Veterans' acceptance of Frontier Wars march - a turning point

Photo credit: Eleanor Gilbert

Ghillar, Michael Anderson, 26 April 2018

The success of the 2018 Anzac Day Frontier Wars March in Canberra has given great affirmation to the old adage that if you say it long enough and represent your message by physically making your presence known, people do begin to ask questions and begin to search inwardly within themselves about the truth of the message that we seek to get through to them.

Photo credit: Eleanor Gilbert

The wreath laying event yesterday at the cenotaph of the War Memorial caught us by surprise when we realised that many of the older veterans of the modern wars stood still as we passed and applauded our entourage. People should not underestimate what this meant in the long term.

Photo credit: Geoff Bagnall

This is a monumental shift, because now these veterans will take this back to their tables and begin to ask the right question: What is the Frontier Wars commemorative presence all about?

Photo credit: Geoff Bagnall

This is a turning point.

Our continuing sovereignty as First Nations is underpinned by our Law and culture that establishes a continental wide ancient common law system that is connected nationally through our Dreaming Songlines. This in turn gives rises to our claim of permanent sovereignty over all natural resources and includes the airspace to the outer rim of the galaxy.

[ Indigenous peoples’ permanent sovereignty over natural resources Final report of the Special Rapporteur, Erica-Irene A. Daes, E/CN.4/Sub.2/2004/30 13 July 2004, PREVENTION OF DISCRIMINATION, PREVENTION OF DISCRIMINATION AND PROTECTION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights Fifty-sixth session ]

Our Peoples should not be encouraged by fame or fortune to press forward with the State governments’ eagerness to blind-side you by agreeing to negotiate domestic treaties, agreements or contracts. Their abilities in wordmanship is usually far greater than ours and so the choice of words and the construct of the text of treaties could, without you knowing, take away all that you currently own.

First Nations Peoples should never let anyone tell them that the Crown took ownership in 1788.

Not true.

The Mabo (No.2) judgement confirms this. The Mabo (No.2) judgement gave recognition to a colonial skeletal framework that is very brittle. This is why the full bench of the High Court in Mabo (No.2) agreed that for them to maintain some degree of strength of this brittle framework of the British assertion of sovereignty over Australia, they said at paragraph 43

43. However, recognition by our common law of the rights and interests in land of the indigenous inhabitants of a settled colony would be precluded if the recognition were to fracture a skeletal principle of our legal system. The proposition that the Crown became the beneficial owner of all colonial land on first settlement has been supported by more than a disregard of indigenous rights and interests. It is necessary to consider these other reasons for past disregard of indigenous rights and interests and then to return to a consideration of the question whether and in what way our contemporary common law recognizes such rights and interests in land.

[ Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] HCA 23; (1992) 175 CLR 1 (3 June 1992) ]

It is therefore wrong for the Native Title lawyers around this country to be telling the Native Title claimants that they should agree to a wholesale surrender of claims both now and in the future. The surrender arrangements were built within John Howard’s Ten Point Plan strategy within the 1998 Native Title amendment. The Native Title Lawyers should NOT be persuading applicants and claimants to agree to an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA), that request two things of the claimants:

Photo credit: Eleanor Gilbert

Firstly, surrender all your future claims and title under your Law and culture to the British colonial States as occupiers and the second thing they ask you to do is to approve that all future development acts by Local, State and Commonwealth government are to be classified as ‘past acts’, which ultimately takes away all your rights to negotiate in the future on any and all developments, including mining.

The fact that these modern-day Uncle Toms and Aunt Marys succumb to the needs occupying colonial powers and continue to lurk in the shadows of mainstream politics means they continue to be dangerous in that they are unable to think Black or as First Nations person, where their mind and their thinking should come from within their own culture and not as an assimilated educated First Nations person, who thinks in the black letter laws of the occupier. Sadly, they have been so inculcated with their occupiers’ mindset that they no longer possess the ability to think outside of that, in particular, that of their own Law and customs, which, by the way, over shadows the black letter law of the British occupying power, if you can read between the lines in the Mabo judgement.

Senior non-Aboriginal lawyers and counsel understand the fragile and brittle claims to power over First Nations Peoples’ rights under our Law and culture. This is why they discriminate when they discourage First Nations Peoples resolving that their Native Title claims are to be underpinned by their pre-existing sovereignty under the continental common law of the Dreaming.

Furthermore, this is why they also demand in a Native Title application that First Nations do not claim ownership of the natural resources on and within their lands.

So those shadowy people, dressed up as a First Nation person, who continue to push treaty without sovereignty and perpetual sovereign title to all natural resources on and within their lands, are traitors to their own culture and People.

The Referendum Councils’ agents of the coloniser are being paid by the Commonwealth to coerce and entice people into giving away everything to the oppressor occupying State by trying to resurrect the Uluru Statement and promote First Nations Peoples inclusion in the Constitution of Australia. These First Nations people, who accept salaries to illegally charm and trick our people, need a lot of help to bring them out of a colonised traumatised mindset, which clearly demonstrates that they suffer horribly from the Stockholm Syndrome.

I say to these people that if you enjoy your bank loans, IBA loans, your hire purchase deals to buy vehicles and other goods, then enjoy them, but do not purport to represent a mindset of grassroots peoples, who are dying in abject poverty, trauma, grief and loss and whom by way of survival are imprisoned for being a dissenter or obstructionist, or one who by defying the authorities on and within their lands, ends up in the oppressors’ prisons.

Photo credit: Eleanor Gilbert

This, my assimilated friends, is tyranny and our Peoples are suffering because we, as First Nations, are different. The criminalisation of difference and otherness must be stamped out.

If our assimilated fellows believe that constitutional recognition and inclusion can change these circumstances and rid us of abject poverty and criminal proceedings being brought against our People by mentally deranged legislators, who have no connection to this Country, emotionally, spiritually or otherwise and that constitutional recognition will change all these things then please identify how this can be done and achieved.

Let the Federal government do its own job. Let the Prime Minister, his Attorney-general and the governing caucus of the Commonwealth come out to our Peoples on the ground and describe the benefits that will flow if First Nations agree to placing before the Australian ppopulation a referendum for First Nations Peoples inclusion in the constitution.

Our people do not need First Nations puppets to do the campaigns and sell a white man’s agenda. Let the whiteman talk for himself. This includes Bill Shorten of the Opposition. He like PM Turnbull can talk a lot but say nothing that is meaningful for our future well-being.

The Sovereign Union puts it to the people that constitutional recognition is total assimilation and I put it to you that when they talk about benefits, they can only say to you: You will have the same rights and privileges as all other Australians and be serviced with our prejudice.

I thought that is what we are meant to have now? If not, then we all need to know why we don’t have the same benefits and rights as all others, or is all this about one thing – the taking away our future claims to our rightful sovereign inheritance to the land and all its natural resources, including our water and fish?

Recognition and the Referendum Council – Australia – tell the truth of what this is all about, but then we do know that Australia to pretty short on being able to deal with the truth.

More detail: www.australianfrontierconflicts.com.au

Background videos:
MOVING TRUTH (30m) https://vimeo.com/214091130
HEADS DOWN!! (6m) https://vimeo.com/264708545 (1080p) https://vimeo.com/264702441 (m4v)
SMALLPOX: BIOLOGICAL WARFARE 1789 onwards https://vimeo.com/213523350

Photo credit: Eleanor Gilbert