Dear Foxy,

"I backed it up with one from SBS - which gave full
information as well as asking - does it really matter?"

I can see that logical reasoning isn't one of your strong points. What was noted was that several parties made contradictory statements about the length of the Uluru statement. Does it matter how long the statement is? When the guy heading the "Yes" campaign has no idea how long the statement is, has not even read it in its entirety, and makes a complete tit of himself on the floor of parliament, I would think it does matter.

Anyhoo, here is a link to the full statement as released by the NIAA in response to an FOI request:

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/full-uluru-statement-read-the-entire-document-about-the-voice/news-story/eb57fdae8e4d5f4fe31d18376192630b

"The data about her attitude to the showers has been around for ages." mhaze.

You are trying to call it "data" now? It is no such bloody thing you twat. It is vicious made up rubbish.

You claim: "However the place I got it from no long exists (as I showed you) so I couldn't prove the story."

Absolute rubbish. Rather than some 'other site', you said it was: "Actually taken from Biden's daughter's diary. You can actually read the story in her own handwriting if you were of a mind to see the truth. I've linked it here before."

You never read it at all did you. If you had you would have seen her rescheduling her showers was never in her own handwriting. It was quoted as being on pages 65-67. it isn't.

I hadn't wanted to post a link to someone's private diary but it is reproduced in full here: http://www.scribd.com/document/548463188/Ashley-Biden-s-Diary

I haven't read it but show us which pages contains anything about her being so afraid to take showers with her father that she rescheduled them.

All on you.

Pathetic.

Fester,

The length of the Uluru Statement has been explained on
various websites on the web. It's your choice which
source you prefer to believe. Sky News, or the Daily
Telegraph doesn't do it for me.

In "crucial" Tasmania, two opposing aboriginal organisations who never agree on anything have combined to fight the Voice together. They agree that the Voice would do "more harm than good".

Dear Foxy,

Contradictory statements about the length of the Uluru statement by prominent yes campaigners are on the public record and have nothing to do with any media organisation.

Contradictory statements bring into question the integrity of people making them as you can be fairly confident that at least one of the statements made is false.

Contradictory statements are a red flag when you are making a decision based on reason, whereas for members of a cult they are a test of loyalty.

Fester,

As I said - Your choice who you believe.

http://theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/aug/09/indigenous-australians-agency-refutes-jacinta-prices-claim-that-uluru-statement-is-26-pages