Select to expand quoteD3 said..
Apparently it's "blatant honesty"
Nah, not that guy, he left ages ago 
Select to expand quotesnoidberg said..
Yes FN I'm not great at writing/spelling probably because the school I went to in NZ spent more time teaching Maori culture songs than reading/writing. The reason we moved to Australia is 1) the weather, we love the sun and the surf and 2) was because although most of my friends and some of my family are Maori we were having trouble with visiting our local beaches as some Maori groups claiming the land were getting violent and wanting money for us to step foot on the sand.
Unfortunately power corrupts people and this is what you can expect at every beach, park or forest in Australia for your children if this voice passes.
I have never voted because I moved to Australia 25 years ago when I was 13 and have not applied for citizenship because I can see the country go to crap and I will move to wherever has less of a dictatorship. Voting gives the illusion of control to the people, they are just going to scam it anyway. I mean how did Dan Andrews get in again, honestly. More government isn't going to solve any problems that government caused in the first place.
Yes I am anti vax, anti government, anti child mutilation. I do believe the earth is round but lately I find myself beginning to question everything that we have been taught.
Writing and spelling are about noticing things and then copying them. Schooling quality shouldn't affect it, you just need to read and remember.
As for a place without dictatorship, what about Somalia? Anywhere you go in this world there is someone in control and your only way of getting what you want is to find a place you like and try and keep the government honest. Voting is a step in that direction.
Getting back to Somalia. It effectlively doesn't have a government. Is this the sort of government-free place you are after? Can you send a postcard once you are there?
The funny thing about the anti-Yes posters here is that they don't seem to be able to actually do their own research.
Select to expand quotesnoidberg said..
ABC lol, anyone still swallowing this MSM crap are completely deluded, look who funds the ABC. Anxiety, paranoia, loneliness is more likely something people get from reading MSM or sitting on social media all day. I avoid this garbage completely.
For you to understand better, here is a meme.
Nah, ABC just interviewed someone who's researched a book on the subject. You are so deep down in your rabbit warren that you can no longer distinguish between facts and fiction and are now stuck. Kinda sad TBH
Select to expand quotesnoidberg said..
ABC lol, anyone still swallowing this MSM crap are completely deluded, look who funds the ABC. Anxiety, paranoia, loneliness is more likely something people get from reading MSM or sitting on social media all day. I avoid this garbage completely.
For you to understand better, here is a meme.
Nah, ABC just interviewed someone who's researched and written book. It's not their views or their book.
Unfortunately you are so deep down in your rabbit warren that you can no longer distinguish between facts and fiction and are now stuck.
Kinda sad that you are that loneley, anxious and paranoid TBH
Select to expand quoteD3 said..psychojoe said..
Ha! D3. Ha! UN rights. The UN can suck my dick. The universal declaration of human rights was supposed to afford me 43 inescapable rights. 22 of them walked when someone got a cold.
www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
How many rights? Or are you being disingenuous?
Wow! We're down to 30 now. What a difference a few years makes.
Maybe there'll only be 26 next year. Need to wipe out a few more for the Assange situation.
Keep drinking your fluoride.
You'll find out next year another conspiracy theory is actually conspiracy fact when the court case going on in the US gets out to the public.
I am so sick of telling people "I told you so"
If your government cares for you so much, go get your BA.2.86 shot and while your at it the government is offering you all expenses paid gender reassignment.
Thank you for reminding me I have had one minute tooth filling since I was 14 years old. Dentists get rich where fluoride is not part of public health.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
Thank you for reminding me I have had one minute tooth filling since I was 14 years old. Dentists get rich where fluoride is not part of public health.
Yeah but you're only 15
I'll rather have a tooth filling than ADHD, alzheimer's soft bones or calcification of the organs and brain. Yep fluoride probably calcifies your teeth but what other parts of your body are unintentionally being calcified.
Select to expand quotesnoidberg said..
Keep drinking your fluoride.
You'll find out next year another conspiracy theory is actually conspiracy fact when the court case going on in the US gets out to the public.
I am so sick of telling people "I told you so"
If your government cares for you so much, go get your BA.2.86 shot and while your at it the government is offering you all expenses paid gender reassignment.
For those of us that have been here for a while (wasting time), we are still waiting for the 9/11 super trial to happen and then the outcome. Your's will have to wait until that one is done.
I was thinking earlier today after watching 'the amazing race' in India, how lucky are we that when we have a cut here one of the first things we try and do is rinse it with fresh water from the tap, because its clean. Its pretty great living in a country where you can generally count on that.
Fluoride? What has that ever done for anyone? I wonder how that has worked in Britain?
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
The funny thing about the anti-Yes posters here is that they don't seem to be able to actually do their own research.
Yes they do and here it is: 
I feel obliged to point out that these views are crazy and they are not mine. It's just a social media post that people are referring to for their source of 'research'. I have to say I cringe when I read 'your sitting back...'.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
Are you still claiming that Liberal party ministers and shadow ministers are Communists, like you said they were?
I have never heard of the people you mentioned and there is no reason why I should have but thee with thy obsessions for precision and assuming the high moral ground will no doubt retort with more denigration of my good self.
Suffice it to say I will vote NO to the referendum for no other reason than it is my democratic right to do so. That democratic right will most likely disappear if the referendum succeeds.
Select to expand quoteD3 said..cisco said..
I believe we live in the greatest country in the world and that is why so many people from all over the world want to immigrate here.
I believe altering the constitution as per the Voice referendum will be a disaster for this country.
You should watch that cynicism you have. It is not good for you.
Then tell us why you think that rather than just posting links to videos of other people's messaging.
I expressed three different views there. Are you referring to a particular one or all three???
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
So, to be clear, the Uluru Statement from the Heart is a one page message.
You seem to be quoting from the Referendum Council Final report.
I wonder if you read the bits in the report that clearly state Self Determination, Treaties and Reparations are clearly provided for in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
I think you did, because you pointed the Reparations one out to me, I hoping it means you approve and support it? (emphasis mine)
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples enshrines the importance of truth-telling,114 as does the United Nations General Assembly resolution on the basic principles on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law
I couldn't find any mention of Reparations relating to GDP, only relating to Gross Violations of Human rights.
To be clear The Uluru Statement of the Heart is a 26 page document. Of which the first page is often incorrectly cited as the whole Statement.
I will concede many claim only the first page is the only page that counts, however that is simply ignoring the other 25 pages and is more than a little missleading.
This is a link to all 14 documents related to the Uluru Statement. Document 14 is Titled Uluru Statement From the Heart and if you check the page numbering it is 26 pages long. Page 1 is the page many refer to as the statement.
www.niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-log/foi-2223-016.pdf
The Referendum Council site also clearly references and quotes the full 26 page document 14 as the Uluru Statement From the Heart.
Anyone trying to claim that Document 14 does not exist or is only one page is either deliberately lying or completely incompetant in reading comprehension. Unfortunately it is yet another reason why many simply do not trust this government or the proposed voice. There is far too much deciept occuring.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
He thinks that Yes leaders like former Liberal ministers and shadow ministers are Communists, which is pretty hilarious.
You have a habit of twisting and distorting what others say so you can put them down yet you lack the courage to put any of your own views forward.
You have no idea what I think.
Select to expand quotecisco said..
You have no idea what I think.
This is a good thing
Select to expand quoteParadox said..
To be clear The Uluru Statement of the Heart is a 26 page document. Of which the first page is often incorrectly cited as the whole Statement.
I will concede many claim only the first page is the only page that counts, however that is simply ignoring the other 25 pages and is more than a little missleading.
This is a link to all 14 documents related to the Uluru Statement. Document 14 is Titled Uluru Statement From the Heart and if you check the page numbering it is 26 pages long. Page 1 is the page many refer to as the statement.
www.niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-log/foi-2223-016.pdf
The Referendum Council site also clearly references and quotes the full 26 page document 14 as the Uluru Statement From the Heart.
Anyone trying to claim that Document 14 does not exist or is only one page is either deliberately lying or completely incompetant in reading comprehension. Unfortunately it is yet another reason why many simply do not trust this government or the proposed voice. There is far too much deciept occuring.
The lengthy Working Group Report that you provided a link to, clearly states that, "The working group will convene as soon as practicable and meet with the Referendum Council to convey the Uluru Statement from the Heart."
So lets go to the Final Report of the Referendum Council dated 30 June 2017, and see what length Uluru Statement was conveyed to them.
www.referendumcouncil.org.au/sites/default/files/report_attachments/Referendum_Council_Final_Report.pdf
Select to expand quotesnoidberg said..
I'll rather have a tooth filling than ADHD, alzheimer's soft bones or calcification of the organs and brain. Yep fluoride probably calcifies your teeth but what other parts of your body are unintentionally being calcified.
You're not supposed to eat the toothpaste. Spit it out.
Select to expand quotecisco said..Chris 249 said..
Are you still claiming that Liberal party ministers and shadow ministers are Communists, like you said they were?
I have never heard of the people you mentioned and there is no reason why I should have but thee with thy obsessions for precision and assuming the high moral ground will no doubt retort with more denigration of my good self.
Suffice it to say I will vote NO to the referendum for no other reason than it is my democratic right to do so. That democratic right will most likely disappear if the referendum succeeds.
If you had never heard of them then why on earth did you call them communists? It's pretty poor form to throw an insult at a whole bunch of people just because you can't be bothered to check your facts.
I'm not obsessed with precision, I'm obsessed with being fair, truthful and honest. Sorry if those things annoy you.
In this case it's not just fair, truthful and honest to say that it's BS to claim that all the Voice leaders are communists. To point out the reality, which is that even people like Liberal party former ministers and shadow ministers are in favour of the Voice, shows that it's not just a leftist idea.
In Australia, there is no hierarchy of descent [.] there must be no privilege of origin. The commitment is all. The commitment to Australia is the one thing needful to be a true Australian.
All Australians already have a voice to parliament, exercise it next Saturday and vote NO to the division of Australia by race.
Select to expand quotecisco said..Chris 249 said..
He thinks that Yes leaders like former Liberal ministers and shadow ministers are Communists, which is pretty hilarious.
You have a habit of twisting and distorting what others say so you can put them down yet you lack the courage to put any of your own views forward.
You have no idea what I think.
I did not twist or distort anything. You said quite clearly "Check the background of the Yes leaders and you will find they are dyed in the wool communists." If you did not think that then why the hell did you say it?
You didn't say that some of them were communists, or that some of them were allegedly communists or sympathisers or anything like that. You said clearly that the leaders were communists. Not some of them, not most of them, but the leaders as a whole.
You were the one distorting and twisting the truth. The truth is that quite a few leading figures are senior Liberals. For you to twist the fact that the Voice leaders come from both sides into a claim that they are communists is a complete distortion of the truth.
What you said was like me saying "you fill find that the No leaders are Nazis", which would also be a distortion of the truth since many of them are good people with reasonable views that I don't agree with on balance. There are good people leading both sides.
Select to expand quoteParadox said..D3 said..
So, to be clear, the Uluru Statement from the Heart is a one page message.
You seem to be quoting from the Referendum Council Final report.
I wonder if you read the bits in the report that clearly state Self Determination, Treaties and Reparations are clearly provided for in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
I think you did, because you pointed the Reparations one out to me, I hoping it means you approve and support it? (emphasis mine)
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples enshrines the importance of truth-telling,114 as does the United Nations General Assembly resolution on the basic principles on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law
I couldn't find any mention of Reparations relating to GDP, only relating to Gross Violations of Human rights.
To be clear The Uluru Statement of the Heart is a 26 page document. Of which the first page is often incorrectly cited as the whole Statement.
I will concede many claim only the first page is the only page that counts, however that is simply ignoring the other 25 pages and is more than a little missleading.
This is a link to all 14 documents related to the Uluru Statement. Document 14 is Titled Uluru Statement From the Heart and if you check the page numbering it is 26 pages long. Page 1 is the page many refer to as the statement.
www.niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-log/foi-2223-016.pdf
The Referendum Council site also clearly references and quotes the full 26 page document 14 as the Uluru Statement From the Heart.
Anyone trying to claim that Document 14 does not exist or is only one page is either deliberately lying or completely incompetant in reading comprehension. Unfortunately it is yet another reason why many simply do not trust this government or the proposed voice. There is far too much deciept occuring.
So when are you going to answer the questions asked by those who are trying to discuss things with you?
I have been thinking along the same lines as Aroney (in your video link) myself so I do believe that he may have a point. The problem is that people like you don't seem to be interested in actually discussing the issue. You make claims but you won't actually discuss them.
So come on, please tell us;
1 - do you think that sharia law should become part of the Australian legal system?
2 - Why did you say that Aronsay said the Voice "can effectively slow or stop progress on an issue with court challenges" when Aronsay actually said that it was only "arguable" that the High Court could decide that the Voice has such power? Why did you change his possibility into a certainty?
3- What do you mean by "a representation in a legal sense is a challenge"? Why do you think you know more about Fed Con and Admin law than I do?
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..Chris 249 said..
The funny thing about the anti-Yes posters here is that they don't seem to be able to actually do their own research.
Yes they do and here it is:
I feel obliged to point out that these views are crazy and they are not mine. It's just a social media post that people are referring to for their source of 'research'. I have to say I cringe when I read 'your sitting back...'.
It's pathetic and bizarre, isn't it. They are too gullible to actually read what the document referred to is all about, and that no one says that the Voice will make any of these recommendations.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
You said clearly that the leaders were communists. Not some of them, not most of them, but the leaders as a whole.
Semantics.
Select to expand quotepoor relative said..
This is a good thing
Three cheers for the monkey gallery.
Do you have anything constructive to add to the discussion??
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..FormulaNova said..Chris 249 said..
The funny thing about the anti-Yes posters here is that they don't seem to be able to actually do their own research.
Yes they do and here it is:
I feel obliged to point out that these views are crazy and they are not mine. It's just a social media post that people are referring to for their source of 'research'. I have to say I cringe when I read 'your sitting back...'.
It's pathetic and bizarre, isn't it. They are too gullible to actually read what the document referred to is all about, and that no one says that the Voice will make any of these recommendations.
We don't know what representations the Voice will make, we don't know how the representations will be made, we don't know how binding those representations will be on the parliament, we don't know how the people who make up the Voice will come to be there, we don't know if they can be removed, we don't know how many there will be. We do not know any detail on how it will operate
We do know the Uluru Statement from the heart has three objectives Voice, Treaty, Truth. We do know the voice is step one, its a matter of public record. We do know from the same public records some of the authors of the Uluru statement want reparations, we do know they want Aboriginal Soveriengty, we do know they want every one to pay the rent. We do know they want a transfer of power. Theses are matters of public record.
We do know that the constitution is the most important document in the country, what it says over rules anything parliament says or does and we know that The High court interprets it but we don't know how it will be interpreted by the High court.
We also know that if we get the constitution wrong it would be nigh impossible to undo.
Select to expand quoteParadox said..
To be clear The Uluru Statement of the Heart is a 26 page document. Of which the first page is often incorrectly cited as the whole Statement.
I will concede many claim only the first page is the only page that counts, however that is simply ignoring the other 25 pages and is more than a little missleading.
This is a link to all 14 documents related to the Uluru Statement. Document 14 is Titled Uluru Statement From the Heart and if you check the page numbering it is 26 pages long. Page 1 is the page many refer to as the statement.
www.niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-log/foi-2223-016.pdf
The Referendum Council site also clearly references and quotes the full 26 page document 14 as the Uluru Statement From the Heart.
Anyone trying to claim that Document 14 does not exist or is only one page is either deliberately lying or completely incompetant in reading comprehension. Unfortunately it is yet another reason why many simply do not trust this government or the proposed voice. There is far too much deciept occuring.
So, where in those 26 pages did you find
"Reparations in perpetuity based in GDP, recovery of stolen land, access to water, land and mineral rights."?
Who makes up these stories anyway? Are they throw-away comments that someone makes and then the next person embelishes them to make them sound even more interesting and so on?
I am still looking for someone that can validate that "aboriginals can just throw away their cars when they are done as the government just buys them a new one". Someone told me this years ago, and even then I thought there is no way that can be true.
I would be a rich man selling cars to those people if it were true, but it really mystifies me why someone would believe it and why they wouldn't think it through about whether it sounded possible or even likely.
But it's a good story to tell if you already are of the opinion that someone has it easier than you, so that's what you tell people.
Select to expand quotecammd said..Chris 249 said..FormulaNova said..Chris 249 said..
The funny thing about the anti-Yes posters here is that they don't seem to be able to actually do their own research.
Yes they do and here it is:
I feel obliged to point out that these views are crazy and they are not mine. It's just a social media post that people are referring to for their source of 'research'. I have to say I cringe when I read 'your sitting back...'.
It's pathetic and bizarre, isn't it. They are too gullible to actually read what the document referred to is all about, and that no one says that the Voice will make any of these recommendations.
We don't know what representations the Voice will make, we don't know how the representations will be made, we don't know how binding those representations will be on the parliament, we don't know how the people who make up the Voice will come to be there, we don't know if they can be removed, we don't know how many there will be. We do not know any detail on how it will operate
We do know the Uluru Statement from the heart has three objectives Voice, Treaty, Truth. We do know the voice is step one, its a matter of public record. We do know from the same public records some of the authors of the Uluru statement want reparations, we do know they want Aboriginal Soveriengty, we do know they want every one to pay the rent. We do know they want a transfer of power. Theses are matters of public record.
We do know that the constitution is the most important document in the country, what it says over rules anything parliament says or does and we know that The High court interprets it but we don't know how it will be interpreted by the High court.
We also know that if we get the constitution wrong it would be nigh impossible to undo.
We can read the wording to be used in the constitution. We can make up anything after that, negative or positive. Yes, a rogue group of politicians can dominate parliament and vote in 50% tax rates, land grabs, royalties for everything, water and mineral rights, all sorts of things.
But how likely is that? They could just as easily vote for Tasmania to become a separate republic.
