Dear mhaze,

Do you even read what you write anymore?

Sigh.

Once again for the seemingly slow witted. You can't take the statement Rudd a year after the fact and say it shows Howard didn't act at the time unilaterally, especially when he didn't even consult his own bloody cabinet, or are you contesting whether he did or not.

There were aspects of the Intervention I fully supported. The extra resource for child health, the extra policing and increases in social workers. But it was directed at a race of people in a punitive and universal manner with no regard to those who were successfully raising their families.

Both Rudd and Gillard did make quite significant changes to the Intervention including reinstating permit requirements and striking down the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act.

The sad fact is that only 3 of the 97 recommendations in the report were fully acted on. That is an indictment on both parties.

We are now at that part of the SR education where I can't tell if the logic is just too difficult for him to follow or he's decided to act the fool rather than admit his earlier imbecility.

First he claimed Howard acted unilaterally.
I showed that Howard acted with the full support of his party and the opposition.
Then SR claimed that Rudd didn't really support the intervention but didn't oppose it because of the political situation. SR found some obscure article which made this point and SR acted as though said obscure article was holy writ.
Now I've shown that Rudd supported the intervention when it was first proposed AND continued to support it long after the politics had changed.

Let's do SR a favour and just assume that the logic of this is beyond him and that the illogicality of his original claims will remain opaque to him.

Steele,
So now you are blaming Christ for human disfunction, and God for Herods slaughter. You have an uninformed confused mind. Humans are responsible for their behaviors, which includes aboriginal women who murdered their newborn. That is why Christian aboriginals do not want to return to the former pagan culture, which they abhor. They want to enter a better life than their ancestors and elders.

Oh dear mhaze,

Still playing in the semantics and not addressing anything substantive.

Okay, if this is really what this is reduced to I’ll keep going, if only to show how clueless you are.

You have taken a statement from Rudd a year later and said it proves Howard didn’t act unilaterally.

You claim: “I've shown that Rudd supported the intervention when it was first proposed”. No you haven’t.

And you repeatedly claimed: “The NT government (Labor) were fully on-board with the intervention” No they weren’t.

Here is the NT Chief Minister at the time reflecting on Howard’s UNILATERAL ACTION.

“Without any forewarning or consultation at all the prime minister was intending to implement a range of measures that would dramatically affect Aboriginal Territorians. When I asked why he was taking such UNILATERAL action he simply repeated it was a national crisis. When I said if that was the case then I needed to speak to him about the detail as soon as possible and would be on the plane to Canberra that day, he told me not to bother, that he was too busy, and that maybe he would have some time available in a couple of weeks.”

http://youtu.be/-ZnlHaeBLvo

So we have a principal player saying this was a unilateral action by Howard, and a little mhaze chirping from a twig that it wasn't.

Game set and match young fella. Time to give it away.

Oh dear SR,

Even you....yes even you...agreed that Rudd supported the intervention when Howard implemented it. But you claimed this was pure politics and that the ALP didn't rooly-trooly go along with it. Now I've shown that they were still supporting it a year later and suddenly you want to back-track left,, right and centre. You've even been reduced to now claiming that you sorta, kinda supported the intervention also.

Game, set and match? You can't even find your racquet.

A look at Dark Emu:
http://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/anthropologist-peter-sutton-reignites-bitter-debate-over-dark-emu-after-being-slammed-in-new-abc-documentary/news-story/11682a799a94ef57cd480956dabc7f8a?fbclid=IwAR0h2iNnuPSUvJ3szOkl8Yob0orzZSV0rxWuWP1t3e5nQXUL1dTg9VaMUH0

The ABC falsehood of Pascoe.