Supafreak wrote:

https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-wor…. DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization

Supafreak. Hi, thanks, very interesting,AW.

Supafreak wrote:

https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-wor…. DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization

nice - cheers Supa, interesting read.

basesix wrote:

Supafreak wrote:

https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-wor…. DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization

nice - cheers Supa, interesting read.

+1

Great link supa.

Interesting when contrasted against um… the assumption that ‘there’s only a few scenarios’ ;)

“1. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and never read the rest and is telling the truth, this is pretty much impossible to believe, but if true should be of real concern to all Australian's.

2. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and once talk came up about the other pages he read them, and just lied he hasnt read them for some reason, maybe he doesn't want to discuss whats in the other pages.

3. Albo knew long ago there was 25 other pages and read them long ago, but was hoping that they never become an issue.

IMHO number three is the most likely scenario, i think coming into things he thought poll numbers support would stay as high as what they were this time last year, and he could just coast through keeping things as simple and detail free as possible and things like this wouldn't really matter.”

It’s true… ‘Albo’ is not interesting.
And talk is cheap ;)

Jelly Flater wrote:

Great link supa.

Interesting when contrasted against um… the assumption that ‘there’s only a few scenarios’ ;)

“1. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and never read the rest and is telling the truth, this is pretty much impossible to believe, but if true should be of real concern to all Australian's.

2. Albo really didnt know the USFTH was more than one page and once talk came up about the other pages he read them, and just lied he hasnt read them for some reason, maybe he doesn't want to discuss whats in the other pages.

3. Albo knew long ago there was 25 other pages and read them long ago, but was hoping that they never become an issue.

IMHO number three is the most likely scenario, i think coming into things he thought poll numbers support would stay as high as what they were this time last year, and he could just coast through keeping things as simple and detail free as possible and things like this wouldn't really matter.”

Oh great.

Biggest social/political issue of the year V's a tit bit article that creates some Swellnet arse patting.

BTW. Quite happy to hear a fourth or fifth scenario, but it doesn't seem like you have one?????

You skipped past them. Listening isn’t your strong point…

4. ‘Albo’ is not interesting.
5. Talk is cheap ;)

Hahahaha.
One of the greatest mysteries of humankind. Dozens of non-Aussie authors publicly deploring its lack of social traction and engagement. How did Aboriginal people get to Aus, when and how.. clearly before the big, recent migrations from Africa, during the 20,000 - 10,000 years ago ice ages.. was it a flotilla of dreamers, lost raft fishermen? The genetic diversity means more than a single party, yet they can't have stopped long on islands and established colonies, as the genetic diversification to do so, would require a crew of hundreds.
I've read several books with these questions at the core or in passing, especially by interested overseas writers (like Bill Bryson who is just an enthusiast of all things), and I'm just an average shmoe. Imagine how average you'd have to be to find such things tit-bits..
This DNA article was just another piece in a puzzle that is fascinating.

Supafreak wrote:

https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-wor…. DNA Study Finds Aboriginal Australians World’s Oldest Civilization

Er, I believe the expression is "tidbits".
"Tit bits" carries a whole other meaning, not really relevant to the discussion here, but an interesting topic nevertheless.

adam12 wrote:

Er, I believe the expression is "tidbits".

"Tit bits" carries a whole other meaning, not really relevant to the discussion here, but an interesting topic nevertheless.

Seriously dude why do you bother?

You dont make yourself look smart picking on peoples spelling or grammar, you just come over as that elitist wanker that looks down on people thinking you are somehow better than them.

Anyway

Definition of 'titbit'
Word Frequency
titbit
COUNTABLE NOUN
You can refer to a small piece of information about someone's private affairs as a titbit, especially when it is interesting and shocking."
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/titbit

titbit
noun [ C ] UK
UK /ˈtɪt.bɪt/ US
a small piece of interesting information, or a small dish of pleasant-tasting food:
Our guide gave us some interesting titbits about the history of the castle.
This magazine is full of juicy titbits (= small pieces of interesting information, especially about other people's private lives).
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/titbit

titbit
noun
tit·​bit ˈtit-ˌbit
less common variant of TIDBIT

1
: a choice morsel of food
2
: a choice or pleasing bit (as of information)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/titbit

But even if i was wrong, who gives a shit, it's just a word on a forum, as long as people understand the point its all that matters.

#Karen overload

#feisty info

Play the ball not the players. Good comment.
1. How many people know what the 1967 was about. Probably lots. It is interesting.
2. How many people know what particular bozos were in 'power' or 'opposition' or 'vocal' when they implemented OUR 1967 referendum. Probably not many. The bozos are boring. Forgotten. They are not the ball.

@Indo Dreaming,

I deleted the Albo meme thing. Go post that small-minded shit somewhere else.

Fair enough, once that stuff starts it does tend to get into a back and forth silly brainless meme war and derail decent conversation, not that there isnt a lot of one line off topic pointless post to skim through though.

BTW. It was factually correct though pointing out the contradictions of his own words at two different times.

Perhaps Albo isn't as stupid as he looks, best case of diversion politics since reds under the beds, and the media and the plebs have fallen for it hook line and sinker.
His main goals in life are to double our population, go down in history as a progressive labor leader with vision, and of course to get a selfie with the Kardashians.

indo-dreaming wrote:

BTW. It was factually correct though pointing out the contradictions of his own words at two different times.

Maybe. That assumes the person making the meme knows the full context of each statement, and I don't think they do. Like Valvoline, words aren't words. Every utterance is defined by its surroundings and sentiment to mean various things, meaning there's a degree of interpretation.

If people don't understand this then they've skipped any schooling after Year 6 (or perhaps suffer from shades of autism).

The role of good journalism, or even a good media consumer, is to parse that information and read it in the way it was intended.

To willingly interpret it another way is disengenuous and shallow gotcha nonsense.

stunet wrote:

@Indo Dreaming,

I deleted the Albo meme thing. Go post that small-minded shit somewhere else.

…. and in a moment of frustration @stunet sets a precedent for the ages by starting to delete @info’s daily liberal dose of small-minded shit.

“And the coloured girls go
Doo do doo do doo do doo ….”

GuySmiley wrote:

stunet wrote:

@Indo Dreaming,

I deleted the Albo meme thing. Go post that small-minded shit somewhere else.

…. and in a moment of frustration @stunet sets a precedent for the ages by starting to delete @info’s daily liberal dose of small-minded shit.

“And the coloured girls go

Doo do doo do doo do doo ….”

We're all prone to small-minded shit from time to time, you included. That one got my goat because it directly carried on from what I wrote yesterday.

I don't share ID's political view, but he's generally open-minded and not hidebound by ideology, good traits to have whatever stripes you are, but that meme and post was petty.

Ha ha Guy, dont get too excited Stunets no fascist and is smart enough to not want a highly censored echo chamber.

Yeah sure his own politics might have been a factor in deleting the post after all he is human, but i also get that those types of post especially memes can send a thread into a down ward spiral.

Its very unlikely this thread wont go off the rails before we vote, but i dont want to be the one who sends it there.

Edit: wrote this before i saw Stunets post

Indo "Seriously dude why do you bother?

You dont make yourself look smart picking on peoples spelling or grammar, you just come over as that elitist wanker that looks down on people thinking you are somehow better than them."

It was a fucken joke you dipshit.
Jeez.
Did I mention you?
You weren't the only one to say it.
You must be fun to hang with at parties, the nuffy who takes himself way too seriously.
And unless we are in the UK, it was a technically correct joke, maybe not that funny, but correct.
Indo-freeloading.

“ …. he's generally open-minded and not hidebound by ideology, …”

Say whattt?
I’m going to have to give up drugs immediately!!

And that’s entertainment!!
More drugs Guy much more.

Keeping the subject of the thread in mind, keeping on the ball, keeping an open mind, this is totally pertinant to this absolutely crucial topic. Just like you’d be mega carefull about taking a known, repeat offender pedophile’s views regarding child protection on board discussing child care, or about protecting and supporting children, especially if they wilfully show zero remorse, this sort of thing should ring alarm bells, when it cuts loose in any subject involving racism, stereotyping, misogyny, and right from wrong.

'BTW. i saw a women at the market in Dandenong the other day with a burqua or maybe it was a Niqab it was kind of in-between couldn't see her face though, i was waiting for my missus so did a bit of people watching with her, to be honest she didn't look oppressed like the full black robe ones I've seen in Indonesia that look like servants of the men, actually looked the opposite in this case she had her little middle eastern guy following her around and from the body language she looked like she was wearing the pants so to speak.

It was quite crowded and was thinking maybe i will accidentally go bump into her and say sorry etc and see if she will interact with me and see the reaction of her husband, but by that time my missus had finished.'

https://www.swellnet.com/forums/politico/307178?page=63

‘Hey, would ya like to stalk my family and bump into them, I know where you’ll be welcomed with open arms and even protected as you go about your brilliant(sic), open minded(sic) educating and documenting ‘work’’.

Taking into account that lot, in yet another stunning outburst of awareness, but in reality to play games and bolster his fucked up (naar, iz nort, iz juzz a opern myndud outlook), he simultaneously drivvles this, in relation to another, ‘by the way IMHO google skim’.

‘especially if i came up against challenges or disadvantages that true indigenous people face like being judged on their appearance and stereotypes‘

'I dont agree Floyd I'm sure there is many many many true indigenous people that feel as i do and think it's a joke that some white fella thinks he is indigenous because their great great grandmother was indigenous, id sure feel that way if i was a true indigenous person’

'I can't believe nobody came up with the old line.

"It doesn't matter how much milk you put in coffee it's still coffee"

Which well is not true at some point it just becomes coffee flavour milk.'

https://www.swellnet.com/forums/politico/352734?page=1

So there, all you despicable people that that’s aimed at…

‘Stop pickin’ orn me an’ bringin’ shite up… its protected here anyway.’

But na, why be petty, its just more ever so lovely, ever so comfortable, some on here have even said ever so ‘sweet’ outbursts. Once again, protected, encouraged, coz,

‘By the way… context!!! IMHO’

And after all he, ‘by the way, was juzz bein’ opern mynded an’ sweet… agin’! IMHO’

Carry on swillnuttlin’.

While its nice that everyone seems to want to talk about me, id much prefer to talk about the topic of the thread.

I guess there is all kinds of views out there, reasons for Yes, reason's for No.

"Arnhem Land clan leader Reverend Djiniyini Gondarra plans to vote No to a Voice as treaty quest continues"

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-17/arnhem-land-clan-leader-djiniyin…

indo-dreaming wrote:

While its nice that everyone seems to want to talk about me, id much prefer to talk about the topic of the thread.

I guess there is all kinds of views out there, reasons for Yes, reason's for No.

"Arnhem Land clan leader Reverend Djiniyini Gondarra plans to vote No to a Voice as treaty quest continues"

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-17/arnhem-land-clan-leader-djiniyin…

Oh, my God, he's found another one.
"Quick, better re-post this on that website I don't actually subscribe to yet use to vent my anti-FNP ideology on day and night, that'll show 'em."
And as the "elitist wanker" in residence, I would point out there are only five spelling and grammatical errors in the two sentences he used. Pretty good effort. D+.

Haha…
Maybe it’s the one eyed thingy that’s easy to relate to ;)

- ‘Its very unlikely this thread wont go off the rails before we vote, but i dont want to be the one who sends it there.’

Farkkk. I guess sometimes you get what u don’t want ay ;)
- not really sure how things can be properly seen with one eye closed…
Is there an actual ability to see ‘all kinds of views’ clearly, let alone much at all ? Probly allows a narrow viewpoint… if that’s what you’re into ;)

Jelly Flater wrote:

Haha…

Maybe it’s the one eyed thingy that’s easy to relate to ;)

Slow clap

Its interesting to see the patterns formed by posters here through this thread

A lot just add nothing to the conversation and are more concerned about dissing me or just posting totally non relevant videos trying to be edgy or play up to the boys like we did at 13

While i dont agree with Supafreak on anything and he can still give it at times, I think he deserves credit in that he does actually post articles or thoughts that are on topic.

Looking through the past pages basesix post are also relevant the music stuff.

Southern raw is also capable as you will see earlier in this thread as is AlfredWallace

Theres is the other odd one like Frog or Seeds, Sypkan that pop in and keep on topic.

Uplift tried to start with some substance with those interesting videos but as predicted slipped back into old habits pretty quickly.

And of course truebluebasher is a facts and figures man

Another flat out day coming up Indo? ;-0

34:45
big 'white' brother.. their rules? their rules.

36:40, the progress from wholesale bastardry in 1963, to making a doco like this in 1985.
Makes you think we should have come a lot further in the 40 years since..

basesix wrote:

34:45

big 'white' brother.. their rules? their rules.

36:40, the progress from wholesale bastardry in 1963, to making a doco like this in 1985.

Makes you think we should have come a lot further in the 40 years since..

Thanks basesix , very educational , easy to see who the real savages were .

“ A lot just add nothing to the conversation …”.

Yet even more narcissism.

@Guy Smiley , I value your contribution to the thread . Having worked in the industry you have first hand experience and knowledge of what’s been given and taken away with changing governments . You have seen what was working and what has failed . Keep it coming .

keeping up with the posts here and on other sites, mostly after looking at friendly jordies opinion pieces there are vids from all and sundry on the page, not from him, who cracks me up, good on em.
and i look at the voice vids then read the comments section, mostly nay voters who give their reasons, i suggest the yes mob read them too.
just read a piece from "checkmate"... @ABC.FactCheck (18/8/2023) about how the yes mob have dissed mundine etc etc, read the article you will find out what i mean.
abc found out that yes campaign had misquoted him and edited his speach deliberately and thereby make him out to be a hypocrite, which he was not.
they (yes) actually called him a hypocrite based on the lies (propaganda) put out by the voice article, it was a deliberate slur on his integrity by malicous editing of his speach.
the only good thing i got from abc fact check was that at least there are some ppl left at abc who are still willing to be impartial and call out the liars and decievers in power.
abc are loseing respect in the community..."the ministry of truth" george orwell 1984.

Yes that’s a telling video. Professor Marcia Langton has been in the trenches for so long. John Pilger has too and now he tells the truth about Julian Assange. You would think all the videos would be enough.

I don’t even know how to describe the likes of id anymore, or nuttle’s ‘open minded’ crap. Or when nuttle proclaimed ‘tough love is the answer’. So so far its been soft? I’ve got friends trying to revive the fucking, ‘look they ate the pymgies’ shit. And like id, ‘look Langton’s just a rich bitch’.

FFS. I’m voting yes. I actually wish that considering the evidence and the whole saga, that we were developed enough that its a no brainer.

Supafreak wrote:

basesix wrote:

34:45

big 'white' brother.. their rules? their rules.

36:40, the progress from wholesale bastardry in 1963, to making a doco like this in 1985.

Makes you think we should have come a lot further in the 40 years since..

Thanks basesix , very educational , easy to see who the real savages were .

supa i watched the naidoc awards on and off and most of the recipients were old comeing up to retirement and were proud of their 45yrs of service to their community.
so 45yrs of what? their lot is worse now than it was 45yrs ago and no one can deny it.
please read mundines speach of what a voice must be, not the false and corrupted propaganda of yes23 as referred to in my previous post.
if the govt adopted his way i will vote yes, leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution.

“ FFS. I’m voting yes. I actually wish that considering the evidence and the whole saga, that we were developed enough that its a no brainer.”

Totally agree

sameaswas wrote:

just read a piece from "checkmate"... @ABC.FactCheck (18/8/2023) about how the yes mob have dissed mundine etc etc, read the article you will find out what i mean.

abc found out that yes campaign had misquoted him and edited his speach deliberately and thereby make him out to be a hypocrite, which he was not.

they (yes) actually called him a hypocrite based on the lies (propaganda) put out by the voice article, it was a deliberate slur on his integrity by malicous editing of his speach.

the only good thing i got from abc fact check was that at least there are some ppl left at abc who are still willing to be impartial and call out the liars and decievers in power.

abc are loseing respect in the community..."the ministry of truth" george orwell 1984.

Thanks for that

"But an analysis of Mr Mundine's public statements from 2017 and more recently show he has consistently opposed a national Voice, while at times advocating for a local, grassroots approach."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-18/fact-check-warren-mundine-voice-…

Like i said before though, even if he had, would it matter, people can and should change their minds when they get new information, generally the change is made over time though a process of evolution, like many of us did during Covid.

Its when you get clear overnight backflips like Megan Davies last week you go hang on a minute, it's clear why they backflipped 360 over night and thats not a genuine reevaluation and changing of view.

sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this .

Supafreak wrote:

sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this .

Let’s face it supafreak, you, me, others are expecting some empathy some graciousness some generosity of spirit when there is none. The NO camp is mean and tricky and so devoid of common decency they would never give a ‘reach around’, more interested in reaming the country hard then working with it!

I’m just trying to understand what exactly they believe they’re going to lose and how their lives will change . It’s like they believe FNP will have the power to change laws and we will all be paying rent or something .

Supafreak posts "sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this . "

If you started at Henry Parkes' Tenterfield Oration (1889), considered the birth of Australian federation, and followed through the various conventions that led to the federation of the colonies and the enactment of the Constitution Act (1901) and specifically s51(xxvi) you would understand that "racism and favouratism and division based on colour" has been entrenched in our constitution since it's inception.
Some quotes from that time;

" ‘the moment the Commonwealth obtains any legislative power at all it should
have the power to regulate the affairs of the people of
coloured or inferior races who are in the Commonwealth’."
Edmund Barton 1898 Australia’s first prime minister and
a founding justice of the High Court of Australia,

"(s51(xxvi)...enables the Parliament to deal with people of any alien
race after they have entered the Commonwealth; to localise
them within defined areas, to restrict their migration, to
confine them to certain occupations, or to give them special
protection and secure their return after a certain period to
the country whence they came"
Quick and Gerran 'Annotated Constitution' 1901

" ‘we want a discrimination based on
colour’.
Henry Higgins, Victorian Delegate and future High Court Justice, at the Melbourne Convention 1898.

Many have argued over the years for the repeal of s51(xxvi), known as the "race power", (it was amended in the 1967 Referendum to include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders), but only those who lack a knowledge and understanding of Australian history and the Constitution itself would say something like " “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “
It was there from the beginning.
It is still there today.
Yet the No case still assert incorrectly that the Voice will be inserting race and division based on colour into our Constitution and the ignorant eat it up in spoonfuls.

Supafreak wrote:

I’m just trying to understand what exactly they believe they’re going to lose and how their lives will change . It’s like they believe FNP will have the power to change laws and we will all be paying rent or something .

Supafreak.

Best quote ever on this topic since it commenced.

For the scared and opposed, this highlights the selfishness within, period.AW

Thanks for spelling it out ( again ) adam12

@adam
Yep thanks. Should be a no brainer for Yes, but we need the Tories to create division....

Supafreak wrote:

sameaswas said “ leave the constitution alone, do not entrench racism and favouritism and division based on colour in our constitution. “ …….I really don’t know what to make of this .

Seems pretty clear and simple to me, its just means leave the constitution alone, the aim should be that we are all seen as one no matter ethnicity or skin colour or if your family has been here a month, 100 years or thousand's of years.

I cant see how anyone can argue against this, but somehow some try, even strangely trying to take moral high ground in doing so???

Some even claim to be legal experts and try to make ridiculous arguments, but the reality is there is no single ethnic group in the constitution that has special rights and powers above others, and hopefully most Australians will have enough common sense to ensure things stay this way.

GuySmiley wrote:

“ FFS. I’m voting yes. I actually wish that considering the evidence and the whole saga, that we were developed enough that its a no brainer.”

Totally agree

Indeed, completely agree too.
Was actually thinking about this yesterday, and my first thoughts when i heard about this referendum, and where my mind went.
Asked myself the honest questions, is my yes vote based on reasoning, or my own biases?
All i can conclude is that it was an easy thought. This is just part of the evolution of ideas and progress that i've been trying to vocally throw my support behind for alot longer than this referendum was tabled, which i believe would be similar sentiments to the other crew on here that don't have to think too hard about a commonsense decision.
What i really asked myself was, given there's been no singular significant movement to create a better way of living for indigenous Australians, and this is framed as being one, even if you don't completely buy into it and are skeptical, what is your option B?? For however many years since the last referendum, there has been little to no political push to help initiate change. The opportunity was always there for past governments, and bar K.Rudds Sorry, there's been nothing. But now there's a huge backlash from the naysayers because it's not up to 'their' expectations.
Tough titties.
Something has to change, and without an option B, voting yes couldn't be easier. Better than just leaving it the way it was to sort itself out. Clearly that hasn't worked.

Supafreak wrote:

I’m just trying to understand what exactly they believe they’re going to lose and how their lives will change . It’s like they believe FNP will have the power to change laws and we will all be paying rent or something .

…. and no thought of what the country would gain