Hi Maverick,

Thanks for your appreciation.

There are quite a few females on the forum.
All capable of more than anyone can imagine.
As for experience? It's what you do with it that
matters.

Lawyer and journalist, Chris Merritt, reveals that the basis for the racist Voice is not home-grown: it was imported from a 1975 judgement concerning the Republic of Zaire. It is an African concept.

The Uluru Statement is almost a word-for-word copy of the Zaire original, with aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders inserted.

Uluru is not a 'statement from the heart' of locals: it is out of Africa.

The Aboriginal Voice Concept is an honest outgrowth of post-WW2 international sovereignty/independence thinking, which included WESTERN SAHARA
and many other nations, especially those in Africa and Asia.

Certainly Australian Aboriginal sovereignty thinking was part of that international trend of peoples rejecting the notion whites could claim vast land areas (eg. the Australian continent) through RE-discovery and/or Conquest.

White-men presumed no one owned the land prior to their white "discovery" or conquest. More accurately tribes had owned the land for 10,000s years before whites re-discovery/conquest of land later labeled Australia.

++++++++++++++

More detail including WESTERN SAHARA.

In one paragraph of a briefing from the Australian Parliamentary Library research team:

titled "An unsettling decision: a legal and social history of native title and the Mabo decision"

of 5 December 2022

at http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp2223/Mabo

advises:

"Throughout the 1970s, in response to civil and indigenous rights activism of the era, many nations revisited their colonial histories and policies of assimilation.

In the US, the Nixon Government overturned the ‘termination’ policy[69] in favour of supporting tribal self-government.[70]

In New Zealand, after many years of considering the Treaty of Waitangi a ‘nullity’, continued campaigning by Maori for the Treaty to be respected led to the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 (NZ), which established a permanent commission of inquiry, the Waitangi Tribunal. The Tribunal investigates claims made by Maori against the Crown under the treaty and makes recommendations on applying the Treaty’s principles.[71]

[now coming to WESTERN SAHARA]

In a parallel development in international law, in 1975 the International Court of Justice issued an advisory but influential ruling on the status of the WESTERN SAHARA that rejected doctrines of sovereignty-by-discovery and terra nullius in favour of the self‑determination rights of the tribes of the WESTERN SAHARA territory.[72]"

Just read the same report, and it is about first nations sovereignty.

"According to Legal Affairs Contributor at the Australian Chris Merritt, the Uluru statement "From the Heart" may have been “plugged in and imported” from the Republic of Zaire.
“It’s been presented to the pope, it has been endorsed by the Labor party, it’s being taught in some schools, but when you look at it … it didn’t come out of Uluru originally.

“It came out of a judgement of the International Court of Justice that was put forward by the representative of the Republic of Zaire.”

Yes Josephus

The Uluru Statement is an Australian movement based on broader international trends.

Like you and Neo-Fascism.

Does that diminish the validity of the contrasting philosophies of Aborigines and your dear self?

Your Führer Mavs

Hi Mavs,

I have spent much time "researching" the 'Treaty of Waitangi' over the years, just as an interest. Things I have learnt.

1. It was written by men of good intent, but having no experience in treaty writing and little time, 2 days, it was doomed to be totally inadequate, and it is.

2. The sticking point to this day concerns the words "sovereignty" as in the English version, and the Maori version which refers to "governance".

There is little doubt that the Maori signatories never intended to cede sovereignty to the British Crown, but rather believed a partnership between themselves and the British was possible, with British governance, and Maori still retaining sovereignty. As unworthy as it was the treaty was not respected by the Pakeha.

My opinion is Australia first needs to climb the hill that is 'The Voice', before entertaining any notions of a treaty, and attempting to climb that mountain with all its pitfalls. Good luck Lidia!