Is HREOC really for this intervention? I've heard nothing from Tom Calma that suggests anything other than he is deeply confused about the issue.

And on the point of HREOC believing in anti-discrimination, come on, discrimination has been going on for years!

Abstudy is about giving additional funds to Aboriginies based not on income levels, but rather the colour of one's skin!

This is racism!

Hypothetically, if there were an Aboriginal student doing medicine say, from a wealthy background, he/she could effectively get all tuition fees, books, and so on - paid for by the government.

And this despite the fact that if based on income levels, it wouldn't happen.

Anyway, that's a seperate issue, although it's laughable to hear Tom Calma say he is opposed to discrimination.

On the topic, of course Aboriginies deserve to live without violence. The anger has to be aimed at those upper middle-class white leftist academics who thought up the ridiculous self-determination model.

You're talking about tribal culture here, many of whom (in the outback) have never been to school, don't know English, and have survived using tribal skills.

Such policies was about appeasing leftist consciousness, not about helping Aboriginies. We know how to do that, and thankfully, Howard has started that.

It makes me laugh when I hear the likes of Peter Garrett say the government has done nothing. This is the same bigot who wrote songs about giving back land, and screamed colonialism anytime decent people made suggestions.

It was this typical leftist fear-mongering that held up the process, as it has on the long overdue debate on multiculturalism (anyone opposed to it is a racist) and racism (apparently a white only phenomenon!).

It's good that such fear mongering has a lesser affect than it used to, many have woken up.

I don't see anything short of another 'saved' generation fixing these problems up. Isn't it telling that we are only now talking about this issue because an Aboriginal, Noel Pearson, started the debate.

Apparently, if a white person says it they are a racist, but if an Aboriginal does it's alright.

The problem with HREOC's approach is that it has demonstrably failed to identify practical solutions with proven effectiveness to many of the problems it belatedly identifies, let alone sell the solutions to the politicians.

Often the real, immediate problems are clearly more destructive than minor human rights violations that may accompany quickly dealing with problems before they get completely out of hand. HREOC sometimes approaches the issues in an idealised, undifferentiated, impractical way that often undermines its own moral authority in the eyes of the very people whom it is trying to benefit.

Of course the issues are complex and raise a host of fundamental human rights principles, but "Australia’s international reputation" is NOT "of the utmost importance": ending child abuse and neglect, overcoming the epidemic of alcohol-induced death and providing an educated, self-determining healthy, future to Indigenous people is what is of "the utmost importance".

For everybody's sake, HREOC has to get over the infantile idea "that solutions to all aspects of these matters [must always, ideally and in every possible minor way] respect the human rights and freedoms of everyone involved."

Not all instances of discrimination carry the same weight or have the same impact. Undifferentiated application of anti-discrimination principles brings the human rights movement itself into disrepute with many people of goodwill.

HREOC has no solutions...they work on a 'conciliation' model/process which rarely produces results, especially as they lack the authority to enforce decisions.
Several things need to be put to one side. One is 'self-determination'(of the politically correct imposed by others who know better than you variety) as that assumes that people live in isolation. They do not. Another is land rights that allow for other forms of isolation and encourages people to remain on welfare in areas where training and work opportunities are limited at best and in reality largely non-existent. Another is the notion that a 'culture has to be preserved' when the reality is that what is perceived to be a culture has already been thoroughly and irreparably tainted.
The squeals and screams of outrage are coming from people who see their leftist research papers and their activist livelihoods disintegrating in the face of indigenous communities being permitted the same rights as other Australians to enter the 21st C. Their attitude is ensuring that any effort to address the problems is going to fail.

What venom and bile this topic evokes.
How can a community claim to be civilised when there are calls such as these posts to ignore human rights.
Are you previous posters so morally bankrupt that you are not able to question how Howard and co are able to pull 600 medical practioners out of their closet. Gee if this number of health professionals, and the level of service the numbers imply, were properly funded years ago this problem would not be so severe.
Child abuse and sexual abuse is not solely a black issue for many non-Indigenous children are also suffering, but the timing of this latest stunt is purely political - it is the latest TAMPA.
You previous posters are fools if you are prepared to tolerate this violation of human rights simply so the Howard govt can attempt to retain its vile hold on power.
Simply being a professional, a medical practioner, does not guarantee that someone is a good person as recent news can attest where drs are terrorists. So how come Howard can get 600 drs? Can he guarantee that they will do no harm as they violate the human rights of little children?

Aka,

Your joking right? How is what Howard wants to do ignoring human rights? It is the left that have ignored their rights! Didn't you even read my post?

It isn't racist to help black children, to remove them from homes where they are sexually abused. They are children, and all children deserve not to be abused.

The problem is that due to politics and fear-mongering, they haven't been taken because it would be seen as a 'stolen' generation. I've actually heard Aboriginals who were taken say they are thankful, and that rather than being stolen - they were 'saved'!

Wake up mate.

How is this a Tampa? What is that anyway? Reporting on some wealthy immigrants who jumped queues, flew past hundreds of perfectly safe nations to get to Indonesia, then paid $5000 to some filthy criminal Arab smuggling syndicate so they could come to a western country?

And then protest when we invade their filthy dump of a homeland to turn it into a western country - like the ones they all want to live in!

Utter insanity. Tampa is over mate, although for those who think the government lied - grow up.

I remember the footage, there were Arabs holding kids over the rails indicating they were going to throw them in the water. The navy recorded the filth rioting on our navy vessel, after we rescued the ingrates, and they threw faeces at our navy crew.

I would have shot them if they did that to me.

We are so tolerant, and they know it. That's why they sabotaged their engine, as they knew we wouldn't let them drown, because we are humanitarian westerners.

Would you sink your boat near an Iranian navy ship?

Utter filth. These refugees give us a mandate to force our superior values on humanity. Colonialism ended too soon, what a mess!

Sign the petition to bomb Iran, at frontpagemagazine.com!

The use of the term “women and children” in this article by the HREOC highlights its feminist and sexist nature. The term has been frequently used by feminists in the past to alienate men as much as possible, and to declassify fathers as parents.

In the 6 year tenure of the previous Sex Discrimination Commissioner, she frequently used the term “women and children” and never said one positive word about the male gender. That tradition of devaluing men seems to live on in the HREOC, and so much for the recognition of human rights by the HREOC.

I don’t think “women and children” are going to solve the problems that are occurring in aboriginal communities. Eventually “men” will be necessary to help solve those problems also. Any feminist attempt to devalue men, or to not recognise men, or to declassify fathers as parents, or to remove men from aboriginal communities will only add to problems in the longer term.