Probably the biggest area of behaviour that Aborigines find impossible to hold to is NOT just claiming everything in sight and then assuming it 'belongs' to them once some agreement is reached on access and use, when the reality is that they are simply having their access to and use of open range formally permitted. For example:-
"The most comprehensive native title agreement negotiated in Australian history. The Settlement between the Noongar people and the Western Australian (WA) Government covers approximately 200,000 square kilometres of the south-west region."
What this means is:-
"A range of Noongar-held land assets, including further arrangements for Noongar peoples’ access to and co-management of Crown land with the WA Government."i.e:-
"The Noongar Land Estate will provide the Noongar people with a significant asset" = SOME Freehold land, same rights and obligations as everyone else - most not Freehold and thus not 'owned' outright. A flashpoint there for future problems.
"A 10-year fund to support the land, joint management and heritage objectives " = MONEY - you can see the future problem areas there now.
"co-operative and joint management agreements for the care and protection of the(South West Conservation) Estate." = again you can see the potential for future problems arising over 'joint management' and similar.
"Noongar peoples' lawful access to certain unallocated Crown Land and unmanaged reserve land for customary activities." = note carefully the wording - this is NOT Freehold land totally owned and never can be, access is the same as everyone else, and many areas such as 'unmanaged' need to be cleared up.
" access to Public Drinking Water Source Areas for certain customary purposes." = access to - not control over.; again a future flashpoint for problems over 'interpretation'.
Simple enough - until the stupid politicians, the activists and the 'courts' get involved in every aspect of every dispute area over every little thing... and that is when the excrement strikes the propellor. Also note that all other stakeholders are excluded from any discussion of usage and 'ownership' of what is non-Freehold land granted ACCESS to and 'traditional usage' of - meaning ceremonies - not just - 'me walk here - this my land'. Note this 'government' has NOT made that last clear at all but wide open for warfare and endless dispute.
Why did I choose Western Australia and this agreement? Because it covers the capital city etc of Perth and there are countless turkey-heads over there who seem to imagine their rights are never going to be impinged on in any way and it is so sweet to give the Aborigines everything they want. Wait until the disputes start rolling in, the complaints about 'heritage violations' (like Hindmarsh Island - never heard of until someone decides it is - Culture Cult like Cargo Cult); the dopes standing on the road and telling authorities they have no rights to entry etc; the claims of 'sovereignty' over and total ownership of the entire thing; the claims to Ownership of Perth and all in it - you can work the rest out for yourself.
Now then - How does this fit with the demand for CONTROL over land, water, air and resources? Simple - right to use is what Native Title offers - so now an Aboriginal can access drinking water and use creek water on licence for land use etc!!! Can walk across land NOT owned by someone else and actually legally access national parks and similar!! Is actually entitled to breathe air!! Can dispose of THEIR personal resources!!
Control and free shared use are two totally different things - watch this space for court actions funded by you idiots to take your rights from you. The German socialist parties thought they could control Hitler by giving him power and control by using the democratic process and fair play ...... took six months for them to realise their mistake.
So - what has changed with this massive 'agreement'? A bit of Freehold (as I've advocated for ages unlike - say ShakaRoo or PillPerth who offer nothing but bile towards Whites), and some cash (how unusual) - and the potential for a whole heap of future trouble over ownership, rights and land management of PUBLIC lands ending in court battles under 'activist judges' with an agenda under the rule of the government of the day, and with one side funded fully for free and all other stakeholders excluded by virtue of lack of funds etc and ignored even if they get a hearing.
It's your Perth, turkey-heads - YOU drink it! I'll be sitting back laughing.... and poking a stick and rattling your cages at every move...... just like now with the Lawfare columns.... need a new one for SEWA Lawfare soon.
https://www.wa.gov.au/organisation/department-of-the-premier-and-cabinet/south-w...https://www.wa.gov.au/organisation/department-of-planning-lands-and-heritage/noo...Like Gnads - I am ashamed that I spent my life primarily voting for a party that I thought was for everyone equally, and was even an unpaid Union delegate who took the hits from management in return for protecting the rights of me mates (so I could be rejected for a job with the Union 'encouraging applications from women, ATSIs and Non-English speakers').
Forum
Pages: 
behavioural standards impossible for Aborigines (Read 3278 times)
