 6^th, 2024 at 2:58pm:


Nope.

It was a proposed constitutional amendment to establish an advisory body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to provide input on laws and policies affecting them.

That's what it was.

That issue has been put to bed, as has been the cover you enjoyed to spread your hatred towards Indigenous Australians under the guise of "debate" around the vote.

That's why you're trying to pretend everything in this thread is an attempt to use lawfare to implement the voice by stealth, so you can continue to pretend to be debating that issue.

I know it sounds like an odd thing to say, but you won, get over it.