Two questions about the Voice's wording

Originally posted by Scott th Ratbag ↑

"the Indigenous voice has never been heard,". ....... so you now revert to spin? why is this treefer?

who is telling lies?

Previous elected representative national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander bodies supported by the Australian Government are the National Aboriginal Consultative Committee (NACC) (1973–77), the National Aboriginal Conference (NAC) (1977–85), the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) (1989–2005) and the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples (NCAFP) (2009–19). The Torres Strait Regional Authority has continuously represented the people of the Torres Strait since being separated from ATSIC in the 1990s.
There were no equivalent organisations before the NACC. The Federal Council for the Advancement of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders (FCAATSI), a non-government organisation, played a leadership role among Indigenous and associated organisations in the 1960s and early 1970s, particularly in campaigning for the 1967 referendum.
Previous Australian Government-appointed advisory bodies include the Council for Aboriginal Affairs (1967–1976), the National Conference of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Advisory Councillors (1972), the National Indigenous Council (2005–07), and the Prime Minister’s Indigenous Advisory Council (2013–c. 2019).
While not fitting the definition of a government-created elected or appointed representative and advisory body, also relevant are the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation (1991–2000), the Special Envoy on Indigenous Affairs (2018–19) and the Coalition of Peaks (2018–present).
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parlia...andTorresStraightIslanderRepresentativeBodies

Expand

So you're telling me that there are bodies where the Indigenous voice has been heard for 38 years since 1973? Is THAT what you are telling me here? That the Indigenous voice HAS been heard for 38 years? If so, where are their successes? If they have been abject failures, then why would this one be any different?

"Silenced AGAIN" Scott. You are telling us all that the Indigenous Voice has been heard for 38 of the last 50 years. Is that it? Why hasn't it made a difference? They all lasted years and years, no abolition.

Scott, either they've never been heard before, and therefore they can't be silenced AGAIN, or they've been heard for 38 of the last 50 years and couldn't get out of their own way. Which is it? I'll let you pick, seeing you're the one who is contradicting yourself with the post.

It's not spin, Scott, you are contradicting yourself and the Prime Minister. Let me know which one you think it is, because they can't have 'never have been heard before', AND 'heard' in all the bodies you have just listed.