Bill Martin expresses his personal doubt that Ken Wyatt is the right person for the job of Minister for Indigenous Australians; in fact, he considers the appointment to be "a serious mistake" by the Prime Minister. (Quadrant Online, 26/7/19).

Wyatt, according to Martin, is "a man whose airing of his personal, subjective perspective so early on calls into question his capacity to discharge his duties for the good and betterment of all Australians."

Wyatt admits that the proposed interference with our Constitution based on race will be unpopular, so he wants the "right words" be used in a referendum.

Martin interprets this to mean that Wyatt "favours phrases sufficiently vague and innocuous so as not to frighten the horses." So will millions of politically aware Australians interpret it that way. Wyatt has also mooted the idea of parliament making a decision, irrespective of the referendum result!

Wyatt is enthusiastically supported by Opposition spokeswoman, Linda Burnley, who describes herself as a Wiradjuri woman, but " seldom if ever as an Australian".

However, Bill Martin is "heartened" by the fact that Coalition voices, " including those of senior government members" have expressed their disapproval of the whole idea, emphasising that Ken Wyatt is "off on a frolic of his own" without consulting his colleagues before making his comments.

Martin believes, as do many others that " any notion that differentiates Australians in any way based on race is not merely unacceptable but egregiously repugnant.".

A big problem with Foxy's submissions are the words she uses, which are mostly taken from other sources.
These words are 'TRIGGERS'.
These triggers form the basis of the unrealistic, selfish, petulant, unjustified, irrelevant, capricious and generally not entitled to the very things she is promoting.
For example she frequently uses words like;
First Nations.
The Intervention.
Empowered.
Responsibility.
Discriminatory.
Communities.
Discriminatory Paternalism.
Responsibility.
Empower communities.
But to name a few.
Then we have this further rubbish and clap trap;
"First Nations of Australia have a right to take responsibility, they should be empowered so they have a constitutional voice in their affairs so they can always participate in decisions made about them".
In summarising these triggers, what a load of bullsh!t!
These words were written to try to justify the unjustifiable.
As too many others have already pointed out, there is no case to be heard of any wrong doing by the whites, ever, not hundreds of years ago, nor today.
All that has happened has had good reason and how dare anyone attack the whites, accusing them of doing anything but good for the blacks.
They may not have done it as good as SOME blacks would like us to believe but it was for the greater good and for the good of all, not just the blacks.
I make it clear, that all this push for self regulation, forget all the stupid words and padding to disguise its true intent, is simply another rung in the ladder of a power grab.
These people must be slapped down and back into oblivion where they belong, because unfortunately for the sake of those few of us better informed, we will be dragged down by the many uninformed and gullible, who also happen to be completely dis-interested in such frivolous claims, and they are the ones they are focused on converting or influencing.
So we must keep opposing these stupid demands at every opportunity, or we will be the worse off for it, if they succeed.

ALTRAV,

I suppose you would have been against same-sex
marriage as well? Well guess what? The legislation
passed. The same will happen (according to recent polls)
with an Indigenous voice in Parliament. So you
can continue to rant and rave all you like.
Australia will decide.

Why can't we have a
rational, logical, discussion, on subjects that we
agree or disagree on - without the attacks and
insults?

It is after all only a discussion and opinions do vary,
as they should.

I feel as though you and I are
here facing off in a war of values.

Where I say asylum seekers, you say
queue jumpers. I say - Indigenous rights,
you say - special privileges. I say -
global warming, you say - conspiracy. I say -
gay marriage, you say - unnatural. I say -
feminism, you say selfish maggots, I say - immigration,
you say - invasion. I say - Islamophobia, you say -
- terrorism, and so it goes.

You see - an endless parade of man-hating feminists,
queue-jumping asylum seekers, Leftist University Lecturers,
biased ABC journalists, Grant-grabbing Scientists,
hand-out addicted Aborigines, and sharia - law
promoting Islamic clerics.
These all populate your fevered imagination.
Their stories are told with your own obsessive
compulsive repetitiveness that
creates its own kind of "truth." Which you believe is the
only "truth," because you are so "objective" and "rational."

There's barely an issue now that is not refracted by you
through the lens of your "truth".

Your "truth" is so well known now on this forum.

How can anyone possibly want to bother wasting their time
in arguing with it.

Talk to your kindred spirits. They're all here.

Foxy,

Spot-on !

"Government cannot solve people's problems. To paraphrase Eleanor Roosevelt, government cannot do anything for you that you are not willing to do yourself."

Yes, indeed, and people in communities already have the power to do for themselves. The question is, why don't they ?

As you point out: "The First Nations of Australia have a right to take responsibility."

More than that, they have the obligation to take responsibility for their own self-determination - but don't. Why's that ? What's stopping them ?

Your next paragraph should read:

"They are already empowered to take control of their own affairs, and have been for the best part of fifty years now, so they can always participate in decisions made about them, by themselves. And if we are champions of responsibility, we should support the full exercise of such powers, no matter how difficult it may be for them. Because ultimately, it's nobody else's business but theirs."

Sounds better ?

Joe

Dear Big Nana,

I have answered your questions.

You just refuse to see the answers.

I can't help you any further.

Cheers.

Joe,

Keep trying.

Constitutional 'recognition' is seen by many as just another 'silver bullet' to follow all the other dud bullets used by the elites to solve problems that they caused, with their paternalism, divisiveness and Marxist attitudes. A distraction from 'closing the gap', which is not closing. If the electorate, which would have to give its permission for the latest hare-brained scheme, was silly enough to endorse the racist idea, it too would be a dud. We've already seen $30 billions worth silly schemes go down the toilet. There is something seriously wrong with the people pushing for things that won't work.