Come on Banjo Paterson, the only time Albo is not lying when he opens his mouth, is when he complains about being a welfare kid.

I stopped reading at "...I have read all 26 pages of Uluru Statement ,,'

It's simply impossible to discuss anything logically with someone so willfully blind (or possibly something more sinister?).

It seems true - facts don't care about your emotions.

.

Dear Hasbeen,

.

You wrote :

« Come on Banjo Paterson, the only time Albo is not lying when he opens his mouth, is when he complains about being a welfare kid. »
.

I’m not so sure about that, Hasbeen. I suspect that anybody who manages to fight and struggle his way to the top of the heap in our political jungle dispenses quite a few truths in his discourse if only to fool the enemy.

You can be sure that Aesop’s fable “The boy who cried wolf” (or “no wolf”) holds no secret for Albo or any of our Prime Ministers – past or future. It’s just that some are better at lying than others. ScoMo happened to be something of an exception. He simply didn’t know there was any difference at all between the two, lies and truth.

I don’t think the problem is there, Hasbeen. I think it’s more psychological, a personality trait, more to do with our outlook on life. If we are optimistic, we tend to see things positively and are generally confident and hopeful of what the future holds. We see the world as full of potential opportunities. If we are pessimistic, we tend to observe mainly the negative aspects of everything around us, thinking of all the potential dangers and pitfalls on the way. Of course, we can also be a little bit of both, alternately.

Unfortunately, to make things even more complicated, conspiracy theories have become rife since Donald Trump’s false accusation that the US presidential election in 2020 was rigged. The phenomenon spread like wildfire and has had a negative impact worldwide in a multitude of social and political domains. Disinformation and misinformation are now permeating and polluting almost every aspect of our lives.

Research published by the American Psychological Association found that people can be prone to believe in conspiracy theories due to a combination of personality traits and motivations, including relying strongly on their intuition, feeling a sense of antagonism and superiority toward others, and perceiving threats in their environment.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

The research also revealed that people with certain personality traits, such as a sense of antagonism toward others and high levels of paranoia, were more prone to believe conspiracy theories. Those who strongly believed in conspiracy theories were also more likely to be insecure, paranoid, emotionally volatile, impulsive, suspicious, withdrawn, manipulative, egocentric and eccentric.

While those who come under that category are probably only a relatively small minority, their compulsive negative attitude automatically sets off a snowballing effect across social media, and 24-hour news cycles that is stimulated and amplified by increased accessibility to information.

Having grown up in the Queensland bush with a large amount of autonomy and used to defending myself, I am not one to run with the herd of pessimists and paranoiacs of this world. I try to get to the facts, make up my own mind about things, face the foe and stand my ground. It’s not the Haka of would-be opponents that impresses me.

As I see it, Hasbeen, enshrining the Voice in our old colonial constitution is aimed at protecting the lobby of our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders from possible future hostile governments and parliaments, which seems to me both reasonable and understandable – knowing just how unreasonable they have sometimes been in the not so distant past in their dealings with our indigenous peoples.

As they say : "Once bitten, twice shy."

I don’t see why I should refuse them their modest voice lobby. Quite the contrary, I think we should all be united in helping them to achieve it.

http://www.google.com/search?q=The+Seekers%2C+we+are+Australian&rlz=1C1ASVC_enFR879FR890&oq=The+Seekers%2C+we+are+Australian&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQLhiABDIHCAIQLhiABDIHCAMQABiABDIICAQQABgWGB4yCAgFEAAYFhgeMggIBhAAGBYYHjIKCAcQABiGAxiKBTIGCAgQRRhAMgYICRBFGEDSAQkxNDMwNGowajeoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&ip=1&vld=cid:bccdb99e,vid:KrLTe1_9zso,st:0

.

enshrining the Voice in our old colonial constitution is aimed at protecting the lobby of our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders from possible future hostile governments and parliaments, which seems to me both reasonable and understandable
Banjo Paterson,
No objections there but where does it say anything about protecting non-indigenous Australians from the unwarranted future hostilities we already see & hear from the activists in the Yes camp ?
I have heard Yes campers proclaim that "just wait till we have the power" & "time for paying the rent" or "reparations" etc etc.
Also, can you please refer to the page in the Uluru statement where it states the responsibilities of the Indigenous & their supporters for the Yes because I can't find anything on that.
As someone who has lived & worked alongside indigenous I have now witnessed sufficient evidence that no matter the outcome on the 14th, irreparable social damage has already occurred just by the proposal of the Voice. I really hope I'm wrong though !

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You ask :

1. « … where does it say anything about protecting non-indigenous Australians from the unwarranted future hostilities we already see & hear from the activists in the Yes camp ?

I have heard Yes campers proclaim that "just wait till we have the power" & "time for paying the rent" or "reparations" etc etc. »
.

The sole object of the referendum is to put the following question to those Australian citizens eligible to vote and determine if the majority response is YES or NO :

« A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration? »

In the meantime, Common Law continues to apply throughout the country. If, as you indicate, there are “unwarranted future hostilities we already see & hear from the activists in the Yes camp”, they should be reported to the police and the perpetrators brought before justice.

The same goes for any “unwarranted future hostilities from the activists in the No camp”.

As for threats and attempts at intimidation such as : "just wait till we have the power" & "time for paying the rent" or "reparations" etc., that is the sort of thing I had in mind when I wrote :

« It’s not the Haka of would-be opponents that impresses me. »

I grant you that such behaviour is most unpleasant. It is a sign of weakness, powerlessness, and frustration. But as I understand you intend to vote with the predicted, quasi-certain, majority of NO voters, I wouldn’t worry about it if I were you, Indyvidual. That’s just the Haka before the match.

You are almost certain to beat all those poor devils.
.

2. « … can you please refer to the page in the Uluru statement where it states the responsibilities of the Indigenous & their supporters for the Yes because I can't find anything on that. »

.

(Continued …)

.