The Nationals have just had nearly 10 years in office along with their Liberal mates, and achieved nothing worthwhile in aboriginal affairs. Us Europeans have had 230 years of decision making and despite at times good intentions, we have made nothing more than very slow progress, but realistically overall we have achieved little in so many aspects of indigenous peoples lives, with our "we know best" attitude. Look at the years of 'Closing the Gap Reports', they make for pathetic and sorrowful reading. Aboriginal people are only asking for a constructive voice to parliament within their own affairs, surely nothing wrong with that. Although some in the Nationals, and others, seem to have a real problem with that.

WTF NOT AGAIN...

Why only indigenous folk who deserve to have a voice? What about those who defended this great Nation in 1914 -18 and again in 1939 - 45, Korea, Vietnam and the many smaller wars, where Australia has committed troops. Surely they have a moral right to have a voice in Parliament.

I appreciate indigenous Australians have their own unique set of problems, but surely now there are sufficient number of very erudite people, enunciating those problems for them already in Parliament? As there appear to be for our war veterans. And in the criminal law, I can tell you authoritatively, they enjoy more protections and rights if they're suspects or in custody than any other citizen in this country does.

Actually Sir there'll come a point where indigenous Australian will be seen as receiving far too many rights, privileges, and protections, above and beyond the rest of the citizenry, there will surely be a backlash. Equity is what's needed to retain harmony and balance.

As I retired police detective I've on occasions needed to interact with our indigenous blacks. And in every case they MUST be handled with 'kid gloves' (metaphorically speaking). Whenever a crime is committed and an indigenous person is involved, the appointed case officer is usually of a higher rank. Moreover he's generally well across the necessary nuances associated with investigating such indigenous involvement. Thus he must have a thorough understanding of the 'Judges Rules' as well as the 'Anunga Rules'.

'The Judges Rules' are a series of protections for all those in custody. Including our indigenous folk. And a further set of protective rules exist only for the benefit of our indigenous people. They're known as the 'Anunga Rules' (sic). Accordingly our indigenous people enjoy both levels of protections in the criminal law. Be assured they have a voice, and a loud one at that. WTF NOT AGAIN.

If opposition to the Voice Referendum in this thread is anything to go by it won't pass.

WTF?
ttbn states: "Perhaps you could reveal the "past discussions many have provided the sources that discredit this notion".

Sure thing - here is a link to the 55 page OLO discussion back in July that you were part of where myself and many others gave you multiply sources that make your statement look like nonsense.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9888&page=0#336816

It seems to me you are just angrily shouting into the wind.

Oh by the way the F is for Fudge or was your mind thinking of something else

WTF?

o sung wu states: "And in every case they MUST be handled with 'kid gloves" when talking about police interaction with Indigenous Australians.

Was this always the case or is it in response to the findings of a Royal Commission?

Hey Foxy,
Yeah I saw that Albanese / Assange news too.
- Glad that he's trying to something, instead of ignoring it.
I guess we'll see what comes of it... also this:

NY Times, four other news outlets urge U.S. to drop espionage charges against Assange
http://justthenews.com/accountability/media/major-media-outlets-urge-us-drop-charges-against-assange-publishing-not-crime