Land rights determinations usually go to the wrong people
From Kev Moore
In 1996 the Carr Government in NSW badly needed a ‘success story’ to validate its land claims legislation, under which not one square inch of land had been restored to its aboriginal owners. Fortunately, there was a case in the legal pipeline, which could fill the need. The Crescent Head case on the NSW central coast had been before the courts for months, and the NSW Aboriginal Land Council, representing Mary-Lou Buck of the Dunghutti people, had established its native title credentials.
When the Crescent Head ruling was handed down, the first ever case of aboriginal land being restored to its “rightful owners” was touted as establishing the native title credentials of the Carr Labor administration. The land was ‘handed over’ with great fanfare, and the new aboriginal owners promptly sold their title. Perhaps they knew something Carr didn’t?
Now, however, according to columnist Piers Ackerman (Sunday Telegraph, 31/1/99) there is doubt that the Dunghutti people really were the traditional owners of the Crescent Head land. The allegation has been raised by another Dunghutti, Anthony Carter, who points out that there is a very strong case of traditional ownership by the Biripai people. The NSW Land Council has refused to acknowledge these doubts as valid, because its own credibility is at stake. It was the Land Council that validated the Dunghutti claim, and provided the ‘experts’ to verify their validation. Last November, a meeting of a number of representatives of different tribal groups confirmed that the traditional owners, who had been removed from the area a century ago, had been completely ignored.
This is not the first case in which “land rights” have been allocated to the wrong people. The most famous case, covered up at the time, was that of Ayers Rock, now known by the trendy as “Uluru”. In November 1983 the new Hawke Government announced that it was handing the Uluru National Park to an Aboriginal Land Trust. The Minister at the time was Mr. Clyde Holding, and although experts like Peter English warned that the Land Trust did not represent the (dispersed) traditional owners, the transfer went ahead. Peter English went on to document the betrayal in a book published in 1986, Storm Over Uluru. Rev Cedric Jacobs, drawing from Peter English’s material, confirms what he has to say in (Jacobs’) book Healing a Divided Nation (1986).
Storm Over Uluru, by Peter B. English; $10.00 posted from all League bookservices.
Healing a Divided Nation, by Rev Cedric Jacobs; $7.00, or $9.00 posted.
Posted on March 13, 2023, in aborigines, General and tagged Crescent Head, Land Claims. Bookmark the permalink. 17 Comments.
Cairns News 
Clear example [as in CRYSTAL] why the Australian CoVID Regime of the United [Communist] Nations is pushing this ‘Voice’ Referendum.
This is about creating a Black Minority government of Box Ticker Aboriginal Industry anti-Whites as a cloak of legitimacy for the Aus CoVID Regime.
We should not consider these Box Ticker Activists from the Aboriginal Industry as legitimate representatives of anything. On a budget of 33 billion / year from the Australian tax payer, they have completely failed their constituents – Aboriginal communities – in terms of the issues these communities have identified as THEIR issues.
We have heard from all the CCP Assets in the Australian CoVID Regime. Now here is the Soviet Union / Russian [NOT] Federation version of Voice.
Why do I say NOT / NYET? The Ashkhenazi / Khazarian Jews that took over Russia 1917 genocided the real European, ethnic Russian people – upward of 60 million, according to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, ground the survivors into an absolute minority and cloaked themselves in their racial, ethnic identity as ‘Russians’. Today the RF is run by wall-to-wall crypto Jews. And in Ukraine they are doing exactly the same thing to the European Ukrainian people who are ethnically of Rus – Kievan Rus – Novrogod.
These Aboriginal Industry Activist Box Tickers (AbIABoTs) are a communist front. Of course, they are against Australian alliances with other nations that have a majority White demographic (kind of like Australia). And yes, they are all as subverted as we are (in terms of the crime, chaos, corruption sistema), but their majority population is struggling with the same issues we are struggling with.
Can hardly wait to hear the ‘welcome to country’ for the Ashkhenazis (posing as Russians – the ethnically European people they ‘slaughtered without a shred of remorse’) .
Indigenous Elders Conduct International Diplomacy with the Russian Consulate in Sydney uploaded by the Aussie Cossack
LikeLike
I would also like to hear Tony Ryan’s comments on this. Being taught here in Tassie for a number of years. Gumnuts and Buttons (FFS).
What about those sent across the world, removed from family and treated as slaves here in this country? You know the convicts. Well my heritage is convict plus aboriginal. Moreso convict.. One could ask where the “sorry” is for those people denied their natural heritage, ripped from their families and in a lot of instances treated worse. My children, myself and many others are both gum nuts and buttons according to this stuff
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/From+Gumnuts+to+Buttons.-a0293544415
So I am a colonist yet an aborigine. Explain that to my children.
LikeLike
Just anthropologists trying to reinvent the wheel. Editor
LikeLike
Tonyryan43, just out of personal interest, are you aware of any traditions “from the dreamtime” that have given pine cones (as in Bunya) a “sacred/spiritual” meaning?
“Special envoys carrying message sticks from custodians of the trees travelled through surrounding districts to invite selected groups to attend the ceremonial feasts. … They were times of great spiritual significance, when Aboriginal people gathered to receive strength from Mother Earth. They were also times for arranging marriages, settling disputes and for trading goods and sharing dances and songs. … Aboriginal people considered the bunya pine to be sacred, and there is scant evidence that they used parts of the tree other than the edible nuts.”
https://www.conifers.org/ar/Araucaria_bidwillii.php
LikeLike
Malcolm Roberts again guts the sacred Marxist oppression narrative and reads the entrails for the Senate.
“Aboriginals aren’t victims, stop trying to be white saviour lefties”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Come in spinner… The claim that Aborigines were nomads is pure bullshit, put about to justify regarding their culture with contempt. In fact, as I said previously, they followed food cycles, which is an intelligent approach in the southern hemisphere where conserving energy is important.
Along the coasts, they pursued sea foods in the right seasons and then made their way to back-country for the other season. In the North, they worked the coasts in the dry season and travelled back 100 Ks to the higher country for the wet season. In the desert regions, their treks covered a lot more ground. The Europeans who arrived here were generally illiterate, malnourished, brain-damaged, and compulsively ethnocentric, judging everything by their own narrow Christian belief systems, so it is no surprise they misinterpreted everything they saw. In my opinion, in much of rural Australia, nothing has changed.
Having experience in both farming and hunting, my conclusion is that harvesting food makes way more sense than domesticating it. Domestication is capital-intensive and labour-intensive. Most people today simply do not have the cerebral capacity to think this comparison out. They just parrot what they heard in the pub.
As to your belief that “they lit fires to get the last animals out”, precisely how does this makes sense? Out of what?
Fire was never used for this purpose. Why would a hunter want to force a kangaroo to come ripping out of the scrub, making for an impossible target for a spear thrower, when the same roo can be quietly stalked and speared when stationary. Secondly, you try running barefoot over burned ground and then tell us blacks did this. The last thing any Aborigne needed was stab wounds in the feet from burned grass and shrub stalks. Nobody traverses burned ground barefoot at speed.
Dunno where you live mate, but it sure ain’t in the Centre or northern NT/Kimberly where the people still know how to hunt.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Daviddd… Thanks. But as to shite, I’m afraid you are being prophetic. My guess is that in ten years the genuine culture will have crashed forever and all songline authorities will be dead. But there will be lots of white pretenders prancing around making video noises, painted up in glorious traditional Dulux, waving burning gum leaves, and making yidaki noises that make no sense.
I’ve been down this road before. And, yes, I hope we are both wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
tonyryan43: ““Nation” was then embraced by NSW Aboriginal activists who had no idea what the word means….”
Thank you, tonyryan43. For some reason I have never been comfortable with the nomenclature applied to the overwhelming Aboriginal issues we face as a country.
Suffice to say at this point that it should be possible to a very large extent to facilitate the traditions and customs and way of life most Aboriginal people are entitled to pursue. But it will NEVER be achieved as long as Aboriginal welfare and issues are determined by political and financial interests, particularly foreign ones. Nor will it be achieved by ignoring the views and desires of the genuine Aboriginal communities as opposed to the loud mouth activists, Aboriginal or not.
Gotta love Cairns news for providing a forum in which, in this case (as in many other cases) I have learned from you in 5 mins what no amount of formal schooling has managed to cover in decades.
The manipulative arty farty bleeding heart nonsense and platitudes such as “The Voice” will do nothing with respect to Aboriginal issues until the Aboriginal communities themselves get a genuine say about the issues they face and are empowered at a local level to start with!
Yet another politically manipulated political body in Canberra will give the Aboriginal communities more of the same that we are all getting…. Shyt!
I sincerely hope I’m wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Have we forgotten aborigines were nomads, they travelled around, they did NOT stay in one spot. Thet went Walkabout. Sure they had their favourite places . They moved wen the hunting got scarce ,They often lit fires to get the last animals out. When they went back the next year or so the land would be replenished.I have never met an oborigine who has done that ever, Believe me I know a lot. I have been to places which, if I was an aborigine , I would really be connected to. in thirty odd years I never met an aborigine who even knew of these places. So do not bother talking about connection to land.
I have met people from uni’s who have told aborigines where “their land was, they actually took them there because they had never been there and were never told. So much for story and tradition.
The whole thing is anther ploy. I do not believe for one minute it is for the benefit of all aboriginals.
If you believe it is , I suggest you do more research.
I admire anyone black white or brown , who is genuinely fighting for their rights. I am totally sick of liars , cheats anf moneygrubbers. There are far too many of them.
Once I believed Australia was a fair, free, honest open society..
Thank you to all the loyal Australians no matter where you came from, or when. We have a fihjt on our hands.
Sorry it sounds a bit dramatic.
LikeLike
Lindesey… Not really. The Rev Jim Downing covered this quite well in his book Country of my Spirit.
The traditional owners (songline/ceremony authorities) were dispersed on stations up to a hundred Ks away and the welfare officers of Welfare Branch would never have wasted their time passing on word of what was happening. Basically, only a handful of people know what was going on in those times. Most old-school Territorians would not lower themselves to read about ‘Blackfella business’. By the way, I worked for Welfare Branch.
LikeLike
Daviddd… in answer to your question, the term “nation” was borrowed by NT Aboriginal Wesley Lanhupuy, having visited the Inuit and Mohawk in Canada in 1973, and also people in China and Nigeria. He was much-travelled and later was MLA for Arnhem electorate.
“Nation” was then embraced by NSW Aboriginal activists who had no idea what the word means. They still do not. If you are tribal you cannot simultaneously be a nation. The terms exist at opposite ends of the selfview-identification spectrum: ie Self > family > extended family > tribe/village > regional ID/state > kingdom/nation or Empire/nation.
As to ownership. You are presuming the word ‘ownership’ has universal applicability. It does not. In many parts of the world, the concept is “we are owned by the land”. “Land ownership” as a concept gained currency with farming and, later, inherited ownership, militarism, and so on around 10,000 years ago. Many in the West have questioned the validity of ‘land ownership’ as an elitist ploy.
The concept of national borders commenced with WWI, which largely replaced kingdoms. For example, 19th century Germany was 34 kingdoms. The resultant borders influence how Europeans see Aboriginal tribal lands, which is plain wrong.
Aboriginal land is the genesis of tribes/language groups, made clear in Songlines, but for the most part these are not like European countries with demarcated borders, but are demarcated distinctly where practical, such as rocky points going out to sea, rivers, certain water holes, or creation-spirit features. The in-between areas are relevant for whoever happens to be using them at the moment. This is because clan groups followed food cycles each year, sometimes varied by different weather.
It was normal for these clans to pass through the country of other people and if they encountered a spirit site, they negotiated a deal with ceremony men to organise an access ceremony for them. This was usually trade items or food. This was compensation for time taken away from family hunting duties. The entire point of the ceremony was to protect the passing-through clans from spirits that might see them as intruders.
I see where you are going with this. ‘Traditional owners’ is a phrase created by the Northern Land Council/Australian Law Reform Commission/Rothschild Bank for International Settlements inaugural Governor, Nugget Combs, to create a barrier to exclude the traditional Aboriginal consensus protocols which ensure every man, woman, and child has their say. David Rockefeller realised that if this was permitted to happen, minerals would be locked up forever. Incidentally, this was the source of the phrase “terra nulious”, which was never used previously. This is pure propaganda.
By the way, I was present at all of those meetings.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Aboriginal people who lived around Ayers Rock were probably ignored in the land rights claim because they could not field any Activists to the whole UN Communist land rights project.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Criminal organisations in Australia: Italian Mafia, Russian Mafia, Tong, ALP, all Aboriginal Land Councils.
LikeLike
Thanks Craig
Regards
David Colley
Ph. 09 436-1874
cid:image001.png@01D6BB90.F8899820
LikeLike
Due to a personal lack of knowledge, I’d appreciate it if someone much more knowledgeable could shed some light with respect to the below…
1st Nation? Which one is that? is there any evidence of Aboriginal “nationalism” in the various tribal cultures in “Terra Australis”?
According to historians a “nation state” is a modern political concept coined by Europeans. At what point did our Aboriginal population adopt the concept of Aboriginal “nationhood”, if at all?
On the issue of land “ownership”, what exactly constituted “ownership” in the context of the many different Aboriginal tribal cultures? Was any “ownership” by any Aboriginal tribe vested in the members of the tribe as owners in common or jointly and severally and did such land ownership identify land boundaries?
It seems rather evident that if the principles of traditional land ownership as are being pushed in Australia were applied across the world, MOST of the current populations across the world would lose “ownership” and “sovereignty” over the lands they currently occupy.
After all, didn’t some greater power ultimately displace some lesser power by hook or by crook from just about any place on the globe? If any restitution is to be made, should it be effected on a “collective” or “individual” basis subject to proper identification?
LikeLike
Pingback: Land rights determinations usually go to the wrong people – debtstop
Pingback: Land rights determinations usually go to the wrong people – altnews.org