Dear Saltpetre,

Beautifully put, and I'm sure that all Australians
regardless of their ancestry,
feel just as strongly remembering of course
that many of them and their ancestors as well as
our Indigenous People fought in so many
of the wars alongside their fellow countrymen.

Foxy,
Remember, you said, "People who are in denial about racism in this country are simply ignorant. Lets look at the facts - we imprison
brown asylum seekers, we once celebrated our national day
with a white racist riot. There were assaults on Indian
students, a little political organisation called
One Nation, and of course "the intervention" - the heraldic
beak on our long hawkish treatment of Indigenous Australians".
Foxy, OLO Friday 18-4-2014 12.18.35

You could admit that you were misleading everyone here, as I am sure you know your 'facts' are incorrect.

Susie,
No one that misrepresents items as 'facts' of racism can be honourable. The above was written to deceive and denigrate Australia.
The fact is that Foxy has been caught out promulgating false information as 'facts'. She has since tried to pass it off as some other persons words and will not accept responsibility for her writings. It is a pity that some people are so careless with truthfulness. But then obviously some have no self respect.

Seeing that you agree with Foxy you must be included as one who is prepared to write untruths to promote your agenda.

I note that RObert did not find anything racist in the items.

I challenge you to show the items are 'facts' of racism.

Banjo a.k.a. otb, perchance?

Surely not; one is quite sufficient.

Why do some people go out of their way to pick on Foxy,
almost exclusively in a nitpicking, mean-spirited and unenlightened manner,
with virtually no merit to their essentially pointless barbs,
and absolutely no credit whatsoever to whatever 'barrow' they are pushing -
endlessly, inescapably,
like some rat running up a drain-pipe,
or trying to catch up to its backside,
on some self-constructed hamster-wheel?

Decorum Gentlemen, please.
People are listening.

No ill-will to either Banjo or otb, but please, think about giving it a rest?
We've all got our troubles you know; you're not Robinson Crusoe/s.

Where's your true-blue, dyed in the wool, dinky-dye, Son of Aussie 'Anzac Spirit'?
Two-up anyone?

BTT

The subject report referred to the ANZAC centenary commemoration in 2015.

There was an attempt to de-rail the thread through claims there was no report, despite PM Julia Gillard having publicly criticised its multicultural recommendations.

There are also attempts to plaster over with soothing 'never you mind' and extravagant, fulsome praise for the present ANZAC Day.

The elephant in the room however is whether the same people who promote multiculturalism, the diversity-we-have-to-have and are forever critical of inherited British traditions are saying they support ANZAC Day to conceal their intent to morph it into something else.

I am not saying that migrants themselves would be asking for that, but that the political 'Progressives' who assume that they always know what is best for everyone else would likely not be happy with ANZAC Day and what it represents. Quite obviously the Green Left, socialist alliance, Marxists and others have never been comfortable with ANZAC Day and would very much like to water it down into anything that could divert it into another direction.

So the question is rather should ANZAC Day be kept as it traditionally has been and was on 25 April 2015, or do the posters here believe it should change and if so, how specifically?

Shocker, thanks for posting a link to the REPORT from "The National Commission on the Commemoration of the Anzac Centenary and their report to Government.

Beach <<There was an attempt to de-rail the thread through claims there was no report, despite PM Julia Gillard having publicly criticised its multicultural recommendations.>>

Contraire, old chap, I had found the report quite early in the peace, it wasn't hard, but I thought as you and one or two others of the 'Usual Suspects' were banging on about it, I would leave it to you to provide the link, I believed you were obligated to do so, not me. Shocker at the 49th post provided the necessary link for you, three cheers for Shocker. There never was any claim from me that their was NO report, when in fact I knew of the existence of the said report. Therefore there was no attempt to de-rail anything.

I note with some amusement that about halfway through the discussion Shocker posted a link to an article in one of Murdoch's gutter rags, where the journalistic geniuses at The Daily Telegraph had be able to take an 84 page report and condense it down to about three lines. Like many of the 'usual Suspects' on OLO the Murdoch scribes were clever at using cut and paste and out of context to convey a completely false impression of what was in the report. As for Gillards reaction, who cares.
I have read the report all 84 pages, as for what it containes, and its finding and recommendations, all fine by me. What the Commission is saying about others, migrants and former enemies, is in a nut shell, 'don't try and rub their noses in it.' I think some are trying to read far more into p70-71 than what is actually being said

@Paul,

<<I have read the report …What the Commission is saying about others, migrants and former enemies, is in a nut shell, 'don't try and rub their noses in it.'>>

If that is all you got from reading it, little wonder you are a Green.

As I recall, you were totally oblivious to some of the Greens core policies till *you had your nose rubbed in it* . And even then it didn't change your behaviour.

I think the report might be better summarised as: do rub their noses in it. With the "their" 'being the community and the "ït" being the PC crap.