Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "Voice opponents to be urged not to repeat Stolen Generations apology mistake" video.

OMG, wilful ignorance at its finest. Read the 1997 bringing them home report from the Royal Commission. You level of ignorance is staggering.
2
And your evidence of this claim is?
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Over five hundred individuals gave evidence of forced separation at the Royal Commission. Are you deliberately or deceitfully being ignorant?
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Utter rubbish. They were children. You are factually wrong. Children were being seperated in the same year Rudd made his apology and to this day are significantly over represented in child separation data. I have no idea what you are attempting to achieve by denying the obvious?
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 slightly off subject I know but tell me why in your humble opinion where there no records keep of how many indigenous people were in Australia prior to 1971 census? Financial compensation for individuals from the stolen generation was an outcome of the Royal commission. No indigenous person could have possibly predicted a reports recommendations. Your argument is a non-sequiter.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 WTF I explained it was slightly off subject it wasn't a strawman it was providing evidence of a lack of records. I then exposed your argument as illogical. Do you even understand how a argumentation works? Do you wish me to start quoting individual testimony from the Royal Commission into child separations? Ten year old children being separated from their mothers by having police officers throw thier mothers out of the police vans they were in and then spending days in a police lock up when they were just ten years old. Just so they could be better. Pigs fucking eye.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Wow that's impressive. Denying over 800 personal testimonials and the final report from a Royal Commission and the human rights Commission. Narcissism at its finest. I know you haven't read the reports as they quote actual state government policies. Your level of ignorance is astounding.
1
I have explained to you why your opinion is factually incorrect. Why do you continue to post deceptive misinformation?
1
@jiminverness I was addressing Trill. I have no problem with whatever way you vote. Using the word division is deceptive and just factually wrong, but if you chose to remain ignorant that’s fine by me. I have demonstrably proven trills comments to be factually wrong in other comments. You however seem to be blindly following his comments with no thought of your own. Again no problems all the data shows a fixed 15% of conservative voters no matter what sensible logical argument presented to them about why a voice to parliament is not decisive still vote no. That is your right.
1
@jiminverness Nice response and straight off the hat apologies for the ignorant comment as it wasn't entirely accurate. It is just factually incorrect to correlate ASTIC which while an advisory body of sorts was mainly a service delivery organisation and was legislated. A Voice constitutionally enshrined is an advisory body only. It has no veto power no legislative capability, and no financial delegation. To compare the two is either ignorance or deliberate deception. Numerous constitutional experts have opinioned that constitutional recognition in no way affords indigenous groups any benefit other than equality under the constitution. There is no different race. Indigenous groups require constitutional recognition as the original inhabitants not through any misunderstanding by you of race. On every data set, education, health, life span, housing, employment, indigenous people are significantly below the national average. Except for arrest and incarceration rates then they are well ahead. To claim they are privileged is comically ignorant every single gap report and data set says the complete opposite. Trill made factually incorrect statements about the government's apology to the Stolen generations and discriminatory policies about indigenous soldiers in WWI and WII. Other than that I was impressed by your reply, mostly all you get from these dimwits is "It's racist".
1
@jiminverness You offer no evidence of why you disagree to my fact based argument. So I can ignore your disagreement. A voice is exactly a lobby group. That's its purpose to influence. Duh. You have concern but no evidence to support that concern. That just becomes fear mongering. Again factually incorrect statement. A Voice is exactly constitutional recognition. You need to read a book on constitutional law. Provide the evidence more than one species of humans currently existing on the planet. Otherwise again you are factually incorrect. Indigenous people were explicitly denied constitutional recognition in our original and current constitution. Section 127 of the original constitution specifies native Australians not be counted in any census. That made them non citizens. You are factually incorrect again. The original inhabitants genealogy still exsists. Again factually wrong. You misunderstand race and ethnic/cultural groups. Again you are factually incorrect. You continue to misunderstand ethnic/cultural groups with race. Read a book on the subject. It is not my job to educate on basic science. The rest of your reply is incoherent factless opinion. In summary you managed to not even make a single evidence based factually point. Finally you have the chutzpah to have a go at "yes" proponents for fluff pieces in the media when your entire argument is a piece of fluff.
1
@jiminverness So all I got out of that was you are frightened of an indigenous voice to parliament for undisclosed reasons. You provided no argument just emotional fluff.
1
@jiminverness As I said all you have are emotional responses to undisclosed reasons and continuing unsubstantiated claims as to why an advisory body with no veto power, no legislative capability, and no financial delegation has you in such fear that the best you can manage is a clumsy attempt at a personal slur.
1
OMG how ignorant are you. Are you even Australian? Read the “1997 Bringing them home report” that was from the Royal Commission into the Stolen generations. Seriously are you deliberately trying to be a dimwit?
1
Rudd didn’t individually apologise for anything you did. You clearly have no understanding of the Royal Commission into child separation or even what the Rudd governments apology was about.
1
@trill4907 No factually incorrect. The government apologised to the Stolen generations and specifically for past racist and discriminatory injustices. For instance, indigenous soldiers who fought in WWI and WWII that were denied war pensions and refused membership to RSLs. Indigenous workers who were paid significantly less despite doing the same work as non-indigenous and had thier wages garnered by state governments. The fact indigenous peoples were made non citizens and denied voting rights by our constitution. The list goes on.
1
@trill4907 Denying war pensions and RSL membership is spitting on them. The reason we needed a Racial discrimination act is because section 25 of our constitution is explicitly racist.
1
@trill4907 I have accused no one of being racist. Our original constitution is explicitly racist in three sections. Our constitution is so racist it allowed for specifically racist legislation to be passed as legal ie The 1902 immigration Act or as you know it the white Australia policy. WA had legislation that specifically stopped Africans from obtaining gold mining leases. You may attempt to hid from the demonstrably racist history of our country but denying it happened says far more about your emotional state than it does about my own fact based knowledge of Australian history. You need to do some reading.
1
@trill4907 You display a breathtaking lack of knowledge of our parliamentary system. A government does not need a referendum to pass legislation through parliament, only if it wishes to change the constitution. Do you have any knowledge of Australia?
1
@trill4907 Under the Commonwealth Defence Act 1903 returning indigenous soldiers were denied access to settlement schemes and a whole range of assistance. In some states agencies quarantined their wages. Your knowledge of Australian history is woefully poor. You could learn all this from a a 2 minute research on the Australian War memorial website. Stay blissfully ignorant from all I care, and we will leave it at that.
1
@trill4907 You claimed incorrectly that indigenous soldiers were treated equally and I proved demonstratively with evidence that you are factually wrong. I have no understanding why you chose to ignore Australia's racist history other than "those who ignore history are bound to repeat it" a quote by George Santayana an American philosopher. And we will leave it at that.
1
@trill4907 Twice now I have concluded the discussion you were wrong I was right, and I'll leave it there.
1
Why is it racist?
1
You total flogbag. I have on numerous occasions explained to you in detail about why you are factually wrong on the priority of the positioning of the national flag. You are officially a dimwit.
1
@bitmeight8338 Go the CMFEU.
1