Hey Bazz,
It wasn't this young lady here was it?
http://independentaustralia.net/profile-on/natalie-cromb,327
Read what she has to say here about the racism she's experienced because shes white and identifies as black.
http://independentaustralia.net/australia/australia-display/im-not-racist-but,6598

I tried commenting on that website but they instantly deleted my 2 comments then banned me.
Obviously they don't like people questioning their leftist views.

Well her indigenous ancestry dates back to 1840's when an Irish family member came to Australia and got together with an Aboriginal.

I have an almost identical story as (just one part) of my family tree, only my Irish / Aboriginal descendant goes back to 1820's.
My grandmother was half aboriginal, but I don't claim to represent aboriginal people, though I will stick up for them as human beings.
My fathers side of the family goes back to the third fleet and came from wee Scotland.
But I don't claim to represent the Scottish people either.

I take offense a little, because I've read stories from my own indigenous branch of my family, and know that there were disagreements within the families as some sides of families over time became more 'whiter' than others.
The whiter sides of the families tried to assimilate while the darker ones would experience more racism and discrimination (I assume) and rifts within larger family units developed.
So I feel like this girl doesn't have a clue about some of the realities of what actually happened in the past, though I do not begrudge her willingness to support indigenous people.

Anyway, just thought I'd share that.

Diver Dan,
Sorry, it was a blanket statement regarding the general consensus of comments so far and not necessarily directed just at you.
I agree the indigenous need to help themselves more, they won't get a free pass from me, but I do acknowledge some of the injustices and hardships and discrimination they've endured..
That said, I prefer a carrot on a stick policy to help them choose a better life for themselves than the foot in the backside policy.
More often than not I do agree with Rehctub's opinions on things though.

No Armchair it was not her. She was much lighter and had noticible green eyes.
Also her hair was a light brown colour.
I can understand what you meant by tension within the family when some
want to say they are white and others who are darker complain.
That shows how silly racism is when it is within a family.

You yourself point up the argument I was making for there to be no
special legislation that gives rights to some people.
Just today I lodged an information on a government scam reporting
website and had to fill in a section about myself and one of the
questions was, wait for it;
Are you an aboriginal ? Yes No.

Steel, I have never questioned your entitlement to having been here longer, although like Bazz, I too question the legitimise of being an Aboriginal. Surely the line must be drawn at a reasonable percentage, not 1/16th.

Furthermore, if one wants to rely on their heritage, which was in fact 'hunting and gathering' in this case, then by all means continue, I'm just saying that the local centerlink office should be off limits.

As for the funding, no matter which way you look at it, pouring this amount of funding into anything achieving such appalling results is nothing more than waste.

So I ask you Steel, when are the likes of yourself going to accept that small unviable communities must go?

How many more billions do you think we should pour in knowing how much is being wasted?

Surely projects in such communities should have to pass the 'cost benefit analysis' as they do in non indigenous communities, otherwise the non indigenous communities are being disadvantaged.

Surely if what the indigenous folk want is equality, they first need to play by the same rules.

Tell me they are not playing the victim card for all it's worth Steel?

Rectub...I was under the impression that to be classified an Aboriginal, it was necessary to be accepted for membership of a land council. To be eligible for membership of a land council, it is necessary to be identified as belonging to a local Aboriginal community: And to confirm an applicant is accepted by the local community as a community member, an application is submitted at a land council meeting, where three independent members of the land council, confirm the legitimacy of the applicant.

So that outlines the real McCoy Aboriginal. What you describe, is what I complain about also, the non bona-fide, IE the "tick-a-box" Aboriginals.
Evidence of legitimate Aboriginal status, is readily available by proof of Land council membership.

I fail to see why this criteria is not enforced through an ID process when ticking a box.
So thus the question; are you Aboriginal or TSI? If yes, then what is your land council member sip detail?...simple!

Err, Diver Dan, that method would seem to be wide open for abuse.
I suspect that aboriginal privilege is being granted in many places
such as universities just on say so.
However this bit of the discussion points out the racism that is
involved in it.
If it must be done, then a DNA test with say a 50% or greater means
you are an aboriginal. No special privileges then granted except in
very special cases.

True Bazz, the regional mobs are savvy. But the system I outlined, in spite of the obvious floors, would overcome non-Aboriginals from capitalising illegitimately, by ticking a box on a form.
Confining the dogs breakfast to strictly Aboriginals displaying cultural connections to their tribe, would be a big step forward!