October 17, 2021

High court ruling on Aborigines may end in civil war

The constitution, imperfect though it is, is under attack. Recently, the High court voted 4-3 to allow to foreign-born criminals to avoid extradition on the basis that each had Aboriginal ancestry. In doing so, they have conferred special rights upon the blackfella which supersede our migration laws on the basis that their ‘Aboriginality’ connects them to the land in a wholly transcendental fashion not applicable to the rest of us; not even those of us White Australians with ties going back several generations. Suddenly, race matters very much.

By Brian Dove

Shared from New Australian Bulletin

The constitution, imperfect though it is, is under attack. Recently, the High court voted 4-3 to allow two foreign-born criminals to avoid extradition on the basis that each had Aboriginal ancestry.

In doing so, they have conferred special rights upon the blackfella which supersede our migration laws on the basis that their ‘Aboriginality’ connects them to the land in a wholly transcendental fashion not applicable to the rest of us; not even those of us White Australians with ties going back several generations. Suddenly, race matters very much.

Yet, one of the criminals facing deportation is white as pasteurised milk, and his ‘Aboriginal relation’ was a distant granny who probably died before the gold rush; such as a specimen like a crim in question even possesses an erudite interest in genealogy that could prove it either way. However, he was ‘accepted’ into an Aboriginal tribe. Apparently, this is good enough for them and is all that’s needed to satisfy the out-of-touch elites sitting in the High court.

This ruling has caused angst for the government, who have criticised the judges involved for putting politics above constitutional law, especially at a time when the political divide has been working gingerly towards a constitutional amendment that offers Aborigines more of a say in their own affairs.

Needless to mention, it was a ‘Woke ruling’, and not an objective interpretation of constitutional law. What’s more, it’s blown up in the faces of those who tried to strike that delicate balance in establishing an indigenous voice.

The implications for such a decision are unsettling, with no-one really knowing for sure where it may lead, but it has theoretically paved the way for making a special class of ‘Australians’ out of Aborigines. That would cause their ancestors to laugh darkly (no pun intended).

Yes, while discussion rages about a ‘voice to parliament’ for Aborigines, it appears such a voice is automatically implied.

Now it’s a matter of expatiating upon that status. Either that, or triggering them by fixing to jam it shut, and avoid politically revisiting the topic at all costs: perhaps by concocting a disaster of sufficient magnitude to turn political attention away from Aborigines for a bit: just long enough to give all concerned a breather until they can figure things out.

Right now, rabid virtue signallers are beating a path to attack the constitution and amend it to expunge all ‘imperial’ references, which, in a nutshell, means white people. It seems, whiteness and democracy are insoluble together. Yes, the wolves are at the gates.

In its submission to the senate on their inquiry into ‘nationhood and democracy’, the University of Western Sydney (UWS) argued that the Anglo-Celtic-European ‘core identity’ is “redundant and based on imperialist logic.”

According to the university, national identity should be assumed on the basis of “the indigenous people of this country.”

The rest of its submission delved into bilious deprecation and shaming in the name of ‘egalitarianism’. Careful what you wish for.

Now, without blowing anyone’s mind, Aboriginals are not Australians. This is not a ‘racist’ argument but a fact as demonstrable by the existence of a separate flag, as for the truth they are, well, Aboriginals. Australians are descended from the convicts and settlers banished here by Great Britain over two hundred years ago. Our people built this country, the Aboriginal lived in disparate groups upon the land, not even sharing the same language. They had no nation.

Meanwhile, the convicts arrived in ‘chains’ as much as any African American slave landed in the United States, and under an oppressive form of social subjugation, since the majority were political prisoners inasmuch as they were deemed criminals often for committing ‘crimes’ of the poor in a country stratified by a ruthless class structure.

These unfortunates were thrown into a harsh wilderness and condemned to toil in order to civilise the land and make it fit for exploitation by the empire. Did that not make them slaves, indentured as the convicts were? And, if they were slaves, why does Woke history empathise with blacks, based on the merit of their skin colour, and not whites?

They had no choice about coming here and their ancestors belong nowhere else. All of this evades the argument that if England hadn’t arrived here sooner or later a less-egalitarian people would have.

The assumption of many is that convicts were Australian immediately upon arriving in Sydney Harbour. Ludicrously enough, English Woke is given to criticise ‘Australians’ for mistreatment of Aborigines, conveniently forgetting the British colonised the land. So, what becomes of the White native ancestors who created this civilisation?

Two very privileged white convicts whose suffering couldn’t possibly be compared to negro slaves

No matter how much enemy brokers like those making the submission to the senate try to use sophistry to obfuscate the facts that offend them, reason disarms them every time (well, it would if there was ever an opportunity for reason to prevail). For it is only by recasting the identity of the native Australian that one can then argue he has no connection to White peoples of Anglo-Celtic-European origins.

This has been a programme of destabilisation pursued by many, and ironically assisted by the very conservatives now pulling out their hair over the consequences of this high court verdict; for it was those of their stripe who deconstructed the White Australia Policy in the interests of labour exploitation.

The UWS is a hotbed of anti-Australian activity and is involved in undermining the security of this country by offering $1,500 packages to Chinese students to circumvent the travel ban by arriving via a third-party country whether or not they’re carrying the coronavirus. It is not the only university doing this.

To the UWS, two contradictory beliefs can exist side-by-side without any crisis, such as their motivation for profit while insisting on ideological superiority. They believe in the pre-eminence of their values. By expunging the ‘white core’ of this country and replacing it (if their intentions have been articulated correctly) with an Aboriginal council, or parliament, or whatever is ‘traditional’ to them, historical injustices can be righted. This is the kind of ‘education’ they offer.

Yet, for profit’s sake, they undermine national health and safety by encouraging the mass-entry of Chinese students, whose motives for studying here have little to do with academia but are all about gaining permanent residency. This is a foothold very much in favour with the stratagem of Communist China, and its despotic ruler, Xi Xinping. It’s little wonder the universities, now dedicated to catering almost exclusively to a Chinese clientele, are excreting proverbial bricks. Given the numbers of those studying here, soon to reach an estimated 40,000 strong, that’s lots of precious fees being put at risk because of panic over a silly potential pandemic.

How this is conducive to an Aboriginal future for Australia is beyond the manner of sense that doesn’t require the persuasion of money, as it will lead to Australia conceding Chinese dominion over national policy and direction. This agitation, a component of social justice causes related to the experience of the Aborigine, has an underlying goal and inevitable result to make Australia’s borders porous. It was said as much by senior lawyer and ‘social activist’ Mark Leibler.

A fanatical Jew, Leibler has had his mighty proboscis stuck into indigenous causes for yonks, often working pro bono for the blackfella. He compares the experience of the Jew with that of the Aborigine and desires to see white Australia expunged from this continent and its borders opened up to all. Nonetheless, they condemn nationalists and celebrate filth like him.

He has served as head of the Zionist Federation of Australia and acted for more Jewish organisations than are fit to repeat. Interestingly, he was also, as his webpage says, “One of a small number of recipients of the Israel Goldstein Award for distinguished leadership by Diaspora leaders, presented by Israeli President Shimon Peres in June 2011.” Otherwise known as the Shlomo Award for Meddling in Goyim Affairs.

Yes, Diaspora leaders, as in, leaders of an alien presence that vigorously retains its identity and pursues its own interests within the borders of a host country.

Leibler is typical of the Woke classes, even if he himself is too old and too much of a grizzled Zionist to be included in such a hip category as boasts child saints like Greta Thunberg. However, collectively, the energy they’ve put behind so-called ‘indigenous causes’ and especially this cockeyed ‘indigenous voice to parliament’ finally caused the constitution to creak under pressure.

The High Court judgement has popped its bolts. Aliens fighting so that aliens can now be considered immovable (even if this outcome wasn’t exactly their doing) from our country based on their ‘race’, which the same people otherwise spend all their time denying exists. That is, even though the ‘race’ of these subjects in all cases has been mixed with the blood of other races so that we’re talking a mere splash of Aborigines in the genes. Thus, Aborigines who aren’t Aborigines are protected because they are Aborigines. One might begin to believe it’s all a satire from the pages of the former Mad Magazine. Queerer still, is that it’s being done for the benefit of violent criminals.

In reality, it’s solely the idea of Aboriginality that transcends Australian constitutional law, without even having Aborigines specifically included in its wording. Again, that’s some advancement.

A troublesome Jew like Leibler being at the forefront of these types of shenanigans is no surprise: Jews believe themselves entitled to intrude in others’ affairs. We are talking about an alien people insisting they are Australian all the while maintaining their Jewish aplomb and advocating from that position.

Mark Leibler, Israel-firster, and dedicated to helping Aborigines overthrow Australian sovereignty. It’s his duty as a fully wukkas Australian

They, and those from the Woke, don’t stop at Aborigines; by promoting a multi-racial Australia they’ve created a free-for-all. The Chinese diaspora will grow exponentially, while Aborigines will shrink, so who the beneficiary of this bastardised race will be is nobody’s business. It’s almost a moot point.

But we bring this up, not to gratuitously introduce our anti-Semitic credentials (sic) but to convey how a multi-racialized post-colonial society is at risk from the very ethnic formations it creates in the accretion of a population.

The High court’s conclusion satisfies aliens since Aborigines born here don’t require a reprieve by migration law, it’s only those claiming heritage that benefits. Ergo, Aborigines become favoured on the back of a determination that aliens can possess the inviolable status of a preeminent race. It is circular logic without a centre.

So far, none of these beneficiaries is Australians, not the Aborigines, and not those pretending to be them. It’s a sad point that the constitution and those who’ve hijacked it had never been resolved to maintain this point. Which is, dear readers, why we’re in a mess that might very well lead to civil war. Well, anything’s possible now.

The outcome from the ruling has emboldened the criminal element. Shane Martin, the 52-year-old father of AFL star Dustin Martin, flew back to Australia from New Zealand following his 2016 extradition. Why, well, to claim the Aboriginal heritage, of course. Martin has an extensive criminal history with ties to the drug-peddling youth-corrupting outlaw Rebels MC. While he was sent packing, he now has the High court backing him (how ironic is that), and how does one even prove Aboriginal ancestry? More than likely Martin will be back to properly challenge his extradition.

Meanwhile, with a repetitious onslaught of attacks against the ‘core’ Anglo-Celtic-European Australian identity, the strain is beginning to show. There are only so many councils banning Australia Day, only so many disrespectful acts by dark-skinned footballers, who enjoy a virtual monopoly on the lucrative sport, before the average bloke snaps.

The UWS mentioned the need for Aborigines to be absorbed into the mainstream, but what is the mainstream? Nobody here at NAB offices is part of the mainstream. Everyday normies we bump into, especially older folks, are feeling totally disenfranchised. Farmers aren’t part of the mainstream, as they struggle with crooked banks keen for their land to go to Chinese investment companies. The unemployed are not welcomed into this elusive mainstream, and so many feel isolated in plain sight that, without putting a too finer point on it, it’s probably correct to say that the mainstream is a myth.

It is hammered into us that Aborigines are so beat when the government has for decades rolled out the red carpet for them. A visit to the government’s Job Search site and you can peruse many opportunities and it’s not expected candidates are even educated at an employable level. Plus, how many have been gypped by their own ‘indigenous corporations’? One classic historical case was that of the Aboriginal Housing Company which proved that Aborigines are just as disposed to doing over their own kind as whitey.

In the Closing The Gap report to government last week, former teachers at an all-Aboriginal boarding school in Alice Springs admitted they routinely completed students’ work for them. This is due to a disconnect between qualified teachers and an innate inability for Aborigines to be cultivated under such a system. Hell, they’re having trouble enough teaching the multi-racial masses. It is a great mistake to believe that you can bring a primitive race up to snuff by throwing them in the deep end of an advanced culture whereupon it’s expected they’ll naturally learn to swim. Clearly not, or we wouldn’t be dealing with this. And what gap is it exactly that we’re supposed to be closing?

What will ever happen if one day, tremors in constitutional reform lead to Aboriginal tribes being able to claim a person’s house, or farm? What happens when they do it on land owned by a foreign company that is, say, Chinese?

One lot who’ve had a gutful is a sub-branch of the RSL in Fremantle. According to media reports (and we know how accurate they are), they are planning to ban the flying of the Aboriginal flag and the ‘Welcome to Country’ ceremony. Naturally, this triggered the snowflakes who dived on their social media accounts to cry racism. It’s a wonder someone hasn’t developed a keyboard that automatically provides the word already spelt out. In a less frantic telling of the story by The Australian, it appears the issue centres around the ode of remembrance being spoken in the Noongar tongue.

Aborigines most definitely served in the forces, but then so did others; it’s well worth remembering the all-be-it reluctant help given in PNG by the fuzzy wuzzy angels. As nationalists, we have no objection to the recognition of the service given by those Aborigines and we are grateful for their contribution. But ‘Welcome to Country’ ceremonies and special flags are an attempt at consuming the event and making it about them. And, for heaven’s sake, Welcome to Country is a made-up ceremony. It was cobbled together in 1976 by indigenous comedian Ernie Dingo and musician Richard Whalley.

The pair were put on the spot during an international arts festival in Perth where they were due to perform. Asked by visiting islanders to present a ceremony to welcome them they essentially pulled it out of their hat. Now, it’s fair to say, this ludicrous mud-man dance with its smoke, waving of twigs and shuffling on the sand, was literally concocted by a comedian to get himself out of a jam. There are no tens-of-thousands of years of cultural tradition invested in it; it’s bullshit, like Aboriginal art.

It’s either Ernie Dingo or Morgan Freeman, we can’t tell

The trouble with all of this is that western values create western-style problems. Even if we’re not talking about a post-colonial nation the west is in decline and everybody knows it. The muddy hordes have swarmed into Europe and true cultures, peoples who gave civilisation to the world and sent us to the stars, are now being outbred and subsumed by races whose existence on this planet is prolific and not in doubt of disappearing, unlike the hated white people of this earth.

Back home, this is what the push is ultimately about, and those who wish to strike a balance can now see how absolutely determined the abolitionists of western society are to remake our country into a copy of South Africa under ANC control. This country is like the four sides of a bedsheet with interest groups and opposing ideologies all crying “I want it!” while China and others look on with interest as they frantically tug for dominance.

Those opposing our national identity, which has long been established not only here but in the minds of the world, they are demonstrating their hatred of white people. Make no mistake, this is what it’s about – they hate white people and they’ve made it their duty to encourage other white people to hate white people in the name of a wretched conscience. It is a lemming mentality based on twisted egalitarianism.

None of this would’ve happened had the White Australia Policy not been dismantled. We wouldn’t be experiencing this low ebb had successive political classes held steadfastly to the idea of this country remaining with those who built it regardless of any misplaced feelings about a loose formation of inhabitants stuck in the year zero. When Captain Cook declared this land terra nullius during his voyage in 1770, he was damned right. A bunch of naked primitives running about with spears making life hell for goannas were not worthy of consideration when it came to whether or not the land should be inhabited by an advanced culture, and as hateful as that might sound to the Woke, that’s how every other first-power nation would’ve regarded it at the time. Again, it’s just the British were first to claim this land.

Thus, it becomes easier to see how with a powerful lobby pushing for the elevation of Aborigines, which must ultimately lead them into a governing role if not stopped, then the country will not just be divided but split. What side would the army back? The police? Most importantly, what would the US and China make of it, and who would they back if the match hit the haystack?

Nationalists would never have made any concessions to Aborigines. We would help them, sure, but we would not carry them. And, while we’ll happily give them lots of lands, it wouldn’t be strategic land or land needed for mining or food production. What’s more, we’d never ever apologise for our heritage or our beliefs. We would never shake from proudly declaring that Australia is, was, and shall forever be white man’s land.

error: