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 > A bunch of nomads - whose land is it anyway? > Comments

A bunch of nomads - whose land is it anyway? : Comments

By Stephen Hagan, published 10/2/2006

Weak anthropological analysis is turning traditional land owners into native title squatters.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
This land,this Australia is and always was the land of the Aboriginal nation,those that dispute the fact are out of touch with reality,they can come up with many more political Crap to prove otherwise,and the answer will still be,the same the true and rightful owners are the Aboriginal owners,the Andrew Bolt believers,that this is not so,are just plain ignorant,and RACIST,and other RIGHTWING journalists,can come up with more crap,but they must be ignored,and must also be found guilty of false,untrue and unethical journalism,as they have no historical or any other reason to try and bolster their journalistic CRAP.This writer in an immigrant,like all the rest who came here in the last two hundred years,since colonisation by the british of Australia.
Posted by KAROOSON, Saturday, 11 February 2006 6:44:54 AM
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
Dear Ranier

Crazy.. too much medication. The research shows that there are identifiable differences between Celts and [Anglo/Saxon/French/Viking] groups which all bear a strong similarity.

err.. so ? why even raise it ? Are you saying there is no difference between Aboriginal and Caucasian racially ? If yes.. good.. lets all intermarry and resolve the Indigenous 'problem' once and for all by becoming one people !

My point was clearly that there is no where and no one in this world who has not been either a victim or a perpetrator of dispossession or BOTH.

Scratching around for legal mumbo jumbo to try to resolve 'legally' issues of native title seem does not have much in the way of legs to me. The best approach is KICK us in the balls ! :) then we will listen, or..kick back a little harder than we were kicked. Nah.. there is no future in that. Even the suffragettes tried to use the 'talk and be patient' attitude, but it was only when they began bombing Parliament and attacking politicians that things 'speeded up' a bit.

I do support the idea of native control of as much land as can be realistically allocated that way, and sacred sites respected if they happen to be on 'owned' land.. and I'd even go so far as to suggest 'free access' to 'owned' land for Aboriginal people. Voila..problem solved :)

I'm not sure what Aboriginal people want..

-a subsistence hunter gatherer life ? (the old days)
-a better deal in the new nation ? ( they seem locked into perenial grieving about the old though)
-throw a truck load of money at them ? (wont do any good, unless dignity is restored first.)

If you cannot come up with a serious answer, I'll just accept that all you want to do is benefit as much as possible yourself, for yourself, from politicizing a serious issue for your benefit.

So..I'll put it in 'SHOUT' mode :)

WHAT...DO....YOU....WANT.. ?

Please have the balls to actually answer the question. A list form will do thanx. Tell us your 'demands'.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 11 February 2006 12:21:20 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
Boaz,

Your repeated requests are interesting in that you appear to be frustrated with me not providing you with silver bullet panaceas to problems that are inherently born out of the history of white racism and its contemporary [nebulous] manifestations.

“If you cannot come up with a serious answer, I'll just accept that all you want to do is benefit as much as possible yourself, for yourself, from politicizing a serious issue for your benefit.”

While I can understand this reductivist convention of discussion is how you would prefer discussion to proceed - it’s totally unproductive. I have better things to do than to be cross-examined for your sporting benefit.

Demands have been made by Indigenous leaders and communities for a long time. One of these demands has been for a treaty. But we should have consulted you about this it seems.

In your mind it seems our own lawyers and other professional and community people and leaders as well supporting non-Indigenous professional and ordinary citizens over the last 50 years of political activism and struggle were not abreast of what need to be demanded or acted upon. You display all the naïve traits of someone who has never actually supported Indigenous people or struggles beyond your claims to empathy which are in reality your own self congratulatory wankings.

Read the recommendations (239 of them) from the Royal Commission into Aboriginal deaths in Custody. Read the recommendations from the Stolen Generations report. Read the recommendations from hundreds of government funded investigations into (their failings) in Aboriginal affairs and you will find demands that I and others have repeatedly made.

Like others in this forum I find your hair splitting approach to discussion excruciatingly monotonous - so much so - that it’s pointless dialoguing with you about anything at all.

Go away pious old man -you jumped on the wrong bus a long time ago. But now you want me to tell you how this happened but I can’t. It was of your own doing.
Posted by Rainier, Saturday, 11 February 2006 4:33:07 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
Boaz-David

I think it admirable you provide the answer to your own question.
What do Indigenous people seek? The comment about...what was it now?... something about restoring dignity?

Like to expand and add other similar ideas to that admirable suggestion.

How exactly do you think Indigenous people would react to your effort in that regard?
Do you think Non-indigenous people could supply any inkling of an appropriate answer without initiating discussion and listening very carefully to what it is Indigenous people seek?

Assisting any effective effort by anyone that aids achieving those ends would show ... what... real balls?
Posted by keith, Saturday, 11 February 2006 6:36:05 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
Ranier
thanx for that 'age-ist' response.."go away old man".... I can think of quite a few phrases with with I could respond to that, but in the spirit of constructive dialogue, I'll resist.

Ive done some reading.
well, I warn you.. I can smell political intrigue from Cairns to Perth and if I get a wiff of it, I'll jump on it with my hobnail boots full force.

http://www.eniar.org/news/pdfs/restoringidentity.pdf

2 immediate observations.

1/ The POLICY of the government at the time, was to seek to assimilate HALF CASTES. i.e. those who have dual cultural identity.
They were as much WHITE as they were BLACK.

2/ From the document above, the recommendation is as follows:

Tribunal principles
5. State, territory and federal governments, in co-operation with the churches, establish a
tribunal to make full and just reparations for forcible removal policies based on the following
principles:
a) acknowledgement of the racist nature of forcible removal policies and the harm caused
b) self-determination of Indigenous peoples, including the stolen generations
c)access to redress for Indigenous peoples affected by forcible removal policies

Now.. I told you I can smell 'politics' a mile off and HERE it is....

Do you notice how 'Indigenous' is here referring to the HALF CASTES.... suddenly the 'white' side of their identity conveniently dissapears, and that my friend, is 'racism'.

I can envisage that many chidren were fathered by Whites, who then took no further interest in the offspring, and to that extent, I agree with the findings, except that point "a)" is absolutely pure undadulterated POLITICS. The stench is wreaking all over the forum here.

If we accept all those findings.. welllll lets see.. I should go back to England, and rip into the absentee landlords who drove my ancestors out of the Scottish highlands to feed more SHEEP ! and so on..and so on..and so on......

Oh.. don't forget our convicts.. who were FORCIBLY removed from England.

get my drift ?
Posted by BOAZ_David, Sunday, 12 February 2006 8:42:40 AM
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
Mr Hagan - As an indigenous Australian, I am deeply, may I repeat that, 'deeply offended' by your comment and acceptance that anyone who does not fit your criteria for 'indigenous' Australian ie of aboriginal lineage, is of 'non indigenous' background.

Yes, indigenous does mean 'originating in and naturally living, growing, or occuring in a region or country.' and Yes there is a newer addition to the meaning - indigenous people which means these are 'people who occupy a region at the time of its contact with colonial powers or the outside world' but I will not allow this or any PC meaning to dis-enfranchise or dispossess me.
I appreciate the common interpretation is accepted in tandem with the word 'people' ie 'indigenous people' but then my opinion is this is all double speak by the PC movement.

I will always be an indigenous australian and no one can take this away from me, even the PC. If I am not indigenous to Australia - where am I indigenous to?

Mr Hagan - If I am an INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIAN- to which country am I indigenous?
Posted by Cynthia2, Sunday, 12 February 2006 7:11:04 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

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