The historical reality is that Australian land now equally belongs to all Australian citizens regardless of ethnicity.
Burning Australian flag and dividing Australians on the basis of their ethnic background must be viewed as one of the most serious crimes.
I am calling on relevant authorities to employ the fullest power of law in such cases.

Dear Andreas,

I looked up Australian legislation and International Law
regarding violent behaviour on the web.
It puts things into some historical perspective:

"Until recent years, racist policies and practices
were embedded within Australian laws and institutions.
The most telling examples of these were the removal
of Aboriginal children from their families and the
denial of full citizenship rights to Aboriginal people
and Torres Strait Islander people. Similarly, the
White Australia policy aimed to restrict immigration by
people from non-European backgrounds. Historically,
rises in unemployment have often led to calls for
immigration restrictions and in some cases led to the
scapegoating of people who were seen to be different to
members of the dominant culture."

"While legislation now exists to protect the rights of
all citizens, there is a continuing legacy today from the
effects of these racist practices. Contemporary expressions
of racism which have emerged in recent years relate to
notions of nationhood which are seen as incompatible with
diversity. These racist beliefs may be expressed in
various stereotyped views of who the "real" Australians are."

"For the original inhabitants, Aboriginal people and Torres
Strait Islander people - who were dispossessed of their land
and were discriminated against by the first British and
European settlers the process of colonisation has been perceived
as invasion. It didn't help matters that
racial discrimination has continued to influence
their lives in the two centuries
following white settlement."

"However having said all that - Australian laws as they stand
today make it illegal for people to incite or permit violent
acts to occur. Some people mistakenly believe that public
expression of violent behaviour are legal and an acceptable
form of free speech. In Australia, as internationally, the
right to freedom of speech carries with it certain
responsibilities and restrictions which protect the rights of
others against open hostility."

Aborginal leaders were right to condemn the behaviour that
took place on Australia Day. A peaceful demonstration is one
thing - but violent behaviour is not acceptable and does much
harm to their cause.

I would rather he flag be burnt than wrapped around some drunk yobbo on Australia day or waved in my face by a moron.

Getting away from flag waving ninny's was my goal this Australia day Andreas.

Taking note of how many people around you in your neighborhood adorn their cars with flags on Australia day is a good way of determining how dumb your neighborhood is.

The mere fact that Aboriginals have taken over 200 years to publicly defy the Australian flag, shows you just how civilised they really are.

People arriving from oppression as immigrants also feel the need to wave flags and are second only to brainwashed and bigoted Americans.

Wherever your from Andreas please don't express your patriotism in such a small minded way. Just anglo-size your name.

It's a lot better way to defend your self from the other flag waving bigots who would see the indigenous inhabitants of our country hung from the yard arm for any excuse they could find anyway.

Your only encouraging them Andreas.

Whatever happened to free-speech? Tony Abbott expressed a view about the tent embassy. From what I can ascertain from the media reports, his views were passed on to people at the event in a manner that conflated his words into a message that he was about to come and personally evict people and their belongings from the tent embassy. The events that occurred outside the Lobby cafe and at parliament house on 27 Jan, seemed more to be about people living in the past rather than embracing the many avenues we all have for expressing views and seeking change. Perhaps Andrew Bolt has a valid point in his article "Day of shame shows why we must stop this racial charade" From: Herald Sun January 27, 2012 12:00AM http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/day-of-shame-shows-why-we-must-stop-this-racial-charade/story-e6frfifx-1226254760404

We are continually being told by those of the aboriginal industry that we should learn how to manage Oz from the aborigines.

Well one thing they knew well was how to use the fire stick, to clear rubbish. The greenies would have stopped it if they had been around, but with out white mans law, our first settlers would have given them a hit on the head, & thrown them into the river. Just clearing more rubbish.

They knew that you don't want noxious weeds, & useless junk taking over any previously useful area. They chucked a fire stick into such infestations quick time.

Well that "tent embassy" is definitely a pile of junk, The aborigines would have put a fire stick to it about 39.5 years ago, & that's what we should do today.

We sure are slow learners.

what is a flag
a symbol

i note you didnt start a topic
re pissing..on them dead arabs...[murded by snipers]

yet burning a flag drives you nuts
[well get ready for this one]
i tested the law re flags

and its not a crime
the only crime was..a petty crime
public unrination...[the four flags didnt rate a mention]

your not burning a flag
your burning an idea/a symbol
[its dumb..but the media redneck's..love it]

insult to all austr-alians
lol...would their parents..have felt the same
indignation..[lol]..insult...re their oppressors flag burning?

i symbolicly tested..
the flags..that symbolize

yes it was symbolical...
but they all get wet..and pissed on flags dont burn

so a burning flag
means no one is pissing on ya
nor on ya flag

only burning a dumb flag
a symbol...not even a good rag

i must note
a short walk..on a main road
will reap a huge number of aussie bluey..flags...on the road

WHO"S CLEANING UP THE MESS?

Dear Lexi,

Thank you for your quick and detailed response. However, my post is not about violence. It is obvious that violence is not acceptable in any case.
As an Australian citizen, I am deeply insulted by words "it is our land", "piss off from our land", "give us a treaty", etc.
It is a historical reality that Aboriginal people have lost their exclusive right for this land quite a long time ago. This is not new for human world. Nations, states, ethnic groups, etc. have been appearing and disappearing all along human history.
It is a historical reality that our current state of Australia has been built and is continuing to be built by people of variety of ethnic backgrounds. Thus, our country equally belongs to all its citizens regardless of their background - historical,ethnic, cultural, etc.
Any public threats to equality of our citizens, any attempts of discrimination and division of any Australians must be dealt with the fullest power of our law.
It is not possible and acceptable to correct past discrimination of native Australians by 'discrimination backwards'.

Andreas,
You won't find much support for your point of view here or for that matter out in the community, assimilation is dead, separation is the only way a multicultural society can survive.
The commercial precincts of our cities will soon become the cosmopolitan hub areas with various groups returning to their segregated (if not gated) communities and living their lives as their traditions and beliefs dictate.
The only way we can survive is by keeping away from each other, mutualism and the rule of law are not possible in a multiracial society because of Racial and cultural differences, non White people can't be held accountable to White law.
What's more forced assimilation is classed as genocide under international law, people spruiking views such as your own need to realise that the world will not stay as it is today.
I recently read an article detailing the Genocide charges being leveled against the former Guatemalan president Mejia.
He's accused of complicity in the deaths of 1700 indigenous Guatemalens and the displacement or mistreatment of 29,000 others.
My point is that if you force people to change any aspect of their lives, their culture, their behaviour etc you are possibly committing a crime against humanity and these things always catch up with you, it doesn't matter if the head count is six or six million.
Mejia is now 80, the crimes were alleged to have occurred in the 1980's, I don't suppose he ever dreamed he'd spend his twilight years in prison but there he sits.

Dear Andreas,

Words are important I agree. And one has to be careful
in certain instances as to how they are used. However,
the facts don't change regarding our country's
original inhabitants. They were dispossessed of their land
and were discriminated against by the first British and
European settlers as well as in the two cneturies following
white settlement. The phrases -"This is our land," and
"Piss off..." may not (like Mr Abbott's choice of words)
be the most tactful - but they are expressions (and reactions)
to the understandable injustices that
some people still feel today.

However, I doubt whether these words are criminal offences.
Inciting violence is against the law.

It is unfortunate that the ideology of national culture
sometimes regards minority cultures as alien and a threat
to social cohesion. Where pervasive cultural assumptions
are the beliefs and customs of the dominant group they're
presented as the norm. This results in the status and
behaviour of minority groups (particularly those who are
more visibly different) being defined and judged with respect
to the dominant group.

These attitdues are widely discussed in the media where they're
presented as reasonable and commonsense and are reflected through
media images that don't accurately portray Australia's
cultural diversity.

Many of these beliefs are at the core of the resentment
expressed by some people at measures taken by governments to
address the disadvantages of particular groups of
people. Affirmative measures and positive
discrimination are frequently seen as the preferential treatment
of one group at the expense of another rather than
the means of redressing the disadvantages inherent in our
society.

Examples include opposition to Aboriginal land rights,
calls for the removal of special benefits for particular groups
and resentment towards the provision of English language support
to migrants. These beliefs are absorved into popular
culture - and hence problems arise.

You have a very valid point, Jay, but I don't think we're talking about forced assimilation here. Many races, 'nations' (by Benedict Anderson's definition of the term) and groups can be united in one state without becoming one group. The Belgians have done it for a couple of centuries now, as have the Japanese. We don't have to agree about everything, and we don't have to follow the same path; we don't even have to like each other. However, following a few common goals (wishy-washy things like peace, harmony and prosperity) sought after by a central state symbolised by a single flag should not be impossible.

As for the burning of that flag, it seems to me that it was a futile act. It hardly garnered the support of the nation, which must be the purpose of any successful public demonstration; it also seemed misguided. The angry 15 year-old who has been mentioned many times in the press spoke of ancestors being raped and murdered under that flag. Today's news outlets are suggesting that she was talking specifically about the Union Jack, but it wasn't a Union Jack she ignited and spat on. It was an Australian flag. The murder and rape of her ancestors were never authorised under a government symbolised by that flag. Many other atrocious things were, but she didn't mention them. That flag represents a nation that still has a way to go to fix up the errors of the past, but it also represents a nation that mas made considerable progress and commits itself to further progress. It represents a people emerging from ignorance, racism and bigotry and, though she and a fair few others might disagree, it represents her people as well.

As for legality, perhaps any Canberrans around might be able to let us know whether or not a total fire ban is in place in Canberra at present.

Ancestors raped and murdered ? Who ? When ? What are the details ?

Or is just easier to throw those sorts of accusations around, without having to prove anything ?

Not any more, it's not.

No more lies from either side. No more scams. No more sucking dry the goodwill of others.

Torres Strait Islander people - who were dispossessed of their land.
Lexi,
I think you're out of your depth there. Name one.

Come on, individual. I doubt the Torres Strait Islanders built this:

http://queenslandplaces.com.au/sites/queenslandplaces.com.au/files/imagecache/watermarked/exhibits/digital/DSC00395.jpg

Being a military installation, I doubt they had free access to the area, either - an area of which they consider themselves custodians or (to some) owners.

I doubt they were asked 'hey, do you mind if we use your land to build a fort?', either.

Many bad deeds against both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are questionable in their historical authenticity. I don't know that we can really question the idea of dispossession in this case, though.

I get heated only on this subject.
And boy am I hot right now.
Thanks to our Author, real thanks and agreement.
How many Gday Loudmouth, like your post, know what took place?
Abbott a man I do not like, said nothing wrong!
Did you see both a woman and male spokes man/woman, talk.
No way the represent Aboriginal Australia.
But SOME, who followed them did, both speakers showed poor education, followers showed none.
Abbott may well have spoke for most Australians.
I have HAD A GUTFUL! of alleged past crimes of long dead people, whites only, being blamed for today.
BALANCE TRUTH PLEASE!
Is it known, understood, such miss use brings Great damage TO ALL ABORIGINALS?
That this morning now, this instant most Australians would vote against any action to give more rights, vote to bulldoze that Embassy?
A considered thought,I would recommend a prison term for some who took part, long one for the flag burner, and that we all of us!
Stop blaming every Aboriginal and stop giving air to white extremists, uninformed Aboriginal activists, and not ignore they are few.
And they, the Aboriginal industry jockeys should be unloaded now and then, we can fix what needs fixing.
As an ALP fixed voter No way I need to lie for my party Abbott did nothing wrong .

It was perfectly clear that Abbott at no point called for the tent embassy to be torn down or even removed.

The entire incident was just another of the PM's staff dirty tricksters who told Kim Sattler (who is a well-connected Labor figure) who then passed on the message to the protesters.

While I don't believe the PM was personally involved, it was her office from which this outrage originated, and the PM needs to take responsibility and find out exactly who was involved and who said what to whom.

While the PM can make Hodges a scapegoat, the question is why Hodges would be under the impression that this behaviour was acceptable? Was this a man acting alone or was this standard practise that went wrong? While the PM claimed he was acting alone, Hodges has not come out and said so.

Unless the PM allows a full police investigation this will look like yet another cover up.

Joe.
Comments from a 15 year old, a person who was in no way affected by those acts or by those policies, who taught this child to live in the past?.
The "crimes against humanity" approach was put to the test in Kruger & Bray v The Commonwealth of Australia, don't they teach kids about that in school?
I'm opposed to Genocide and I'm sensitive to anything that can be construed as supporting such crimes but I'm also aware that there's the way things ought to be and the way things are, anything occurring before 1948 has to be water under the bridge because the U.N convention is all any of us have to rely on at this point in time.

Otokonoko,

Yes, well, I'm getting sceptical even about forcible 'dispossession'. I suppose, like everyone else, that it happened but since 1851, on all pastoral and other leasehold lands and Crown Lands, in all States and Territories (for most of the time), Aboriginal people have had the full rights to use land in traditional ways, to hunt, gather food, collect water, camp, carry out ceremonies, etc. 'as if this lease had not been made'. This did not amount to land OWNERSHIP, just the usufructuary rights, the rights to USE lands in traditional ways.

Of course, people have now lost - or surrendered - many of those rights: in the nineties, believing that 'we got nothin ! Nothin !' groups down this way 'negotiated' from a position of zero, and eventually settled for less than they already had: you have to apply to a committee now to enter all leased land.

Here in SA, once Adelaide and other ration stations were set up, in the late 1830s, it seems that people often moved to them permanently, leaving their own country empty. After all, they no more had a sense of losing their country than you or I might have a sense of not having enough air to breathe: the concept may not have occurred to people (pace Henry Reynolds). Along the south coast here, the whaling stations would have attracted a huge proportion of the population - all that meat that the whites didn't want ! So their original country would have been emptied of people.

The Barossa Valley, for example, would have seen all of its Aboriginal inhabitants head off to the city nearby. So when the early governments talked of 'Waste Lands' there, they meant literally empty lands. No massacres, no driving of people away.

People got used to rations amazingly quickly: within two months here in Adelaide, the people became so used to getting rations of flour that when it ran short and the government tried to provide them with rice instead, they complained about 'maggot' food and wouldn't eat it.

Primary sources of history - fascinating stuff !

Lexis hate and distortion of Abbott continues

'he phrases -"This is our land," and
"Piss off..." may not (like Mr Abbott's choice of words)
be the most tactful - but they are expressions (and reactions)

To compare Mr Abbott expressing a point of view which the vast majority of fair minded Australian would agree with as opposed to the hateful spiteful rhetoric of the aboriginal industry shows how out of touch you are.

Joe,
Everyone wants a better life, could it be that the Aborigines saw and desired the same things in a European styled society that a modern day Indian or Filipino does?

Belly, I expected the 'shadow minister' to defend Abbott, but not you. Abbott did say something wrong.

I said this on another thread.

Tony Abbott displayed yet again his diplomatic and political ineptitude of being a real leader by picking Australia Day (of all days) to stir the proverbial pot.

What Abbott said was just as offensive as someone making antiwar comments on ANZAC Day, or making anti-semetic comments in rememberance of the Holocaust - whatever one's personal beliefs.

Indeed, for a 'leader' who takes photo opportunities "helping" indigenous communities, one would imagine he would have enough nouse and sensitivity not to have made those comments on a day that many aboriginal people don't support as Australia Day, whether you like it or not.

Granted, the 'mob attack' was unacceptable and has done immense damage to their cause, but Abbott's churlish comments were ill-timed, insensitive and bordered on incitement.

I also said (in response to being asked why should I be frightened by the Australia Day fiasco):

I'm frightened of having a man like Tony Abbott lead our country (because of the above mentioned ineptitude) but there's only one thing I'm more frightened of, the measure of support he is getting.

Even now, Abbott and his followers are trying to blame Gillard for the despicable display shown yesterday and the day before. For what it's worth, Gillard had a press conference today explaining the chain of events - did you watch it?

I deeply regret about past crimes and discrimination towards native Australians. Yet, I cannot consider myself responsible. Today, as a citizen, I am responsible for not repeating such atrocities to any Australians.
We cannot just cry over the shameful past and try to 'correct' it at expense of the majority of Australians, who by no means can be considered responsible. This would lead us not even to 'nowhere' but to bitter and painful death as a nation.
Aboriginal people, as the eldest Australians, have my deepest respect and sympathies. How good it wood be to live in our Australian home together as dearest brothers and sisters!

Otokonko,
that installation is on Waibene. It was built to protect Australia in anticipation of the Russian Invasion. The land there was not used by the Islanders then hence Thursday Island being chosen as site for Qld Govt Administration. Your query however suggests that the land used was "taken" just like that. It wasn't. There were negotiations with the people from the area & they in turn realised that it was their own benefit also. Don't forget also that the real Islanders by 1877 had already been massively interbred with the real invaders of Torres Strait, the Samoans. This fact is being kept rather low nowadays.
Please read The colonial & cultural occupation of Torres Strait by Steve Mullins. Thie man actually lived & worked in the Strait rather than simply consult history books . He ended up a Professor of History not just an academic wanting to be a Professor. Huge difference in integrity there. In nearly all land acquisitions people were & still are compensated. Telstra, Schools, shops etc all pay leases. There is not a single square metre of privately owned land on the 15 inhabited outer islands yet all facilities & services are provided.

It's now possible to explore the past by means of
a large number of books, articles, films, novels,
songs and paintings. We can find out so much
about the history of indigenous-settler relations.
If we really want to know that is.
I would highly recommend the book by Henry Reynolds,
"Why weren't We Told?"

As Reynolds points out:

"Knowing brings burdens which can be shirked by
those living in ignorance. With knowledge the
question is no longer what we know but what we are not
to do, and this is a much harder matter to deal with.
It's a matter that will continue to perplex some of us
for many years to come."

Reynolds tells us that, "telling the truth is central
to the Aboriginal agenda for reconciliation. They want
to have the truth told about numerous things - about
the taking of the children, about the exploitation of labour,
the systematic abuse of women. But above all is the
matter of violence, the long history of frontier conflict.
They want white Australia to own, to accept, to identify
with a past thay they know only too well. Reconciliation
means reconciliation of the two stories about what
happened when pioneer settlers met indigenous people all
around a vast, moving, ragged frontier. They want us to
talk about the line of blood. They want us to take it
seriously and treat it with gravity, to recognise
that violence was not just an aberration or an accident
but rather that it was central to the creation of modern
Australia. They would like us to admit that settlement
grew out of the barrel of a gun, for how else can their
loss of ancestral lands be understood and explained?"

Dear runner,

I do not hate Mr Abbott or any politician for that matter.
I, as a voter am entitled to remark on what he does
as a politician. And stating that he showed a lack of
tact in this case does not equate to "hatred." At least
not in my books.

Lexi

At best your analogy of an opinion by Mr Abbott that you disagree with compared with hate filled bile often demonstrated by the aboriginal industry is very poor.

Dear runner,

Again you're presenting your views as facts.
You don't know what I agree with or disagree
with. Context is everything. Try again - reading and
comprehending what's actually been written and not
add your own version.

Lexi,
It would be very interesting to get one Government funded & one privately funded historian to write about history & compare them. Just to make it easy let's just try the past twenty years after all many people involved are still around to verify the stories.
How about a book on ATSIC Bureaucrats ?

Lexi there are some authors who's writings should be viewed with a huge dose of scepticism, & Reynolds is definitely one of them.

It is difficult to say weather the greatest number of lies ever put into print were produced by anthropologists, historians or climate scientists. In fact I think the historians probably have it by a hair. However in Oz the anthropologists are trying to reverse that.

Just because it made it into print does not make it so, & in fact you are more likely to find something more closely approaching the truth if it never made in into print, & was never meant to be printed.

After all most things were printed to sell at a profit, & a bit of spice, & or ideology added here & there, sure helps with that.

Australians are weird. You love to hate yourselves but heaven help anyone outside who judges you. Bizarre place.

Dear Hasbeen,

Yes there are some so called historians who
had their own agendas and ulterior motives
in what they had recorded. We know that from
history. Many twisted things to suit
themselves - many did not do the proper research
(from primary sources) of verified the facts.
They wrote what people wanted to hear - not
how things actually occurred.
These historians have since been discredited. Henry Reynolds
wasn't one of them - although heaven knows they tried
hard enough to slur his reputation.

The following website may be of interest to you:

http://www.utas.edu.au/library/companion_to_tasmanian_history/F/Fabrication.htm

You're right, individual. I got lazy with that one. Though I do ask: when you refer to the site being unused prior to the establishment of the fort, are you referring to that specific site or to Waibene as a whole?

I guess my point, which I cut short with the lazy 'ta-dah' moment of the fort, was that the colonial government of Queensland didn't build a fort to protect the Torres Strait Islanders, or because they liked the scenery. They had their own interests in the area, including the pearling which brought many non-European migrants, that they wanted to secure. Whether or not the native population retained use of the lands they had once used, my point is that their use was compromised by external interests. Maybe dispossession isn't the right word; I'd say 'invasion' is certainly the wrong word. Sorry again for being lazy there.

The following two links may be of interest:

http://newmatilda.com/2012/01/27/mob-violence-wasnt

And -

http://newmatilda.com/2012/01/27/real-tent-embassy-story

Thanks for the links, Lexi. It's good to get perspectives from both sides of the issue. I would argue, though, that Ben Eltham's journalism is as sloppy and one-sided as the reporting that he condemns. It's a sad statement about our media that we can't get level-handed reporting.

Whether or not the protesters resorted to violence is, in my opinion, beside the point. I try to place myself in the Lobby Restaurant, at the awards ceremony, as an angry mob appears out the front, shouting abuse and banging on the windows. What should have been an opportunity to celebrate the good deeds of a handful of Australians was utterly ruined - for those being celebrated, for their families and for those who they had helped out during a time of crisis.

Two things strike me about this incident. One is the callous comment by a protester (reported by Laurie Oakes in the Herald Sun): "Who f---ing cares? They're not our heroes." Such disrespect towards people who selflessly acted on behalf of the community is disgraceful. I doubt that the award recipients ever considered themselves exclusively white heroes as they took considerable risks to help their communities.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/prime-minister-treated-like-a-rag-doll/story-fn56baaq-1226255778540

The second is the look of fear on our PM's face as she was whisked away by her security. Whether the fear was brought about by the protesters or the security officers (though once again you might like to place yourself in the restaurant with the mob outside when deciding what caused the fear) is irrelevant to me. The fact is that she was there to celebrate something great about our country - a joyous occasion - and left terrified. Love her or hate her, nobody deserves that.

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?q=julia+gillard+protest&hl=en&gbv=2&biw=1366&bih=612&tbm=isch&tbnid=IodZ9fFoy59AhM:&imgrefurl=http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/mob-sinks-slipper-into-nations-day/story-e6frg12c-1226255575959&docid=7agP5ub4G7geDM&imgurl=http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2012/01/26/1226254/424404-julia-gillard.jpg&w=650&h=366&ei=K_0jT9zRFKSXiQecrJDTBA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=717&vpy=160&dur=1997&hovh=168&hovw=299&tx=109&ty=81&sig=110694877743643696152&page=1&tbnh=129&tbnw=196&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0

Otokonoko,
Yes self-interest was the major role in building the fort & if you include the interest of protecting the indigenous as well then yes it was self-interest. The 1872 protection Act was self-interest from the view that protecting the then Torres Strait Islanders from exploitation.
Nothing would ever be done if it weren't for self-interest. Do you think the new $35 million Dollar school on Murray Island would have materialised if it was up to the self interest of the locals ? Yet were it not provided discrimination would be the cry of the day as it always is when indigenous can't get what they desire because of their lack of inbuilt initiative. They freely & unashamedly admit to that. Something your average white ALP supporter would never do.
I have personally witnessed the destruction by Labor of indigenous communities & now there is no morale left. People have lost interest now that Labor has taken away their dignity by making them utterly dependent on Government had-outs. There's no training happening, all work is done by shonky contractors. All due to integrity devoid Labor Policy disguised as assistance. Ask local ALP member Jason O'Brien how Labor intends the people to become less dependent when the Government policy is not to have any local enterprise whatsoever.
Ask him what answer an indigenous person would get from him were that person to express an interest in starting a local enterprise ? Ask Jason O'Brien how he proposes to rebuild what his outfit has ruined since Goss ? Don't ask the indigenous bureaucrats in Labor's pockets, ask the people in the communities.

we are all ab-original
lets look at the pommie abo'

the peasents...farming..HIS LORDSHIPS LANDS..
paying whatever his troops required

recall..when them peon/poms
wanted to become gentry..too
they had things..called musters..where 'the masters/govener general
sent in his troops..to collect the muster..just like in ol blighty..when it was time to pay the rent

[plus 10 percent tythe
to the church..to build them castles of religeouse zeal]

recall the cost of a loaf of bread
got you a free ticket to rot to death in an old hulk
or get exported to work for free..for the new lord masters

stealing others lands...in the other colonies..
[with coolies..or slaves or prisoners..
doing it for ya..for free]

the mindset continues till this day
we got corperations running private prisons
withy in the main ab-origonal/and other ab-origonal poor
doing their job..for 1 buck 25 cents..a day

how does one..family trust
own land..bigger than belgum/or france
by what right..can a dead corperate trust..
lord it over..our own vesion of kings/queens..[sovereigns]

when their claim isnt owning
but use..[usefractry right]

we are all
origonally from the first people..from somewhere

if israel means anything..
it..{ISRAEL}>..means..!

ya claim..cant lapse!
only the lies collapse

how come you hold 5 aces?

que warrento?
[by what right]?

so we got a chance..
to fix all that error..

[owing things..fungable's..is fine
but people arnt things]

no one can own fixtures..[that in or attatched to the land]

we are a part of the land..
like our finger is a part of our body

just as my finger dont own my body
my body...represents my finger

here accept its sign
we are asked to sign...pieces of paper
these pieces of paper say i own the land...
but i know you cant take..the land no where

as much as you try..to stweal more of it
allways more will remain..to validate our claim

we can visit the places poisend..by greed
poisend by those who thought they too could own land
whose greed depoiled otyhers lands..while they took the money 'home'

and built huge estates
on the commons...that now we serfes cant concieve

imaging..a common weal
owned by us all

to be used RESPONSABLY
or be dispossesed..of ya right..to stay

expelled from your homelands...

[sure in times of plenty
we move to food/water...plenty

just like the masters..of the laws
and licence[under right of warrent]

que warrento?

move to ya summer house
or resent a mine..in ya best food place
or a framer muddying up ya waters
or a rum corpse...demanding muster
under threat of violence.or incatrceration

shut up
or we send ya to jail

riot...lol
in ya dreams

clealy a beat-up
where the burned/loooted buildings?
ripped up pavement..busted windows..walking wounded

the racism...
in the media use of mob..or riot
or worse the pm using it...thats an insult to all aussies

far worse than phony toney..hoping on his pony
[high hoarse]

Dear Otokonoko,

What the media brings into our homes is highly
selective or distorted. News programs tend to feature
visually exciting or emotionally moving stories that
will draw in large audiences - even if this means
omitting issues that are more sober but more significant.
And with today's technology - photographs can be made
to portray whatever emotion is wanted - so the supposed
look of fear on the PM's face - is open to interpretation.
If I tripped and fell and lost a shoe and was caught by
a bodyguard - the look on my face would be one of panic
as well. Had the PM not tripped - the media would have
found another "newsworthy" controversial
photo of someone else for their front pages.
They could make anyone look like a lunatic if they
chose to do so - even Mr Abbott.

As for the callous comments by Laurie Oakes writing for
The Herald Sun - again, were there no positive comments in
the entire crowd - only "callous" ones? Why did we not
see the peaceful march photos - which was the major part of
the demonstration. I guess they're not very exciting.

There's always two sides to each story and as celebrities
have testified in the past - rarely do we get the full
truth of what actually took place. As you stated - our
media has a lot to answer for. I wonder whether the
Aboriginal Leadership intends to take a class action
against the media for the way they were misrepresented?
I'm sure there would be plenty of law firms willing to
take on the job on their behalf. It just may teach the press
something about responsible reporting.

[PDF]
Constructing Aboriginality: Archibald Meston's Literary Journalism ...
www.nla.gov.au/openpublish/index.php/jasal/article/download/.../38

Haven't read it yet but sounds interesting

Dear, sweet lexi,

Come on, surely we've both been on enough demos to realise that a bit of biff and police action - especially if it gets filmed - is just what we want ? There's nothing so dreary and frustrating as a demo which starts and ends peacefully, all that buggerising around to get it going and then it sort of fizzles and we all head off for the pub, telling each other what a great day it's been. We remember the good ones by the amount of 'action' we could provoke, let's be honest.

The point of a demo is to cause some hassle and get it in the paper and on TV. Isn't that so ? Please let's not pretend that this was all started by Abbott making his entirely reasonable comment, or by police provocateurs, or by the media: people got stuck in, and kept it kicking along: I'll bet the conversations later turned on the 'success' of the event, how they had really shoved it up the whitefellas: "Did you see the look on Gillard's face?" "Yeah, even Tony was sh1tting himself." "Yuk, yuk."

Meanwhile, what do you reckon Gillard and Abbott talked about in the back of the car, in relation to Constitutional change ?

A brilliant publicity coup for ..... somebody ....... or something .....

A typical misinformed riotous crowd, a bloody disgrace for the whole of Australia. When a riotous mob come at you unannounced, the police should have the right to open fire. There demonstrations, organized, but this was an act of mob rule, misinformed and uncalculated.

Loudmouth has it right. Lexi should stop reading the lefty rubbish in new matilda.

What do we have here? A bright spark, or more, from the PMs office seeking to cause embarrassment to Abbott for political advantage. A heavy union official and an aboriginal extremist and former greens candidate, to rev up the crowd, with misconscrewed info.

Then we have new matilda coming out with "oh no sir it wasn't us, we have done no wrong", except gloating and laughing about how we put fright into the two highest polys in the country.

Now we have a PM sacking one of her staff and saying he acted alone. That could be so but our PM does have a deserved reputation for lieing, so who is to believe her now?

Facts are it is another stunt and bright idea that has gone wrong for this government. This story and pics will not generate much support for either the government or the proposed changes to our constitution.

Another Labor stuff up!

Banjo I have stopped reading that rag, not having a shot at Lexi.
But is it, no less than the Murdock toilet paper press capable of only its view.
Bonmot,with respect, my thoughts on Abbott are unprintable, my thoughts on Shadow Minister, not as heated but he, is out of the Monty Python show is he not?
Consider this
Debate. conversation is quite like the Tower of Babble.
If we left of center posters, include lies, deliberate lies, to combat Abbott?
We then belong as he does in the local rubbish dump!
Australia day, the event is an every day one in hundreds of Aboriginal community's around this country.
As drunken people fight one another.
WATCH the deniers, watch them slam me, for telling the truth.
These few and the brain dead two from my side of the fence took us back by actions that stink.
RACISM, is it honestly used? or more likely abused, in conversations such as this, if it was trade unionists would we not want them in prison?
WHY must we be confronted with leftist crafted junk, that drives voters away from Labor Friends away from these people and conservatives into power?
Under standing views other than our own is far more important than just putting ours here.
You can not plant spuds and harvest pumpkins truth exists.

Gentlemen,

As I've stated time and time again on this forum -
people in different walks of life may interpret the
same phenomenon - whether it is a "riot,"
a PM's policies, a religious doctrine, or a
governmental budget - in very different ways. In other
words, people tend to see the world from a viewpoint
of subjectivity - an interpretation based on personal
values and experiences and of course political inclinations.

If the world consisted simply of some self-evident
reality that everyone perceived in exactly the same way,
there might be no disagreement among observers. But
the truth of the matter is that what we see is not
determined by what exists "out there."

It is shaped by what our past experience has prepared us to
see and by what we consciously or unconsciously want
to see. Knowledge and belief don't exist in a vacuum:
they are social products whose content depends on the
context in which they are produced. Inevitably therefore
we're all guilty of some measure of bias - and we all
have the tendency, often unconscious, to interpret facts
according to our own values.

This problem becomes particularly acute when the subject
matter involves issues of deep human and moral concern.

I have nothing more to say on this subject

Lexi,

As your greenie links indicated, the majority of the tent embassy protest went ahead without violence, but the mob that surrounded the PM looked anything but peaceful, and with that idiot trying to throw herself on the car, it certainly looked more than just noisy.

For the Police to feel they need to drag the PM along the path and thrust her into the car indicates that they thought so too. So while there are always 2 sides of a story, there certainly was an ugly side of the tent embassy mob.

the hatred being instilled in the young kids who spit on our flag is similar to the hatred the Arabs have for the Jews. The hatred is taught at a young age. In my part of the world young aboriginal kids think its an entitlement to break into other people's house. Their parents are even known to encourage it in some instances. What on earth does DCS do? Mr Rudd's tearful sorry was suppose to change all this.

Dear SM,

I wasn't aware that I cited any "Greenie links," but never
mind.

There's always two sides to every story and as I
pointed out earlier - the media will focus and present
to the public what they consider "newsworthy."

As for the police. As we know from various past events -
young inexperienced police officers
often over react. Their training needs to be
re-examined in certain situations. I wonder how much
training these officers had in crowd control?

Dear runner,

It is sad that children are taught to hate no matter
who they are. Hopefully, through education -
the heavy burden they are currently forced to carry
i.e. - the baggage of their parents, will become
lighter.

Lexi you write

' It is sad that children are taught to hate no matter
who they are.Hopefully, through education -
the heavy burden they are currently forced to carry
i.e. - the baggage of their parents, will become
lighter.'

It is very sad that children are taught hatred. However education does not necassarily deliver one of it. Some of the most hateful are often very educated. Many of those the Americans opened their hearts to and educated as doctors, engineers etc then turn on them as seen by 9/11. Envy, jealousy and unforgiveness is not overcome by education.

I've never liked adoration of flags.George Carlin would say,"they are symbols for the symbol minded." Flags are used by the war mongerers to rev people up for violence.It is just stirring up old tribal primal urges and we have to progress beyond this.

Whilst I don't agree with burning anyone's flag I do find that the Australian Flag contains certain racist elements that it would be better to remove.

Aboriginal Australians shouldn't have any privileges that other Australians don't have.
Legislation based on race is racist legislation.
Welfare based on race is racist welfare.

No Government form should ask ones race, except the Census (which is anonymous).

One would hope that all Aboriginals who want to have a separate Nation will return their next welfare payment and refuse all others.

Lexi,

The new matilda is an almost exclusively greenie magazine whether it claims this or not.

The PM's security detail were very experienced officers, whose main objective was the security of the PM.

with all this platitude..re insalt
lets rub salt into the wound

reply to sense
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4941&page=0

common/sense
[for once]..to quote..

""The nation of Australia..was actually born on January 1st,..1901.""

wether it was vandiemens land...new holland...
or simply the great south land's..australia didnt egsist..
till it was created..[or granted..to egsist by its people]

not some other foreign
[colonising]..british govt's act
[australia act]...lol

your a colon[y]
get your own act
dont take insult/consult

there is no flag
described..in its constitution

as we still have an armed occupation force
CONTROLED..by a representative of the queen
who serve to protect the queen and her heirs
we teqniclly cant even claim..a flag..

cause we arnt even a self aware declared independant nation
maybe at best a colony...[lets face it the australia ACT...had to be ratiefied..by british govt

look at who gives orsder..to the armed forces
a queens govener[general]...lol

if anything the flag stands for ignorance

we are a funny convoliution of states gov generals
and a federal gov general..who has final yeah or nay
indeed teqniclly cant sign any law...by by the queens mark
[thus cant even..join the united nations..unless ratified..by hrh]

sao that hasnt happend
but other things have...[funny how lies only grow bigger]

""This inauguration..date
was legally and constitutionally proclaimed by Queen Victoria on 17 September, 1900...This is our true birthday as a nation.""

lol if nation we be
or colony..or collective of colonies

""December 31st..should also be made a public holiday
as it was on December 31st,..1900.""

till we direct...the gg to leave
we are a colony..under occupation

that deserves more thinking
than blustering..[spin]..by an anti monarcist pm

Dear SM,

Thank You for sharing your "insider" knowledge
with us regarding "New Matilda," and the
ACT police officers. That's one of the great
things about a public forum - you post and learn.

The actions of protesters at the Tent Embassy went too far . If they have committed any offence , and those who committed it can be identified , they should be prosecuted .

The flag should not have been burnt . This type of protest is about as original as the " What do we want ? When do we want it ? " chants upon which so many protesters , whether of right or left persuasion , rely whenever they protest .

However , I do not agree with the way in which many people attach superstitious reference to the present Australian flag . It is
" the " Australian flag , but it is not " an " Australian flag , being the Union Jack [ British flag ] with a few stars added grudgingly . It should be changed to a flag which is exclusively Australian , without any foreign flag superimposed .

I aslo agree with other comments regarding the way in which bogans like those at Cronulla a few years ago , and Pauline Hanson , drape themselves and their 4WDs , in the present flag .

This type of action is neither Australian , nor even British . It is borrowed from American racists , and is used , on behalf of that section of the Australian population which is of little benefit to Australian society generally , to claim some form of superiority over those who come from non - English speaking backgrounds [ particularly if they are not fair skinned ]. The Ku Klax Klan did a similar thing with the Stars and Stripes , in the 60 s .

The silly expression "un Australian " should be dropped . It is borrowed from the " un American " epithet of the 1950 s Mc Carthy era .

Lexi,

Here is an accurate summary of the "New Matilda" from the Sydney Morning Herald:

"But New Matilda was never intended as a local New Yorker. It was from the outset an avowed journal of the left. The end of the tidy bipolar politics of the Cold War has been good for the left, by depriving it of a convenient rallying point. It's been forced to leave to its reactionary detractors the peevish sniping and polemic technique of reverse-engineering cherry-picked facts into an argument supporting a predetermined conclusion"

The New Matilda from which you almost exclusively quote, and identify with is not held in any regard by any serious journalists, and would appear to have the integrity and research of a high school rag.

As for the PM's body guard, the recent newspaper write ups on them make it clear as to their training and experience, so ignorance of this is possible only for the illiterate or ill informed, and no insider knowledge is required.

Major stuff-ups all round.

PM's staffer - stupid
Union official - silly
Tent embassy protesters - mob
AFP - keytone cops
PM's security - spooks
Julia Gillard - cinderella
Tony Abbott - terminal foot-in-mouth syndrome

Yep, sure showed us up to the world.

Thing is, the whole fracus could have been avoided in the first place if Abbott had just displayed a smidgeon of diplomatic and political nouse by keeping his mouth shut on a topic that must be the most sensitive of days on the Australian calender. Whether you agree with the sentiments or not.

Going by Tony's record, if he were to be elected our next PM, I would not be surprised one bit that whenever he opened his mouth he would sure to offend not only Australia, but those overseas too.

An insult to all Australians, Andreas? Yep.

the biggest fools are those who voted this totally incompetent Government in along with the Greens.

"The historical reality is that Australian land now equally belongs to all Australian citizens regardless of ethnicity."

wow, what a naive statement, not worth unpacking here

Regarding the events of 26 January, see

http://fieldnotesandfootnotes.wordpress.com/2012/01/28/for-the-record-my-personal-first-hand-account-of-events-that-led-to-gillard-and-abbotts-dramatic-escape-and-subsequent-clash-between-police-and-demonstrators-from-the-aboriginal-tent-embassy

Dear SM,

I often quote from the Lowy Institute, The Age,
The Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian,
The New York Times, a variety of links and websites,
and other databases, books, films, et cetera.

As I've written in the past - people should do
their research from a variety of sources. You seem
to have something against "New Matilda," that's fine.
Don't use it. Frankly, I'll use whatever source I
feel adds something to the discussion - and possibly
enlightens us. I don't pre-judge. If an article makes
sense - I'll use it.

Once again - regarding the ACT police officers and their
training and experience. I am not in a position to comment
but if you say that a newspaper verified their expertise -
well that's good enough. I guess. All though, wait a minute,
it was the newspapers that focused on the violence. And showed
us photos of the PM's "fear," even though she later appeared
cool, calm, and smiling, on TV. Right.

"Major stuff-ups all round."

You're so right, bonmot.....the whole unfolding scenario was a debacle from all aspects.

"How embarrassment"

Hey, welcome back mon amie!

Yeah, could add media to that list as well - bloody blinkered.

Anyone else care to add to the list?

Merci beaucoup, mon ami,

Ah yes, the media.....

As the intrepid pack of pollies and minders were cascading down the stairs, it seemed the only real threat was their being photographed into oblivion.

Truth still has apart to play,if we let it.
Abbott said nothing wrong, until he turned this in to a weapon.
The two ALP and Union fools are of no worth.
Those who did this, and the flag burning,are less than idiots.
Australia is unimpressed and damage will remain for a decade because of this.
Police failed, twice at least, first in not knowing the protesters started to come, and in haveing to drag the leaders out.
Truth, unloved but needed, those targeting Abbott, a man of little worth,on this issue, do more harm than good.
Last Gillard was handled badly but she should know, long ago, she lost any chance, even if right, to win Australians over.

Just a thought! I wonder what would have happened had the French settled Australia before the British. Then again if we had not stopped the japanese occupying Australia, there certainly would not be an aboriginal Tent Embassy. Come to think of it there would be no Aborigines (or would be aborigines) Get down on your bended Knees and thank providence that the British were first here.
It is gutless politics that has caused all the problem.
To all the realist aborigines, and there are a lot of them, I love you all.

Lexi,

With all due respect, the NM has been described In the SMH as fabricating its stories, and if you chose to quote them, then expect to be taken as seriously as they are. As for the Lowry institute, you once quoted an opinion piece in a magazine produced by the Lowry institute, which does not represent the opinion of anyone at the institute itself. Articles from SMH or the Age are few and far between.

As for your comment on the police, that was juvenile and lacking in logic. Perhaps you can support your claim that they are not well trained, maybe quoting MAD magazine?

Shadow Minister the NM is as described in the SMH, not far away in its policy's from the greens.
It and most of us, fail to understand this simple truth.
Minority views, party's, are so because few want them.
It never gained Labor a single vote, being Abbott like.
Constructing events and story's to show a different light, other than honesty.
Polling today points to the ALP being in the deepest pit of its life, in part because of perceptions it is too close to greens.
And without doubt GILLARD haveing said that, this unloved Lady, still leads Tony Abbott as preferred PM.
Could it be other than his constructing issues, bending truth, is turning voters away from him personally.
You gloat ,and inform us all on the rare occasion he gets his nose in front, as both charge in the wrong direction, for this country.
Any comment on why he is behind?

Welcome back Poirot - and Happy New Year!
As you can see it the same old, same old, on OLO.
you've been sorely missed.

Lexi you write

'As you can see it the same old, same old, on OLO.
you've been sorely missed.'

Yes it is pitiful to see our PM clinging to power from one diaster to another. Each time we see the office of PM hitting a new low we can't believe it can go any lower. How wrong we are each time.

Thank you, Lexi. Happy New Year to you too : )

runner,

The PM's not on OLO....but I note that you're still here and thrilling us with runneresque commentary...same old, same old.

To quote our former leader John Howard when asked about Aboriginal protesters burning the flag in Brisbane back in 2006;

“I see that kind of thing as just as expression, however offensive to the majority of the Australian community, an expression of political opinion.”

It would seem that those calling for lengthy a gaol sentence for the Canberra flag burner are far to the right of Mr Howard.

Who would have thought. Well me actually, but perhaps the odd poster needs to own up the that reality.

Csteele,

I agree with you with regards the burning of the flag, I find it offensive, but would never call for this to be banned as I believe strongly in free speech, and responsibility for one's actions.

I just wish the labor party and greens would.

Dear SM,

If you believe in people taking responsibility
for their actions - then perhaps you could
try to have some influence on your party's leader.
He seems to continually fail to grasp the bigger
picture when it comes to the issues that confront our
nation.

Lexi, Lexi, Lexi,

And Juliar has done a stellar job?

What about the BER stuff up, or the biggest carbon tax in the world, or the highest taxes on mining in the world, etc, etc, etc.

Juliar as PM is the biggest insult to all Australians.

free speech: um, tony said what he wanted to say. so do lots of others, how is this very public broadcaste of political views a sign that free speech is being curtailed

Free speech 2: those who whinge about free speech being suppressed are akin to those who whinge about floods after a drought

Hi CSteele,

Well, I hope nobody ever burns the Aboriginal Flag: I think that would deserve some time inside. The Flag is a thing of beauty, and I hope that one day it is incorporated into the Australian flag, perhaps as it is or perhaps in the dominant top-left-hand corner of the current one.

Of course that would take another Referendum. Slowly, slowly .....

Rainier's whinge about whingeing has brightened my day ! Keep sitting there, brother/sister, that might work !

Cheers,

Joe

Dear SM,

No one is saying that any politician has done a
stellar job recently. But you're the one who only
points the finger at the government when the Opposition
has little to feel smug about - hence my responses to
you. For as long as you keep it up - I shall continue
to respond. Game set and match.

Lexi,

There are sufficient lefties here to make outrageous unsupported claims about Abbott and the coalition that any of my misgivings seem trivial.

While certainly Abbott committed more than a few gaffes, the policy and his game play of the political situation hasn't given Gillard any oxygen at any point and has played specifically to labor's weaknesses. Labor's response has foolishly been to try and beat him on his home ground, and the continuous character assassination has made him the bogey man of non liberal voters (but still with an approval rating higher than Turnbull ever achieved) but actually kept continually him in the public focus.

If Labor had ignored him, they would have done far better.

Keeping Rudd continually in the picture has also been a successful coalition strategy, and he would be nowhere without the coalition's focus. This has continually sapped Gillard's authority.

As for Abbott's performance as PM, it has yet to be tested, and the negative ratings by the lefties are by definition just speculation. In the last 12 months, Abbott has kept his head down and controlled his mouth, and is looking stronger every day.

Dear SM,

Frankly I'm getting sick and tired of all this
rhetoric about "my party is better than ..."
As far as I'm concerned today's
politicians are a motley lot and I'm slowly becoming
dishearted by the entire bunch. The election is still
a fair way away - I'll have to wait and see what
surprises are ahead of us. In politics, as you
know - nothing's a certainty.

SM,

I'm coming to think that if Abbott said 'G'day' to someone, many people would be enraged, interpreting it as a backhanded and sarcastic insult at someone who - Abbott is insinuating - is not really Australian. This would fit in with his 'Turn Back the Boats' policy and racist opposition to multiculturalism.

On the other hand, if Abbott said nothing to someone in the street who had said 'G'day' to him, many people would be enraged, that in his subservience to Big Banks and Big Business, he ignores ordinary people, the battlers, and shows his true neo-conservative colours.

Either way, he's obviously in the wrong.

There must be a term for this sort of fallacy in logic. Pericles would know.

Cheers,

Joe

"In the last 12 months, Abbott has kept his head down and controlled his mouth, and is looking stronger every day."

Look out the window ... that's a squadron of pigs taking off. LOL

The tone of most of the posts confirms that Australia is still a society in transition. Many years and much more experience is needed before we settle down to be a fully formed nation. The squabbles in Parliament; the apparent similarity in what the leading parties pass off as 'policy'; problems with disaffected ethnic groups; short-term prosperity (mining) with little preparation for leaner days ahead; a politically lazy population and the concomitant perceived need for compulsory voting - all these spell continuing domestic strife. Better education would help, of course, but maybe what we need is a war big enough to scare the pants off us (and give our youth purpose in life) in order to reach the sunlit uplands of serene maturity. Perhaps China, having transformed our iron ore into guns and bombers, will oblige.

prialprang,

It would seem that you have faith that humans - (Australian or otherwise) - could perceive, learn and alter their behaviour as part of an ongoing trajectory toward wisdom... as oppose to displaying the same frailties and reactionary behaviour as they always have.

If mr abbott gets a chance, he will transform AU into a haven for the mega rich, and hand them tax breaks. Their type of politics only governs for the rich side of town. Labor wants to take the rich and famous out of the medical subsidy equation, but mr Abbott is not keen on the idea. As usual he is protecting the interests of the the well to do people. This noalition is the worst ever. I suppose when he was apprenticed to mr Howard he picked up a few tricks. And of cause he still likes work-choices.

Howard has already done that 579. As far as Abbott is concerned he "is" a faulty leader figure without question, but more a front for an even more sinister bunch of ideological loonies that exist within his Party.

Today we witness the banks whacking up rates on little people in small business (or with a mortgage) to bolster their margins based on the principle that margins should only ever stay the same or increase. Ebbing and flowing with the economy like the rest of us does not enter into the thinking of execs at the big end of town. Ever must they be protected even though they are already, "the most profitable banks per capita in the world".

"Howard ensured legislatively, that margins would remain unrestrained by ethics, and that wages would never rise to compensate".

Destroying collective bargaining and replacing the notion of consensus with confrontational politics and individual contracts alone, has had the effect that wages for most working people haven't risen sufficiently now for 15 yrs.

Selling valuable profitable assets like Telstra to show a budget surplus has also disempowered Australia and it's taxpayers, whose future is now knobbled by corporate interests controlling most (if not all) of our essential services and infrastructure.

A new class of working poor in our country is the product and our present day attitudes too this, is evidence of the deep ideological scarring that exist post the Howard years. I believe it may take a generation too recover our sense of civilisation, if we ever will. We will never be able to buy back our assets, they are too profitable for their owners.

I'm not mincing words about this 579, I agree this is the worst, the most deceitful devious and power crazed (and hungry for it !), Coalition version to date. Economically a complete fraud, and premeditatedly lying through their teeth , with trumped up audits, (for which the authors were all but debarred since), during an election campaign.

Could anyone ever imagine this lot in Gov't. And lest we not forget the Howard legacy.

im searching for something
[not insult]..in fact far-est from insult
leaning towards truth...more than opinion...

that said the only real truth..is god is all good
if attributing things good..that inherantly arn't...*all good..well thats not good..nor great mate

now we get to the party bikkering...
if half thinks its bad..the half thinking its all good...well they must got rose coloured glass....cause halfgood still aint all good

making a person/
making a party/
making a govt/..all good

well thats a huge lol
but so too making[labling]..*it..all bad

see that govt is a legal constituted/person
and the opposition is a balanced part of govt

so govt is nessisarilly half good half vile
depending on which viles..bring you*..the most good

well i de=test..the lot of em
now they both represent the same 1%
[and their public servants][their susstems...their judgments]

and god [good]..dont judge
no wonder people arnt posting
be it percieved good or vile....both judged

when i cant grasp my own posts
i know..the time of departure draws near

we are all being poisend
literally and figerativly
google food that makes you sleepy

im just too tired
to wit im injesting bad mind energy/food
why is my body learning for love...[yearning for its learning]

earning..not learning
heck...shouldnt take the blue pill?
if the red pill fits the bill...its no thrill to b tha dill

Lets not forget the noalition wants to sell off medibank.
Mr Abbotts form yesterday was to talk the economy down again. Anyone can see through this sort of public abuse, yet somehow it is very reportable. Tony wants the subsidy for high income people to remain on medibank. Joice says he can-not live on two million a year.
For the sake of AU i wish the coalition would put Turnbull in the front job. We need a viable opposition. Tony Abbott, Joe Hocky, and Bishop x 2 are all Howards attack dogs, and seen better days.

579,

The government has no job trying to run a commercial business. It should sell Medibank, Telstra, Quantas, and any other tax payer subsidized ventures.

Though I suppose Medibank will be worth less now that Labor is breaking another promise not to remove the health fund rebate.

There are people who think that taxes should be at a much higher level - pro rata by income - and all social services freely available. Top class health, dentistry, old age care, single parent compensation (if we want healthy and well-adjusted descendants) even free funerals etc etc. Cradle to grave stuff.

Many others in Australia, however, consider this would be a betrayal of the capitalist system that has served us so well over the years. They see the feeloaders, the unemployable (on their own admission) and the plain lazy resulting into another Greece.

Especially when the iron runs out and/or China has its own financial crisis.

We live in a lucky country overseen, on the main, by a responsible but not too intrusive bureaucracy.