Just four weeks ago, I reported how a prediction by Australian ‘conspiracy theorists’, falsely debunked by the press, became reality in just three months.
That story was about certain Australians who predicted that the Government would move their country to become a ‘cashless society’. Those people were soundly debunked and called crazy right-wing conspiracy theorists by the Australian press. Then, three months later, the Australian Government decided to move towards a cashless society, indeed.
At the time, I thought that three months from a conspiracy theory being debunked to the same theory coming true was fast.
Boy, was I wrong! Australia just outdid itself.
The Labour Party of Australia and other forces are championing a referendum to change the Australian Constitution. The proposed change will create the Voice, a new body representing indigenous people. The Voice (fully named ‘Indigenous Voice to Parliament’) will have a say in law and policy development in Australia.
The proposal is vague and calls for creating a novel structure – almost a new branch of government – with unclear responsibilities and an undefined process of selecting its members.
The vague proposal crucially depends on a statement from representatives of Indigenous people called the ‘Uluru Statement from the Heart’.
Officially, here it is, a one-page document highlighted by me:
I used blue to circle the part of the document that is the introduction: a short statement on what the document will discuss.
What is missing from this page is the conclusion. The one-page document also completely misses the prescriptive part (specifics of its proposal). This one-page text ends abruptly without a logically complete culmination and details and seems incomplete.
People smarter than me noticed that and said this is only the first page from a larger document. They publicly stated that Australians are being misled and the underlying policy-setting documentation is missing and is not presented to the Australian people, who will vote on the Voice proposal in a referendum – without access to the details of what is being proposed.
So, they explained, Australians do not even know what they will be voting on! Citizens will vote on a proposal in which all but one page of the most important document are kept secret.
The allegation that the pages from the Uluru statement were withheld from the public caused a storm among the supporters of the Voice referendum!
Australian fact-checkers published a sternly worded debunking of what was called a conspiracy theory:
The verdict: False. The Uluru Statement is a one-page document comprising just 440 words, as confirmed by the statement’s authors. Papers released under FOI contain the statement, but also include 25 pages of minutes of meetings held with indigenous communities in 2016 and 2017, which are not part of the ‘Uluru Statement from the Heart’. The claim that the FOI documents reveal that the ‘Uluru Statement of the Heart’ is 26 pages long and contains policies such as reparations for First Nations peoples is false.
Australian Labour Prime Minister, Mr. Anthony Albanese, said that the “26 pages” is a QAnon-style conspiracy that is so stupid as to not even qualify as a theory:
The rebuttal of RMIT fact-checkers and a strong statement by the Australian PM was enough to make Facebook, a foreign organisation, censor all statements by Australians questioning the Uluru statement.
The social media discussion was censored, and Facebook accounts were deleted. But the story only began!
Australian PM Anthony Albanese lied about the Uluru statement being one page. The paper actually is 26 pages long – and has pages neatly numbered!
The document in question was obtained from the Government via Freedom of Information. It contains the Uluru statement.
The Uluru statement is a set of twenty-six numbered pages. For those who want to check my words, open the FOI’d document and go to page 87 (saying Document 14 on top).
The discovered pages two-26 make perfect sense and complete the Uluru statement. These pages contain the history, the demands and the roadmap to implementing them. They mention historical injustices, reparations for the indigenous people and more. Without pages two-26, the first page is like a locomotive without a train.
The leading proponent of the Voice, Megan Davis, told fact-checkers that the Uluru statement is only one page:
A spokesperson from the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) told RMIT FactLab in an email, “the Uluru Statement from the Heart is a one-page document, [as] confirmed by the authors Noel Pearson, Pat Anderson AO and Professor Megan Davis.”
Megan Davis was caught in a lie: Australians uncovered an old video by Prof. Davis, where she openly stated that the Uluru statement was a multi-page document:
The brazen lies by the fact-checker RMIT were too much even for Facebook, which was forced, by the public outcry, to fire them:
The good news is that the lies by the proponents of the Voice referendum were too obvious and were thus discovered.
Let’s look at this story more closely:
- A proposal to alter the Australian Constitution to create a new governmental body with a vaguely defined structure and unclear but far-reaching responsibilities was put forward by the Labour Party and a cluster of behind-the-scenes ‘progressive organisations’.
- The new body would likely be influenced by various shadowy committees accountable to nobody (which is likely why it was promoted).
- Any attempts to question this proposal were declared ‘right-wing propaganda’.
- The Government (Prime Minister Albanese) lied. (see above)
- The proponents of the referendum lied about its most fundamentally defining documents. (see above)
- Activist, politically engaged fact-checkers lied. (see above)
- The official Australian ‘science’ somehow got involved in politics (sounds familiar?) and demanded a Yes vote.
- Facebook censored any opposition to the Voice at a critical moment. (see above)
As with most conspiracies, this one would likely have succeeded if not for some luck uncovering the underlying Uluru document and Prof. Davis’s earlier video admitting its length.
The conspirators were sloppy and got caught.
The Voice proposal is often presented as a favour to the indigenous people by the Labour Party. This party wants to look like a champion of indigenous people, to be seen at the forefront of listening to the voice of indigenous people.
Listening to the indigenous voice and respecting their wishes is good. Right?
However, just two years ago, the Labour Party completely ignored the resistance of the indigenous people of Australia and conducted a campaign of terror and coercion to force-vaccinate the unwilling indigenous Native Australians. Native Australians were famously unwilling to get vaccinated for various reasons, including their religious views, but also due to common sense that the native people retained due to closeness with nature.
Chief Minister of Australia’s Northern Territory, Michael Gunner of the Labour Party, led the most shameful campaign of coercion, intimidation and imprisonment of indigenous people to force-vaccinate them against their will.
Watch this desperate plea of terrified unvaccinated indigenous people of the Northern Territories, who were arrested, imprisoned at home, and deported to Covid quarantine camps by the ruthless representatives of the Labour Party-led Government of Northern Territories:
Does that sound like a party wishing to respect indigenous voices? Not to me!
I am not an Australian citizen. I have never visited that beautiful country. My post is not about telling the people of Australia how to decide on possibly the most important poll they will be voting on.
I am not considering the merits of the Voice proposal or whether the indigenous people of Australia, who suffered greatly in the past and even two years ago, deserve more than just a vote at the ballot box like all other Australians. This question is not up to me to answer!
This substack post aims to show how a typical conspiracy involving dissembling government, dishonest science, lying fact-checkers, powerful foreign corporations, the corrupt press and ‘democracy activists’ works.
This Substack post illustrates how conspiracies work and how they unravel.
This funny YouTube video is a summary of the Voice story:
The Uluru Statement | Pauline Hanson's Please Explain
— Pauline Hanson
This week Anthony Albanese announced that the vote for his Voice to Parliament will be held on the 14th of October.
As the campaign to defeat his risky and divisive Voice begins in earnest, it’s important to understand what… pic.twitter.com/hTJ7kUD8gN(@PaulineHansonOz) August 31, 2023
What do you think?
This article was first published on Igor’s Substack page. Subscribe here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Of course energy saving measures can be ranked according to payback time with some low hanging fruit with short payback times and others with very long payback times. This will presumably differ according to property. So what?
Incidentally in your calculations you seem to have omitted the increased value of the house. Some of the suggested improvements (wind turbine) will depreciate over the years but others (insulated walls) are pretty much permanent. The latter ones may pay for themselves when you sell the house (or pay your descendants when they sell the house) even if the “breakeven” date is a long way off.
Not if the WEF compulsory purchase your house in 2036! remember, “you’ll OWN nothing and be happy” but they’ll let you pay to improve it first! Don’t forget the Dutch farms, it’s not a pipedream, WEF sure as hell mean it!
I’m ok with insulation but not going to install any fancy green crap. I want a gas boiler and cheap, reliable electricity that doesn’t depend on the wind blowing or on the goodwill of that snake Macron.
The 8th clot shot has just been authorized in the UK. But what I don’t get is the ”primary vaccination” part. If this one isn’t a bivalent and they don’t mention the word ”booster”, surely they aren’t intending this one for the ‘Never-jabbed’ are they? Because that’s what my understanding of a ”primary vaccination” would be, which makes no sense whatsoever. And what’s with the dumb AF name FGS?? 😮
”The SKYCovion vaccine combines a part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus spike protein with an ‘adjuvant’ – an additional ingredient designed to trigger a stronger immune response. It is given as two injections, four weeks part.
The clinical evidence for this authorisation is based on data from two clinical trials on approximately 3,100 individuals aged 18 to 84 years. The vaccine demonstrated a strong immune response, and the most common side effects were mild, and self-resolved within a few days of vaccination.
This authorisation is for use as a primary vaccination in those aged 18 and over. Decisions on which COVID-19 vaccines are deployed in the UK are taken by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI).”
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/skycovion-covid-19-vaccine-authorised-by-mhra
Lol, the press release by the MRHA says the jab meets the MHRA’s effectiveness standards. Then when you read the product information for professionals, it says efficacy was NOT assessed as part of the clinical trials. The patient leaflet says this medicine MAY protect you from SARSCov2 (but then again it may not?!) What the company did do was something called “immunobridging” which I don’t claim to fully understand but basically they appear to have compared old Astra Zeneca data on levels of antibodies to this Skycovion jab and said, yep, looks pretty similar so we’ll just assume it works as “”well”” as AZ did.
So that’s how MHRA is assessing effectiveness (“oooo looks about the same immune response as the last jab we authorised, so we’ll authorise this one as well) without ACTUALLY assessing its effectiveness.
Guy, why on earth did you put PV panels on your roof?
Are you having a wake up moment?
Given the 25 year payback period you could bet on global warming reducing your heating bill.
No mention of solar thermal, thought that had quite a fast payback period.
I think the government have actually thought of this one already. Why should you invest 40 grand? Because you won’t be able to let or sell your house if you don’t.
Unless you bribe the issuer of the stupid energy performance certificate, that is… This is what too many (stupid) rules causes, and then bribery becomes the norm. Not great, because then state officials start demanding bribes too, and then, as ever, life becomes easier and easier for the crooks and harder and harder for the honest people.
Exactly. Actually the measures required to condemn a property have already been brought in or are on the way. The rental market is being absolutely catered with statutory “improvement measures.” These will have the effect of lowering house prices as landlords make their escape. Once the rental market has been devastated it will be us next. I genuinely believe the intention is to steal our properties. All in the name of saving the planet.
Becoming more and more obvious.
As it happens I travelled from Kings Cross across London to the outer suburbs, on the top of a bus, last week (and back again).
Easy to note all the built housing environment:- age, condition especially roofs, rainwater goods condition, solid walls, windows. Forget about foundations, mould growth, can’t see that from a bus top.
Although many older houses are no doubt loved by their proud owners, (maybe also some of the new ones) but it is quite clear that, even at a glance, much of the building stock was well past its “sell by date”, long before HMG’s lunatic ruinable energy project had got underway.
Today? Many Trillions needed for maintenance or, far more probably, “slum clearance and rebuild”, probably leaving most residents (as in the 1960s genius schemes), living in Social Housing hell holes.
Are we certain that Big Government mandated, half baked schemes paid for by high tax high spend economics, is where we want to be?
Sure makes the King, Klaus Schwab, George Soros and Billy Gates, chuckle.
Well said Guy.
And the inconvenient truth that CO2 makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere, of which only 0.0004 is man made, and the UKs contribution almost nothing.
And of course of the worlds 194 nations, only a tiny (stupid) minority are signed up to the carbon zero suicide pact.
To be honest, since our government is made up of corrupt, lying fools, it would be unwise to do anything they say at any point in time. Unless they’re bribing you to do it with subsidies, which means you’re helping yourself to other people’s taxes and should make you ashamed.
I’m with you on the solar panels – my 14 SE/NW panels produce 3,500 kW h per year – and because I rarely put on central heating, wear multiple layers of wool, heat only one room, use the sun room to help heat the house, half freeze to death, etc etc – this is more than all of the energy I use in a year (gas / electricity). On top of that, the government gave me quite a bit of money. All in all, I broke even last year. If I had received state pension I might even have made a profit. No £2,000 bills for me – I was determined to beat the system, a true sceptic!
Payback is 7 or 8 years, as you say.
Yes, I am sure you are correct. But, as Shimpling Chadacre above correctly points out, you are saving money by deliberately impoverishing other people. For example, those living in flats or accomodation, where installing PV will never be an option.
Each to his own but I prefer to not have that on my conscience, not least because, if “solar power” hasn’t been shown to be genuinely profitable in the Nevada desert, how well is it likely to perform at latitude 54° North, half way up the UK?
And because no solar panel will ever produce enough energy to extract and refine the minerals, build another panel and fix it onto your roof.
It’s all very well being a climate sceptic, especially when you can soak up a subsidy from taxpayers to do so. Those who gleefully clap their hands at the money received are no better morally than Drax or windfarm operators. Raging hypocrites all.
Your payback periods are likely to be much longer as the government conveniently forgets to factor in the impact of inflation. Which they brought about by shutting down the economy for 2+, years. Quelle surprise!
The West is destroying itself whilst China looks on amused. They’ll still be burning fossil fuels when we’re sitting in the dark.
Burning fossil fuels to make the green products for the west..
Hey if you have one of the miniature garages you are in business. You know the kind the builders put next to your house. Yes, the same ones you cannot get in or out of your car in. Those ones. We’ll get yourself a little electric car, slap on a few solar panels to the roof of your mini garage and charge your car daily. Don’t forget though to stay in your 15 minute hell hole.
Genuine question – what kind of internal temperatures are ‘they’ aiming at for a property to be considered ‘adequately insulated’, and are these ever realistic given historical housing stock, geography and latitude? Like the author I have an old (c270yr old) stone house, built on stone in a hilly landscape which is cold for 10 months of the year. Ambient temp hovers around 15 degrees, can drop as low as 9. In warm spells it gets to around 17; last summer it hit 24 for a couple of days, woohoo (this is with newly insulated lofts, double glazing and two heavily insulated walls). It needs to be kept well aired to let the stone breathe. You get used to it and adjust accordingly: like porgycorgy I only heat the space I need and wear lots of layers. I live with the the building, not try to force it into something it isn’t. What’s wrong with that? Or is it now like the jab – I’ve got to insulate more to make other people feel safe/warm/virtuous? And don’t forget that sick building syndrome is a thing – it’s even on the NHS website – why is this not being addressed in this rush towards hermetically sealed living?