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 > Australians in denial ... > Comments

Australians in denial ... : Comments

By Bruce Pascoe, published 21/5/2007

Why do we maintain the myth of a crude Aboriginal civilisation meandering hopelessly across the continent?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Aborigines with villages? This is new to me. Readers had better look more deeply into this before believing it.

My understanding is that aboriginal society was the lowest low-tech in the world. This was not because aboriginals were dumb but because they had the technology they needed and there was no pressure to change.

The basis of low aboriginal technology is that there were no herding animals on the continent. This meant aboriginals had to keep moving and wherever that happens, there can be no structured settlements.
Posted by healthwatcher, Monday, 21 May 2007 9:13:04 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
I'm interested in this. Can anyone shed any light on the 'village' arguement?
Posted by Media, Monday, 21 May 2007 10:08:55 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
The internal logic of this article is rather empty.

First, the straw horse of Australians 'in the middle of the floor with a bag over our head' is a metaphor of complaint, rather than grounded in any serious analysis of collective memory, academic consensus or public opinion.

Second, in arguing about the specialness of traditional Indigenous societies, the author puts the case entirely in terms which are valourised in modernity: that is, democracy, productivity and infrastructure. The logical problem with this is that if in fact the author's mythologising of the Aboriginal past is demonstrated to be hyperbolic, then the logical inference is that it would be fair to dismiss the Indigenous inhabitants as 'primitive hunter gatherers'. In other words, the author is actually accepting the analytical framework which supports the opinions which he wants to critique.

Third, there is the confusion of a moral issue with an historical and ethnographic one. Some societies may indeed have different belief systems, less technology, simpler social structures and be less immediately fitted for the shocking impact of modernity, but such conclusions need to be divorced from moral questions. To put the point another way, you can still believe that traditional Aboriginal society was simple and unsophisticated and with plenty of downsides, but very much support an emancipative agenda for Aboriginal people in the present
Posted by Gazza2121, Monday, 21 May 2007 10:24:59 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
It is true that Australians in general are ignorant of many aspects of classical Australian Indigenous societies and cultures. Many old Australian families have traditions of racism, prejudice and ethnocentrism, as Pauline Hanson's accounts of her upbringing illustrates in cameo. However Bruce Pascoe's contribution here illustrates another kind of Australian ignorance and prejudice. He insists that instances of crude engineering (the 'eel-farms' and stone cottages in a small part of Victoria) or seed storage amount to anything more than local adaptations to relatively rich environments. There are many such instances evident across pre-European Australia, but they don't contradict the evidence of all historical witnesses, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, about the general fundamental modes of Australian Indigenous production, the dynamics of their social organisation and the nature of their cultures. Gathering yams and grain is a form of harvesting, but it is not an 'agrarian' mode, even though the gatherers sometimes did take some steps to ensure the reproduction of the supply. There were apparently around 500 distinct Indigenous groups, based on language. If one or more of these built stone cottages, it hardly says anything about how the rest lived. Having music, language and art are wonderful achievements, but their presence implies nothing about the presence of democracy. Many authoritarian patriarchal societies have had plenty of music, language and art. To infer that somehow Indigenous societies were like modern states is simply silly, and indicates a fundamental ignorance of the basic hallmarks of what constitutes a modern state. Theorists such as Pascoe need to beware of wishful thinking and fantasy capturing their critical faculties. Indigenous people are no more served by their spokespeople descending into infantile delusions than we non-Indigenous Australians are served by the equally infantile propaganda of people like Hanson. Bruce, you are a great guy, but please, get a little more careful when you go into bat for Indigenous people. Otherwise you risk discrediting them, by feeding the appetites for self-delusion on the one side, and racist prejudice on the other.
Posted by Dan Fitzpatrick, Monday, 21 May 2007 11:15:14 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
Interesting reactions to this passionate message.

healthwatcher says that because it's news to him 'Readers had better look more deeply into this before believing it.' Then without further ado, he concludes: 'The basis of low aboriginal technology is that there were no herding animals on the continent. This meant aboriginals had to keep moving and wherever that happens, there can be no structured settlements.' Bags over the head never stop some people shooting their mouths off.

Gazza2121 obfuscates with an hysterical 'straw horse', 'valourised in modernity', 'confusion of a moral issue with an historical and ethnographic one' and possible support for 'an emancipative agenda'. Not to mention a pseudo-sympathetic call for 'serious analysis of collective memory, academic consensus or public opinion'. (Well which would you count for most Gazza: collective memory, academic consensus or public opinion?)

Media, at least, is interested, has an open mind and asks for more information. Some can be found in:

Critchett, Janet 1980 A History of Framlingham and Lake Condah Aboriginal
Stations 1860-1918. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Melbourne

Critchett, J.1992 A 'distant field of murder' – western district frontiers 1834-1848.
Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.

Coutts, P.J.F, R.K. Frank & P. Hughes 1978 ‘Aboriginal Engineers of the Western
District, Victoria’ Records of the Victoria Archaeological Survey, No. 7

Hedditch, Katrina 1996 Land and Power: A Settlement History of the Glenelg Shire to 1890

Rhodes, David 1986 The Lake Condah Aboriginal Mission Dormitory: an historical
and archaeological investigation. MA Prelim. Thesis, LaTrobe University.

Wesson, Jane 1981 Excavations of Stone Structures in the Condah Area, Western
Victoria. Unpublished MA (Prelim) Thesis, La Trobe Universit
Posted by FrankGol, Monday, 21 May 2007 11:17:27 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
Thanks FrankGol. I am really interested in this topic. Can anyone refer me to a few online sources about Aust Aboriginal history, culture and current situation? I do feel that the original article was thought provoking. I'm from OS and I get the sense that in Australia there is this general dismissal of the indigenous people. I detect a sort of cultural guilt about the colonisation of the continent, the 'war' and a sense that if we as a community throw money at the 'Aboriginal problem' it will hopefully go away. If not, not our problem. Rather than valuing the enormous history of the people who have been here for tens of thousands of years and who are in fact still here. The NZ culture and identity would seem (superficially) to be much more enriched by their indigenous cultures.
Posted by Media, Monday, 21 May 2007 11:42:18 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
The noble savage? Not many people take that line anymore however.
It might be not be PC to say but the fact is Civilization arose in number (5) of places in the world, But Australia was not one of them. Whether some groups were nomadic, semi-nomadic is really mute. Aboriginals never got out of the stone age. Having said that I like to believe it was for reasons outlined by the 2nd poster rather then any thing else.
Posted by Kenny, Monday, 21 May 2007 12:18:44 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
Dan Fitzpatrick, you accuse Bruce Pascoe of ‘another kind of Australian ignorance and prejudice’ and, while patronising him as ‘a great guy’, you warn him to beware of ‘wishful thinking and fantasy’ and ‘descending into infantile delusions’.

And what did Bruce Pascoe do to deserve your walloping? He challenged Australians to learn more about some instances of relatively sophisticated economies as an antidote to maintaining the myth of ‘a crude civilisation meandering hopelessly across the continent’.

‘To infer [sic] that somehow Indigenous societies were like modern states is simply silly,’ you say. Yes, Dan, but only if you take a wholly literal approach to Bruce’s article. I suppose it depends how you are predisposed to approach a topic like this and how important you consider the historical context to be. Pascoe looks at the evidence and sees eel aquaculture in Victoria and grain harvesting in Queensland as sophisticated. You dismiss these as ‘instances of crude engineering’ and atypical.

So what’s to be done, Dan? Should we just ignore this evidence of advanced Indigenous economic activity and return to what you call ‘the evidence of all [sic] historical witnesses, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, about the general fundamental modes of Australian Indigenous production, the dynamics of their social organisation and the nature of their cultures’? Where does that sweeping put-down stand, Dan, in your own dichotomy of ‘self-delusion on the one side, and racist prejudice on the other’?

It must be worrying that you may be encouraging people like Kenny (‘Aboriginals never got out of the stone age.’) to turn away from evidence that challenges their blind ignorance.

For people like Media who might be open to information on-line, I can suggest some starting points – but you’ll have to do lots more work because the information is not yet well mainstreamed.

http://www.wmac.org.au/lake/area

http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/national/sites/budjbim-factsheet.html

http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/national/sites/budjbim-mteccles.html

http://www.ag.gov.au/portal/govgazonline.nsf/3CEEEC8EC2A2D602CA256ED7000C458C/$file/PG%207.pdf
Posted by FrankGol, Monday, 21 May 2007 12:52:38 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'm not quite sure what the point of this article was. Even if I blindly accept the vision of Aboriginal Australia as some sort of Utopia that was rudely and violently conquered by European settlers, it doesn't change where we are now.

The appalingly high rates of infant mortality, the low life expectancy, the alcohol abuse and lawlessness do exist now and it is not because of convenient memory or some sort of 'spin'.

We need to look forward, not back. We need to start treating Aboriginals like equals which means equal responsibility as well as reward. Humankind can benefit from the transferral of valuable insights and lessons from earlier cultures, but that doesn't mean we should encourage primitive lifestyles that precede modern medicine and education.
Posted by Nigel from Jerrabomberra, Monday, 21 May 2007 1:49:52 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
This is a fantastic article, absolutely studded with footnotes which sadly are invisible to those of unfeeling heart. As Bruce notes, "We live in a country with an incredible history." I'm looking forward to his next article explaining how Uluru is actually a rock structure built by the ancestors of today's Anangu, and how these same ancestors also assembled the stone mountains of Kata Tjuta just like the ancient Britons put together Stonehenge but obviously on a much more massive scale. Go for it Mr. Pascoe!!
Posted by Snappy Tom, Monday, 21 May 2007 2:03:12 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 am about as interested in Aboriginal culture and history as I am in tales of Britney Spears' latest misadventures. That is to say, not at all. I suspect the only difference between me and 95% of non-Aboriginal Australians is that I'm honest about my indifference.

I AM concerned about the appalling circumstances in which so many Aborigines live but I'm not sure what, if anything, an outsider can do to make a difference. I suspect very little.

If Aborigines want to focus attention, and resources, on themselves, I suggest they convert to Islam. As an attention getter nothing beats being Muslim at the moment.

Conversion to Islam would help Aborigines in other ways. There is nothing wishy washy about the Muslim attitude towards sex, alcohol and drugs. I suspect it's over-indulgence in the last two and having the former in inappropriate circumstances that is the cause of much Aboriginal misery.

For the record, I am not a Muslim.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Monday, 21 May 2007 3:08:41 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
Media. I'm suprised no one has suggested
http://www.aiatsis.gov.au/
I have friends, who have shown me most of what I want to know about aboriginal history, they work assiduously at informing people about their subject.
Some I'm afraid, a little academic, but if you want fact I suppose that's the cost.
The institute is in Canberra, right next to the Aust. Museum. I was informed and delighted by my visits. The museum is supported by the institute.
fluff4
Posted by fluff4, Monday, 21 May 2007 5:24:43 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
With respect to FrankGol:

'And what did Bruce Pascoe do?'

He failed to provide an accurate, factual portrayal of the reality of mainland Australian Indigenous societies for impressionable sections of his audience. He risked misleading them off into an imaginary lost golden-age continent of democracy, economic plenty, advanced technology, stone town halls, eel farms and plains of waving grain.

What did FrankGol do? He tried to excuse Pascoe's flaws, on the grounds that he wasn't to be taken literally and means well.

'Should we just ignore this evidence of advanced Indigenous economic activity' (i.e. some isolated stone traps and channels, eel harvesting, grain and yam collecting)? No, but we are not ignoring it, and it is inaccurate to characterise it as 'advanced' (unless we are prepared to add the word 'paleolithic' to the phrase, as that would probably be more accurate).

Should I shut up, worried that I might be encouraging people like Kenny (‘Aboriginals never got out of the stone age.’) to turn away from evidence that challenges their blind ignorance? No, because Kenny might not be all wrong - he just calls a stone axe a stone axe, after all - and because when you are debating issues in OnLineOpinion at least, the truth is sometimes more important than sensitivity about hurting the feelings of misguided people. Obscuring accuracy helps nobody except the exploiters and the obscurantists.
Posted by Dan Fitzpatrick, Monday, 21 May 2007 5:32:44 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
What drugs are you using FrankGol? They certainly must be assisting in your flight from reality. Actually one would wonder what drugs the writers of one of the documents he refers us to are using as well? This is the Commonwealth Government gazette of July 20, 2004, referenced at http://www.ag.gov.au/portal/govgazonline.nsf/3CEEEC8EC2A2D602CA256ED7000C458C/$file/PG%207.pdf

According to one section in this document, "Mount Eccles is an ancestral creation being Budj bim and the scoria cones are described as tung att – teeth belong it (Clark 1990a; 1990b; Builth 2003). It therefore demonstrates the process through which Aboriginal creation beings reveal themselves in the landscape". (Page 5)

Mount Eccles demonstrates the process through which Aboriginal creation beings reveal themselves in the landscpe ONLY if you wish to toss overboard the entire science of geology. The trouble is that Aboriginal ancestral creation beings never ever existed. They are no more real than fairies, hobgoblins and mythical taniwha swimming in New Zealand lakes.

As for the stone foundations of what would otherwise have been simple thatched huts being evidence of "complex housing", one wonders what the author might make of other indigenous achievements elsewhere in the world. There is a world of difference between the remnants of Aboriginal culture in western Victoria and real civilisations such as that of the Aztec, the Inca or the Maya of modern-day Latin America.
Posted by Snappy Tom, Monday, 21 May 2007 7:26:45 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
“What do I think of Western civilisation"?

"I think it would be a very good idea.”

- Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)
Posted by Rainier, Monday, 21 May 2007 8:21:20 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
Dan Fitzpatrick
Until you show evidence of having read something about the advanced technology that Bruce Pascoe referred to (or read anything for that matter) I’m wasting my time. (Feel free to do what you like with yours).

As you so rightly say, “Obscuring accuracy helps nobody except the exploiters and the obscurantists.” The cap fits you, Dan.

Snappy Tom,

Your sooo subtle reference to drugs can pass; at least you have made an effort to read one of the references. Pity you chose to ignore the technological descriptions and rubbish the creationist theories that we all know have now been superseded by geological science (although neo-creationist theories are resurgent in western culture too at present).

The Government Gazette reports that the system of ponds, wetlands, channels, weirs and fish and eel traps eel along the Tyrendarra lava flow in the Mt Eccles/Lake Condah area are of “outstanding heritage value”. And for good reason.

“Gunditj Mara people constructed the channels to manipulate water flows and the weirs to modify and create wetlands that provided ideal growing conditions for the shortfinned eel and other fish…This system is confined to Western Victoria and shows a high degree of creativity not found in freshwater fish traps in other parts of Australia.”

I’m not sure what merit there is in ranking civilizations in terms of their size and architectural complexity. Contexts count. I admire and value what you call “real civilizations” such as those found in what is now modern-day Latin America. I also admire and appreciate what has been recovered in Western Victoria. As Bruce Pascoe said, “Enjoy it, learn that you live in a fabulous place where a civilisation developed which may yet teach us crucial lessons about sustainability and civilised behaviour.”
Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 5:28:59 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
Frankie boy ... the development of a system of ponds, wetlands, channels, weirs and fish and eel traps along the Tyrendarra lava flow in the Mount Eccles/Lake Condah area may well be of “outstanding heritage value”, but it does not constitute a civilisation. Whatever you or Rainier may think of Western civilisation, there was no civilisation in Australia prior to 1788. Culture yes, civilisation no.

The Free Online Dictionary defines civilisation as: "An advanced state of intellectual, cultural, and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record-keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions".

A short-list definition of civilisation (Clyde Kluckhohn, cited in Whitehouse and Wilkins; see http://bruceowen.com/emciv/341-06f-06-CityStateCiv.pdf) notes that civilised societies possess at least TWO of the following three characteristics:
- towns of over 5000 people
- writing
- monumental ceremonial centres.

As far as has been established, none of these characteristics was applicable to Western Victoria prior to European arrival/invasion/settlement, whatever you want to call it. But these characteristics/criteria were applicable to a greater or lesser degree at pre-Hispanic sites such as Chan Chan, Chavin, Chichen Itza, Copan, Machu Picchu, Mayapan, Palenque, Teotihuacán, Tenochtitlan, Tikal and Uxmal, to name just a few.

As for quoting Bruce Pascoe - "learn that you live in a fabulous place where a civilisation developed which may yet teach us crucial lessons about sustainability and civilised behaviour" - apart from the fact that there was NO civilisation there anyway, where exactly is the contemporary relevance? Do we now all move to Western Victoria and become eel farmers? Come off it.
Posted by Snappy Tom, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 6:19:13 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
Yep, there is a great deal we can learn from the past. Good on you Bruce for presenting some evidence to debunk the notion that Aboriginal people are somehow less worthy than non-Aboriginal folk in a historical sense. A lot of people are concerned about climate issues and the number of species of animals and plants that are becoming extinct everyday. The cause of this problem is directly linked to the domination, greed & exploitation ethic of centralised states with monotheistic religions that have historically disconnected people from nature. Whilst this is going on there is a whole different way of interacting with otherness (spiritual & social) that still remains largely intact despite several decades of Aboriginal people being forcibly relegated to welfare dependency and a century and a half of overt genocide before that. As Bruce says these Aboriginal people have much to offer to assist us to make the transition to a more socially just and sustainable future. No wonder Aboriginal people have disengaged and would prefer to live on $30 a fortnight than engage in a stupid system that has been imposed on them without their consent given our attitudes. We non-Aboriginal people are the stupid ones destroying our planet living what is in a relative sense a half life that is devoid of integrity and meaning. If some of you folk denigrating Aboriginal people or expressing your lack of compassion could have seen some of the things that I have seen you would hopefully realise how culpable you are for what is going on and you would be ashamed. Many in various levels of government and/or on the ground working on remote communities are disenfranchising and disempowering Aboriginal people perpetuating and creating assimilation based welfare oriented policies that are nothing short of covert cultural genocide. Whilst Aboriginal people are prematurely dying on the ground as a direct result of most non-Aboriginal people in this country doing little to address underlying issues dry academic arguments between ignorant unfeeling people trying to bolster their self importance seems somewhat irrelevant and sickening.
Posted by Bret Fishley, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 7:48:38 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
Tommy lad

Bruce Pascoe used the word 'civilization' in the last sentence of his article as a rhetorical flourish. Your bookish definition of 'civilzation' is interesting academically but irrelevant to this debate. Nothing hangs on it. The point is do you agree that "the development of a system of ponds, wetlands, channels, weirs and fish and eel traps along the Tyrendarra lava flow in the Mount Eccles/Lake Condah area may well be of 'outstanding heritage value'"? And if so what would you do about it in the future?

Bruce was merely saying that Indigenous life was well developed and in the instances he cited, "Aboriginal people were not feckless and innocent nomads". He merely asked the question: why do we maintain the myth of a crude civilisation meandering hopelessly across the continent? Why indeed?

While your bookish definition leads you to the view that there was no civilisation in western Victoria, don't overlook the contemporary relevance in terms of land ownership. Aboriginal people did not simply walk away from their fishing grounds and cede their land to the white settlers. The noble savage image has served whites' interests well but it is being challenged here. What's your problem with that?

As for your question: do we now all move to Western Victoria and become eel farmers? Tommy, I think you would need to learn a great deal about how to do it. I know some Indigenous people who could teach you!
Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 7:57:54 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
Bruce Pascoe writes ..'This country is unique but we can't bring ourselves to admit it because we have to believe the Indigenes walked away from it, left the field in awe of the marvellous European'.
From the records of the 19 NSW colonial counties spreading out from Sydney Cove, it would have to be acknowledged that the Eora, the Cadgigal, the Darkinjung and the other clans around early Sydney were in awe, who wouldn't be with axe heads and knives the superior technology beckoning. It isn't to denigrate the Indigenes and it isn't to say that all were in awe. Put yourself in their place and sheer curiosity would prevail. It would be interesting to research the place of the early corn crops along the Hawkesbury as another competitor, in this case against the traditionally harvested root crops of the Indigenes that were displaced on the riverbank.
It is fascinating in retrospect to contemplate that as famine gripped the colony in 1789-90 what the colonists would have done with a nearby eel farming technology if the West Victorian reality had been available. Before plundering it you can almost be convinced that wiser heads might have discerned that this deserved recognition, a proper exchange underpinned be an agreement, perhaps even a treaty..and we all would have been the richer for it.
Posted by jup, Tuesday, 22 May 2007 9:28:04 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
Well done Bruce,

As an Indigenous teacher I congratulate you on encouraging people to examine the evidence rather than believe the uninformed perceptions of current and past generations.

Hopefully it will change the social view of people. When I enter a room, people see me from the view of an Indigenous male, as such they bring up their ideas that we were primative, 'stone age' wandering savages with no moral, intellectual or rational understanding. Not as an Murri with two degrees and a wealth of experience and expertise to offer to this country. Perceptions change peoples ideals and expectations of others. I recall a moment when my cousin visited my work for a day (keen to wait in the air-conditioning). Because he was young, waiting around on a work day and dressed casually, my boss thought he was just an unemployed black young person. When we finally asked him what he was doing, he was amazed to find out that he was a reserve grade League player for a NRL team down south, in his 3rd year of a Law degree and could speak Mandarin and Cantonese. We can base our perspectives on perceptions of the social view rather than learn for ourselves.

Sadly, many questions of the forms of technology, societal structures and amazing strategies and techniques used to survive this harsh country for thousands of years were lost due to past policies of extermination and ignorance. Only those Anthropologist that worked with remaining nations of the interior were able to glean some of the walth of knowledge.

Looking forward to the forum discussions, even from those ignorant few , maybe this article will help change a small portion of your heart to consider what every Indigenous kid lives with as a socially constructed image of them.

Regards,
Posted by 2deadly, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 11:32:57 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
Offer, offer, it was not an unreasonable offer. A pillbox crisp, that French git. The spikes he left in the bathroom, and I never heard from him again.

You may pronounce us guilty a thousand times over, but the goddess of the eternal court of history will smile and tear to tatters the brief of the state prosecutor and the sentence of this court, for she acquits us. Condemn me, condemn me, condemn me? History will absolve ...

If your grandmother or any other member of your family should die whilst in the shelter, put them outside, but remember to tag them first for identification purposes.

And did those feet in ancient time, walk upon western Victoria's volcanic plain green. And was the holy lamb of God on western Victoria's pleasant eel-farming arrangements seen?

And did the countenance divine shine forth upon those clouded hills. And was Jerusalem builded there among those dark Satanic mills?

You don't have to be weird to be wired and you don't have to be an American brand. My heart and I agree ... so pay your rates.
Posted by Snappy Tom, Friday, 25 May 2007 4:51:28 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
Dear Steven L Meyer

I would like to address the one point you raised about Muslims not having a wishy washy approach to sex drugs and alchohol.

What they actually have is a disgraceful attitude to sex, and a rigid 'taskmaster' approach to alchohol, lets leave drugs aside for the moment.

TEMPORARY MARRIAGE/(prostitution by another name)Mut'a marriage.

Please refer to this Muslim discussion on the matter.
http://www.guidedones.com/metapage/frq/mutah10.htm

You will note the the main writer simply digs his heels in and 'denies' the undeniable i.e. that later Quran verses abrogate earlier ones where they differ. This is pointed out by a reader.
The later verses clearly advocate 'payment(dowery)' for the sexual use of a woman for an indeterminate time, and this can be (and often was) for the duration of a single nite.

The other point to note in that discussion is that even in denying 'temporary' marriage, the main author also SUPPORTS the 'sexual use of captive slave girls' as one authorized/legal male female relationships and provides Quranic support/proof for this.

This wikipedia article also provides much insight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_Mut'ah

That article can be summarized in that Sunni's believe it is 'haram' forbidden, Shia (today) believe it is allowed.

Bilal Skaf (according to Shia) would not be guilty of any sin.
-He captured the girls.
-He had sex with them.
-Such captives have no say in this matter.
Surah 23:5-6

In summary, the greatest danger we face in Australia today (in terms of terrorism) is the possibility of an infection of Aboriginal minds with Islam, and its associated calls to 'fight' non Muslims who have 'turned you out of your homes'. (Surah 2:191)

Imagine if the lingering resentment of dispossessed Indigenous people is linked up to Al Qaeda and the Quran?
http://forum.mpacuk.org/archive/index.php?t-8808.html (please read this)
Posted by BOAZ_David, Sunday, 27 May 2007 10:06:26 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
David

Quote: "...the greatest danger we face in Australia today (in terms of terrorism) is the possibility of an infection of Aboriginal minds with Islam, and its associated calls to 'fight' non Muslims..."

Two cruel prejudices bundled as one paranoia. Two outrageous stereotypes wrapped up in shameful fear-mongering.

Franklin D Roosevelt in a different context said, "... the only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes..." His speech seems still to have contemporary application.

You are manufacturing an unreasoning, unjustified terror which seems to have paralysed your intellect. On the other hand watch your back - Tony Mundine is out there somewhere.
Posted by FrankGol, Sunday, 27 May 2007 12:56:59 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, do you actually read the examples you put forward?

The wikipedia piece is headed "This article or section is not written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Please improve it..."

This is the polite way the Wikipedians point out that the contribution is either biased or contentious, with insufficient scholarship to allow referrers to use its content with safety.

The first article is a discussion between adherents with differing ideas on interpretation. You choose to take one side - quelle surprise - but the argument was far from conclusive.

The inference you draw from these pieces is astounding.

>>Bilal Skaf (according to Shia) would not be guilty of any sin.
-He captured the girls.
-He had sex with them.
-Such captives have no say in this matter<<

That is utter fallacy, and you are fully aware of it.

There is absolutely no scriptural justification for gang rape, or for any other form of rape.

Slavery no longer exists, and you know it. "Capturing girls" doesn't turn them into slaves, and you know it.

What staggers me is that you can say this stuff with - presumably - a straight face, and still deny that you are a top-flight, copper-bottomed, out-and-out rabble-rouser.
Posted by Pericles, Sunday, 27 May 2007 6:31:12 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
Oh My! I'm amazed and horrified at your comment David Boaz...
Posted by Media, Monday, 28 May 2007 9:48:09 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
I do not recall reading anything about storehouses or agriculture within aboriginal society but it would not suprise me to find this to be truthfull. The white dominant culture has perpertrated many untruths in its attempt to enforce its power throughout the world why would the colonies of the great southern continent be any different. I do believe that the liberty of all people in this country we now call Australia is tied up with the liberty of the indigenous people and their culture and would love to see a nation where we are truelly reconciled. My idealist view however gets knocked around by comments such as some of the replies to Australians in Denial. I would like to know why we can't teach our children about people like Benelong and Colbey. Why are we afraid to tell the stories of dispossession and massacres. Why do we take for granted that the economic wealth we enjoy today and beleive that it is because of good economic management of white governments when in reality it is a direct consequence of taking peoples land from them and using it for resources. The Centruy mine in Queensland made $750,000,000 in profit last year. The Queensland Government got $50,000,000 and the traditional owner groups got $50,000 each ie about $400,000. They live in poor conditions with basic infrastructure in their communities while we reap the benefits of thier land. Why do we not see this as wrong.
Posted by LAINEE, Monday, 18 June 2007 4:44:24 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
Hello Everyone,

Let me firstly say I am amazed at the gusto many people on here use in attack or defence of something they have never seen. What I would prefer to do, without having the benefit of visiting the site, is propose points for consideration that I personally would like to see more adequately evaluated, by people who are involved in the actual examination of the farm site in order for me personally to be able to scientifically accept this find:

1. ‘The hundreds of Stone Huts, dating somewhere between 200-8,000 years, are of international significance and evidence of a transition to sedentary living.’ As a professional miner involved in exploration I can assure you this time frame is far too vague and it seems to be deliberately expressed as such. A study of sedimentation in the farm system and a study of the rate of alluvial attrition on the host rock for the channel systems would be very accurate.

2. Huts resemble Celtic roundhouses which would have had a fire in the centre and hole in top of the roof. The bases and thatching are very much the same.

3. The initial contacts between Aboriginals and Europeans were with crews from Celtic Countries. These countries had been using this eel-farming system since ancient times and are considered masters of ancient freshwater aquaculture.

4. Where did the appropriate tools for cutting hard rock materialise from? I note there is no form of metal cutting tool recorded as being found, which would be required for this purpose. Where is the evidence of methods of smelting metals?

5. Have this tribe been DNA tested?

6. Why didn’t another tribe try and copy this farming it if it was so lucrative?

I know it will be an extremely important find to Aboriginal history if this is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but I do not believe that has yet been done.

The fact that Aboriginals and Europeans may have existed harmoniously before greed and colonialism entered the equation would also be an equally important historical find.

Regards To All,

Paul KTS
AUSTRALIA
Posted by Templar, Sunday, 9 September 2007 11:55:02 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

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