October 14, 2023 will one day be officially marked in the history books as the day Australians started to reclaim their country from the forces of darkness. The revolution is NOW!
Voting in a farce that out masters put on for us is hardly a revolt. They do this crap as social experiments. They play 3d chess. We won't get a say in anything important like digi ID, Misinfo or cbdc.
Interesting story - I do not think our elections are 'selections', as evidenced by the No victory. Instead, what happens, is the two major parties are co-opted and infiltrated by corporate interests and adopt the same policies on things that really matter, differing only in the trivia. It therefore doesn't matter which one gets in. Also, I do not think the US election was stolen. This has become a sad feature of the US that the losers will not concede. Hillary did the same thing, pretending Russia interfered and lost it for her (they didn't). Hillary lost because she was a corrupt P.O.S who sold influence as Secretary of State in return for donations to her family foundation. Trump lost fair and square because he didn't build the wall or do anything else he promised. Trump deserved to lose. Ann Coulter was right about Trump. About the only person fit for office in the US, and our only hope there, is RFK jr who I sincerely hope and wish would team up with Tulsi Gabbard now he's independent and make a concerted run at the Presidency.
You are right BUT the mere fact that we the people made our thoughts about this very clear indicates that we may have reached a critical mass of people who are awake. This is crucial as our NUMBERS is our primary (and maybe ONLY) defence....and the enemy knows that and always did!
These clandestine attacks on our national sovereignty, personal liberties and freedoms must be resisted. The oligarchs (and yes there are Australian ones) who covertly fund these UN democratical reforms must be resisted. Perhaps it may be becoming obvious to the sleeping what beckons.
thank you for great link - you know what else? Brave Jacinta Price - her parents were attacked in Alice Springs and egged because she supported No. How bad is that!
On reading your post again, I had missed this opportunity to comment. What a Virtue Signaling opportunity it was those in the more affluent suburbs. I still chuckle about the lyrics from Peter Garret, “it belongs to them let’s give it back “. How about Peter start with his own house in Balgowlah , you know that one worth about $3 million or something 😜
For anyone interested. although the Voice was a UN takeover attempt, the Aboriginal development issue is still critical.
The city-based Voice architects speak no Aboriginal languages and understand nothing about culture, thus they cannot communicate with the NT and Kimberly people let alone represent them. Yet they dominate the narrative, making demands that cannot benefit anybody in the north. Worse, they shout down measures that people in the north have been calling for, for 235 years.
There are three documents that cover all issues:
(1) The critical need for government recognition of Aboriginal languages and Law in Aboriginal communities (YNA);
(2) The causes of ill-health and premature death; and
(3) The actual genesis of the Northern Land Council as a tool of the Rothschilds and Rockefellers, overturning its intended role as administration for traditional consensus protocols for each tribe in the northern region.
i agree we must help aboriginal communities become better places to live, but separate laws is a problem imho rather than a solution, and cause unintended consequences. equality before the law is such an important principle.
Yes, but in the NT western law does not work. Law follows culture. I have proved this but the judiciary has kept it from the Australian public. Using Aboriginal law, it took me 20 minutes negotiation to convert Australia's most dysfunctional community, Bamyili, into a model community, which then changed its name to Burunga and commenced the Burunga Festivals. What southerners never understand is that in the NT, we have two distinct worlds sharing one continent. In the other, English is almost non-existent and we speak one or more of 60 NT languages. Almost every concept you would recognise does not exist here, and vice versa.
It is the inflexibility of southerners that leads so many Territorians to declare we must seccede. You demonstrate this necessity. Funnily enough, other countries and most immigrants get this.
The major strength of Western civilisation is the principle of equality of all before the law. One law for all and all are equal before it. This is what guarantees our human rights. Aboriginal people are the only group with any moral claim to a separate law because they can argue they were here first and don't want the imposition of western law. However, since 1901 Federation, they are part of one nation, Australia.
Having law come from culture is not always a good thing in the NT, as anyone who remembers the Yarralin case will know.
Yes, I have been to the Barunga festival. And yes, I know it's two different worlds in the one continent, and that English is indeed a foreign language in the remote communities. However I do not think the imposition of Western laws are the main problem in Aboriginal communities, in fact they protect the rights of women and girls.
Aboriginal communities will see an improvement in living standards if they adopt 99-year-leases as this is the fundamental building block of any sort of enterprise or individual ownership. That one small change would make such a world of difference.
There is no such thing as "equality before the law" in any western nation. There is, as everybody awake knows, "a law for the rich and a law for the poor".
And, as I suspected, you have no grasp whatsoever of the Aboriginal demand. They have not argued that being here first mandates their law. That is the kind of nonsense dribbled out by the Marcia Langtons of this world and parroted by fools of whatever culture. What they are saying is that they want their communities regulated by Aboriginal Law because that is what works WITHIN THE COMMUNITIES regardless of the application of western law. Their law is homogenous, seamlessly applied with family relationship law, ceremonial law, land management law, and so on.
As the Maori anthropologist Peter Buck tried to point out in the 19th century, a culture is like a chain. "Remove a link and the entire thing falls apart". It was 70 years before anybody comprehend his message.
The NT Police Officer Dave Walter, reputedely the toughest in the NT, proved this beyond all doubt when together we converted the dysfunctional community of Bamyili into the model community it is now, purely with the application of AboriginaL law; a process formally monitered by the then Director of Welfare, Bruce Alcorn, April to July, 1979. Once empowered with tribal power devolution, they changed the name to Burunga and became self-regulating.
And spare me the "that was OK in the old says" mantra. I have been doing this for half a century, long enough to understand that there is no Aboriginal problem; only a stupid westerner problem, reinforced by clever colonial powers who have never let go and intend never to let go. The funding for the referendum Yes vote exposed this for even Blind Freddie to see... BHP, Riotinto, Pfizer.
In referring to the rights of women and girls, you expose yourself as the same gurgler of propaganda as those who believe we were in Afghanistan to "help women and girls".
God help us.
This is why the most intelligent and articulate Aborigines have concluded that the only way they can survive is to declare national sovereignty over their own tribal lands and, following secession, to create a Singapore-style economy by trading in over-taxed commodities such as cigarettes and fuels. They will have little difficulty harnessing other foreign product sources considering the PR disaster that is the current Australian Government.
Also secondly I would say that Aboriginal law stems from traditional survivalist culture. But culture is not a museum piece fixed in time, it changes.
That survival culture was destroyed the second a shop with food, and taps with running water were installed. Many of the strict tribal rules were in place because they guaranteed survival in a culture without technology, living off the land, in small communities. Strict social systems of who can marry who, who cannot speak to who, who is a poison aunt etc, were all in place because they prevented incest and kept the tribes healthy and surviving for thousands of years.
This is obviously completely changed now. Aboriginal people are not museum pieces and they cannot shut off their communities and secede. For one thing they are completely dependent on Government money. Secondly many are run like fiefdoms because of the terrible power conferred by remoteness plus the ALRA.
So reforming the law to make it less racist, having one law for all with all equal before it really is our best hope. Tribal law should not be legally recognised. Australia cannot have a system of multilegalism and succeed in being any kind of fair or just place.
What I would say is that you are correct in that all are not equal before Australian law right now because the Racial Discrimination Act was suspended in order to enact race-based service delivery etc, which I argue is wrong.
To recount the unfairness of having different laws for different groups. When Galarrwuy Yunupingu’s son Makuma killed a woman he got just 15 months in prison. She is dead. She will never come back or be freed, her life is ended. For that he got less than 2 years, and why? The court took into account tribal rules sentencing him to a period of exile in central australia and a spearing in the leg that his relative Sidney took for him.
This is manifestly unjust. He should have faced the full force of the law like anyone else would. Anything less is a betrayal of that woman’s right to justice. But Galarrwuy was a big man at Ski Beach, in charge of a lot of things.
So I argue that the best interests of justice is to return Australian law to the guiding principle of one law for all with all equal before it. It will never be a perfect system but equality before the law is our best hope for a fair society.
Also the second problem you get is other groups ask for separate laws. Islam is right now lobbying for separate Sharia courts in a system of multilegalism.
Your main grievance appears to be the inequality of access to justice caused by wealth. That is a separate issue to whether the laws themselves are written to impartially apply to all.
When G Yunupingu was first made Chairman of the NLC, he was living in my house in Wulagi, Darwin. We worked closely together, later joined by Wes Lanhupuy. So I have a reasonable grasp of events and trends over the following half century. I am currently the researcher on the issue of law.
Within six months of assuming the Chair of the NLC, Yunupingu was hopelessly corrupt, as was the intention of the people who groomed him, the Pacific School of Administration, who sponsored young people for boarding school education in Queensland.
So, let me say, there is no law that says somebody can be speared as punishment. This is a fabrication that has gained currency since the mid 1970s, thanks to gormless Aboriginal legal aid lawyers, even more stupid judges. Just because a criminal claims there is such a law this does not make it so.
In fact, I later checked with the 1950s and 60s patrol officers and their wives, the latter of which were required to learn destert tribe-compatible first aid. I asked if they ever were required to treat thigh spearings and they said no such injury was ever encountered, although it had been previuously known that the kadaitja targeted the femoral artery as a killing blow. But this was not punishment but death, either as clan-derived assasination or hired killing. Punishment was not known.
Likewise, Makarrata is not a treaty but a conflict resolution process, ruled by Law and ceremonies. The word should never have been uttered but was introduced by an entirly unqualified young man who was later humiliated by clan elders for ursurping a role without quaslification.. This also had nothing to do with punishment, but the exposure of blood to end all further conflict.
Likewise, Yunupingu used "law" to escape underage sex, which was also forbidden under traditional law. Once again, a gullible judge undermined Law, aided and abbetted by souless journalists and ignor5ant social workers. For the recod, a girls grandmother decides when a girl is ready for child-bearing, generally around 19 years. This was the evidence produced by senior law women at a conference delivered to Darwin Midwives in the late -1980s.
You seem keen to follow the path of obstruction in deliberately misinterpreting situations you are wholly unqualified to comment upon. You and your ilk are a blight on the Aboriginal future.
Hello Rebekah, thanks for visiting and reading you wonderful journalist. Did you get bombarded with professionally printed signs on every street too? I thought Yes was going to win because their material was just everywhere. I was quite depressed about it. And then - boom! landslide!
October 14, 2023 will one day be officially marked in the history books as the day Australians started to reclaim their country from the forces of darkness. The revolution is NOW!
Voting in a farce that out masters put on for us is hardly a revolt. They do this crap as social experiments. They play 3d chess. We won't get a say in anything important like digi ID, Misinfo or cbdc.
That's the next step.
https://actionabletruth.substack.com/p/the-great-tax-strike
Interesting story - I do not think our elections are 'selections', as evidenced by the No victory. Instead, what happens, is the two major parties are co-opted and infiltrated by corporate interests and adopt the same policies on things that really matter, differing only in the trivia. It therefore doesn't matter which one gets in. Also, I do not think the US election was stolen. This has become a sad feature of the US that the losers will not concede. Hillary did the same thing, pretending Russia interfered and lost it for her (they didn't). Hillary lost because she was a corrupt P.O.S who sold influence as Secretary of State in return for donations to her family foundation. Trump lost fair and square because he didn't build the wall or do anything else he promised. Trump deserved to lose. Ann Coulter was right about Trump. About the only person fit for office in the US, and our only hope there, is RFK jr who I sincerely hope and wish would team up with Tulsi Gabbard now he's independent and make a concerted run at the Presidency.
Thanks. That's a big read. I'll get stuck into it...
You are right BUT the mere fact that we the people made our thoughts about this very clear indicates that we may have reached a critical mass of people who are awake. This is crucial as our NUMBERS is our primary (and maybe ONLY) defence....and the enemy knows that and always did!
For any with actual experience, this was never about Australian Aboriginal welfare whatsoever!
These clandestine attacks on our national sovereignty, personal liberties and freedoms must be resisted. The oligarchs (and yes there are Australian ones) who covertly fund these UN democratical reforms must be resisted. Perhaps it may be becoming obvious to the sleeping what beckons.
Congratulations to NO!
Great work Bridget. It takes a lot of courage to stand alone in what appears to be hostile territory. You are the best of us ma'am.
Nice article too, Alison showing the reality of life in the communities.
Please enjoy a video of two formidable Australians schooling the press: https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/wake-up-to-yourselves-warren-mundine-takes-aim-at-the-media-in-emotional-speech-after-historic-voice-to-parliament-defeat/news-story/bcacedf6a54b4b950864926f598e37ff
thank you for great link - you know what else? Brave Jacinta Price - her parents were attacked in Alice Springs and egged because she supported No. How bad is that!
Brave Jacinta comes from Brave Bess (and Dad), who I have admired for decades.
They are the best of Australia and the people that did that to them are sad.
Amazing! you are so well-informed. Yes, brave parents also. Bess Price a fiery parliamentarian herself!
On reading your post again, I had missed this opportunity to comment. What a Virtue Signaling opportunity it was those in the more affluent suburbs. I still chuckle about the lyrics from Peter Garret, “it belongs to them let’s give it back “. How about Peter start with his own house in Balgowlah , you know that one worth about $3 million or something 😜
For anyone interested. although the Voice was a UN takeover attempt, the Aboriginal development issue is still critical.
The city-based Voice architects speak no Aboriginal languages and understand nothing about culture, thus they cannot communicate with the NT and Kimberly people let alone represent them. Yet they dominate the narrative, making demands that cannot benefit anybody in the north. Worse, they shout down measures that people in the north have been calling for, for 235 years.
There are three documents that cover all issues:
(1) The critical need for government recognition of Aboriginal languages and Law in Aboriginal communities (YNA);
(2) The causes of ill-health and premature death; and
(3) The actual genesis of the Northern Land Council as a tool of the Rothschilds and Rockefellers, overturning its intended role as administration for traditional consensus protocols for each tribe in the northern region.
Copies can be obtained on request from tonyryan43@gmail.com
i agree we must help aboriginal communities become better places to live, but separate laws is a problem imho rather than a solution, and cause unintended consequences. equality before the law is such an important principle.
Yes, but in the NT western law does not work. Law follows culture. I have proved this but the judiciary has kept it from the Australian public. Using Aboriginal law, it took me 20 minutes negotiation to convert Australia's most dysfunctional community, Bamyili, into a model community, which then changed its name to Burunga and commenced the Burunga Festivals. What southerners never understand is that in the NT, we have two distinct worlds sharing one continent. In the other, English is almost non-existent and we speak one or more of 60 NT languages. Almost every concept you would recognise does not exist here, and vice versa.
It is the inflexibility of southerners that leads so many Territorians to declare we must seccede. You demonstrate this necessity. Funnily enough, other countries and most immigrants get this.
The major strength of Western civilisation is the principle of equality of all before the law. One law for all and all are equal before it. This is what guarantees our human rights. Aboriginal people are the only group with any moral claim to a separate law because they can argue they were here first and don't want the imposition of western law. However, since 1901 Federation, they are part of one nation, Australia.
Having law come from culture is not always a good thing in the NT, as anyone who remembers the Yarralin case will know.
Yes, I have been to the Barunga festival. And yes, I know it's two different worlds in the one continent, and that English is indeed a foreign language in the remote communities. However I do not think the imposition of Western laws are the main problem in Aboriginal communities, in fact they protect the rights of women and girls.
Aboriginal communities will see an improvement in living standards if they adopt 99-year-leases as this is the fundamental building block of any sort of enterprise or individual ownership. That one small change would make such a world of difference.
You are massively delusional.
There is no such thing as "equality before the law" in any western nation. There is, as everybody awake knows, "a law for the rich and a law for the poor".
And, as I suspected, you have no grasp whatsoever of the Aboriginal demand. They have not argued that being here first mandates their law. That is the kind of nonsense dribbled out by the Marcia Langtons of this world and parroted by fools of whatever culture. What they are saying is that they want their communities regulated by Aboriginal Law because that is what works WITHIN THE COMMUNITIES regardless of the application of western law. Their law is homogenous, seamlessly applied with family relationship law, ceremonial law, land management law, and so on.
As the Maori anthropologist Peter Buck tried to point out in the 19th century, a culture is like a chain. "Remove a link and the entire thing falls apart". It was 70 years before anybody comprehend his message.
The NT Police Officer Dave Walter, reputedely the toughest in the NT, proved this beyond all doubt when together we converted the dysfunctional community of Bamyili into the model community it is now, purely with the application of AboriginaL law; a process formally monitered by the then Director of Welfare, Bruce Alcorn, April to July, 1979. Once empowered with tribal power devolution, they changed the name to Burunga and became self-regulating.
And spare me the "that was OK in the old says" mantra. I have been doing this for half a century, long enough to understand that there is no Aboriginal problem; only a stupid westerner problem, reinforced by clever colonial powers who have never let go and intend never to let go. The funding for the referendum Yes vote exposed this for even Blind Freddie to see... BHP, Riotinto, Pfizer.
In referring to the rights of women and girls, you expose yourself as the same gurgler of propaganda as those who believe we were in Afghanistan to "help women and girls".
God help us.
This is why the most intelligent and articulate Aborigines have concluded that the only way they can survive is to declare national sovereignty over their own tribal lands and, following secession, to create a Singapore-style economy by trading in over-taxed commodities such as cigarettes and fuels. They will have little difficulty harnessing other foreign product sources considering the PR disaster that is the current Australian Government.
Also secondly I would say that Aboriginal law stems from traditional survivalist culture. But culture is not a museum piece fixed in time, it changes.
That survival culture was destroyed the second a shop with food, and taps with running water were installed. Many of the strict tribal rules were in place because they guaranteed survival in a culture without technology, living off the land, in small communities. Strict social systems of who can marry who, who cannot speak to who, who is a poison aunt etc, were all in place because they prevented incest and kept the tribes healthy and surviving for thousands of years.
This is obviously completely changed now. Aboriginal people are not museum pieces and they cannot shut off their communities and secede. For one thing they are completely dependent on Government money. Secondly many are run like fiefdoms because of the terrible power conferred by remoteness plus the ALRA.
So reforming the law to make it less racist, having one law for all with all equal before it really is our best hope. Tribal law should not be legally recognised. Australia cannot have a system of multilegalism and succeed in being any kind of fair or just place.
What I would say is that you are correct in that all are not equal before Australian law right now because the Racial Discrimination Act was suspended in order to enact race-based service delivery etc, which I argue is wrong.
To recount the unfairness of having different laws for different groups. When Galarrwuy Yunupingu’s son Makuma killed a woman he got just 15 months in prison. She is dead. She will never come back or be freed, her life is ended. For that he got less than 2 years, and why? The court took into account tribal rules sentencing him to a period of exile in central australia and a spearing in the leg that his relative Sidney took for him.
This is manifestly unjust. He should have faced the full force of the law like anyone else would. Anything less is a betrayal of that woman’s right to justice. But Galarrwuy was a big man at Ski Beach, in charge of a lot of things.
So I argue that the best interests of justice is to return Australian law to the guiding principle of one law for all with all equal before it. It will never be a perfect system but equality before the law is our best hope for a fair society.
Also the second problem you get is other groups ask for separate laws. Islam is right now lobbying for separate Sharia courts in a system of multilegalism.
Your main grievance appears to be the inequality of access to justice caused by wealth. That is a separate issue to whether the laws themselves are written to impartially apply to all.
When G Yunupingu was first made Chairman of the NLC, he was living in my house in Wulagi, Darwin. We worked closely together, later joined by Wes Lanhupuy. So I have a reasonable grasp of events and trends over the following half century. I am currently the researcher on the issue of law.
Within six months of assuming the Chair of the NLC, Yunupingu was hopelessly corrupt, as was the intention of the people who groomed him, the Pacific School of Administration, who sponsored young people for boarding school education in Queensland.
So, let me say, there is no law that says somebody can be speared as punishment. This is a fabrication that has gained currency since the mid 1970s, thanks to gormless Aboriginal legal aid lawyers, even more stupid judges. Just because a criminal claims there is such a law this does not make it so.
In fact, I later checked with the 1950s and 60s patrol officers and their wives, the latter of which were required to learn destert tribe-compatible first aid. I asked if they ever were required to treat thigh spearings and they said no such injury was ever encountered, although it had been previuously known that the kadaitja targeted the femoral artery as a killing blow. But this was not punishment but death, either as clan-derived assasination or hired killing. Punishment was not known.
Likewise, Makarrata is not a treaty but a conflict resolution process, ruled by Law and ceremonies. The word should never have been uttered but was introduced by an entirly unqualified young man who was later humiliated by clan elders for ursurping a role without quaslification.. This also had nothing to do with punishment, but the exposure of blood to end all further conflict.
Likewise, Yunupingu used "law" to escape underage sex, which was also forbidden under traditional law. Once again, a gullible judge undermined Law, aided and abbetted by souless journalists and ignor5ant social workers. For the recod, a girls grandmother decides when a girl is ready for child-bearing, generally around 19 years. This was the evidence produced by senior law women at a conference delivered to Darwin Midwives in the late -1980s.
You seem keen to follow the path of obstruction in deliberately misinterpreting situations you are wholly unqualified to comment upon. You and your ilk are a blight on the Aboriginal future.
My rich Teal electorate (Curtin) was one of the only WA electorates to fall to Yes as well! But only by a hair.
Hello Rebekah, thanks for visiting and reading you wonderful journalist. Did you get bombarded with professionally printed signs on every street too? I thought Yes was going to win because their material was just everywhere. I was quite depressed about it. And then - boom! landslide!