Well Aries, we've gone from "[t]he tradition of asking permission to enter another group's lands and being welcomed is widely acknowledged to be centuries old" to someone somewhere sometime might have done something vaguely similar to the current stage-show. Except they didn't get paid!

Seems my work here is almost done.

But its untrue that aboriginals didn't have some mechanisms to try to placate visiting tribes. Chief among them was the practice of sending some of the more comely women of the tribe over to the visiting tribe as sexual offerings. If the visitors took up the offer and reciprocated with similar sexual offerings, then all was well. Now that's a welcome ceremony I can get behind. Of course we aren't allowed to talk about such things because we are supposed to pretend that aboriginal society was highly egalitarian and that the women had equal rights and to not notice that they were little better than slaves to the elders.

Of course, if the sexual offerings weren't accepted, war would ensue.

_____________________________________________________________________

"you said they were "interminable wars", INTERMINABLE". So now you want to play with semantics? The wars were interminable in that they recurred regularly since it was unusual for one tribe to be wiped out all together in which case they would seek revenge. (I've told you about the Finke River Massacre before although I'm sure you memory-holed it.)

"2 deaths in 40, is not evidence of large scale battles!"

Didn't say there were large scale battles. In pre-1788 Australia there wasn't large scale anything. But 5% of combatants dying is on the same scale as the worst European wars. Remember I taught you about that in regards to the wars in the Moreton Bay area?

____________________________________________________________________

" All of which probably didn't happen in Mhaze's state of intentional ignorance and racism."

And there it is. If you don't fall for every piece of rubbish thought up by the aboriginal industry, you're racist. In the end, that's the level of thinking from the likes of Aries.

Oh no no no Mhaze. I don't think it, you have demonstrated it to be true. With every post you dive deeper and deeper into crackpot racist ranting.

Hi again Trumpster,

"Chief among them was the practice of sending some of the more comely women of the tribe over to the visiting tribe as sexual offerings" Now YOU are saying anything that comes to mind.

Two dead in some supposed battle, in the year 4,000,000BC equates to the Battle of the Somme with a million dead. 5% a huge number, the Battle of Port Arthur with 7% dead far greater than the Battle of the Somme, as our resident fool wouldn't you agree Trumpster.

Your view of the Aboriginal Welcome To Country and that of the Neo-Nazi Eli Toby and other like minded are in unison, YOU both don't want it.

BTW, The Poms Anglo-Saxons gave women and children to 8th century Viking raiders, hoping to avoid mass brutality. Maybe Great, Great etc etc Granny Mhaze was offered to the Vikings, but being comely as she was they knocked her back, and then proceed to chop Great Great etc etc Grandpa Mhaze to pieces for offering reject goods. That's a fact Trumpster, its in the "History" book!

We need to remember why our diggers fought for us, so we can defend their principles as they age, and repel pretenders.

ttbn said- "Currently a bare majority of 52% of able-bodied people say that they would defend Australia. Of the 52%, 62% were males, 41% females." (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=10776#375505)

Ans- Thanks for the data ttbn.

Runner said- "Personally, I think the British should be thanked and appreciated for bringing a civilised society." (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=10776#375511)

Ans- I agree Runner. I don't think that certain activist Aboriginal's ever want peace with Whitey, so if we buy into discussions with them, we are buying into their bad faith disenginuous tactics, negotiation theory says that at some point you have to have to walk away from the negotiation, and say I don't want to make a deal with you because I don't trust you.

Aboriginal's can and do participate in ANZAC Day, if certain Aboriginal activists and their Woke Marxist friends want more than their sacrifice, they should be the ones to stay home. Do Aboriginal's only want to respect their own culture and stamp over the sacrifice of our ANZAC's.

In business you can take from competitors market pie segment or you can make a bigger pie. It seems that certain Woke Marxist Aboriginal's prefer destroying the White competitor.

But even if these activist Aboriginal's have a point, they don't, but they shouldn't be making that point at ANZAC Day. Sadly it appears that the new President, ex-Labor minister has been involved in pushing the WTC/ AOC. It appears that the Labor party hates ANZAC Day, and seek to destroy it using similar tactics to what has been used to invert Australia Day. What's next Easter, or Christmas. Sad to see that this president is ex-SAS. I believe he has betrayed the SAS, the veterans, and Australia

Usually ANZAC Day is a place to put politics aside, but when the RSL President brings politics to ANZAC Day, at the ceremony, that's enough, if some want to say, "not in my name", by booing, I say let them, this is their exercising direct democracy.

There's a point where you have to say, he may be the president of the RSL, but if he isn't fulfulling the duties of the office, we need to invite him to leave. It's important to remember that in order to preserve ANZAC Day we need to be members of the RSL.

Labor politicians appear to have been bringing politics to ANZAC Day for a while in their speeches. And Woke politics has been inserting its politics, into ANZAC Day, now some including ex-service men and women have been making their own speeches, from the crowd, in support of the integrity of the sacrifice of the diggers.

Most of those that made the ultimate sacrifice were young white men (the 'in' group), that thought enough about the Australian diaspora made up of other groups (the Australian 'out' group/ broader group), that they engaged in brutal combat to preserve the Australian cultural identity. In my mind I see these young mainly white men as the heros of their communities- standing out front to defend generations of their families, their old, their women, their children, their friends, their communities, their culture, their nation, their standards. Their sacrifice are the pillars of our world, we often take these pillars for granted, remembering them every year reminds us how our safety endures, or not. Even if we don't make a similar sacrifice, at least we can respect theirs, and remember how we benefit from it, and 'defend them' when their idea is threatened. They defended us! Now we defend them

This is where it always ends up with Paul. I make a factual statement about the aboriginals....he demands evidence...I provide evidence...he then races to say "yeah, well others did it too"...while creating some fantasy about Vikings.

I wasn't saying that what happened to the aboriginals was exceptional, just that it happened despite the Disneyfied fables about how peaceful they were. But Paul prefers Disneyfied fables.

Whereas Aries has decided that pointing out anything detrimental to the aboriginal culture is (boo) racism. I never quite understood how people prefer to be wrong rather than run the risk of being called racist.