Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "The government has not revealed 'big details' on Voice to Parliament proposal" video.

  1. And in your comment you have expressed 132 years of indigenous experience. Welcome to the fold.
    2
  2.  @TheRealBobSmith.  So I have served alongside some indigenous soldiers, but in WWI indigenous men were not allowed to serve. They got into the AIF as white men, they essentially scammed the system, and they served magnificently, however when they returned they were denied all the services offered to white ex servicemen. They were even denied RSL membership. Many indigenous soldiers speak fondly of their time in the military as they were treated as equals, something I am very proud of, however out of the military they were non citizens.
    2
  3.  @TheRealBobSmith.  No factually wrong Aboriginal men were not allowed to serve as Aboriginal men until after WWII, 1949 I think.
    2
  4.  @TheRealBobSmith.  There is currently a group of over a thousand indigenous women sueing the WA government for garnered wages during the 60s & 70s. Straight out Institutional racism here and now.
    2
  5. Considering everyone in the world has been advocating for a two state solution since forever it is highly unlikely.
    2
  6.  @davidparris7167  No you just made it about race. Nobody mentioned race you did. Why. A voice is based on a cultural group and their connection with land. Why did you raise race, considering we are all one species.
    2
  7. To really make it bubble read the lastest Newspoll results
    2
  8.  @TheRealBobSmith.  No you are factually wrong, you are confusing what people got away with and what was actually the law.
    1
  9.  @TheRealBobSmith.  You mistake misguided anger toward Vietnam vets from ignorant protesters with institutional racism against veteran aboriginal soldiers who were denied war pensions that were available to returned white soldiers. These two issues are not even remotely related, other than they were both unacceptable.
    1
  10.  @axle.australian.patriot  What statement of retribution??? WTF are you talking about?
    1
  11.  @TheRealBobSmith.  Prior to 1917 indigenous men only got into the AIF because they tricked the recruiter or they turned a blind eye, after the failure of conscription in 1917 then I’d a indigenous male could prove some white genealogy they could get in, however many scammed this as well. Same thing in WWII. But do you really want to talk about how they were treated outside the military, No because you will go very quite as they were treated appallingly.
    1
  12.  @TheRealBobSmith.  yep that's what I just said.
    1
  13.  @axle.australian.patriot  Yes, part of the Uluṟu statement from the heart is a Makkaratta truth commission so in respect to your concept of retribution the indigenous people would like the country to know as fact how they have been treated for 132 years. If that’s what you consider retribution to be and are afraid of the truth, I say bring it on. I have nothing to fear about the truth.
    1
  14.  @hotwheels70  legislation passed by the Howard government after the high court Wik decision makes a nonsense of your claim.
    1
  15.  @hotwheels70  The High court has already determined native title is extinguished by free hold land rights. I mean really do you have any clue at all about Australian history.
    1
  16.  @axle.australian.patriot  All honourable sentiments which I agree with. A Makkaratta truth commission is a peace making process that acknowledges wrong doing, and as such is perfectly in line with your sentiments. On the other matter you raised and this is only my personal opinion but most definitely we should look at out constitution regularly to check on whether its fit for purpose. Every 10 or 15 years seems reasonable to me for a country to have a dialogue on its constitution. Much like a person gets to a certain age and has their health checked.
    1
  17. Well if you were an aboriginal in 1901 you would not even be considered a citizen at all.
    1
  18. There is already a 500 page detailed document prepared by the indigenous community associated with the voice. Read it.
    1
  19.  @robharris6874  Prices voice is important but it is by no means particularly popular amongst the indigenous population.
    1
  20.  @robharris6874  present the evidence of a group of people being in Australia before the aboriginals. You can’t there is none. Zero zip zilch.
    1
  21.  @davidparris7167  Your assertion that there was another group of people here before the aboriginal is based on what? Your imagination! You are just factually wrong. Otherwise present your evidence of a cultural/ethnic group preceding aborigines. DNA evidence of Denisovans is not proof of anything.
    1