This is our chance to do what we should have done two centuries ago. It is a moment that will define our humanity, our sense of fairness and a legacy we leave to our children.” – Path to Treaty bill introduced to Queensland parliament.
- Blubbering Blowhards Battered
- Noticeably eager to escalate Labor’s national war on Catholics
- 2023: “Novak Djokovic has stirred anger after calling for peace”
- I’ll tell you what rule I applied, sir. I applied rule D.S.C!
- Few causes are more satisfying than routing the Spanish left
- The Ma’am With The Golden Smarm
- Mentally vulnerable ‘No’ voters officially stigmatised as racists
- May 2023 (88)
- April 2023 (90)
- March 2023 (118)
- February 2023 (84)
- January 2023 (101)
- December 2022 (62)
- November 2022 (72)
- October 2022 (83)
- September 2022 (81)
- August 2022 (82)
- July 2022 (83)
- June 2022 (113)
- May 2022 (80)
- April 2022 (114)
- March 2022 (117)
- February 2022 (120)
- January 2022 (126)
- December 2021 (116)
- November 2021 (112)
- October 2021 (126)
- September 2021 (84)
- August 2021 (6)
- Art, music, letters
- Australian police state
- Climate hoax
- COVID hysteria
- Defence and national security
- Economics and the economy
- Ethics and morality
- Fake conservatism
- Fake news
- Fake science
- Federal politics
- Foreign policy
- Hypocrisy of the left
- Innovation and technology
- Left-wing extremism
- Legal affairs
- Religion and faith
- Rule of law
- Social media
- State politics
- US politics
- War and peace
- War on Christianity
The Cat Empire
200 years ago? Who would they have signed a treaty with?
Since only the city elite fauxboriginals seem to have the requisite education to even read a treaty, there are still real aboriginals who struggle with basic literacy who would miss out.
Queensland wasn’t even a colony 200 years ago.
Don’t forget that they are the “First Nation.”
Who would have the authority to sign a treaty with aborigines anyway?
It wouldn’t have been possible in any case as they were and are made of hundreds (thousands?) of tribes.
So many of the people with political clout are very, very ugly.
Not as a turn of nature. No. But as a concomitant reflection of their intentionally affected, inauthentic lives. Simply ugly.
Can show “Stacia” the definition of ‘humanity’ in my Oxford dictionary.
Could our Premier be the worst of Australia’s women-in-power ..
None of the state governments have the power to sign treaties … nor is there any other foreign government to make a treaty with. The whole thing is a farce.
I wish a journalist would ask Amnesia why her Polish dad was christened Heinrich and not Henryk.
All that is true, but I was thinking specifically of a treaty back in the colonial days, which I failed to mention by an oversight.
The total ignorance displayed by 21st century Australian ‘leaders’ is just astounding. We are
ledruled by imbeciles.
I didn’t see any of Pony Girl’s humanity, fairness or a decent legacy when she said “Queensland hospitals are for our people” in August 2020.
I did read about the consequences though – one dead unborn baby.
Brilliant Annastacia, just brilliant.
As for jellyback Morrison, he’s just as culpable.
This is our chance to do what we should have done two centuries ago. It is a moment that will define our humanity, our sense of fairness and a legacy we leave to our children
It’s about time. Congrats to Palasook. A few hundred years back, after the early settlers got through immigration check at the wharf, they did attempt to engage the Aboriginal government through the First Nations Emu & Goanna DreamWorld regarding a “Treaty”. But the First Nations were pretty busy at the time, what… with building a network of freeways across the country and connecting First Nations people to the electricity grid, that the parties just never got round to it.
So much for “we’re all in this [Covid] together.”
Pluckachook committed some acts of bastardry possibly worse than even Andrews during the pandemic.
Congrats to Palasook.
Could I just say… Go Anna!!
Strange woman. She was married and divorced twice and split with her third (common-law) partner before the age of 50.
Queensland is withdrawing from the Commonwealth of Australia?
Ah! The Third Reich of QLD! Superb. Nazis galore.
We need not get too bothered if some document that states the terms of an agreement (leaving aside who the parties might be) is styled as a treaty.
It could not be considered as a treaty in international law terms because it would not be an agreement between states, or a state and an international organisation
This is not the only sense in which the word “treaty” is used. Any kind of agreement, binding or not, can be so called. Many a sale of land is called a “private treaty” to distinguish the sale from one reached at an auction. There is no closed list. I could call an agreement with my special friend to go to the movie a treaty.
The laws or plans by governments to enter into treaties with Aborigines is purely theatrical. It’s the terms of the agreements that are critical. OTOH of course, use of treaty will cause confusion and should be avoided.
Nix, you have to argue (somehow) that the men of the Third Reich would oppose her abortion and euthanasia laws. Otherwise, the comparison is good and you lose.
And one of those husbands was George Megalogenis.
I’m afraid your argument won’t do, Raf. It’s being called a “treaty” to afford nation status to Aborigines – pursuant to a (fatuous) Waitangi-like view of two peoples interacting for the first time and in deference to the “first nations” ideology aped from North America.
It is also racist: it’s the equivalent of giving trinkets and blankets to piccaninnies in order to purchase concessions. We give them a “treaty” and they give us absolution for “racism” or something. The Chook does this knowing it is not in fact a treaty.
Unless, the Vibe Court in Canberra decides to invest in the “treaties” now being concocted in various states some sort of “implied” secondary efficacy; for example, precisely because they are not treaties with foreign entities (the preserve of the Commonwealth).
Oh yes, now I get you.
Some of the very early NSW Parliaments discussed this issue. There’s a kind of Hansard available online … I once sat and read them … possibly because I was drunk and someone locked me in my house. Unfortunately they are scanned handwritten documents without keyword search so you can’t jump straight into the interesting bits.
With some significant effort you could extract valuable information about how we got to where we are today.
I can pretty safely say that any treaty of the kind we are speaking of will not, in international law terms, create a nation state to which only Aborigines belong. One might think China would do so to create mischief of some kind, but it has minority peoples and is not likely to take this option.
Yes, the whole shebang is racist, and I have noted before on your blog that Malcolm Turnbull put this eloquently in his autobiography.
And yes, one cannot be certain that a future High Court won’t find some implied rights and/or obligations arising from the State laws. Much more of concern will be what the Court might make of the a Voice amendment. It has shown that it will find, by highly tendentious reasoning, some limit on government implied in provisions of the Constitution .
My ancestors came here because they were made poor by penal laws/ were urchin crims and deported. Now that the rules have changed in Australia and we find ourselves in another situation of rights for thee but not for me, can we have our money back? I might try a case on at the High Court of the old sod to see if they’ll accept me back after six generations because of my, er, unbreakable bond to the Cliffs of Moher and whatnot. Vibe for thee but not for me.
Even then the left/activists won’t be satisfied or grateful, but just move on to the next grievance or demand.
The same thing happened with SSM; you only have to look where we’re at now with trans rubbish and children being indoctrinated with conversion therapy, except from straight to gay this time.
Okay Franx, “concomitant” – a word I’ve never heard anyone utter.
In my ancient dictionary are some interesting examples of its use.
While on this topic, it is useful to know that Lydia Thorpe speaks of Aboriginals (and not of First Nations people), and – in derogatory terms – of an ‘Aboriginal industry’.
Her talk is dangerous, but she doesn’t bullshit.
Third Reich or Weimar Republic?
Those rascals were the original Wokesters.
First with the Hate Speech Laws, Trannies were practically gods in 1920s Berlin.
Yeah, she’s been married a few times, but it’s too high off the ground to eat grass, plus I reckon she could look after a bloke, a rare talent both in the Weimar Republic and today.
Heinrich or Henryk?
I guess it depends on how Poland is defined.
Henry was born in Athens, a long way from Poland.
‘looking after’ a bloke
She takes after her father, in looks and personality type
rough minus diamond
I see her as one of those women who operate like men (nothing wrong with that, if you like that sort of thing)
But why she’s popular is a mystery
She’s popular because, unlike every other Premier of Queensland in living memory, she hasn’t oppressed the people, plus she comes across as the type of sheila who could look after a bloke.
You’re reading comprehension needs improvement. The question related to his christening, not his place of birth.
I quite like old Henry. It must be interesting at family get togethers, I suspect their views misalign.
Surely you jest?
That’s if you have excruciatingly bad taste in women.
I’d far sooner enter a monastery than hook up with her.
Thus spake the trans-it (pronouns he/haw) on Das Projekt
He/haw thinks he/haw’s so, so wise ‘n funny. Wait ’til he/haw finds out that he/haw ain’t. 🙂
Distasteful ‘joke’ about Jesus Christ on Ten’s The Project – they wouldn’t try that with Mohammed.
Thus spake the trans-it (pronouns he/haw) on Das Projekt
He-hawww… he-hawww… he-hawwwlways says that.
What are you saying here, Ed?
You’re saying she’s a naughty tigress in the bedroom, is that it?
I’m saying she could look after a bloke.
Why has everything gotta be about sex, C.L.?
The average woman couldn’t look after a cat.
Richard Cranium (aka Ed Case)
You need to meet a wider range of women.
Are you implying that she can make a sandwich for her man? Sacrilege!
Or is it about providing some extra ways of making money on a side? She is Labor/unions after all. What are you saying, Ed?
If looking after a bloke means property tips, you’re probably right
Heinrich’s Wikipedia entry says he was born in Germany. A strange choice for a family abused by Nazis in forced labour camps. Apparently.
Uh-huh. Why would you say a woman who bungled two formal marriages and one common-law marriage before the age of 50 can “look after a bloke”?
Trudeau’s government calls for euthanasia program to ‘treat’ children with naysaying parents.
Hey, I didn’t stipulate just one bloke.
So far, she’s looked after 3 blokes, perhaps there are more in her future?
By the way, could you re post those pics of Annastacia, Heinrich and Hawkie from
Durack High School 1984?