The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Doesn’t a ‘national emergency’ require a national response? > Comments

Doesn’t a ‘national emergency’ require a national response? : Comments

By Jennifer Clarke, published 4/7/2007

One puzzling thing about the Commonwealth plan to 'save' Aboriginal children is that it only applies to the Northern Territory.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Why is Australia’s capital, the porn capital of Australia? I would like to congratulate the Prime Minister, Mr. Howard, on his action to deal with the ongoing sexual abuse of women and children in Northern Territory's Indigenous communities. However, this is only the first step to help to mop up the deadly cocktail of drugs, alcohol and X-rated pornography in Aboriginal communities in NT. Many Australians would be shocked to know that the heart of the child abuse problem in the NT, lies in ‘Pornberra’, our nation's capital. X-rated porn is illegal in every state in Australia except the Labor dominated NT and ACT. Australia’s children will never be safe until the porn tap is turned off at the head. Real governments don’t siphon porn from the sewers of the earth to destroy our precious children!
Posted by DAVID BERNARD, Wednesday, 4 July 2007 3:43:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David Bernard

You will find that most on these posts want to attack Mr Howard more than the want the abuse to stop. Don't u know he is to blame for every ill in society? If the devil was given as much credit as Mr Howard he would be very proud. To think that many of these posters accuse me of sarcasm!
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 4 July 2007 3:57:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree Jennifer, there are also non Aboriginal alcohol abusers and women and child abusers in every State of Australia.
John Howard has been selective in choosing Aboriginals in the NT, as they are in more remote areas and more difficult for the non corporate media to observe and report on the Federal governments activities, just as the placement of asylum seekers in remote areas off the Australian mainland.
John Howard has also chosen the NT because he can exercise his power over the administration of the NT, he is unable to do this in the States.
John Howard cannot be taken seriously, re his attempt to convince the voters that he is a humane person. He has denied Aboriginals their right to education and health, equal to other Australians, for the past eleven years.
It is my personal view that John Howard has another agenda, which will not be revealed to Australians prior to the election. If he wins the election, the NT could become the area for burying nuclear waste materials.
Posted by Sarah101, Wednesday, 4 July 2007 4:44:20 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What's the mystery? It's just Howard playing wedge politics, as ever.

If he was at all serious he would do this Australia wide, not just selectively use the NT for his own motives. He is using the NT as it is the smallest and cheapest option. As he always does. The wedge failed and now all he will be doing is letting it fade away as the usual process takes place. Panic, emergency, oh what was the problem again? Sorry it's election time, let's "MOVE ON". Howard's standard procedure.

David Bernard is partly right. Yes the ACT does sell X rated porn but this isn't the porn the NT abusers use anyway. They don't have a lot of mail deliveris at these places mate. They just get normal men's magazines and movies which are even on Pay tv, which they can't watch. So DVD's or video's are dropped off. Who by? White men. These movies and magazines all have porn in them, some extreme.

Which begs a huge question. The ACT has just as much of a problem with drugs, alcohol and sexual abuse of children but Howard has ignored that Territory. Why? Because it's not an indigenous problem as such. That's too hard so he uses one of dozens of reports he has ignored to date.

Does anyone here seriously think this invasion will change anything? It won't as to get that change the indigenous community must initiate it.

Putting Police there will help, until they are pulled out after the election leaving the people sitting in the desert surrounded by those abusers that did not get either charged or found guilty.

How many white men are involved and how many will be caught. I'm betting about....zero.

Runner, get a life. Everyone wants this abuse to stop. Howard is pointed at simply because he is actually PM. You know Runner, the guy who takes credit for anything good but no blame for anything bad.
Posted by RobbyH, Wednesday, 4 July 2007 4:58:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Australian people voted overwhelmingly in 1967 to EXTINGUISH, to END, ALL discrimination between Australians on the grounds of race.

Commonwealth regards referenda differently for self interest reasons.

Appallingly High Court interprets '67 referenda so as to avoid need to enforce true objective of Australian People, justifying the same actions Australians sort to prohibit.

The Commonwealth discriminated against Aboriginals in the NT pre 67, and continued post 67.

Read again second reading speech for 67 referenda bill, the literature of the time, and read your constitution.

Were Australians voting to widen opportunity to practice racial discrimination or to extinguish it ? Clearly to extinguish it.

The Commonwealth and the States, authorities of power, discriminate against anyone and everyone they can, until stopped by the High Court.

Eviction from office merely changes the flavours of discrimination they prefer.

Only blinkered biggotted idiots believe Australians - with knowledge of how various governments treated their citizens differently on grounds of race, might overwhelmingly empower our own politicians to widen opportunity for them to exercise such racist segregationist treatments in Australia on a wider scale.

But of course there are a lot of thst mind around, snouts in the trough !
Posted by polpak, Wednesday, 4 July 2007 7:42:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Howard is a criminal - simple as that. An extremely devious and lying little man.
Posted by Ev, Wednesday, 4 July 2007 8:51:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy