Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jun 17^th, 2024 at 1:34pm:


I didn't realise me describing your behaviour and referring to you as "champ" here,

ProudKangaroo wrote on Jun 15^th, 2024 at 12:17am:


Would trigger you so very much...

Truth hurts?

And you've since gone on to call me "champ", which I've learned by your response must be the height of insult, 13 times...

Ouch.  Burn.

I said it once as a throwaway, and again replying to you after your champtrum.

You poor victim.  You're so oppressed.

Given the things you've called me in the past, who would have thought "champ" was the trigger point for you...

I don't know why it's always the self-proclaimed tough guy conservative types that cry the most over the lightest of pushback utilising their own tactics against them.

I mean, you did shoot yourself in the foot.  You posted a link, commented that it meant X, and the link itself disproves that claim as nowhere in there, does it support what you made up.

And you keep running from it, trying to gaslight me, spout diatribe after diatribe and then project all of that onto me as if you're the victim.

I knew you wouldn't be capable of any sort of good faith discussion or debate, but even I wasn't expecting this...

You did in fact shoot yourself in the foot, champ.

Frank wrote on Jun 17^th, 2024 at 6:02pm:


That has been my understanding of it historically.

Which is why I was asking.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/white-idiot-activists-told-to-butt-out-...

AAP  17/06/2024

White 'idiot' activists told to butt out of Top End

"Idiot" white activists from southern states are blocking economic development opportunities for Indigenous people in the Top End, according to a traditional owner group.

Top End Aboriginal Coastal Alliance Chair, Julius Kernan, told a federal parliamentary inquiry into a controversial mining and manufacturing project that Indigenous Territorians faced many "hurdles".

And siding with interstate environmentalists had previously caused them to "miss out" on the benefits projects bring, he said.

"It is time for our people to be recognised or identified as people to engage with in a culturally appropriate manner and have space to have a say without interruption from non-Indigenous idiots," Mr Kernan told a Senate inquiry examining the Middle Arm development in the Northern Territory on Monday.

It was a response to NT Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price's question about the detrimental effect of interstate environmental activists blocking projects that could bring economic development to Aboriginal people.

Mr Kernan said the group representing people from Top End coastal and sea country areas wants economic development to help improve education outcomes and create jobs for future generations of Indigenous Territorians.

"We want them to fill the roles our people have been missing out on," he said.

Renewable energy company, Suncable, denied helping to greenwash the project, known as the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct by the NT government.

It is already home to the Santos Darwin LNG and the INPEX Ichthys LNG processing facilities, with plans for gas-fracking company Tamboran Resources Limited to take a parcel of land at the site near Darwin.

Suncable Managing Director Cameron Garnsworthy said the company was in talks with the other four "green and forward-facing" future tenants, including prospective hydrogen producer Fortescue Future Industries.

"We don't see ourselves as greenwashing at all," he said.

"We're looking to supply low-cost electrons to those customers and we've entered into a number of (letters of intent) to that effect, which supports that basis of our business going forward."

The other proponents are Tivan and Avenira, with proposed critical mineral processing projects, and renewable energy company TEH2, which wants to develop a green hydrogen production facility

Economic and finance analyst, Joshua Runciman, said the LNG side of the $1.5 billion project, that has Commonwealth backing, was fraught with danger for taxpayers and may not yield an economic return.

He said Tamboran Resources Limited's proposed shale gas project in the Beetaloo Basin was highly uneconomic and not competitive with other suppliers around the globe."

"There are some real risks for taxpayers here, particularly around some of the investment in LNG infrastructure, because I really think Tamboran are going to face an uphill struggle to get financing for that project," he said.

Outside of the Canberra hearing, committee chair, South Australian Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young said Middle Arm would contribute to climate change.

"No wonder the local community, the tourism industry, the fishing industry, the schools, the nurses, the doctors, and the local traditional owners don't want this project," she said.

"It's time that the local Darwin community were listened to by representatives here in Canberra."

Larrakia woman Laniyuk said she had travelled to the inquiry from Darwin to help "protect" her country and people from the project.

"Our land, water, sacred sites, climate and the health of people in the NT - everything's at risk," she said in a statement.

"We stand with First Nations across the NT and Tiwi Islands staunchly opposing toxic gas expansion."

The hearing continues on Tuesday."

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jun 17^th, 2024 at 7:51pm:


Because that's what I understand it to mean.

I'm more interested in what you think it is, because none of those points are articulated in most of the articles you're posting and they don't align with those definitions.

Quote:


You're projecting again. I'm not afraid, I'm trying to understand. You're the one acting afraid, hence the impression of you projecting, because you're not answering the questions put to you and trying to weasel out of doing so.

Quote:


All you do is run from scrutiny and tell anyone who will listen that you won.

There is no competition.

I'm trying to understand what you mean by the voice and in that same context lawfare.

What you are attributing to them in the content you are posting highlight that you don't understand either of them.

So if you're done running off and boasting in an effort to even convince yourself that it's not just pantomime bravado and you're not in fact running scared, would you like to come back to the table and answer the questions?

ProudKangaroo wrote on Jun 17^th, 2024 at 9:33pm:


You know what I know it to be...

All that bravado there, champ, and you still don't address a single issue.  I need to convince myself of nothing - I merely assemble the news - you all lost about that 'sky channel' thing, didn't you, with most links to 'other' sites ..... but you!  Oh.. you're a doozie!!  You mean you can't see the voice by stealth yet - let alone the way lawfare interweaves with it to generate the very things voted down by the public?  Now I already told you that lawfare has many aspects..... have you actually read any of the things linked?

Just FYI - links that refer directly to lawfare claims that generate the voice by stealth direct often just disappear - not available..... even they are running scared in the knowledge that someone is collecting them.......... what does that tell you?

What is your opinion?  What about some of my commentaries?  Any chance of a direct discussion of those ... or do you prefer simply slagging?  I could get Smithy in to do that - or mothra when she's finished barring up her house after making peace with her local Tribesmen... what kind of neighbourhood is that?  LTYC would just hare off on some ... hare-brained pursuit .... but you?  You lay such claims to superiority!  Surely you can back those up???

Come right in - I know your next move.... come right in...

Frank wrote on Jun 17^th, 2024 at 9:43pm:


I agree with you, that's exactly what lawfare is.

Thanks Grap.

Is it fair to summarise that as the following,

You believe that Lawfare refers to the use of legal systems and principles by wealthier parties to overpower less financially equipped opponents, often leading to conflicts and misinterpretations, particularly in land claims. It exploits the judiciary's weaknesses, causing disputes and you've highlighted native title as one that matters to you.

Recent clarifications have distinguished native title from absolute ownership, reducing conflicts and enabling progress towards fair land distribution for native claimants.

Is that an accurate summation?