Sorry Belly,

That article does not really defend Bolt, but does criticize the judgement.

You could never accuse Holmes of being left or right. He is balance personified.

Thinker2,

Nice summation, I totally agree.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/nuts-come-out-after-the-truth-has-bolted-20110930-1l1al.html
From Lefty like me, [anything of substance is lefty junk] but expressing another view.
I am rather proud most seem to share my views about Bolt.
Still would be pleased to see some truth.
How many know, understand,to become an Aboriginal.
This was my point to you Bazz, all you have to do.
Is be excepted as one,by they community.
My continuing services to that community, has twice, seen me offered recognition as? an Aboriginal.
I could, LEGALLY, drop all claims my ancestors treated them badly and become a victim! over night!
Our first Australians can be served much better by actions and truth.

Loudmouth, I confess to wording that poorly. I know there are historical issues associated with being Aboriginal in Australia. I also know there are hstorical issues with being Irish in Britain, or peasant Scottish at the time of the Clearances

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances

Then there are all the terrible things that have happened to other populations of native peoples around the world, some of which have simply been eradicated.

My point? We've all got historical ethnic baggage. Australia has had, for many years now, quite a lot of additional support for Aboriginal people, accessible for the asking. If my ancestors could pick themselves up after being carted halfway around the world against their will and thrown into a completely different and hostile world, why the hell can't Aborigines do the same with all the help in the world living in the same society as the rest of us? Bloody-minded adherence to one's heritage is all well and good, but it doesn't help the kids.

Graham, I confess to reading the judgement itself after I made that comment - serves me right! However, my point remains: how much "aboriginality" defines "aboriginal"? Should I define myself in some way other than "Australian" since I was brought up in another country of parentage that was from still other countries? To what end?

I don't much like Bolt (think he's a bit of a tool, TBH), but I think he's been hard done by on this issue. If there was no money in being an Aboriginal advocate, nobody would have cared and I suspect he'd not have even mentioned it.

ABC's "The Drum" web poll is about neck and neck.
51% deem the decision a victory against racial intolerance.
49% view it as a blow against free speech.
Antiseptic.
Race and culture are separate issues, Race is indelible, culture is transferrable.

I don't think adherence to "culture" is the problem, the lack of exposure to any traditional culture or assimilation into the Hollywood version of Afro American lifestyles appears to be hurting all disadvantaged youth across the country regardless of race.
Kids with a solid grounding in traditional concepts of decency and morality who are raised in loving homes are less likely to run off the rails, those ideals are common to all people and all cultures.
The vast majority of people living in poverty in Australia are White, so it is for cases of drug and gambling addiction, alchoholism, poor mental health, suicide etc.
It's a tragedy that anyone lives like that in the 21st century, poverty is not "worse" for Aboriginals or "better" for Whites it's just misery all round. We live under the stewardship of an elite who despise the "feckless poor", people forget the purpose of Eugenics was to eliminate the underclass, read Mein Kampf, Hitler makes it pretty clear why he wanted to put his programs in place.
The postwar drive to eliminate poverty has always been Eugenics driven, no more poor people equals no more poverty, we see almost daily expressions of that on OLO, people wanting control populations in Africa etc.
They wouldn't dare comment on high Aboriginal birth rates but we know what they're thinking, don't we?

Yeah, really democratic that is. Those who feign indignation at Bolt's apt description can get him hammered yet those who soberly digest his comments have to swallow the bitter pills. As I said very democratic indeed. Hooray to Judges who wouldn't know what day it was in the real world. May I suggest these judges learn some indigenous language so they can understand what we are being called without anyone in ignoramus academica raising an eyebrow ?

Thinker2 said:
In Bolt's case, he clearly vilified not only a race,

Well actually he did not. He picked on those that were making choices
that he thought were spurious.
There seem to be many who are saying he is racist etc etc when actually
what he said was the opposite.

I think some people should go back to school and learn to read.

No one has said there is a limitation on how many generations back you
can claim aboriginal benifits.
So, I can claim that my Somerset and London ancestors are descended
from the tribes that migrated out of Africa as did the aboriginal's
ancestors. Therefore I have common ancestry with any other aboriginal.
The proof is in my DNA which is acceptable evidence in court.

See where unintended consequences gets you ?