Friday Rave 51- THE VOICE - Do you really know what you are potentially voting for?
With many Australians crippled by rising interest rates, petrol costs, electricity hikes and exorbitant grocery bills, we vote next Saturday on Prime Minister Albanese's obsession, The Voice. A hugely divisive misdirection of government focus and resources, while more and more Australians suffer from the rapidly rising cost of living.
Australians will be forced to vote on an issue not deemed culturally acceptable, including by many in the Indigenous community. 96.2% of the population will determine for 3.8% of Australians whether or not they will be forced to have an unelected group of 24 or 25 elite Indigenous (probably inner-city Marxists in bed with Albanese’s far-left Labor government) to be their voice and do the speaking for them. Did you know there are 300-plus tribes of Indigenous people, and historically, it has never been culturally acceptable for one tribe to speak on behalf of any other tribe?
Today the Friday Rave raises concerns about the ‘The voice to Parliament’ through six key questions. Undecided voters or those leaning either way on the fence are encouraged to read and think critically about the issues presented and act accordingly to what they believe is for the best interests of the whole nation.
1. Is it right for our nation to be divided along racial lines?
The referendum is a “choice about what kind of nation we want to be … a liberal democracy where all people are equal … or a country where people are divided by race, and permanently in conflict with each other over facts of history that cannot be altered”.
(Warren Mundine - Australian Indigenous citizen)
2. Is it right that because you have an Indigenous ancestor, you should receive additional benefits or privileges that others can’t receive?
“Having an Aboriginal ancestor one, two or more generations back should not be grounds for additional benefits or privileged access to government any more than dressing in drag should make a man a legitimate substitute for a woman” Piers Akerman.
3. Are the architects of the ‘Voice to Parliament’ primarily concerned about the welfare of the Indigenous people, or are the Indigenous people being used as pawns in a game being played by Marxist Communists aiming at political change on a colossal scale?
4. With Prime Minister Albanese not providing the details of what powers and influence the ‘Voice to Parliament’ will have, do you feel comfortable handing a blank cheque to a Prime Minister who even openly lied to us about the Uluru Statement, which he didn't even read in full himself?
5. Are you one hundred per cent certain that there aren't other hidden agendas that could cause imminent harm to our nation, including to Indigenous people? Are you aware there was a Communist agenda dating back to the 1920s, “National and Colonial Question” by Joseph Stalin (Former Communist murdering dictator), under the instruction of the Communist murderer Vladimir Lenin, to establish a separate Aboriginal nation under communist domination.
“As the activist mantra goes, it’s Voice, Treaty, Truth. Voice, to give Aboriginal people privileged access to government; Treaty, to secure more money and control over land; and Truth, to re-cast Australia’s history as a story of shame.
As the Aboriginal group ANTARS says, a treaty is “more than symbolic recognition … (it) recognises that First Nations people never ceded their sovereignty and creates space for First Nations communities to exercise their sovereignty through a form of self-government”.
6. Could 96.2% of voters unknowingly impact Aboriginal land sovereignty, having potentially serious ramifications for all Australians who own land?
All Indigenous sovereign claims over the land are outside of the Constitution. As evidenced by the statement above by the Aboriginal group ANTARS “.........First Nations people never ceded their sovereignty ………”
Could the YES vote result in the superseding of Indigenous sovereignty of the land to the corporate government of Australia? Under the guise of Native Title; does all of this have the potential of taking away Indigenous tribal lands - along with ALL Australians losing their land - now or in the future - to entities including but not limited to the globalist elite of the United Nations?
Before you dismiss this question and organise to book me into a mental asylum, please be reminded of the words of Klaus Schwab, Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), an organisation of globalist-elite in alliance with the United Nations (UN) and World Health Organisation (WHO).
“You will own nothing and be happy”.
Numerous Indigenous people have raised the serious issue of the Voice to Parliament threatening Indigenous sovereignty of the land, which protects all Australians. Why has that not been reported in the globalist mainstream media? (You don't need to be Einstein to know why.)
The following interview (8 min 28 sec) on 2SM with an Indigenous lady called Sandy explains where this question comes from. IT IS A MUST LISTEN
I will go as far as to say. If you are uncertain about how to vote, please play this interview as you drive to the voting booth.
I will be voting NO. However, the Indigenous people do need a voice—a voice in the form of a Royal Commission to investigate where all the money is going. An audit is sorely needed: A thorough one!
The Productivity Commission report shows that Indigenous spending was $33.4 billion in 2016 across all services from federal, state and territory governments. This has now been estimated at just under approximately 40 billion dollars across the last 12 months.
The 2022 figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) show that among the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, heart disease was the number one cause of death. This was followed by diabetes, chronic lung diseases, lung cancer, and suicide. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have a life expectancy of eight years less than their fellow non-Indigenous Australians. How much of that $40 billion dollars is actually going to close the gap, and where has it gone over the past decades?
I conclude this week’s Rave with this question and encourage you to join me in advocating for a Royal Commission to investigate Indigenous funding.
I wonder what the $364.6 million cost of delivering the Voice referendum would have done if it had been instead redirected towards lowering the gap? In other words, what if one million dollars was given instead to each of the 300-plus Indigenous tribes? What if it was truly monitored to ensure it will be spent on something tangible: something that makes a real difference to real lives in the real world - in real-time - instead of lining the pockets of some bureaucratic gravy train?
The below links provide further Friday Rave commentary regarding the ‘Voice to Parliament. They are meant to assist those with this very important decision - under the guise of “Native Title’ - because it is a decision that will have ongoing ramifications in our own backyards - repercussions across our country for democracy and for the welfare of future generations to come.
PS If you agree with my words, please stand with me to speak up by Liking and Sharing the rave.