Dear Joe,

I know nothing about Big Nana, so I can't comment
on her "qualifications," regarding the stolen
generations. (Rocket Science no less?)
I am merely going by what she says
in her posts. The evidence that I am finding in
my research does not support either her or your
denials. And if that puts me back to primary school
in your opinion then I guess that's something I
shall have to learn to live with.

SteeleRedux, you have ignored my information about how part aboriginal children were not removed from stable families. The ones removed from stations had no fathers, and their mothers rarely had any form of income, but were dependant on rations from the station manager.
As the Protector has said, from your own quote, too white to leave them in those conditions". Which means exactly that, white children living with white single mothers with no means of support were also removed!
I suggest you study the history of white child protection and you may discover that aboriginal children were not the only ones removed from mothers who had no husband or income!
You also need to speak to some aboriginal children who were removed from appalling conditions and who later returned to find their mothers and siblings. Most are horrified by what they see and express deep gratitude for their removal.
TBC

As for kids being put into appalling conditions in homes, well, I can only speak about what I know and have been told by adults who grew up in the dormitory system in missions in the Kimberley. Including my mother in law and her 10 siblings, who, like all other aboriginal people who choose to live in the mission, had to move into the dormitory at age 7 and stay there until they were school leaving age. However, their parents also lived in the same mission and they saw them every day and spent Sundays and school holidays with them. The dormitory system there was a form of boarding school to ensure the kids were well educated and learnt good hygiene.
The other dormitory system was for those fair skinned children who had been removed from stations and sent to BEagle Bay to be raised by the nuns. However, these kids also had visits from mothers and family members whenever they had the chance to travel to BEagle Bay and certainly all the kids knew who their families were.
Not once have I ever heard one of those people complain about unclean living conditions, lack of food, unfair treatment of children in the dorms.
Yes, the nuns were strict. Kids had rules, especially regarding school, hygiene, and not speaking language in the dorm. And the church did not allow promised marriages of young girls to go ahead, which was the main complaint of the elders.
As I said, I cannot speak of other children's homes because I have no personal experience of them but I am very reluctant to believe a lot of stories I hear because I have known quite a few people to lie about their circumstances of removal because they cannot bear to accept that their family gave them away.
That's perfectly understandable but it tends to distort historical truth.

Just as afterthought for all involved in discussing Aboriginal Acts and other legal rulings, it pays to be aware of the definition of " aboriginal " that was used at that time. Where the word Aboriginal or Native is used it refers to full blood aboriginals only. And in the Protection Acts I have read, the conditions applied only to full blood and half caste people, anyone of less blood was not considered aboriginal. In fact, in the Act linked by SteeleRedux, octoroons( quarter caste) people actually had to apply to the Protector for permission to be legally known as aboriginal if they so wished.
This blood quotient was taken seriously and I learnt this from personal experience when my husband was pulled from a pub where he was having a beer after work and marched off to the local Native Welfare office by a new policeman in town so he could work out exactly,how much aboriginal blood my husband had to see if he could legally drink. He was actually halfcaste but the local police saergent rescued him because there was an unwritten rule in town that aboriginal people who worked had the same drinking rights as whites.
So where people presume that the Protector had power over all aboriginal people that's incorrect. It was only half caste and full bloods who came under the act, or the children of half castes. who were living with fullbloods.
And once again, this was done to try and protect gullible people from being exploited by unscrupulous men and employers .

"Protecting gullible people . circumstances of removal because they cannot bear to accept that their family gave them away.
That's perfectly understandable but it tends to distort historical truth."

So we have what ? Sign board at police station : Gullible children can apply here to avoid unscrupulous employers. Parents can give away surplus kids in the pen next to Police station . A Receipt will be issued business hours 9-5pm.

Rubbish , my Nigerian barrister sent $4837194 and discount coupon for Freddo frog chocolate. He operates through Canberra Fed Hacker Cops.