Thankyou for the article Jennifer. I was interested to read Pat O'Shane's comments in the Sydney Morning Herald some weeks ago in which she suggested a link between land acquistion under the Brough legislation and uranium mining. Do you or does anyone else know if exploratory mining surveys will be permitted under this legislation? Perhaps the legislation is a trojan horse for purposes other than those stated by the government. Am I being too cynical in thinking this? To date I have heard no convincing argument that the legislation will benefit the control of alcohol or aid in the protection of indigenous children from abuse. What then, is it's ultimate purpose?

Nearly all Posts on the right track. Hope Howard and Co take notice. But we are only just a few people, few left wing loonies among us too. So-called silly old me being one, for my love of learning in my old life. Got a shock when one of our group told me that most history is just old Pap.

Guess modern electronics is now producing learners with little depth of reasoning - thought processes only just behind the eyes and ears.

Might be as well for us to re-remember the phrase that From Deserts the Prophets Come.

Cheers - BB - WA

BK writes "acquistion under the Brough legislation and uranium mining. Do you or does anyone else know if exploratory mining surveys will be permitted under this legislation?" What then, is it's ultimate purpose?"
Probably exploratory mining surveys have already been done. But now, Howard, the mining companies and the customer (or customers) India or China are talking about mining and after treatment and use dumping the nuclear waste on aboriginal lands. That is the deal that is being brokered albeit with the usual denials. The aboriginals will be used as a source of very cheap casual and expendable labour in the mines. That aspect figures prominently in Howards new industrial relations.
Try and see the bigger picture world OIL deposits in time will become further depleted and will command a far heftier price. That is what Iraq is all about - colonial plunder - stealing the oil from the second largest oil deposits. More over, uranium as an energy source will partly replace some oil requirements. As well, Bush and Howard have indicated ongoing wars, "one war following another." China and India as well as requiring energy sources want to upgrade their weapons capability.
BIG MONEY has done their sums and counted the profits, that is the ultimate purpose and in their reckoning the aboriginals are expendable.
We should never forget the Maralinga trials whereby servicemen and aboriginals were used as guinea pigs in the Maralinga nuclear explosions. Those trials left almost 24 kilos of plutonium, with a half-life of 24,000 years, scattered around a huge area.

When land is vested collectively in a clan or tribe or community, the understanding is that this will be utilised for the common good. However when the effective powerplayers (the elders; the leaders; the council) become tyrants, or rapists or child molesters and implement a reign of depraved terror on the other community members, they have to be disempowered. To do this they have to have the source of their power removed. That is; control of the land. Got it now?

In any normal town, the victims would be removed for their safety, and the perpetrators of the crimes investigated, charged, tried and possibly imprisoned. However in these remote communities such a course would destroy and depopulate the entire "town"; bringing raucous accusations of "rascism, genocide,child stealing" etc etc, from all the usual suspects. The question of how to then repopulate the former hell-hole would be rather complex. The Govt is avoiding this by leaving the landowners in place.

Sorry Bushbred, but I'll have to disagree with your summary that most bloggers on this thread are on the right track. Most of them are not in the slightest bit interested in stopping the violence or paedophilia. Hardly a one has even mentioned it. What they desire are further gabfests and enquiries while the mayhem continues. If you are truly "from the bush" then you would realise that it is prevaricators and whingers like these who would stand by criticising even as the Summer Bushfire engulfed whole towns. They just don't care nor get it, at all. Cheers.

punter57

Two weak ‘arguments’ and one attempted character assassination.

Whether it’s child abuse or domestic violence – all Australians are and should be subject to the law, no matter what their power base may be. What does ownership or non-ownership of land have to do with how a crime against women and children is treated? Would we treat a non-landowner differently to a land-owner is they are both guilty of rape? Or are you saying collective ownership of land is different to private ownership of land insofar as it affects crime?

Secondly, of what relevance is the quantum of crime in each locality? You seem to be arguing that if the police find too many perpetrators in one community, they would only prosecute a few because (a) too many prosecutions would destroy the “town” and (b) there would be an outcry from anti-racists. (By the way, apart from your difficulties with logic, do you have you any evidence for these claims?)

Your first two ‘arguments’ seem contradictory anyway. In the first, you justify confiscation of land; but in the second you assert that it’s not going to happen. Just what is your position? And the Government’s?

Finally, on your attempted character assassination. This blogger (and I know many others) have vigorously voiced their consternation at crimes against women and children. Failing to mention it again on this occasion is no indication that we are not alarmed and concerned. This is not the first article on the topic. Have a look at comments on other threads.

And your extensions: (a) ‘What they desire are further gabfests and enquiries while the mayhem continues’ and (b) they ‘would stand by criticising even as the Summer Bushfire engulfed whole towns’ are as illogical as they are wacky.

How about I say that I didn’t see you comment on AWB bribes nor did I hear a peep out of you on al-Qaida when you last wrote about Dr Haneef? Do you support bribes and al-Qaida? Wacky argument, isn’t it?

FrankGol. You asked in the First Posting for an explanation of why the Fed Govt is acting in this way. I have given you the answer. You are correct that The Territory Govt has not applied the laws of the NT as it should have. Only 12% of NT Communities have Resident Police. You may wonder why this is so. Block-votes delivered to the ALP is the answer.
Consequently the situation within the communities has deteriorated dramatically, while requests from the Feds to act have been ignored by the NT Govt. Meanwhile a state of fear and intimidation has developed. Many local community authority figures are "believed" to be involved in paedophilia/rapes/violence etc, or to have turned a blind eye to these activities. Any Community using the CDEP system effectively puts the money of the whole community into the hands of the CDEP co-ordinator who then controls it's distribution. This is very different to any "normal" town. This means that the power-group run the place AND hold the pursestrings.
The "quantum" is why the Feds have acted as they have, Frank.
I am arguing EXACTLY the opposite to how you interpret my explanation. I am saying that so many people will be/should be charged/arrested/removed from positions of authority that there may be nothing left. The Feds have been obliged to replace the existing authorities of the communities before hauling them away. Got it yet? Hope so.

As for character assasination. Hmmm. Support the Feds or allow the previous state of affairs to go on. Support the NT Govt and Aboriginal Leaders have done nothing to stop the violence or support the Govt who STOPPED it already. Your choice Frank. Cheers.