We came to this meeting delegated by a number of nations with the greatest respect and integrity hoping to reach agreement.

We as sovereign first nations people reject constitutional recognition.

We do not recognize the occupying power or their sovereignty because it serves to disempower, takes away our voice.

There is no integrity, our mandate has been stifled.

We need to protect and preserve our sovereignty.

We demand a sovereign treaty with an independent sovereign treaty commission and appropriate funds allocated.

To make this happen this treaty be governed by the Vienna Convention the Law of Treaties.

We don’t need a referendum. We need a sovereign treaty.

This is the walkout statement transcribed as read by Lidia Thorpe.

Background – the walkout was part-way through a multi-day conference. The convention was still deliberating on the form of “Constitutional Recognition”. Officially, no decision was made at this point in time. At this time in the convention – it may have appeared that preambular, symbolic recognition was still on the table.

The curious thing is this. This walkout statement – read very carefully – is perfectly aligned with the final end result proposal of the Constitutional Convention. It’s as if someone WHO KNEW what the final outcome would be, wrote this. This walkout statement ASKS FOR EXACTLY WHAT IS IN THE ULURU STATEMENT!

Point by point:

• The walkout statement uses the term “First Nations”. This was defined at the end of the convention in the First Nations Constitution – the Uluru Statement itself.
• The Uluru Statement is not “constitutional recognition”. It is recognition OUTSIDE the constitution. The Uluru Statement does in fact – “reject constitutional recognition”.
• A line talks about “taking away our voice”. The Uluru Statement requests a Voice.
• First Nations Sovereignty will be protected and preserved under the reforms. It will form the basis of the new re-enactment of Australia. (First Nations will have bugger-all effective power – but one thing is sure – their sovereign legacy will be preserved).
• The Makarrata commission will be the “independent Treaty commission”.
• The Uluru Statement Treaty WILL be “governed by the Vienna Convention the Law of Treaties”. The Federation itself is the treaty – not the “agreement making”. It meets all the requirements of the Vienna Convention.

All up – it is VERY LIKELY that someone who had a role in drafting this is – is government controlled. They knew ahead of time what the final outcome of the convention would be. They prepared this ahead of time to reduce the DAMAGE of a potential walkout.

The odds of this particular wording being a coincidence is far to incredulous, to me anyway.

It’s very concerning. The sovereignty movement is infiltrated. I’m not pointing the finger at any individual – there is little point in doing that. It’s easy for an innocent person to see this walkout statement and go along with it – thinking it sounds good.

The only way things can be cleaned out is through revelation of the truth.

I’m very disappointed. Searching for the truth is a very lonely journey.