Their double registration is noted and they'll likely be fined.Quote:
Originally Posted by fud
Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk
Printable View
Their double registration is noted and they'll likely be fined.Quote:
Originally Posted by fud
Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk
I'd be more concerned about the agenda of the guys making that video, bro.Quote:
Originally Posted by dt333
An interesting perspective on song lines, harmonic resonance, energy fields, earths memory codes, consciousness grids and the effect on wars, famine, sickness, and not feeling well by dt333 new cult leader Grandmother Mulara.Quote:
Originally Posted by dt333
https://youtu.be/3KsU6BxoHgk?si=23iqTVd6Hz-RCoic
Spewing she didn’t mention how corporations actually choose our parliament and rig elections and how there are actually two constitutions like in other videos.
If you want to vote no because you think the negatives outweigh the positives, then vote no,
If you think the positives outweigh the negatives vote yes… It’s that simple.
I’m trying to find on YouTube the Bhagwan’s thoughts on this conundrum.
I didn't watch the video (seems pretty long), but it's interesting to see that it's really just clickbait to sell you stuff from their survivalist / gold bullion / cyber paranoia / supplement sponsors.Quote:
Originally Posted by dt333
https://youtu.be/SAqIypjk-5A
Sound familiar?
Haha, too familiar.
The voice isn’t a lobby or interest group.
The Voice would be an advisory body, offering advice in the form of ‘representations’, often in response to a request from the government or Parliament. Its advice would be formal and public. Government and Parliament would acknowledge when they were acting in response to a representation. The Voice would differ from a lobby group in all these ways.
https://www.unimelb.edu.au/voice/faqs/law-questions/isnt-a-voice-to-parliament-just-a-constitutionally-enshrined-lobby-group
Just out of interest what other interest groups/lobby groups are calling for similar voice rights? I’m genuinely interested to know!
The voice isn’t a lobby or interest group.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dweebles
The Voice would be an advisory body, offering advice in the form of ‘representations’, often in response to a request from the government or Parliament. Its advice would be formal and public. Government and Parliament would acknowledge when they were acting in response to a representation. The Voice would differ from a lobby group in all these ways.
https://www.unimelb.edu.au/voice/faq...ed-lobby-group
Just out of interest what other interest groups/lobby groups are calling for similar voice rights? I’m genuinely interested to know!
Today the National Press Club of Australia had Robert French AC, Former Chief Justice of Australia speak on "The Voice – Filling a Long Constitutional Silence".
It's worth watching/listening to clear the myths, misinformation surrounding this debate.
The benefits from a Yes will outweigh any risks he said
https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NS1413V001S00
There's also an article on his speech in the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...e-as-resentful
Brilliant speech from a very intelligent, ethical, and moral Australian, and the ultimate expert and authority on the Australian Constitution (think hard and do some serious fucking research before you challenge this dude - he was the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia)Quote:
Originally Posted by fud
Basically he destroyed every single argument put forward to vote NO and made the very obvious point that voting YES really is the only rational, reasonable, logical, sensible, and moral thing to do.
He even quoted John Howard former Liberal Prime Minister and darling of the conservative Right who spoke in favour of the Voice way back in the early 2000s when he was Prime Minister.
But we all know that the NO vote will still win, because as another legendary Aussie Ray Martin pointed out there are "dickheads and dinosaurs" out there preaching hate and fear and lies and deliberately misleading people.
Anyway it's all good, on the 15th October Australia will still be an awesome country to live in.
All of us should be thankful that we or our parents or grandparents or great grandparents immigrated to this Great Southern Land. We are truly blessed. it's the best country in the world.
It would be nice if we could find it in our hearts to accept and acknowledge and respect and to put it in writing that there were people here 60,000 years (thats 2,500 generations) before us here and that today most of those people are not enjoying the same quality of life that we are and that maybe a good start to fixing that would be for those people to have an official advisory say in how to fix that.
But it seems like the majority of Australians are so full of fear and denial, and anger and insecurity and hate that they won't vote for that.
It's sad but that's just the way it is.
Anyway enjoy the privileged life you have in this very privileged country.
All good. Enjoy! I certainly will! I had a fucken great day today.
It's the hypocrisy of it. It isn't a welcome, it's a political point being made every time. It's a welcome wrapped up in a sly dig at the people involuntarily subject to it. Hypocritical passive aggression designed to make you feel less Australian - if not completely Stateless. Or more "British" as you say. Some "welcome." I don't feel British at all. If I want to go back 50,000 years too nor do I feel particularly Cro-Magnon either. :miao:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamez11
That’s a brilliant speech.Quote:
Originally Posted by rooter
Briggs is awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soccerfan
Ah yes the thousands of years old tradition of passive aggression! I have to put up with being welcomed at the football, I'm practically stateless!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggurat
You're obviously a very sensitive soul!
Being welcoming to visitors is a universal custom, it's not restricted to aborigines. Whatever former polite practice of former times it was theatrically re-invented by Ernie Dingo 30 years ago, and in today's context it operates only as political. Hence it's not a welcome at all.
It is two sides of the same political coin as the acknowledgment of the country, which happens at the opening of any envelope these days.:what:
We may as well go back further and acknowledge that this great land once belonged to the dinosaurs and have their decedents (birds and reptiles) welcome us to country.
There are still dinosaurs around, apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou
I am voting yes but it doesn't matter. Australia will vote no.
It was a ceremony done long before any settlers got here, the Welcome Ceremony wasn’t a political statement 1000’s of years ago. Again, countries all over the world have their own culture, ceremonies, dance, language etc.. that is celebrated. As I stated before, most people are fascinated and humbled by the Haka. I loved seeing the Fiuji singing their the “Mosu Masu” at the league World Cup, the hymn separates them from all other nations… Divisive? Maybe, if you have an inferiority complex.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggurat
The only reason why it may be seen as a “sly dig” is because it may remind them of the atrocities of the invasion, but the ceremony itself was practiced before then as a sign of respect and humility. I personally believe it is been done in good faith, but I also understand it in it's full context and complexities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggurat
My comment was to someone referring to how his great, great, grandparents were born here so by virtue that makes him more Australian to others, otherwise, he would have just said “I’m born here, so I’m Australian”, so by his own definition he is 0.0003 as Australian as Indigenous Australians i.e "less Australian". I was also pointing out the fact that the person doing the ceremony, has connections to Australian land spanning 65,000 years before his great, great, great parents got here. And the fact he felt the ceremony was racist or he was being excluded seemed very strange to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggurat
Ps, you may not feel particularly Cro-Magnon but I’m sure there are many in your personal life who would disagree. :grimace: