Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

I'll have to look into getting a copy of that book.
I'll let you know when I get hold of a copy.

I'm sorry that your eyesight is not what it used to be.
Thank You for the lovely compliment.
I haven't blushed for a while :-)

cont'd ...

Dear Joe,

This may be a stupid question. In your research on
Aboriginal history were you able to access many primary
sources? How difficult was it?

I've read somewhere that Windschuttle did not use primary
sources in his writings.

Dearest Foxy,

My heart sings when I see post from your lovely hands :)

Yes, Windschuttle very definitely and extensively used primary sources. In fact, he seemed to use ONLY primary sources. He's a historian after all, and a bloody good one. They are available in every State of course, since each State has its State Records or State Archives. Of course, they usually can only be accessed on-site.

Yes, on my web-site (www.firstsources.info), 99 % would be very definitely primary sources, mostly from the SA State Archives - now out at Cavan: anybody can look them up on-line, organise times to go out there, usually 10 am to 3 pm, something like that, and do their own 'primary research' if they wish. In fact, I wish someone would, just to check anything or everything that my colleague Alistair Crooks and I have typed up, for fabrications. They'll be disappointed :)

The other 1 % would be things like the Indigenous higher education database which I have kept up for fifteen-odd years now. But that uses data from the national Education Department site:

https://www.education.gov.au/student-data

Our book summarises policy, mainly from the annual reports between 1837 and the 1950s. One thing about typing up such documents: you learn a hell of a lot, fine details, and neither of us are naïve enough not to have our BS antennas up every second. So far we haven't found any, but anybody else is welcome to try. Just give State Archives a ring and arrange a time to visit.

Well, we did that for a total of eight years, voluntary. That's were my eyes went. They aren't what they used to be, they used to be me knees, mate. And me knees are pretty shot too. Good Show joke.

Lots of love,

Joe

Is anybody else having huge problems with email ? Every day, I bound out of my cave, hoping to launch myself onto a fleet-footed young gelding to race across a flat plain. But instead, I wake up to an interminable craggy mountain range, with only an old mule to take my baggage up and over, crag after crag. Often he refuses to budge, I flog him and kick him but he refuses to go forward - in fact, sometimes we end up back at base. Sometimes he tries, staggering up narrow paths, only to tumble back down into the creek just as it seems he is about to reach the summit, so down I go and drag him up again. And when we do reach a summit, all we can see are a multitude of more summits. At which point he is like to vanish and re-materialise back at base again. And so it goes, all bloody day.

Back to topic:

it seems, from meetings of elite Indigenous 'leaders', that any 'Recognise!' Referendum will now come down to two options:

Option 1: No change.

Option 2:

2 (a) A Treaty

(i) between an Indigenous entity and the government of the Commonwealth of Australia;

(ii) between each Indigenous 'nation' and the Commonwealth of Australia;

(b) Indigenous sovereignty, in the form of

(i) a separate State within the Commonwealth of Australia; or

(ii) a State independent of Australia, occupying roughly the country from Ceduna to Esperance up to Broome (or perhaps the Pilbara) and across to Cape York;

3. Special Indigenous representation in all Australian parliaments;

4. Other substantial means to improve Indigenous well-being;

5. Abolition of all discriminatory legislation.

Yeah, that should do it. Piece of cake.

Buckle up !

Joe

Get serious
They are after your home, your money and your lifestyle.
They want your land and and everything you bought and paid for and they don't want to pay for it.

Those Options should read:
.
.
.

Option 1:

No change.
.
.

Option 2:

(a) A Treaty:

(i) between an Indigenous entity (chosen by Indigenous people) (as defined by Indigenous people)) and the government of the Commonwealth of Australia, the contents to be negotiated; OR

(ii) between each Indigenous 'nation' and the Commonwealth of Australia;

(b) Indigenous sovereignty, in the form of

(i) a separate State within the Commonwealth of Australia; OR

(ii) a State independent of Australia, occupying roughly the country from Ceduna to Esperance up to Broome (or perhaps the Pilbara) and across to Cape York;

(c) Special Indigenous representation in all Australian parliaments;

(d) Other substantial means to improve Indigenous well-being;

(e) Abolition of all discriminatory legislation.
.
.
.
That would all fit nicely on a voting paper.

That might be how it all pans out, what we can all make our decisions on.

Joe