Nice one Tammy. I do believe there are enough children commenting on this forum already judging by the comments given by some.
By the way, at no time did I apologise for my posting...why should I?
I did not apologise and have nothing to say sorry for, since my previous postings were my own thoughts (excluding facts obtained from Aboriginal services).
The majority of comments on this forum have become nothing more than childish attacks upon others who post comments with an opinion contrary to someone else who believes they are better than others.
I do agree with the comment that people are becoming to policically correct these days and it does seem quite ironic that the majority of people who oppose anti-indigenous sentiments are those who are non-indigenous. Guilt perhaps or just a good show for the general public?
It's not for me to choose or judge the hearts and intentions of others, but obviously there are those on this forum who believe they can do so. So be it.

Being new to this forum, I am unfamiliar with those participating. It does seem however that there are varying opinions on the subject, there is a group who believes certain opinions should not be expressed, especially if they differ from their own. An example would be that of Tammy and wassup. Nobody seems to have mentioned that wassup is of Aboriginal heritage and while his opinion is certainly not that of the majority, wassup is entitled to his/her point of view. This is after all a democracy and we do have freedom of speech. I deal with many indigenous people on a daily basis and perhaps those I deal with are not upstanding members of the community, this however is not for any person to judge, God will judge us all come the day of Christ's return. As for the topic itself, is sorry too limited? In my humble opinion, yes it is. Rudd did say he would put certain plans into motion to provide indigenous people with better education and the like. Of course, these things cannot be achieved over night and do take time.
As for getting wassup's details, privacy laws forbid such a thing, again, God bless this democracy we live in. If members of this forum were to obtain wassup's details, what would be done with them? Would we become a communist country? or worse? Our diggers fought hard and sacrificed much to keep our country free from such things. Again, this is just my humble opinion and personal attacks do not glorify anybody. Be at peace with one another and love one another, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, Jesus Christ that everyone may have eternal life". John 3:16

Welcome passive to the forum Wassup may or may not be Aboriginal and while you talk of freedom of speech surely those who oppose the post are able to say so?
In time here you may grow to dislike me, I am not a Christian, but I share the view Rudd has just begun to fix this open wound.
My truly held concerns for our first Australians is not weakened by my understanding some need to change too.
But in a thread like this some intrusions are surely unneeded?
I find any threat to find out more about any poster , well what can you say that would not be offensive?
Quite simple really no one should uninvited look into others lives.

"Be at peace with one another and love one another, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, Jesus Christ that everyone may have eternal life". John 3:16"
Posted by Passive, Friday, 22 February 2008 11:35:45 AM

With the greatest of respect Passive, this is a quite extraordinary finish to your post after endorsing Washed Up's right to say whatever he wants regardless of its utter nastiness. Do you think his invective rubbish is a good example of 'love one another'?

Or is this another example of selective Freedom of Speech?

One more thing. Washed Up is no more an indigenous Australian than I am.

________________________________

I have checked the forum rules GY, and 'squabbles' are not a forum breach of rules. I would also remind you that the Cronulla riots were started as a result of SMS messaging. It is hardly constructive to use that as a reason for allowing this creature to post this inflammatory rubbish.

Given your comments on your basis for possible suspensions. I am fully aware of the possible consequences of my remarks to you.

It seems hypocritical of me to think these things and not say them; no matter what the consequences.

If I am suspended, I will return and convey strong views on the 'malleability' of Freedom of Speech.

If you ban me. So be it. Some will be pleased, some not; most won't care. Again;- so be it.

It will make a complete mockery of Freedom of Speech!

Any other comments will be addressed to the knuckle-dragging Neanderthals on the related thread in Articles

To whom it may concern

First of all congratulations to Ginx on his previous post re Passive, and we don’t want to see you banned for that.

The question as to people posting on any forum and the legal rights of victims are quite simple and I do believe Graham Young addressed this some time ago.

However I am not going back to find his post because I don’t think it’s my place to copy it and re posts it here.
I still get confused also as to some of the rules re posting.
Laws apply to forums as they would anywhere else.
The laws say you may have and use fifty names if you so wish providing that you pay all bills and do not use those names for illegal purpose.
This simply means that if you break a law lets say defamation for example using a forum or anywhere else for that matter i.e. newspaper magazine TV any public place- and your silly enough of course to put it in writing then of course you are responsibly and answerable .

Like wise it works in reverse someone said something that was causing you great distress foe e.g. you were aboriginal you would not think it was fair if that person was immune from the laws simply because they were cowards and used a false name=would you.

So for those naive people claiming they would be offended if made answerable if they said something that was defamed in the eyes of the law only to be defamation that would just be too bad.

There ARE laws and you really ought to consider that before making irresponsible hurtful illegal in some case statements.

Another thing it’s a privileged to post om OLO and we owe GY some respect to his business and his time. He doesn’t even charge a fee which does attacked some people who otherwise might go elsewhere IMOP.

Have consideration for for GY business OLO

Rest assured regardless laws on forums are correct. (if only I knew where to send the bill)smile

Ginx while I agree with your post you may have gone off a bit early.
I can not think for Graham but I would be surprised if his comment was aimed at you, me may be others too but I see no link to you.
It is clear freedom of speech is a rubber band, some see more freedom than others.
But we NEED to see posts such as wassups!
We need reminding and even understanding that some think like that true.
We have to understand, harsh as it is some who do not think that way post just to get us upset.
Some who post are not adults true some we debate with are not yet teenagers.
Some have issues we do not know of Wassup has claimed to be of Aboriginal background that may or may not be true.
If we do not allow such people to talk who next do we censor?
I wrote, check it out, of a kink in the hose, an end to the thread after wassups first post, we stopped for a while posting as a result, if nothing else the second post let us all say we do not agree, that is freedom of speech
regards