As per an article by one David Barton: "Most people don't realise the Australia is at war - with itself". (Quadrant.org.au).

The war is about ownership: who is going to control the country. The people through a democratic parliament, or by those who "ignore (their own) European bloodlines and heritage to identify solely as Aboriginals".

The Voice referendum will determine the answer.

Some of the things Barton lists that we have already lost in the war with aboriginal (or part thereof) activists are:

. Language with many English place names are being replaced with Aboriginal names.

. Access to land and waters denied or payment to enter.

. Freehold title to National Parks now handed over to localised Aboriginal Corporations.

. Our children’s education about early Australian history now revised, distorted and perverted into self-loathing.

"All of what we have lost, of what has been forced upon us, has all been done to us without any consultation and without our permission or consent".

All to 3% of the population - many of whom, it is believed - are not aboriginal at all, or even part aboriginal.

We are not just in a "culture war" Barton writes, but we are in a war against "the reshaping of our whole society".

And, the Albanese government and some of the gormless citizenry are fighting against us on the wrong side.

I am certainly biassed against those who live in a fantasy world, and try to inflict their 'beliefs' on others.
People are entitled to hold strange personal views if they want to, but to insist others follow suit is both unlawful and ridiculous.
However, it seems the law must take in to account the 'existence' of a water serpent during some aspects of its deliberations.
That is quite absurd to me.
It is making a mockery of the serious intent of the law?
But still I am glad others have a different slant on this.
It wouldn't do for us all to be the same, would it?
I was more concerned with the 'water serpent' than with Twiggy.
He was incidental to my interest.
Perhaps I should have quoted from the article.
For example the court found:

...implementation of the ... project, which will affect the natural flow of the river, risks killing or harming the water snake, or causing the water snake to become angry.
'And that that would have a significant adverse impact on the Thalaynji people.'

It is true that it must be an ill wind which blows no good, but to endure such an extreme example?......

ttbn:
Thank you for the link.
I agree with 90% of what is said there.
But it doesn't go far enough?
The situation could be far more serious and urgent than it dares to suggest?
We have already travelled a long way down a very dangerous road.
We are fortunate there are learned and clever people in the crowd around us.
In fact, there are always good men who are willing to step forward in a crisis.
I think they will be well able to explain our dilemma to the population at large.
But I do wish those with this know-how would stop fiddling whilst rome burns.
At least we are moving in the right direction now.

Australia's worst enemies are from within !

Thanks ttbn for the quadrant article.

In typical conservative fashion some are bemoaning small changes that recognise the roll of Aboriginal people in Australia. For example; "English place names are being replaced with Aboriginal names." Oh dear, shock horror, most upsetting, I would say insignificant recompense for 200 years of murder and genocide, but like any recognition the 'Usual Suspect' will try and carry on the fight their ancestors instigated in 1788. One of the great "achievements" of the Phillip governorship (1788-1792) was his ability to wipe out over half, possibly up to 90%, of the Aboriginal population around the new colony.