CG,

-- YOUR IDEAS --

Generally agree. Good common sense.

The large sum suggested, in a relatively short period of time, was meant to extinguish, once and for all, compensation for the invasion. [Reverse reparations. Normally the loosing side pays.]. Wherein, a serious sum is paid. It would the responsibility of that generation to spend it wisely. If some don't, they are accountable to future generations.

- THAT SPENT, NO MORE "GENERIC" CLAIMS CARRYING-ON TO THE THIRTIETH CENTURY.

Generic claims now settled, we can still look at social security at a micro-level, largely along your lines, perhaps. However, such a programme, would need to also apply to similarly-based non-aboriginals.

Rainier,

--LAND--

Freehold title is not absolutely, absolute. One owns Estate in the land. Ownership is ultimately held by the British Crown. Has anyone partitioned Elizabeth, for the deeds of George? Australia did not take possession of aboriginal lands, England did.

We need to learn to differenciate between discrimination based on a persons race, gender, height or other characteristics that cannot be changed, and disagreeing with a persons choice of religion, sexual preference or even football team. Having said that, we should allways respect the individual even though we may disagree with their opinion or preference.

I should be free to disagree with with the practice of homosexuals as long as I do not disrespect the individuals involved. I should also be free to disagree with that practise withoput being subjected to personal attacks.

I do resent negative labels such as Homophobic. Now it seems that Muslims have also taken to labeling anyone who disagrees with them as Islamaphobic. They say that attack is the best form of defence and what better way to attack somebody who disagrees with you than to accuse them of having an irrational and ilogigal fear. What will this come to? Is Kevin Rudd a Liberalaphobic or was Peter Brock a Fordaphobic.

If we are so insecure and unable to inteligently defend our opinions and ideas without resorting to name calling then maybe we need to review our opinions and ideas

Rainier ,
Having to speak English on missions is a problem if one wants to preserve one's birth language and pass on Culture .
However ,many Aboriginal people can speak two or three languages plus English ,and use them in their everyday life in the more remote parts of Australia.
I believe school age whites, school age immigrants and Aboriginal people should learn a working Aboriginal Language. I think the language of Uluru,[think it's Pitjan-jat-jara] as the Centre of Australia would be a good one as most Australians ,old and new will travel there at some stage of their lives and the the revelations in Aboriginal mythology available to be taught about this area may well give us some long overdue appreciation of of our First Nation Peoples' Cultures and their problems.
Teaching the basics to teachers down south will take a while unfortunately .
That should take the Racism out of a fair few of us-but I suspect there are a few hard nuts on OLO that would do a bit of beard chewing if they had to join the classes.

Yes KJ,

I'm not in favour of teaching languages inside schools as they are not condusive to learing ['living, land, people, story languages'] such as my own 3.

I for one do not believe reliance on the revival and retention of languages won't itself mean the revival of whole cultures - but it would help. The underlying cultural philosophy of languages need to be focused on rather than simply concentrating of linguistic competency.

I lament young ones who know kinship 'names' (who is aunty, grandfather, counsin brother) BUT don't know the importance and context these familial relationships,loyalty,responsibility and respect and how they themselves fit into the matrix. (at least in the classical sense).

Or alternatively older ones who abuse these these important kinship layers of belonging and being.

Language alone will not undo or teach this.

Oliver wrote:” Australia did not take possession of aboriginal lands, England did.”

Yes I know this to be the case.

There have been a few challenges to this - see the Paul Coe case.
http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/cth/high_ct/unrep183.html?query=coe

In 1979, Pual Coe was a young barrister took an action in the High Court of Australia arguing that at the time white people came to Australia, Aborigines were here and therefore the Court had to recognise their rights. (Paul Coe vs. Commonwealth of Australia ).

See also:
The Australian High Court's Use of the Western Sahara Case in Mabo by Shirley Scott The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 45, No. 4 (Oct., 1996), pp. 923-927

In 1788, British common law recognised three methods by which the Crown could legitimately acquire new territory and claim sovereignty over it. If the land was already occupied, the Crown could claim that it had acquired the land from the Indigenous peoples by:

• Military conquest

• Or by cession (treaty).

• If the land was unoccupied or terra nullius (owned by no one) it could claim that it had acquired the territory by occupation.

NONE of these have been formally proclaimed in law in Australia.

In fact in Mabo 1 and 2 they avoided addressing anomally altogether.

Native title is the weakest form of land title in Australia.

Native title is not land rights.

Response to Jolanda, who wrote "If these Muslims respected Australia they wouldn't challenge Australians way of life and actively insult their culture."

Jolanda challenges the Australian way of life. She believes it is OK to be racist. Nobody who supports racism can ever speak about the Australian way of life. Racists reject Australia and our way of life. You cannot be a real Australian and a racist at the same time. That is the way it is.

Response to Jolanda who wrote: "Love can lead to killing and death ... and also INDIFFERNCE!"

This is a silly absurd comment. I'll go over my points again:

Racism is connected with killing and death of innocent people. Australians are against racism and we have passed laws to prohibit racial discrimination, so to protect ourselves as far as possible from being affected by racist attitudes and attacks. To believe in racism is to believe in wrongdoing and criminality.