There is a growing question about Bruce Pascoe's Aboriginality.

Andrew Bolt has claimed that he may not be and the ABC, which has invested money in the forthcoming documentary, apparently claims that he is.

A bit hard to find much on the subject as 99.9% of the news stories appear to be on user-pays sites.
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CAFB_enAU718AU718&sxsrf=ACYBGNRmprrBkt9RcSFNgVONGU79YltnyQ:1575880232601&q=bruce+pascoe+is+not+aboriginal&tbm=nws&source=univ&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjz0eOrk6jmAhUyiOYKHZVBBrcQt8YBKAF6BAgBEAk&biw=1008&bih=604

Bruce Pascoe,
is Mise,
Without having read a single line re this chap, all I have to offer is that there is a Pascoe clan of (families) on Cape York.

Experts in the field of genealogy, as well tribes he claims to be related to, say he is definitely not aboriginal.

That's good enough for me.

Ah, well just another one !

"Bitter Harvest" by Peter O'Brien might cast more light on Pascoe's absurd claims about his aboriginality and aborigines being farmers and law makers well before the Ancient Greeks.

Pascoe refuses to have a debate with O'Brien or anyone else who doubts his nonsense. He was happy to perform recently for a LBGT podcast, though. Some scholar! Really scraping the bottom of the barrel for support.

"Is Bruce Pascoe an Indigenous Australian?"

No....next question.

http://www.dark-emu-exposed.org/home/2016/1/30/room-to-work-ye2nx-9cg43

(hint: follow all the links).

Lesson here? No one every went broke telling the left what it wants to hear.

Hi Individual,

Almost all of the surnames of my ancestors on both sides are also the names of Aboriginal families somewhere in Australia, often of many groups not even related to each other all over the country. Surely you know that.

Pascoe is just one more fraud amongst the many in the Indigenous Industry.

But I think the more important issue is whether or not there was anything that could be defined as 'farming'. Going back over ten thousand years, there were very few places in the world where farming arose, perhaps only four or five. Not only that, but it must have happened gradually with many steps from roraging, following herds of domesticable animals, then actually herding those animals, then penning the best animals mainly for fibre for clothing, which required gathering feed for them.

From those beginnings, gathering the best fields of grain, spilling seed across penning areas, someone of genius (probably a woman since gathering was women's work) realised the connection between grain falling on the ground and grain grasses sprouting and maturing; and perhaps between, say, the sheep with the most wool having offspring which may have also produced larger than average wool-clips - and hence, animal breeding. Maybe, but those insights may have been made many, many times before they took hold.

In Australia, there were no domesticable animals; there were no domesticable grasses worth cultivating compared to gathering across vast areas - if grass-seed grows all over the continent, why bother growing it - or even thinking of doing so ?

Australia provided an often-harsh environment, but millions of square km of it and with low populations, there would have been no incentive for people to even imagine growing anything.

If there were of course, we would expect to hear of farming rituals, stories, songs, dances, like in every traditional farming population all over the world (check out Frazer's 'Golden Bough'). Instead, we know of a multitude of traditional hunting stories, rituals, ceremonies, dances across Australia. And there is no visible and unambiguous evidence of farming anywhere in Australia.

Joe

When you farm land, first you have to clear it, then till the soil, keep your plants weed free, then harvest the crop. Aboriginal people had no tools except Stone axes and knives and digging sticks. I would be fascinated to learn how they managed to do all that with those few inefficient tools.
As for towns of 1000 people, well, when you think about it, the problems become obvious. How would you feed that many people without intensive farming? Wild game would have been long eaten out and they had no domestic animals. Kangaroo grass seeds are tiny and you would need tons of them to feed a population that size, even if you found a way to cultivate and store them.
And what about sewage disposal? Without some form of disposal system, disease would be rampant, and that’s ignoring the fact that aboriginal people buried their faeces so that enemies couldn’t find and use it against them by spiritual methods.
So many questions, so few answers,

Dear mhaze,

Why on earth are you linking to a discredited site, one whose authors are not identified on any part of the site?

Go find a decent reference and we can have a look at it.

Dear Is Mise,

Pretty typical of your side of politics. Try and discredit the message and when that fails go after the author. Trouble is Pascoe references explorer diaries and you have to do some serious contortions to discredit them.

Look, I don't know if Bruce Pascoe has all the heritage he has claimed for himself. If he doesn't then it is certainly an issue.

However the degree to which you lot are tying yourselves in knots over his book, which was not written by an historian but by a generalist, is really telling. Have a good look at your motivations old chap, they appear to be pretty average in my book.

What is it about lefties that they hate their own heritage so much they must make up lies. See Elizabeth Warren finally come clean.

Is mise is Andrew Bolt sane? not sure anything he says is worth hearing

Belly,

Why do you say that ? Because Bolt details Pascoe's English heritage, going right back to all of his great-great-grandparents, with no exceptions ? Not a single Aboriginal ancestor ? Thank you, Ancestry.com . Oh, but an Aboriginal person attended his great-grand-parents wedding in Hobart, 'therefore' Pascoe is Aboriginal ? And you're the sane one, Belly ?

But I wish Bolt would focus more on the core issue, foraging or farming, of the mode of production (wow, there's an old Marxist term, where did that come from ?!) across Australia - hunting and gathering, or farming ? What solid evidence is there - settlement patterns, tools, archaeological remains, etc. - that Aboriginal groups ever farmed ? Why isn't there more admiration for the hard work of hunting and (particularly) gathering in some of the harsher environments of Australia ? Why the disrespect ?

Joe

Belly, I agree with Bolt. This book is going to be used as school study material. It’s important that history taught in schools is accurate, not some reconstructed fairy tale that’s suits current agendas.
As they say, tell a lie often enough and it becomes truth.
I want my aboriginal descendants to learn their true history, not some left wing version devised to fit preconceived ideas.

Just to elaborate on the complex history of herding and eventually farming, this article from the wonderful site, Quillette, is very illuminating :

http://quillette.com/2016/03/14/why-some-humans-developed-a-taste-for-milk-and-some-didnt/

Again, there were traditionally no domesticable (and milkable) animals in Australia, so this innovation, this step on the long road to farming, did not occur in Australia.

Highly recommended as a history of the beginnings of actual farming is the fascinating book edited by Peter Bellwood, called "First Farmers". It should be in most library networks.

Joe

Dear Big Nana,

And I want my Australian decedents to learn "their true history, not some" right "wing version devised to fit preconceived ideas" which has been a feature of our education system until quite recently.

I want the 'settler' narrative challenged. I want the dispossession and genocides to be acknowledged, and I want the indefensible gap in life expectancy and conditions to be closed.

Hi SR,

Gosh, so virtuous ! Yes indeed, the truth is what we should all be after, the whole truth and NOTHING but the truth. Nothing hidden, nothing tarted up, no con jobs. The truth, warts and all.

When I started typing up the SA Protector's Correspondence, I certainly didn't expect to find what I did find. Of course, as a good leftist, I expected that he might try to cover up heinous crimes, but the whole tenor of the letters was simply too far removed for that: he matter-of-factly had a job to do, providing rations, etc., and medical services, and other benefits, to Aboriginal people all over the colony.

As Coroner, he had to attend sites of massacres of Aboriginal people by non-Aboriginal people and sites of massacres of non-Aboriginal people by Aboriginal people. His solution to the latter was to place ration depots in strategic places, especially at the hardest times of the year. That stopped any further massacres, as far as one can tell from the Correspondence.

To be honest, I came to admire a couple of Protectors here, Dr Moorhouse and Edward Hamilton who, between them, worked in the role for almost all of the period from 1839 to 1908. Theirs was a six-day-a-week job, often with informal visits to depots on Sundays. Well, six and a half really, because they had to meet the train often on a Saturday night and take Aboriginal patients to the hospital and to hostelries where accommodation was provided free. West's Coffee Palace, for example.

I was also surprised that Aboriginal people received free medical treatment around the colony, eighty years or so before the British NHS system. And on the waterways, free boats, maybe a hundred of them. The men at Goolwa were provided with a whale-boat, but when they demanded to be paid, the Commissioner in charge of Aboriginal Affairs ordered it to be taken from them and given to the men at Encounter Bay who were also asking for a boat. What a total bastard.

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

You have certainly been at pains to paint a particular picture of what happened in SA and as we have discussed I don't buy it all.

However I will acknowledge just by the recorded massacre sites across Australia SA does not feature as heavily. Certainly not in comparison to the Western Districts of Victoria where the history is appalling. However the massacre of over 250 over the space of 15 years in the area of NE of your state running into Queensland was significant.

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2019/mar/04/massacre-map-australia-the-killing-times-frontier-wars

"Why on earth are you linking to a discredited site,"

Discredited you say? Wow I did not know that. And I'm certainly looking forward to you providing evidence of that because I know you wouldn't just make it up in order to hide from data you just don't want to be true. Many would you know. But our SR is way too honourable to do that.

I bet that at this very moment he's gathering all the evidence to show how the site was discredited.

And since the page I linked was really just a conglomeration of our sites, I'm guessing they've all been discredited too and SR will happily show us how, because, you know, he's so honourable in that regard.

"one whose authors are not identified on any part of the site?"

The editor is Ellen Tucker-Moore. Some of the contributors are J & R Camper, Kawon Namor etc. I found those names on the site.

There's nothing like a thorough examination of the data, and what SR did there was nothing like a thorough examination of the data.

As usual.

Steele,

" Have a good look at your motivations old chap, they appear to be pretty average in my book."

My motivation is to seek the truth and to expose fraud, and, hopefully, to help stop the bull that Pascoe has written being taught as truth to school children.

What's your objection to the truth?

Dear mhaze,

Oh this is going to be good.

Okay, firstly, when you say; "And since the page I linked was really just a conglomeration of our sites".

Are you one of the Quadrant misfits as well? What is your contributor name?

Next you can link me to the page on the site which says Ellen Tucker-Moore is the editor much less even real.

Likewise the 'contributors' you have mentioned aren't real people either are they. Or perhaps you do have evidence to contradict this, if so are you able to produce it?

More than happy to be proved wrong but I'm not holding my breath.

The floor is yours. Lol.

Dear Is Mise,

The "bull that Pascoe has written"?

Have you even read the bloody book? I know Bolt most certainly hasn't.

What are the top three things in Dark Emu you feel are bull? Or are you just parroting your clique because the task is beyond you?

Whatcha got big boy?

Pascoe's heritage is a mere unwarranted excuse !

SR,

That 'massacre map' has some problems in SA, namely evidence. In the north-east of SA in the late nineteenth century, Lutheran missions operated between 1866 and 1917, and the area was well-populated by many sheep stations from about 1870. Most were also ration depots for the local Aboriginal people.

In fact, many like the biggest sheep station in the world, Cordillo Downs, with 65,000 sheep, and a shearing shed two hundred yards long, employed perhaps hundreds of local Aboriginal people - as did the mission. So there was hardly likely to be any massacre of Aboriginal people in that context.

Back to topic: so there is no evidence that Bruce Pascoe has any Aboriginal ancestry, at all. Yet he is employed in an Aboriginal position at the University of Technology, Sydney. He has been given awards as an Indigenous author, amounting to tens of thousands of dollars. In those senses, he is not just a fraud but a thief.

And he fabricates quotes from those early observers' notebooks. They did not write what he says they did. And if whitefellas were so intent on destroying all traces of towns, fences, fields, etc., [how the hell, I can't imagine, unless they didn't exist], why would they write what he claims they wrote ?

All human groups in the world were foragers barely twelve thousand years ago. In Australia, they faced perhaps the harshest living conditions, and yet survived. Surely we should be celebrating that ?

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

You claim; "And he fabricates quotes from those early observers' notebooks. They did not write what he says they did."

Absolute crock of dog's vomit. Name one single instance of him fabricating anything in his book Dark Emu.

Have you read the thing either? Or are you another mindless parrot?

Just one single fabrication, that's all.

"And since the page I linked was really just a conglomeration of our sites".

should have read...."And since the page I linked was really just a conglomeration of other sites".

Still looking forward to evidence that any of the sites have been discredited.

Dear mhaze,

Mate I thought you at least took a little pride in quoting decent sources but the fact that you have swallowed hook line and sinker this pathetic site with its anonymous authors makes you look like an imbecile. And no the site isn't “just a conglomeration of other sites” at all.

Just stop and walk away with a modicum of self respect.

I can see why you thought the 'Editor' was Ellen Tucker-Moore because this nom de plume was simply next on the list of supposed contributors, none of whom are real.

Editor
Ellen Tucker-Moore
High School Teacher
J & R Camper
Justa QuietAustralian
Justa QuietAustralian
Kawon Namor
Mr Sims
Mungo Mann
Roman Nowak
The Cocky
TS Fumer

Even its facebook link takes you to Mr Mungo Mann yet you still didn't twig?

It is all a house of cards and you fell for it utterly, not questioning once its veracity. My God what have you become? This is the third time in succession you have been caught without pants. I'm starting to worry for you.

Come on mate, lift your game. You were one of the few on here who could push me a little. Right now you are just a caricature.

The old mhaze wouldn't have fallen for this guff. I miss him. Bring him back.

This is my post limit so see you all tomorrow.

Steele,

In truth, I haven't read 'Dark Emu'; I have however perused it but I found it to be pretentious and badly written and badly edited and as it took ages for the local library to get a copy, I no longer have access to it.

Towns of a 1,000 people? yeah, right!!

SR,

Stooking grass before winnowing it is a standard form of gathering, even if that's what Major Mitchell actually observed. It's not farming. So there goes Major Mivhell.

A gathering of hundreds of people was and still is common, for ceremonial purposes, exchange of women, etc. In Sturt's account, and also in Pascoe's garbled account, there is no evidence of actually growing grain, only of women gathering grass-seed,and spending hours grinding it.

In Lindsay's account (aven in Pascoe's version), there is no evidence of any farming, just of a large gathering of people, as is and was very common across Australia.

So no actual evidence of farming. No farm tools, except (according to Pacoe) a metre-long stone tool, weighing perhaps a hundred kilos. Really ?

No farming stories, rituals, harvest dances, etc. No fence-lines. No stone villages, etc. A complete crock.

Farming was initiated in extremely few places on earth - perhaps, with a story in today's Australia about Indian monkeys found in sculptures around the Mediterranean, fewer than ever. Perhaps only in upper mesopotamia, central Mexico and in the New Guinea highlands. And maybe north China

Joe

DNA test, why not ?

Elizabeth Warren has finally admitted to NOT being an American Indian - thanks to Donald Trump and his BS meter. So, perhaps Pascoe might fess up one day.

The really horrifying thing about these two liars is that it has never been suggested by the powers that be that Warren is a totally unfit person to be running for the position of POTUS, and that Pascoe received literary awards, and his rubbish book is going to be put into schools.

And, the general population has become too zombie-like to protest.

the amazing thing is that both Warren and Pascoe benefited so much by identifying by what they aren't. And people claim that these groups are so disavantaged. Then why are so many whites rushing to identify?

Donald Trump put the madwoman down by persisting and by recruiting genuine descendants of native Americans. He was, and is, trying to protect Americans from lunatics. I can't imagine our 'leader' - the Three Wise Monkeys rolled into one - saying boo about Pascoe and the crap our kids will be brainwashed with.

So Sr,

Did you seriously think I didn't know these were nom de plumes? Actually, given the ferocity of the attempts to protect this fraud, its probably better to call them nom de guerres.
Of course these people are protecting their real identities. Anyone who decides to question bona fides of the latest pet of the aboriginal industry and who didn't hide their real identities would be considered mildly insane.
But so what? Even Pascoe has operated under other names. As has SR and mhaze.

That they do so doesn't change the data.

That's the difference between us SR. I never bothered to check the identities of these people because it doesn't matter. I go straight for the data to see how accurate it might be.

SR on the other hand has a two stage process. (1) do I like the data? if yes - then its true. if no go to (2) where we don't try to disprove the data but attack the messenger.

But the messenger doesn't change the data.

"And no the site isn't “just a conglomeration of other sites” at all."

Well I didn't say it was. I said the PAGE I linked to was. Did you misunderstand that or are we already in the famous SR muddy-the-water phase?

So on the PAGE I linked, one of the more important links was to http://australianhistory972829073.wordpress.com/2019/10/23/bruce-pascoe-how-aboriginal-is-he/

Now is the data in that link 'discredited' because you can't identify the people who linked to it?

Unfortunately in SR-land that's how it works. Don't like the facts - ignore them for any reason at hand. Me? I want to see if those facts are valid.

And they are.

Is Pascoe an aboriginal? Nup. Just because some people you don't like offer proof of that fact, doesn't mean the facts change.

I wonder if you'll understand that?

'Donald Trump put the madwoman down by persisting and by recruiting genuine descendants of native Americans'

yep ttbn, that is why the swamp hate him so much and the deplorables luv him. Done more good for America than last 4 presidents. The sad part is that no one could have imagined how mirky and deep the swamp is. It includes the fbi, lying liberal mainstream media, judges, baby killing , gw fraudsters, Hollywood, illegal immigration trade and the list goes on and on. Amazing against all these traitors of America he has managed to reduce power costs and have record unemployment.

"and by recruiting genuine descendants of native Americans"

Well it seems two aboriginal leaders of tribes Pascoe claimed to be a member of have now come out and categorically denied that he is a member and they doubt he is aboriginal at all. But I guess they've been discredited because....reasons.

One has also complained of Pascoe getting funds and funding that rightfully belongs to true aboriginals.

It gets worse. Bruce Pascoe is a finalist in the 2019 Human Rights Awards because of his:

" …. ongoing research into Aboriginal agriculture challenges the widespread belief that Aboriginal Australians were hunter-gatherers. This belief was used to justify dispossession of Aboriginal lands, but Bruce’s multi-award-winning book Dark Emu uses early explorers’ diaries to reveal complex food production and land management systems used by Aboriginal people. He also seeks to revive these systems and develop a national industry of Aboriginal foodstuffs."

"He also seeks to revive these systems and develop a national industry of Aboriginal foodstuff"

Could be a growth industry; spurred on by Government subsidies.

It's heartening to see my beliefs and comments on the truth about the wannabees finally being discussed, vindicating me and putting paid to my detractors.
I don't care if Pascoe wants to call himself a black or a brick, only that, if it's not true, then it's not true.
I re-iterate, by asking why he and all the other wannabee's choose to call themselves blacks, when it is patently clear, he is not.
I draw everyone's attention to the fact that because he has obviously had European ancestors in his lineage, why oh why does he and all these other wannabees single out their black ancestors to descend from.
I won't make comments or suggestions about the true answer to my question, I suspect those among you are well ahead of me in knowing the true answer.
But the short answer to the posted question is: ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Steele, regards those atrocities and massacres. My understanding comes from reading first hand letters and journals going back to early 1800s. On top of that I have first hand accounts from a father in law raised in one of the last settled, and most remote missions in the Kimberley, where white men didn’t reach until 1910, and grandparents in law raised in another mission in the Kimberley that was started in 1913.
None of my inlaws related anything of persecution or massacres or even dispossession. To this day those tribes still live on their own land, under Native Title. They were fed, clothed, housed and educated by the missionaries. And not under any duress, they were free to leave the missions at any time, which some did, to go working as stockmen and truck drivers and lugger crew.
No one has ever denied that killings happened, to both races but the majority of deaths were caused by diseases that aboriginal people had no defence against and no treatment for. And dispossession has happened to every race that ever existed. They all adapted or became extinct.
As for the gap in health and life expectancy, most of that is due to lifestyle choices some aboriginal people make. Obesity is a huge problem these days, contributing to hypertension, diabetes, heart disease and cancer. And in the more remote areas, poor hygiene is a contributing factor, not due to lack of facilities but more lack of caring by those involved. Multi millions of dollars have been spent training aboriginal health workers in remote communities and regional towns. Lack of improvement in aboriginal health should be raising questions about their role in the problem.

Altrav,

Pascoe doesn't have any non-English ancestors, unless you go back to the Danes. He doesn't have any Indigenous ancestry. He's a whitefella claiming to have Indigenous ancestry, taking Indigenous jobs and prizes that he has no claim on. He's a whitefella fraud, and they're two a penny.

End of that story. Well, it ought to be.

As for Aboriginal farming: what evidence would one expect to find ? Buildings, artifacts, tools, fence-lines, storage pits or silos, on the one hand; and rituals, ceremonies, Dreaming stories, legends, on the other. Has anybody found any evidence of these, any anthropologists or archaeologists ? Most are pretty quiet, but very few have lent their names - and reputations - to this sort of fraud.

Oh, the villages were all destroyed ? How do you eliminate all traces of a multitude of stone villages and all their evidence of farming ?

As for early accounts, most missionaries (usually the one and only whitefella on-site, so 'herding people onto missions' must have presented challenges) almost immediately - after building a school - tried to set up vegetable gardens and orchards. If at all, those initiatives usually took a decade or two to get going, and even by that time, only with Aboriginal men who had lived away from their tribal roots, as orphans or foundlings on whitefella farms. Few if any now exist.

So has there been any rush by Aboriginal groups - now that people have Native Title all over Australia, and I welcome that - to set up vegetable gardens ? In remote areas, vegetables are very expensive. But communities have running water (i.e. flush toilets and sewage ponds), so why not gardens ?

In fact, the more recently that groups have been brought into settlements, the less likely there seems to have been to set up gardens. Any vegetable gardens and orchards in Aboriginal settlements now ? Not just some outside-inspired and -funded enterprise with one or two Aboriginal employees, but all-Aboriginal-run ? Community-run ?

So why this disparagement of traditional hunting-gathering society and economy ?

Joe

End of that story. Well, it ought to be."

Yeah. But the idiots who are wrecking the joint already are treating him like a hero instead of the shonk he is.

Bruce Pascoe's heritage like many "aboriginals" today appears to be mostly from European settlers.

With respect to his book "The dark emu" BP has cherry picked excerpts from various explorers diaries etc and then made some heroic interpretations, using techniques similar to those that advocate that aliens built the pyramids.

That this has been lapped up and treated as gospel by the left whingers fixated on identity politics is no surprise, nor is their disdain for the complete lack of archeological evidence to support it.

There was an Indian bloke in WA who claimed to be Indigenous and he painted traditional Aboriginal paintings (an' he was good at it), but eventually, he was caught out, prosecuted (false pretences?) and convicted.

There is a bearded European in the East who claims to be Indigenous and he writes books, lectures etc., on Aboriginal subjects (an' he is thought by some, like the ABC to be good at it), but eventually, he was caught out, ought to be prosecuted for false pretences as his bogus claims have furthered his earning capacity, just like the Indian bloke in the West.

Hi SM,

No. Not 'mostly' - all of it. He has no Indigenous ancestry. He is a whitefella masquerading as Indigenous, and taking their money. I don't understand why they aren't dragging him out into the street and tarring and feathering him.

I can't believe (not entirely) that the left can be so unbelievably gullible: so why are some pushing this rubbish ? Why the denial that people survived in this harsh country by hunting (men) and gathering (women) ? Why the demeaning of people who, with almost no links to the outside world for sixty thousand years, managed to build elaborate societies here ?

I suspect that the left now believes that foraging doesn't give very strong title to land, and 'therefore' sovereignty, but that farming does, and that 'therefore' Aboriginal people have now become farmers. After all, that stronger title would also strengthen the notion of groups being actually nations - or as Pascoe seems to assert, one single united nation - each of which was, and 'therefore' still is - sovereign across its own territory.

So they have junked the reality that Aboriginal people were traditionally foragers, and seized on a more convenient and useful weapon to stick it up the capitalist, imperialist, colonialist system.

And so many Aboriginal people have gone along with it, since it seems to paint a more civilised picture of their ancestors - to hell with any evidence. But so many Indigenous leaders never miss an opportunity to go down the wrong path, sometimes for decades. Treaties, for example: 'let's have one, but we don't know haven't thought what should be in it'. Or 'Voice'.

So no rush with evidence of farming here: in the meantime, it can be ignored as just another scam. Or would be, except that it is now in Victorian schools as gospel truth.

'Truth' ..... hmmm ...... what's that mean ?

Joe

Joe,

"Truth' ..... hmmm ...... what's that mean?"

Well, it used to be a Sydney newspaper, an' I guess that that will do for many.

'So no rush with evidence of farming here: in the meantime, it can be ignored as just another scam. Or would be, except that it is now in Victorian schools as gospel truth. '

along with 5 year old boys with a penis who needs a crossing guide to get across the road but can decide they are a girl, that by not burning coal we can change the climate, that a baby is not a baby until coming out from the mother. Going to school is becoming more and more like child abuse. The more rational you are the more likely you are to fail many subjects.

Loudmouth, I still can't get my head around all this talk of "land grab" and disenfranchise and other attrocities we are supposed to have committed against the black fella.
As I recall, (correct me if I'm wrong) the blacks did not believe in "owning" land, they were nomadic and transients.
That's why they did not understand the concept of "buying"the land off them, from the white fella settlers.
So if they did not "own" the land, why are we treating them as though they did and all these payouts and handouts about such things as "native title"?
As far as any reasonable, pragmatic and objective assessment of all this goes, there is no basis for treating the blacks any different than everyone else, and absolutely NO special privileges, especially if only because the scum-bag white wannabees, (who are actually whites) claiming special treatment and the number just keeps growing.
It is an affront to the rest of the Australian people to be bias towards one group when the facts and the evidence do not support the decision.
I would not mind if the situation was genuine and the claimants/participants were genuine, but the number of fakes is just too overwhelming to let it go unchecked.
I would insist that anyone who's parents were genuine blacks, without any European in their past, are true blacks.
If not, you're out!
You are an Aussy, with mixed blood.
Suck it up, and wave goodbye to all the benefits and handouts.
Whilst there is REAL money to be stolen by the pollies and their mates, we won't see any REAL change any time soon.
Sad and depressing, until people stop denying and deflecting when it comes to accepting the awful truth.
It's much easier to be compliant and not have to do anything as opposed to doing something about it.

Isn't Andrew Bolt Aboriginal himself?

I think mhaze is Aboriginal. I'm sure it has been recorded somewhere by the ABS.

Nah! MrO, 'Beat Up' Bolt is to busy making up stories about being "attacked" by lefties to be aboriginal. All the best from NZ.

"I think mhaze is Aboriginal. I'm sure it has been recorded somewhere by the ABS."

Yep, I'm just as aboriginal and Mr Pascoe ie not at all.

On the other hand, I am an indigenous Australian having been born here.... as were my parents, half of my grandparents and most of my great-grandparents.

mhaze,

So I guess by that you are saying that you are part of the new white trash minority in a future Chinese Australia.

mhaze, glad to see you understand the formula, as I do and have been trying to explain to the wannabees about how the ancestry thing works.
I've heard some ripper shonk excuses and reasons why someone is a black when they are clearly and visibly not.
I have also explained how these wannabees are a vial lot, that through all the ancestors which came together to allow the wannabee to even exist in the first place, they slap all the other nationalities in the face, rejecting them in favour of "selecting" the black ancestor as the one of choice at the discard and dis-respect of ALL the others.
One can clearly see they are not a black because they are not, duh, BLACK!

ALTRAV,

Is that a new white trash minority definition?

ALTRAV,

It's as good to see you back as it was to see the disappearance of a certain other person. Given our last election, Donald Trump, and now the demolition of the Red Wall in Britain, things are looking up. I never thought that I would see the headline "Tories have now become 'the party of the working class'", but there it was this morning.

The pendulum is swinging back. The best advocates for the return of centre right politics are the loud mouth Lefties, who live on an entirely different plane from the rest of us. The more they talk, the worse they look

Mr O, sorry I'm not up with sarcasm, so could you elaborate please?

ALTRAV

Sarcasm? What sarcasm?

ttbn, thanks for your candor.
As for the 'other person', I thought about it, and I came to ask, what if her absence is part of her studies/book she is writing?
I wondered if it had something to do with the reaction of people under certain circumstances, because her demeanor on OLO was in many ways provocative and at times annoying, even patronising.
She did not seem to me to be the kind of person that could be easily deterred or affected by mere words, like myself.
She comes from tough stock, which I know to someone like me I can find attractive and annoying at the same time, as some of my posts will attest.
As for our political pendulum, you are quite right.
When I think about world politics, it's turned and in some ways badly.
I don't mind Mr T, as I've said before, he's just like the guys down the local, all melded into one/him.
That's why he got to be POTUS.
Now idiots like that Canadian twat, what an uber jerk?
Then there's the French shmuck.
You know my thoughts on the feminazis in high office, well the latest is let's get/install, them as young as we can find.
Pathetic!
Unfortunately, I feel it will only get worse, with people becoming less engaged therefore leaving the door open for the sharks and scumbags.
As much as I like Boris, he won on the back of there being more Brexit voters that were prepared to get off their backsides, brave the cold and vote, than the others.
It was a coming together of labour and liberal voters for a common cause.
Good to see.
In fact as much as certain people don't want to admit it, because it was NOT compulsory, we had the same reaction here over the SSM, SURVEY, when, because it was not compulsory, we got the wrong result, and it was planned to achieve that end.

Mr O, you haven't explained your comment in such a way as to make it clear and un-ambiguous.
Thank you.

ALTRAV,

What you have to realise about O. is that he's a moron.

As far as I can recall he's only ever offered two testable facts to support his opinions and both times they were so laughably wrong that he had to leave the thread, tail between his legs, whimpering for help. No one helped because his assertions were so utterly wrong.

So he sits on the sidelines firing spit-balls at the adults and offer precisely nothing even remotely like substance.

He may grow out of it. My 3 yr old granddaughter did.

mhaze, gotcha.
I actually don't get some styles of discourse, maybe it has to do with coming from a non-English speaking background.
Who knows?
I only know that if I don't get the correct meaning of a comment, I cannot respond truthfully and honestly, thereby justifying and validating the conversation as is the practiced and expected convention.
Anyway it doesn't matter, in hindsight, I feel it might have been a "throw away" comment.

Dear mhaze,

“Did you seriously think I didn't know these were nom de plumes?”

Of course you did and you got caught out so now you are, in typical deceitful mhaze fashion, attempting to claim otherwise. Don't bother, no one is buying it.

But this bit of rank hypocrisy takes the cake;

“Unfortunately in SR-land that's how it works. Don't like the facts - ignore them for any reason at hand. Me? I want to see if those facts are valid.”

My god mate, you have linked to a page attempting to discredit Pascoe because it claims he is not of any aboriginal descent, primarily because they are struggling to counter the facts he has presented, yet you have the gall to try and pull me up?

Stop. You are presenting as an utter fool.

Dear big nana,

You write;

"Steele, regards those atrocities and massacres. My understanding comes from reading first hand letters and journals going back to early 1800s."

So have mine.

As to aboriginal health when touring the NT I visited a community without any doctors, just a nurse even though they were a similar size to the country town I live in in Victoria which was serviced by three doctors. It is very difficult for me to reconcile these facts with your position that it is adequate and not much of a factor.

Steele Redux,

I wonder if that's your real name. Or maybe .... a nom de plume ? Ay ? No ! Surely not !

As for critiques of Pascoe " .... primarily because they are struggling to counter the facts he has presented ...."

begs the question: what 'facts' ? He fabricated what you laughably call 'facts'. If you have the courage to check what Mitchell and Sturt and Lindsay et al. actually write, you will notice a certain amount of embroidery, exaggeration, in the Pascoe Versions.

For example, none of those writers talk about cultivating the ground, i.e. farming. They don't declare that people were pasturing animals, or even definitely penning them for wool or milk, i.e. pastoralism. They don't talk about large permanent towns at all, probably to Pascoe's irritation.

Mitchell writes of grain being 'stooped', i.e. stooked, i.e. stacked, i.e. gathered, most likely by women - IF it had indeed been 'stooped'. Severe thunderstorms can also have those effects on a large field of grasses, not to mention emus and kangaroos running in panic hither and thither (mostly thither) in response to the noise and lightning of major storms.

I'd prefer to imagine that women have gathered those grasses in 'stoops', to leave them to dry, with the intention of stripping off the seed later and taking it back to camp to grind it into damper, i.e. 'cakes'.

Large gatherings of people, usually for ceremonial purposes, are still fairly common: a friend told me about a huge gathering at Willowra a few years ago, with the women working their arses off every day co gather seed - until they went on strike, Lysistrata-like, whereupon the men packed all of their extremely important secret business in. In Rev. Taplin's Journal, he writes many times of large crowds arriving for ceremonies and fights, during the 1860s and 1870s, and a week or so later travelling back to their own countries, and his hassles in scrambling to get rations for them.

[TBC]

[continued]

So you're aware of hunting stories but not planting or harvesting stories ? Gathering stories and dances but not 'fertilising' stories and songs and dances which are common in traditional peasant societies to mark the beginning of the planting season(check out Frazer's 'Golden Bough' which is full of descriptions of such ceremonies) ?

What might that say about traditional Aboriginal economy and society here ?

Which makes me curious about your actual agenda in promoting Pascoe's preposterous claims ? And why the de-valuing and trivialisation of hunting and gathering ?

Joe

Hi Joe, been over in NZ, sent the boys out to do a bit of that hunter gathering last Thursday Friday. Came back on with a few leaves and berries ha ha. Nah, mate the oysters, crays, all the fish etc etc, unbelievable. Put a beast in the ground yesterday etc etc. Do I need to tell you more. After party to 2am. See you are still giving BP and his book a hard time. Cant say more from the phone, next stop Fiji.

Hi paul,

Yeah, it's a bountiful country:) Even farmers traditionally would also do a bit of fishing in the creeks and seas after work. Maybe not so much in the South Island, those Kai Tahu had to give up farming and go back to hunting moa and fishing. And the odd umu of North Islanders. Yum.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Joe, did it a bit differently this time, no main table as is customary. Sat everyone facing each other, with seafood table down the center, it was loaded. I had one small cray tail with seafood sauce not wanting to be greedy. Then one of the bro's came over with 2 massive lobster tails 1 each for Aunty and myself. Said he put them in the chiller special for us from Aussie, us not getting them very often, yum.

Back on the topic of farming: thousands of books have been written describing Aboriginal culture and society. Many hundreds of books have been written by researchers into Aboriginal languages: vocabularies galore have been collected from all over the country.

It would be interesting to know if there are any Aboriginal languages which contain any words which are unambiguously associated with farming - clearing, cultivating, planting, weeding, watering, weeding, watering, and then harvesting, storing and perhaps trading cultivated products. Any farming words shared between languages ?

Compared to the countless words to do with hunting, gathering, trapping, netting, digging for roots and bardi, etc., etc.

It's a bit of a stretch to 'explain' - without actual evidence - that whitefellas stopped everybody in every aboriginal group from speaking their farming languages; and forced every group in Australia to initiate or expand terms for hunting and gathering, which every language seemed to have plenty of (not used or perhaps even known now, simply because people have largely given up hunting and gathering).

And all with some sort of secret co-ordination, without any written communications between all those whitefellas about how to do it.

And artifacts: what's the proportion of farming tools to hunting-and-gathering tools in Museums across the world ?

Too ridiculous.

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

What on earth do you think 'caring for country' entails?

SR,

How is 'caring for country' inconsistent with hunting and gathering ? Are you suggesting that hunters/gatherers are incapable of 'caring for country' ?

Are you referring to mosaic-burning the country ? Do you count burning as farming ?

Joe

Paul would know far more than me about this but in New Zealand, where there was indeed farming on a huge scale, settlement patterns were very distinctive: farming areas, usually controlled by a single hapu or extended family, were often fortified, or at least had a pa or fort for protection, with palisaded defence works, and stepped terraces. Mt Eden (Maungawhau) in the heart of Auckland is a good example.

Those massively-modified earth-works are still there. After all, they would be very difficult to 'vanish'. And there are pas all over the North Island, maybe even some on the South Island around Marlborough and Kaikoura.

Farming leaves a huge imprint on the landscape. In NZ, vegetation patterns are transformed as land is cleared for cultivation. Farming villages, even of neighbouring and related hapu, defend their lands fiercely, since the people there have put so much effort into them. Farming areas were often (perhaps usually) at war with neighbours, there wasn't much sweetness and togetherness between groups - more likely umus.

But one interesting feature was a sort of no-man's-land, rahui, land between different territories which was not used or farmed or even hunted or gathered on without mutual permission between groups.

And of course, people didn't waste their time trying to grow what was already growing everywhere, flax and ferns - they brought root-crops from the Islands with them and grew them all over the North Island. And fenced those areas to keep out rampaging kiwis and kakapos.

Perhaps the next time Paul is in NZ, he could check out the farming implements in the museums there :)

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

After the whole "rabbit proof fence story is fiction' saga we went through I certainly am not inclined to do another dance with you.

However the very British notion of the act of tending one's hunting estates not being regarded as farming is not universal. 'Firestick farming' with cool burns to enable fresh growth of staple food crops along with opening up land for better hunting access involved widespread vegetation modification.

The fact that it doesn't fit your traditional notion of farming doesn't matter.

SR,

Oh, I certainly don't think that the Rabbit Fence saga was all fiction. I think that the girls found the fence and which direction it went in, and went back to the Meekatharra road and hitched rides from there to Jigalong where they arrived unhindered by the one-man 'Aborigines Department'.

In the tiny 145-page book, with its 10-12 pages dealing with the girls actually on or near the Fence, the writer is oblivious to the fact that the Rabbit Department employed maintenance workers every six or seven miles, which indicates that they never spent a single day walking along the Fence. Nor it seems, was there any attempt by Mr Neville to engage the co-operation of the Police, to get in front of the girls and arrest them.

And once they arrived back at Jigalong, they were left alone by Neville. That might differ from the tone of the film somewhat.

Anyway, BTT. Farming, by any definition, involves cultivation and care of the soil. Strictly speaking, farming does not include even pastoral activities. Pastoralists don't like being called farmers, and vice versa. Traditionally, Aboriginal groups were neither.

Foragers, by definition, forage - they hunt, fish and gather food, usually daily. In Australia, there was no herding of animals, nor cultivation of the soil. Nothing unusual about that - most of the world a thousand years ago was occupied by foragers, even maybe half of Europe - the Baltics, much of Scandinavia and Russia.

Yes, Laplanders - Sami - and Native American groups on the Plains of the US and Canada, followed herds of reindeer and buffalo respectively, which is a significant precursor to actually herding, i.e. controlling - and owning - herds of animals. In the Middle East, Kurds and early Persians etc. herded goats and sheep seasonally up into the mountains and down to the plains. People still do that. And also in much of drier parts of Africa.

But it's not farming. Maybe in your view, if those Africans set fire to their environment, they would thereby by farmers ?

Joe

Steele, regarding your comment about health staff in remote communities. I find it hard to believe that a town of a few hundred people would have 3 doctors. It wouldn’t be financially viable.
Large remote communities do have doctors. For example, Wadeye in the NT has a population around 2000, that’s one of the largest communities. They have two doctors there, but also they have 10 registered nurses and 7 aboriginal health workers. That’s 19 health staff for 2000 people, way above the level of mainstream Australia. And before you point out that nurses and health workers aren’t doctors, the fact is that many people go to see a doctor for issues that can be handled by other staff. Blood pressure, blood sugars, wound dressings, nutritional and weight advice, antenatal checks, post natal checks, infant health checks, immunisations etc etc. are all done by nurses and health workers. In addition, specialists fly to remote communities regularly. The large communities might see a paediatrician, obstetrician, surgeon etc once a month or so, depending g on the size of the community. In fact, remote people can see a specialist much quicker than someone in the city who may have to wait years to see a surgeon or orthopaedic surgeon, whereas remote people only wait months.
So, in reality, remote aboriginal communities are well covered for health services, in contrast to remote white settlements, like cattle stations and pearl farms, who have no government provided health staff at all and have to rely on weekly or fortnightly visits from mobile clinics, or drive themselves to the nearest doctor, hundreds of kilometres away.

There you go, Steele. Make an assertion and you'll get an informed response which punctures your balloon.

No free lunches in this business :)

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

If you really don't know what you are talking about it is probably best to put a sock in it mate.

Dear Big Nana,

The 2016 Census has the population of Wadeye at 2280. With 2 doctors that gives a ratio of 1 per 1140 residents.

That is disgraceful.

In my town the ratio is well under half that and pretty well marries with the current Australian ratio of physicians per 1000 head of population of 3.57.

What do you think needs to be done to raise the level of health services within that community so it is commensurate with the rest of Australia?

To have ratios at the level of a country like Guatemala in a place as rich as Australia should not be tolerated

SR, you cannot merely equate numbers by generalising like you have.
There are so many factors that come into play on such decisions that I, in fact, even you cannot begin to know or be privy to.
Like many things in life each case has to be treated according to all the factors at play.
So don't be surprised or get out of sorts over how many medical professionals are at any one particular location.
If the situation was dire, I'm sure the govt would already be aware of it by now.
Also, I'm shocked that you would question or denigrate big nana and loudmouth.
From what I have read and learnt about these two commentors I would tone it down a little if I were you and listen to what they have to say, instead of shirt fronting them.
You never know, you might actually learn something.

SR,

If you can find a ten-year-old to explain to you what 19 health professionals means, two doctors and 17 other professionals, ask him to go slow. Take your time to absorb it all. Nineteen health professionals for 2280 people at Wadeye cracks out at one for every 120 people. Not to mention the frequent visits to Katherine and/or Darwin.

If you really don't know what you are talking about, it's best if you sit back and at least try to learn from others who have been in the business for decades like Big Nana.

One professional for every 120 people - hmmm ........ sounds pretty comprehensive.

Actually, even one professional for every 1140 people sounds pretty ordinary for country towns. I recall as emergency driver, taking people to the nearest hospital twenty kms away at three in the morning and, so it seemed, always the same doctor who we all went to during the day. One doctor for a town of maybe three thousand people. Lovely bloke, I had blood poisoning once and raved to him about Semmelweis. One young bloke I drove to the hospital around one or two a.m. with (I thought) burns but when we got there, he laughed and said it was a joke. I advised him to go down to the cafe, and drove back home without him. For a joke.

So you think Pascoe is, in some arcane way, Indigenous ? No ? Yes ? Evidence one way or the other doesn't matter ?

Joe

Has Pascoe profited by the apparent deception that he is of Aboriginal descent?

So, has he been obtaining advantage by false pretences?

As I siad his book 'Dark Emu' is badly written, badly edited and , to be charitable, somewhat mishandles the truth.

I haven't read any of his other works, "Dark Emu' has put me off him as an author or an authority. I haven't really read 'Dark Emu' either, scanning it was enough to convince me that to really read it would have been wasted effort.

Hi Is Mise,

"Bruce Pascoe

"POSITIONS
Professor, Jumbunna Inst for Indigenous Education & Research

"Core Member, SIC - Strengthening Indigenous Communities

"QUALIFICATIONS
Bachelor of Education

"EMAIL
Bruce.Pascoe@uts.edu.au"

So what sort of salary do you reckon he'd be on, as a "Professor" ?

i.e. an Indigenous person's salary ?

The man is a fraud. He's taking somebody else's job and salary. And he's by no means the only one. The entire Indigenous Industry is corrupt and incompetent like that, in its own cock-eyed way - a whitefella getting a Blackfella's job, and nobody complains.

And then demeans Indigenous hunting and gathering. What a hero.

Joe

Is Mise, yes he has benefited from claiming to be indigenous. He won an indigenous writers award for his book, don’t know how much that was worth but it’s never peanuts

Well, if he identifies as an aboriginal man that's all there is to it!
If he identified as a woman could she hear about woman's business ?
If you object you will be in trouble with the gender police and the
feminazies to say nothing of the GBTJI brigade.

Perhaps he is only an aborigine from 9 to 5 ?
Ahh, that might be why Bolt cannot get him on TV.

Dear Is Mise,

You prattled;

“As I siad(sic) his book 'Dark Emu' is badly written, badly edited and , to be charitable, somewhat mishandles the truth.”

Well mate this should be easy, why don't you give us a single instance where he wrote badly, edited badly, or mishandled the truth then we can judge for ourselves if you are once again gilding the lily.

Dear loudmouth2,

Stop mate, you are embarrassing yourself. The discussion I was having with Big Nana is regarding doctors. If I could be bothered going and looking up the ratio of other health professionals in my town I would, but I can't, because all you are interested in is deflecting once again.

Enough already.

Steele, the discussion was about health care in remote communities, not just doctors, and unless you have taken note of what I previously wrote, you will be none the wiser.
The role of nurses and health workers in communities is totally different to the role they play in cities and large towns.
In a city if you want to get immunised, you go to your GP. If you want antenatal care you go to your GP. If you want your blood sugar, blood pressure or blood oxygen saturation levels checked, you go to your GP. If you have a nasty infection on your leg, you go to your GP. And you do that because apart from a hospital emergency department, that’s the only way you can get those services. And that’s very inefficient because a good nurse can attend to all those things without needing a doctor.
What happens in the bush is that nurses and health workers take care of all these more minor issues, including prescribing antibiotics, which leaves time for the available doctors to focus on more serious issues.
So, when a community of 2200 has two doctors, 10 nurses and 7 health workers, thats a far greater level of health care than is available to people in the rest of the country, apart from the very wealthy. And certainly far more than white people in remote areas who get nothing apart from mobile clinics that visit.

SR,

" .... why don't you give us a single instance where he wrote badly, edited badly, or mishandled the truth .... "

Every 'fact' that Pascoe asserts, SR. Not one is unambiguously true. If you think there is, say, just one, let us see it. If you assert, you must demonstrate, otherwise .... - 'asseritur gratis, negatur gratis'.

Just one instance of actually farming would be a relief from the fraud.

Collections of people for ceremonial purposes, in the hundreds ? Yes, of course, early missionaries reported that often, and had to scramble to find enough rations to feed the sudden crowds. Then they're off, back to their own country.

Joe

An interesting read by the author Rupert Gerritsen see: "Their Ghosts May Be Heard" - http://link.springer.com › article

Dear Big Nana,

You write;

“In a city if you want to get immunised, you go to your GP. If you want antenatal care you go to your GP. If you want your blood sugar, blood pressure or blood oxygen saturation levels checked, you go to your GP. If you have a nasty infection on your leg, you go to your GP. And you do that because apart from a hospital emergency department, that’s the only way you can get those services. And that’s very inefficient because a good nurse can attend to all those things without needing a doctor.”

I'm sorry but this is patently wrong.

I can pop over to my local chemist in my country town and have my blood sugar, blood pressure and O2 levels checked without an appointment right now. They will also administer a range of immunisations.

Here in Victoria we also have remote area nurses as well as nurse practitioners who can prescribe antibiotics and operate x-ray machines among other things.

However it is doctor ratios which most directly impact the health and particularly mortality outcomes in communities, particularly with serious cases.

Wadeye should be staffed by at least 5 of them to be commensurate with ratios that exist across the country. I am surprised you are prepared to accept such blatant under-staffing for that community.

Steele, I don’t know where you are getting your figures from but I suspect that you are confusing medical practitioners with general practitioners. Medical practitioners includes specialists and other allied professionals, not to be confused with your general practitioners.

Here are the official figures from 2015 which shows that Wadeye, with 2 GPs to 2200 people is fairly standard, and the large number of nurses and health workers gives extra health cover.

“While supply of medical practitioners overall was lowest in Remote/Very remote areas, the supply of general practitioners was the highest in Remote/Very remote areas in 2015. The supply of general practitioners in Remote/Very remote areas was 136 FTE per 100,000 population, 24 more than the national rate of 112.”

As for your services by a chemist, they will not do immunisations on babies, which is the biggest demand in communities, nor will they attend to wounds, give antibiotics etc. Your talk of remote area nurses is just repeating what I already wrote. This is supposed to be a comparison between remote area health care and that provided in cities. In a city you need to go to a GP for many of the services provided by nurses in the bush, including suturing wounds, setting broken limbs, delivering babies etc. Which, as I have repeatedly stated , reduces the demand for a GP and leaves them more time for seriously ill patients.

Big Nana, I'm feeling dizzy, aren't you?
Discussions with some people is like riding a merry-go-round.
The only thing, as an observer is to hope the merry-go-round stops soon or the person keeping it in motion, jumps off and moves on.

Steele,

“As I siad(sic) his book 'Dark Emu' is badly written, badly edited and , to be charitable, somewhat mishandles the truth.”

Good on you, you picked up on 'siad' and used 'sic' correctly, which indicates that you might be better than Pascoe.

Shew me where Mitchell writes about towns of a thousand; Pascoe's farming claim is the most demonstrably false of his often weird assumptions.

Steele,

"He refers to the 1848 journal of Thomas Mitchell recounting that he 'rode through nine miles of stooked grain' - sheaves of grain cut and left to dry.

Mr Pascoe has stated that it was this journal, which he picked up for $8 at a second-hand bookstore, that kicked off the research that led to the book.

However, what the journal actually said was that Mitchell: 'counted nine miles along the river, in which we rode through this grass only, reaching to our saddle-girths.

'Dry heaps of this grass, that had been pulled expressly for the purpose of gathering the seed, lay along our path for many miles.'"

Perhaps you'd like to comment on the above claim?

Looks like hunter gatherers at work not farmers.

What is a town ? According to Pascoe, it's a conurbation of, say, a thousand people, plopped down anywhere. In real life, as anyone knows working or driving in country areas, it's a conurbation surrounded by perhaps miles of productive enterprises, usually farming, fruit-blocks, wheat-farms, etc. i.e. where many of the people in the town - and out on those properties - work. A town does not exist out of nothing.

Pascoe writes of Captain Sturt coming across a 'town' (Sturt doesn't refer to the gathering that he met as a 'town') somewhere up between Lake Frome and Cooper's Creek. Currently there would no actual town within hundreds of kilometres of there, except the mighty metropolis of Innamincka. In fact, in that quadrilateral between Alice Springs, Birdsville, Innamincka and Marree, there are current no towns unless we count sheep stations as towns.

Towns exist for a reason. They don't just magically appear out of thin air. In most early peasant societies, and even many today, they are represented by what one might call hamlets, of fifty or a hundred people, usually related, with everybody working on the surrounding land.

Many of our ancestors, like Pascoe's, are descended from English and Welsh and Irish and Scottish migrants, who came from such out-of-the-way hamlets where work opportunities were withering in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, impelling them to migrate. Pascoe's all seemed to have been free men, not convicts, which suggests that they were relatively affluent, able to afford six months at sea and then setting up in one of the colonies. No doubt destroying all evidence of previous towns in the process, somehow.

Hence, according to Pasoe, no evidence of any towns around Lake Frome (salt, by the way, Bruce, with not even sheep stations nearby) and Cooper's Creek.

Maybe it IS possible to fool all of the people for at least part of the time.

Joe

Still haven't made up your kinds?

Dear Is Mise,

It seems all you are arguing is the use by Pascoe of the word 'stooked' to describe the “Dry heaps of this grass, that had been pulled expressly for the purpose of gathering the seed”.

Here is a stock photo of some stooked grass.

http://stock.adobe.com/sk/images/a-stook-of-barely-piled-together-for-harvest/254807879

Certainly looks like dry heaps of grass gathered for the purpose of gathering seed.

What is your issue?

Steele,

You miss the point entirely and as you are obviously not stupid, you must be missing it deliberately.

Pascoe said that Mitchell wrote that he rode through nine miles of stoked grain.
That is not what Mitchell wrote, Mitchell said that he saw grass pulled for removal of the grain during a nine mile ride through such grass.

Pascoe, as an educated man, should also know that grain is not stocked, the grass is stocked but it is impossible to stock grain, a small point but valid in the context of poor writing and poor editing, it'd never get through in an Undergraduate's essay without the welding of the red pencil.

Dear Is Mise,

Sigh.

Perhaps you had better review the differences between stocked and stooked. You seemed to be a little confused.

So here is the actually quote from Mitchell;

“The seed is made by the natives into a kind of paste or bread. Dry heaps of this grass, that has been pulled expressly for this purpose of gathering the seed, lay along our path for many miles. I counted nine miles along the river, in which we rode through this grass only, reaching our saddle girths...”

Your issue now seems to be that the 'many miles' may not have equated to the 'nine miles' so Pascoe was perhaps incorrect in his description.

Well hell mate, aren't you splitting hairs? If this is the level of minutia that you are forcing yourself into in order to discredit the bloke you need to reassess your priorities. This is rubbish.

Pascoe has every right to use these descriptions to weave his narrative. The man is a generalist rather than a dry historian I will grant that, but it certainly doesn't invalidate his position. This is more from Mitchell;

“In the neighbourhood of our camp the grass had been pulled to a very great extent, and piled in hay-ricks so that the aspect of the desert was softened into the agreeable semblance of a hay-field. The grass had evidently been thus laid up by the natives, but for what purpose we could not imagine. At first I thought the heaps were only the remains of encampments, as the aborigines sometimes sleep on a little dry grass; but when we found the ricks, or haycocks, extending for miles we were quite at a loss to understand why they had been made.”

A town of 1000 people could not survive without extensive agriculture.
And animal husbandry. All the surrounding game would have been long hunted out, and even if there were miles of grain ready to be winnowed, that wouldn’t feed 1000 people for long plus they couldn’t live on grain alone. There would also need to be a very reliable water supply and some form of sewage system to prevent disease.
No one has ever denied that groups of aboriginal people got together at Times for ceremonial and group hunting purposes, so perhaps these “ huts” were left over from one of these gatherings.
But an occasional gathering of people doesn’t make a town.

I think Mitchell used the term "stooped", meaning "stooked", i.e. "stacked". It's what gatherers do. Mitchell was oblivious to any evidence of actual cultivation of the land i.e. farming. What he observed was preparatory to gathering: the "stacking" of grain by gatherers.

Joe

Hi Joe,

I spoke with the wife, re Maori gardens. In the past she understands the gardens were in the vicinity of the village located close to, or inside a Pa (fortress). The Pa was essentially a fortified strong point, a place of refuge if attacked, and it occupied a strategically prominent position. Lookouts could spot "visitors" from some distance away. The wife believes gardens were constructed much the same in past times as they were when she was a child. Kumara (sweet potato) and riwai (potato) grown on the inside with kamo kamo (squash) around the outside, European corn and pumpkins were also grown in that garden . She said poha and other greens grew wild in the garden and in the surrounds, and watercress was always in the creek. Two people could maintain a garden of about 3 acres by hand, the main tool was the hoe, but that would have been a stone adze in the old days, did use other modern garden hand tools as well. The wife said the big advantage, and why the large garden for 2 people to maintain was they didn't have to do a lot of watering, the high rainfall seen to that, the main job besides planting was weeding. Storage was in the taka, a raised shed, which kept the root crops fresh for months, they had two such sheds at their homestead. They also stored European vegs, onions etc, as well from the house garden, which was about half an acre, she thinks. Grew lots of different veg and herbs in the house garden. Much of the produce went to whanau in the valley, including old folks who didn't have gardens, and those who lived on smaller blocks, some had orchards or dairies, other family members got plenty of seafood. Fruit, milk and seafood was always around for everyone. Seems her Grandmother had a very big orchard which everyone took advantage of, her mum did a lot of preserving at home, jars were never thrown away. I can attest to the quality of the seafood from my recent visit.

Hi Paul,

I'm confused why the Evils, according to Pascoe, would want to destroy any trace whatever of Aboriginal farming over here, in seven million square km, but have no probs with Maori farming over there, with only a piddly 200 thousand sq km ? Why put huge efforts into destroying every trace of farming here, but not give a toss about intensive farming and/or gardening in Aotearoa ?

After all, it was the same Evils, all whites, all British. Natural Evils. Of course, the Australian land mass was vastly bigger than NZ's, the transformation of which into hunting and gathering environments must have taken up all the time and effort of many tens of thousands of early so-called 'settlers' here, with no known inter-communication (except perhaps by word of mouth), all of them devoted to destroying fences and storage pits and villages in the many thousands - and without bulldozers.

And then stopping Aboriginal people from ever again using any farming terms, and forcing hunting and gathering onto them. And also destroying any identifiable farming implements and substituting hunting and digging implements, and teaching people how to use them. Which they readily abandoned once the ration system was viciously imposed on people by evil missionaries and Protectors.

And the whites were so calculating that they made sure that there was absolutely no evidence of what had existed for fifty thousand years.

And then missionaries stamping out any farming dances, rituals, songs, etc. All utter bastards. But of course, we now know that all whites are utter bastards.

Blacks good, whites bad.

You can always rely on the gullibles, they'll believe anything that they want to believe, even without a scrap of evidence, even AGAINST the available evidence - but of course we're all entitled to be bigots :)

Cheers,

Joe

Steele,

What you describe, via Mitchell, is gathering not farming.

What Joe said is right, how did the early settlers obliterate all the evidence?
Why did Pascoe apparently lie about his heritage?
You haven't tackled that question yet.

Maybe it doesn't matter as he's only "generalising".

Dear Is Mise,

For crying out loud you asked my to comment on something you raised purporting to show that Pascoe was fabricating and misquoting the early invader's diaries.

As well have discussed he did no such thing on this occasion. Do you have a second example to try and prove your point?

Steele,

For crying out loud you asked my[sic] to comment on something you raised purporting to show that Pascoe was fabricating and misquoting the early invader's diaries."

Well he wasn't, because as far as we know the early invaders left no diaries, the post 1788 settlers and explorers left diaries and it is those diaries that he misquotes; so now what about his claims to be Aboriginal?

Twist as much as you like, Pascoe is still considered by many to be a liar and a charlatan.

"I (Is Mise) haven't really read 'Dark Emu' either, scanning it was enough to convince me that to really read it would have been wasted effort."

"As I (Is Mise) siad(sic) his book 'Dark Emu' is badly written, badly edited and , to be charitable, somewhat mishandles the truth.”

Issy, how did you come to the second conclusion, without having read the book? You didn't like the cover, or did 'beat Up'Bolt tell you so?

I read the book, it was an easy read, no words like siad (you certainly must get that 'Grammearly' thing you recommend for others when they do a typo, pot calling the kettle black, ha).

p/s What did you scan the book with to come to your conclusions? Your electric toothbrush!

Paul,

Scanning was easy, I used my eyes.

Any comments on Pascoe's alleged ancestry?

I'm not using my own computer at the moment but an Apple one with small print and with my eyes you can expect some typos, what's your excuse for your's?

Like most discussions, this one has turned into pissing contest: nothing to do with the subject, and an insult to Is Mise who introduced it in good faith. When the very people who Pascoe claims kinship with him reject his claims, there can be no argument. Pascoe is a fraud. End of story.

No wonder there have been few new topics put up lately. No matter what the subject is, one or two idiots use the opportunity to get dirty water off their chests and post irrelevant bulldust.

SR,

So what it all comes down to is:

- what unambiguous evidence is there that:

* . Pascoe is in any way Indigenous ?

* . much more importantly, that farming in anything like the conventional sense for early societies, was carried out anywhere in Australia apart from the areas on Cape York and the TS islands influenced by farmers from PNG ? And by the way, according to the Pascoe Version, why were people up on the Cape and in the Islands allowed to continue unhindered in their farming activities ? In fact, on early Missions, weren't there major efforts everywhere to try to persuade people to grow food ?

Farming, not stooking grain which was and is available all over Australia (so why grow it ?). Systematically, annually, clearing and cultivating the soil in order to plant seed or tubers. Where are there any cultivating implements (as one could easily find in NZ, for example) ? Evidence of storage systems ?

The lack of evidence may well indicate the lack of such activity. The pathetic defence that it was all destroyed by evil whitefellas is not exactly proof of the existence of farming, but for any sane person, simply a lack of evidence.

And even if the quotes from Sturt and Mitchell were accurate, why did they break ranks and write as they did ? Didn't they get the Secret Message that they had to deny any evidence of farming ? They were both military officers, and so according to the Pascoe Fantasy, hardly likely to tell the Pascoe Truth.

So what's the agenda ? Why push this rubbish ? Why deny the truths that thousands of writers have described, chapter and verse ?

Joe

Issy, my excuse is better than yours and more believable. I'm also not using my regular steam powered puter', but rather a Dick Tracy wrist watch machine which has micro small Japanese type face, which I have to painstakingly translate to something resembling English on my good old 'Commodore 64'. Then I transmit the fantastic end result all the way to YOU! Are you not one fortunate lad?

"one or two idiots use the opportunity to get dirty water off their chests and post irrelevant bulldust." Well, ttbn you'll just have to stop doing that. BTW that other thing you constantly do on here, the Pope said if you keep it up you will go blind.

Happy holiday season to you both.

Hi Paul,

Is that your best shot ? No chance of actually tackling the issues then ?

i.e. what evidence is there of farming in pre-Invasion Australia ? Where are the tools ? The stories, legends, rituals, etc. ? I'm sure that Maori groups had farming rituals, digging songs, etc. ? Isn't that so ?

And what were social/political relations like in NZ between hapu over farming and land ? Sweetness and light, or the building of pas and semi-constant warfare ? Like elsewhere in early the early peasant farming world ? Hmmm, that might explain the hostilities between groups here - although hunting/gathering societies were also a bit suspicious of each other. So that wouldn't be a conclusive observation.

Take your time, no rush :)

Joe

Dear Is Mise,

Invaders or peaceful explorers?

Well here is a run down of the weaponry of your peaceful explorers;

Major T.L. Mitchell: Chief of the party : - : Rifle and pistols.
G.C. Stapylton, Esquire : Second in command : - : Carabine and pistol.
**ALEXANDER BURNETT : Overseer : Storekeeper : Carabine and pistol.
**ROBERT MUIRHEAD : Bullock-driver : Soldier and lance-corporal : Musket, bayonet and pistol.
T*Charles Hammond : Bullock-driver : - : Musket, bayonet and pistol.
T*William Thomas : Bullock-driver : Butcher : Musket, bayonet and pistol.
Richard Lane : Bullock-driver : - : Carabine and pistol.
James McLellan : Bullock-driver : - : Musket, bayonet and pistol.
Charles Webb : Bullock-driver : - : Musket, bayonet and pistol.
T*John Johnston : Blacksmith : - : Carabine.
T Walter Blanchard : Blacksmith : Measurer : Carabine and pistol.
**WILLIAM WOODS : Horse carter : Sailor : Carabine and pistol.
*Charles King : Horse carter : Measurer : Musket, bayonet and pistol.
*John Gayton : Horse carter : Cook : Carabine.
John Drysdale : Medical attendant : Barometer-carrier : Carabine.
John Roach : Collector of birds : - : Pistol (fowling-piece).
John Richardson : Collector of plants : Shepherd : Two pistols.
**JOHN PALMER : Sailor : Sailmaker : Carabine and pistol.
John Douglas : Sailor : - : Carabine.
T**Joseph Jones : Shepherd : - : Carabine.
James Taylor : Groom : Trumpeter : Carabine and pistol.
Edward Pickering : Carpenter : Barometer-carrier : Carabine.
Archibald McKean : Carpenter : Barometer-carrier : Carabine.
James Field : Shoemaker : - : Carabine.
**Anthony Brown : Cook : - : Carabine and pistol.

Advanced party of invaders in my book.

You write; "Twist as much as you like, Pascoe is still considered by many to be a liar and a charlatan."

No, not by many, only a lonely group of twisted white old men with nothing better to do.

SR,

I would have thought that invaders would have had cannon and grenades as well. A bloke with a fowling piece would be a bit useless in a battle.

Aboriginal men were warriors, ready and able to attack parties of trespassers, it happened quite a bit.

So what's your point ? That there was an invasion of Australia as a whole ? Well, of course there was, that's how you and I got here.

Any relevance to farming ? Any evidence of Aboriginal farming (or its destruction) out your way ?

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

You picked the least armed person to make your point and you also wanted the expedition to cart around cannon on their travels. To use against what? Fortifications? Grow up. They has more weapons per person than the average soldier of the time.

They were a forward scouting party for others to come and take the land by force.

In other words, invaders.

SR, your belligerent attitude is nearing THAT point, on the patience scale.
What lands do you know of that are not usually taken by the use of force.
The blacks conveniently chose to call white mans arrival as having been something other than what it was so it enabled them to make the claims they are making and have made, to extort money from the govt.
Now I don't remember which one it was whether they want to call it peaceful transition in which case we have rights as it is their land, or whether there was conflict and bloodshed (fighting, war) then it means we invaded, and they have no right to anything.
So any forward or advance parties of explorers or settlers all had a backing of armed soldiers as a matter of due course and proto-col.
That's why it's a big con job that we are paying the blacks for anything.
We invaded, we took over, and we ended up running the place, and therefore "owning" it, all in the name of Queen Victoria.
Australia belongs to the British Royals as part of their spoils of conquering lands, which were all done in the name of the Commonwealth.
Another flaw/lie, Aussies are too lax and stupid to stand up and fight for, is the blacks by their own admission, owned nothing, they did not understand the concept of owning land.
They were nomadic, so I ask again; Why are we paying these blacks all this bloody money?
Someone make some sense of this, or have we taken our eye off the ball and allowed these pigs in Canberra, and beyond to screw us good and proper

Steele,

Prudent, well armed men, what would you have used, willow wands?

How are you and Paul getting on with the Pascoe genealogy?

If he hasn't got the Aboriginal ancestors that he claims then he is doing more than generalising.

Hi Steele,

Bruce Pascoe and his book 'Dark Emu' was discussed in detail on the forum a while back. The hard right detractors admitted then, as they do now, that they had not read the book, Issy has scanned it with his electric toothbrush to draw his conclusions . How they can even hope to discuss a text with any competency without reading it first is beyond me, but they do so free. I assume if its not approved reading as defined by the likes of 'Beat Up'Bolt they are forbidden from any perusal.

Hi Joe,

You were give many examples of Aboriginal farming last time around, now you again demand more. The "Yam Gardens" around early Sydney Town as described by the British Captain Hunter, will do as an example. Rebut those "Yam Gardens" of Hunter's if you can.

"How are you and Paul getting on with the Pascoe genealogy?"

Dear Issy, I have not delved into Bruce Pascoe's genealogy, but any reliance on anything 'Beat Up' Bolt might say should be taken with a grain of salt. Known to exaggerate for political purposes Bolt, many believe, including me, fabricated his past "assault" by leftest thugs in an attempt to gain political advantage, wasting valuable police time and resources. Is this more of that fabrication?

In my own case, having a strong affinity with Maori people, both here and in Aotearoa, does that make me Maori? I think not, although I possibly know more of the history, language, protocols and customs than many Maori do (the plastic Maori, as my wife refers to). More than one of the cuzzy bro's has at times refereed to me as such, not knowing I am Australian. My dearly departed brother-in-law, would refer to me as "Skippy" so I'll take that as making me Australian. I don't identify as aboriginal, although indigenous blood from my mothers side is infused into us all including me. Short of being tested by 'Beat Up' Bolt I'll just have to stay whitefella.

Just to add, my wife will speak to me in Maori, as part of my language education, something she has be teaching me for more than 10 years, alas I am a poor student. Sometimes I understand, sometimes I get the totally wrong interpretation and sometimes she gets left with a blank look from me.

I still have aroha for you my dear koroua huanui.

Now the search is on in earnest to find new excuses !

Paul,

You're kidding. How big was this yam patch ? Did Hunter write that it looked like a garden, nothing more ?

So Hunter didn't get the Message, to conceal any evidence of farming, and destroy whatever looked like a garden ? How come some writers, Hunter, probably Tench as well, Sturt, Mitchell, Lindsay, didn't get the Message ? None of them farmers, by the way, so their observations were nothing more than surmises. Any observations of large, obviously cultivated, areas of farming activity, growing enough to sustain large populations ? What did early observers mean by a 'garden' ? Why didn't they call them farms ?

Is that all there is ? A patch of yams ? How do you think yams grow wild ? Like a garden ?

Joe

Hi Joe,

I have since returned my copy of 'Dark Emu' to the library with its hundreds of examples of aboriginal farming. As this was discussed at an earlier time by us all, I do not see the need to discuss it again. You most likely can obtain a copy of the book from your local library and then you could actually read it, and then draw your own conclusions. How about it?

BTW, Steele has given you lots of leads on aboriginal farming as detailed by those advance parties of invaders. We enjoy a huge advantage over you and the hard right forum faction, having actually read the book ourselves. I'm not counting Issy's attempt at book scanning with his electric toothbrush as valid, he should have used his electric egg beater instead, far more accurate.

Accidental food plant growth via discarding seeds is a very long way from farming indeed !
Stop looking for an evidence that is non-existing !
Next we'll be told Kangaroos were farmers too !

Paul,

No, SR hasn't given me anything of the sort. He has simply asserted what he needed to demonstrate . As you do too :)

Let's get a bit real: apart from the tip of Cape York, and apart from piddly 'gardens' recorded by early observers who didn't seem to get the Message, where - now - is there Aboriginal farming which is a continuation of traditional farming ? Where are the remnants of forts from which groups protected their lands, like in NZ ? Where are the tools ? Where are the stories, songs, rituals ?

Seriously, although my experience is obviously confined to a small part of South Australia, I've never come across any evidence whatever that Aboriginal farming - the cultivation of large areas of land and harvesting the products of that land, which local people depended on from year to year - occurred in those areas that I am familiar with. Or even the slightest interest by the vast majority of Aboriginal people in growing anything.

Hunting and killing animAls, yes: i recall a kangaroo running into my car while i was driving out of a community one time - I told the most traditional man there, thinking of course (traditional life being all sweetness and love) that he would track it and heal it; yes, he tracked it, and killed it. Hunters do that, that's how it works.

Share-farming of Aboriginal land, yes, with neighbouring white farmers farming the land in exchange for a proportion of the proceeds when it is harvested. A.k.a. 'rent-seeking'.

Perhaps you may have better on-the-ground knowledge ?

Joe

Paul,

Is Pascoe telling the truth then about his Aboriginal ancestry?

Others, apart from Bolt, doubt it and Pascoe seems loath to defend his claims.

Why don't you put his detractors to shame and shew his genealogy?

Then we'd all have to shut up.

Paul,

On that last post, you would surely know that it would be pretty impossible for anyone to, say, claim to be Maori, once they come up against genuine Maori: within minutes they would either demonstrate family links, perhaps distant, perhaps by marriage, with any Maori person they met, or it would be clear that they had no Maori links whatever.

So it is here: in thirty years, Pascoe has been unable to establish links with any family. In fact, he doesn't seem to know enough to realise that that's how it works.

When we went to live in one community, within a day or so, the people there could locate my wife in the Grand Family Scheme of Things, as something like a third or fourth cousin of people in one family (Sansburys/Angies/Reids from southern Yorke Peninsula here in SA) , and something similar with another family (gr-gr-grandfather Wilson's and his 'brother''s grandkids). So it wasn't that difficult. In another community, her birth community, of course she was related to pretty much everybody one way or the other.

So why can't Pascoe ? If his gr-grandmother was indeed Aboriginal, she would have had relations, and they would have a multitude of descendants by now. A multitude ? Yes, indeed, my wife would have had more than a thousand people she was related to one way or the other, by birth and by marriage. Maybe a couple of thousand.

The rule is: if someone can't 'locate' their supposed Aboriginal ancestor, they are not in any way Aboriginal. End of. Pity that Pascoe doesn't know enough about Aboriginal culture to know that much.

So it is with so many, many charlatans in Indigenous affairs.

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

I'm wondering if you support the stance of a fellow traveler?

"That's the difference between us SR. I never bothered to check the identities of these people because it doesn't matter. I go straight for the data to see how accurate it might be.

SR on the other hand has a two stage process. (1) do I like the data? if yes - then its true. if no go to (2) where we don't try to disprove the data but attack the messenger.

But the messenger doesn't change the data."

SR and others of similar views, enough!
The topic is asking if this clown is who he purports to be, BLACK.
Well clearly he is not.
As I have pointed out again and again, if there is ANY non black blood in someones lineage, they just cannot be or be called, black.
Just because he wants to benefit, somehow, by being seen as a black fella, absolutely does not allow him or qualify him to do so.
So to end this farce, and even farcical for that matter.
Let's move on.

Altrav,

Skin colour has nowt to do with it, for example, if one has one Irish grandparent then one can claim Irish Citizenship, as a right, and the Irish Government (after checking the truth) will recognise the claim and record he fact in the Book of Foreign Births and citizenship and Irishness is automatic.
{some of our politicians found this out recently!!]

In the case of Pascoe one Aboriginal ancestor would be enough, (not necessarily a grandparent), but it seems that that ancestor is illusive to the point of nonexistence..

SR,

I'm not sure what you're on about. If you mean that I'm attacking Pascoe rather than debunking the dangerous rubbish that he is pushing (i.e. which demeans Aboriginal hunting and gathering), well, no. I'm pointing out both, that this whitefella is taking Indigenous position and money, AND what he writes, or fabricates, is without evidence.

He is in the position of an Indigenous professor, of Indigenous Studies, no less, on a salary of (?) $ 120,000. But he has not shown that he is qualified to take that position. But that's up to his employer, the UTS, to sort out.

He has not provided evidence, apart from dodgy mis-quotes from early observers, that there was anything like what is conventionally taken to be 'farming', and in opposition to the vastly more comprehensive observations of thousands of anthropologists, historians, missionaries, functionaries, Mission and community staff in every part of Australia.

In the process, he has promoted a negative view of Aboriginal people as 'mere' - even 'primitive' - foragers, like we all were just a few thousand years ago - and now probably every schoolkid in (at least) Victoria will forever take on that view.

So real history has to be denied, in order to believe this stuff. This will eventually rebound very badly.

Joe

I suppose if Nancy Pelosi can identify as a catholic while racing off the planned parenthood to plan more murders then Bruce's case of identification is a little less deceitful.

It's not a matter of anti-black, it's a matter of anti pretend-black !

Dear loudmouth2,

You write; "He has not provided evidence, apart from dodgy mis-quotes from early observers"

Show a single mis-quote please.

issy, I'm sorry but I don't care about subjectivity and political agenda.
I am very objective with a fair share of pragmatism.
I remember the case of the Kiwi polly who got pinged because some moronic Kiwi law doesn't give a sh!t about truth.
And the truth was, as I remember, even though he was born in Australia, he was still regarded as a Kiwi, by the Kiwi's.
Well BIG DEAL!
He was born here, so in fact and truth, he IS Aussie, with Kiwi parents! (if that's what they are/were)
So the same goes for this clown.
If he was born here, he is an Aussie, with mixed blood, because he's not black of skin.
As I've said many times before, what arrogant pricks these people (like him) are to completely dismiss all the other nationalities that were involved in them being here today.
What a moron!

SR,

Pascoe, purportedly citing Mitchell (in Dark Emu, 2018, p. 15):

"‘[T]he grass is pulled…and piled in hayricks, so that the aspect of the desert was softened into the agreeable semblance of a hay-field…we found the ricks or hay-cocks extended for miles.’“

From Mitchell's 1848 journal, p. 90:

"Dry heaps of this grass, that had been pulled expressly for the purpose of gathering the seed, lay along our path for many miles. I counted nine miles along the river, in which we rode through this grass only, reaching to our saddle-girths, and the same grass seemed to grow back from the river, at least as far as the eye could reach through a very open forest. I had never seen such rich natural pasturage in any other part of New South Wales.”

Not that there is evidence of farming in either quote, only of gathering dry grass in order to strip the seed in Mitchell's. And we come back to it again and again: why grow grasses which are plentiful (in good seasons) right across Australia (and in Africa and Asia too where it is called 'famine food') ?

" .... rich natural pasturage .... "

Over to you, SR.

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

Over to me hey?

Okay, let's go.

How on earth do you even sleep at night? So determined to discredit this man you gloss over anything which may not align with your deeply antagonistic attitude toward him.

The offending line in the book;

"‘[T]he grass is pulled…and piled in hayricks, so that the aspect of the desert was softened into the agreeable semblance of a hay-field…we found the ricks or hay-cocks extended for miles.’“

Pascoe wasn't quoting from the journal entry you claim but rather this one with my capitalisation;

“In the neighbourhood of our camp the grass had been pulled to a very great extent, AND PILED IN HAY-RICKS SO THAT THE ASPECT OF THE DESERT WAS SOFTENED INTO THE AGREEABLE SEMBLANCE OF A HAY-FIELD. The grass had evidently been thus laid up by the natives, but for what purpose we could not imagine. At first I thought the heaps were only the remains of encampments, as the aborigines sometimes sleep on a little dry grass; but when WE FOUND THE RICKS, OR HAYCOCKS, EXTENDING FOR MILES we were quite at a loss to understand why they had been made.”

Unless you are going to call using 'is' rather 'had been' a hanging offence what is your beef?

Now you really can't claim not to have been aware of the correct passage because I produced it in full earlier in this thread in a post you personally responded to.

Do you have different example because this one is done.

Over to you.

SR,

So, even in this different example, Mitchell describes the gathering of wild grasses by women, while Pascoe's very selective quote (in this case) leaves out inconvenient sections, about possible explanations (Mitchell does not seem to have suggested cultivation) such as sleeping arrangements, for example.

So how is that any evidence of early farming ? i.e. in ways similar to those of early peasant farmers around the world ? Did Mitchell see any evidence of the cultivation or the soil, or any implements such as hoes ?

In fact, descriptions of early farming practice, and current peasant farming practice, assumes that a large holding (for one family) would rarely exceed twenty acres, and be surrounded by jealously-guarded fences. Nine miles, even only a mile wide, would encompass nearly six thousand acres, or - at that rate - the labour of three hundred families. Clans don't often ever get that big without fracturing, even if all within was sweetness and light and love.

Clearly Mitchell was describing the first stages of gathering seed to grind into damper (i.e. Pascoe's 'bread' and 'cakes').

Surely that's not all you've got ?

Joe

Steele,

And still not a shred of evidence for Aboriginal farming, of course the supporters of Pascoe the Aboriginal have to denigrate the hunters because part of your philosophy is to deny present day hunters the practice of their culture.

Dear loudmouth2,

I am really getting heartily sick of the resident right-wing goon squad flinging out slur on top of slander and when they get called out it never apologising but moving straight on to the next bit of bluster and balderdash. Shadow Minister, mhaze and yourself have become shining examples.

Mate, you asserted that Pascoe deliberately misquoted Mitchell and gave an example. Your example was completely and utterly discredited. Yet there was no retraction, no apology, nothing just a determination to crack on slandering the man.

You really need to provide a mea culpa. Not to do so puts you in the Trumpette camp where the truth does not matter, where you thumb your nose at any sense of natural justice, where attack regardless of its validity is paramount.

You have become just another bad faith puppet reciting the playbook of cretins like Bolt.

You have a chance of at least a semblance of credibility, I suggest you take it.

Pascoe merely built on the damage by Gamage.

I do wish someone would address the question posed in the OP.

Is Bruce Pascoe an Indigenous Australian?

SR,

I don't think so.

To summarise:

* . Pascoe is not Indigenous, but has a well-paid position as if he is.

* . Pascoe has fabricated and distorted observations by early observers such as Sturt, Mitchell, Lindsay and others.

These will come back to bite us all.

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

Me: “You have a chance of at least a semblance of credibility, I suggest you take it.”

You: “I don't think so.”

Well that about sums it up doesn't it. You make an egregious error yet refuse to acknowledge it. Instead you double down. This is right out of the alt-right play book.

How on earth do you expect people to take you seriously when you do this kind of thing? If you can't respect the general rules of dialogue why should anyone respect a single thing you have to say?

It really can't be a pleasant place to be in, only you can make that change.

This site goes into Pascoe's ancestry in detail.

Perhaps Steele, you can point out where they are wrong and prove that Pascoe isn't lying.,
http//australianhistory972829073.wordpress.com/2019/10/23/bruce-pascoe-how-aboriginal-is-he/

Dear Is Mise,

Mate it is a wordpress site so it is hardly going to be a serious link is it.

Tell you what though, I will, against my better judgement, commit to clicking your link if you promise me there is an identifiable and verifiable author.

Until then why on earth bother going anywhere near it.

The cynic in me asks, for this fraud to have gone so far up the ladder to actually be recognised as an authentic piece of work, he must have expert, and govt assistance and guidance.
There is enough inconsistencies and questions to consider this guy a fraud.
If he is in fact, squeaky clean, there would be no questions or doubts about him and his allegations and in fact his book and it's veracity.
Knowing the workings of govts and especially the ministers and how they are in it for what they can get out of it, leaves me very curious as to how this guy managed to get this book into the school curriculum.
I want to believe that he had 'inside' and influential help and guidance, because I imagine it pretty rare that something as important as teaching and history, needs to be absolutely without questions or doubts, which this has too many to be considered a truthful and correct collection of information to teach children with.

SR, I just want to bring to your attention that if all this guy says is true then all these people and entities that are openly bagging, criticising him, would have been issued with a writ by now.
How is it that this has not happened?
Is it possibly because he has something to hide and therefore does not want it and he exposed.
You know what the media are like, they love to "get their man", and they have this uncanny ability to find out things that would otherwise be impossible to find.
Just a thought.

Hi Joe,

You asked about Maori genealogy or whakapapa. Ones whakapapa is the important element that links a person to their hapu (tribe). The wife is very familiar with her whakapapa, as are many of her relatives. Family names along with their ancestral location form an important part of that whakapapa. The European concept of kin is different to that of Maori, their's is far more extensive. The wife being a member of a very large hapu, I think its about 35,000 in a Iwi of over 100,000 means she has many many relatives, of course she doesn't know all of them, but certainly known many and how they fit into the whakapapa, who's related to who, and how they relate to her, that sort of thing.

Before speaking at the marae, it is an important protocol that you give a brief description of your whakapapa to the gathering, grandparents, parents and you, and where you and them originate from, and any marital relationship, so that those listing know who is speaking. Its considered bad form not to do so. When meeting people you are not familiar with you ask names and places that they are associated with, in that way a family relationship is established. Maori seem to be rather interested in who you are, I suspect a hangover from the days when it was important to know if you were dealing with a possible friend, or the opposite.

Back in the day many Europeans disregard custom and protocol at their peril. One story is of a French ship in the Bay of Islands. Having established good relations with the locals, but the French were warned not to fish in a certain cove, where a boy had drowned recently. The French took it upon themselves to disregard the tapu, and fished there. The Maori got upset and killed a couple of Frenchmen. The French retaliated and killed several Maori villages, men, women and children.

Steele,

The author is "Jan Holland and the research team" and is probably verifiable but there are many Jan Hollands on the net.

However, their offering is comprehensive and verifiable regarding Pascoe's ancestry and they can't find one Aboriginal.
Perhaps they didn't really try or perhaps Pascoe is lying.

They give references to all of their quotes so their claims are there to be tested.

Anyway, have a read and tell us if/where they are wrong.

Funny that Pascoe keeps contradicting himself on the subject.

Hi Paul,

Similar here. I bumped into an Aboriginal bloke who I thought I'd never met before, and after a while, both of us sort of guarded, he told me his first name, a fairly distinctive name, so I asked if he was from a major family at a particular community. Yep, his mother was so-and-so etc. (So it seemed that I used to drink with her and his late uncle back in the day, before my new friend was born). I suggested that she was related to my wife through a gr-grandfather's sister, etc., and we were away. All up, less than five minutes of cautious toing and froing.

So why can't Pascoe do that ? You can't just say 'Oh, I'm related to the [Group 1] or [Group 2] unless you specify how and who you're related to. If he ever spoke to a person from a group that he claims to be related to, they could very quickly establish if he's genuine or a liar. I wonder if he's ever tried that.

Nah.

So who is fooling who ? The Left is pushing a certain agenda on some pretty wild assumptions - are they manipulating Pascoe or he manipulating them ? You can fool all of the people some of the time .... well, if you get onto the right schtick, like this one about farming (and not 'mere' hunting and gathering) you can fool the Left all of the time, it seems.

After all, ideology beats evidence.

Joe

Paul, LM, IM,

The basis by which one identifies as aboriginal is similar to the way one identifies one's gender in that asking for proof is racist, transphobic etc.

That Pascoe is considered an aboriginal elder in spite of not identifying as one until adulthood is mainly due to the work of fiction that he produced that embroiders aboriginal history beyond belief so much so that I am surprised that Pascoe didn't mention a aboriginal space program before the horrible colonists destroyed it.

That the Dank Emu is being taught at schools is a complete sham.

Hi SM,

I'm puzzled why Pascoe relies on 'modified' [i.e. fabricated] versions of what some early colonists wrote (none of them ever mentioning the cultivation of the soil, i.e. farming) and then implies that all whites were in on an unspoken agreement to destroy any trace of farming, towns, storage, fencing, etc. that they ever came across. After all, even his 'modified' informants, many of whom were military officers, one would think, would have been at the forefront of such a conspiracy. Sturt went on to be the SA colony's Chief Secretary, i.e. head local.

Not only that but - given that the destruction of all traces of farming didn't occur in much small New Zealand - why just Australia ? And wouldn't the conspiracy have required the connivance of the colonial government back in London ?

And then the wholehearted cooperation of colonists, missionaries (not that likely already), government officials, Protectors, etc., etc., to explicitly write about hunters and gatherers - not to mention the hordes of government staff who would have been involved in forcing people to learn hunting and gathering and to stop speaking their farming languages and to adopt hunting-and-gathering languages.

Anybody who knows anything much about traditional Aboriginal culture and languages would be aware of words for spears, shields, clubs, gathering dishes of coolamons or yandies, wiltjas and yuus and pulgis, Dreaming tracks and song-lines, but surprise ! - may not have come across any words which related to farming or herding animals.

And I look forward to the day when, eventually, anthropologists, who may have spent decades with one or two groups, studying them up, down and sideways, open their mouths (perhaps once they have retired) and inform us, one way or the other whether or not they have ever observed any traces, in dance, ritual, song, etc., of farming. They may have to leave the country to do so safely.

Cheers,

Joe

Dear Is Mise,

You write;

“The author is "Jan Holland and the research team" and is probably verifiable but there are many Jan Hollands on the net.”

Well 'Jan Holland' has been described online as a Perth retired author of camping books, a South Australian researcher, and Bolt has now elevated him/her to a 'prominent genealogist'.

The only facebook page even closely resembling this person is of a WA woman who wants national parks opened up and mosques shut down.

It makes one certainly curious about who the research team might consist of.

Anyway just another right wing nutter seems to match what we know so far, that is if it really is a real person.

Do you have anything further?

Dear loudmouth2,

Still no second attempt at an example of Pascoe's supposed embellishments after the first one crashed and burned so spectacularly. Given you claim them to be widespread it should have been easy.

Steele,

Well, you have the author and verification as requested, so go ahead and defend Pascoe; if you can.
Point out all the author's mistakes and misinformation; go on, you can do it!!
Pascoe has made his own bed of nails, let's see if he can lie on it, he seems pretty good at lying.

SR,

You can't get it through your head, that none of the original observations, find them in whatever form - their original form or Pascoe's - as you will, confirm that there was any farming in pre-Invasion Australia.

And common bloody sense suggests that nobody had yet found any evidence otherwise, unless we bend the meaning of the word 'farming' out of all recognition. Nobody has found any cultivating tools, or evidence of an industry making such tools. Nobody has found any evidence of stone towns and villages or fence-lines. No ethnologist or missionary or linguist has written about farming stories or songs or rituals or even farming words in any Aboriginal language.

In short, nobody has found any evidence of anything that was unambiguously 'farming'. And it defies belief, in fact it courts insanity, to assert that all traces of farming and towns were destroyed by some sort of strictly-oral conspiracy.

We come back to the simple principle: the absence of evidence of farming may actually demonstrate the absence of evidence of farming, and no more than that.

Joe

Loudmouth, I applaud your patience and commitment, but boy SR is really stretching the boundaries of reason.
I only ask, if the blacks were such good farmers, why have they not continued even after the white fella came and started settling in?
I have wondered why, with all the promoting and bluster that has been given them by some, including that farce of binge bull or whatever the hell it was that was discovered recently, that someone, also seeking fame and fortune suggested they had discovered early signs/remains of blacks living in round houses made of rocks.
Another load of rubbish.
I tried relentlessly to convince Foxy and others that at the very least they might have been remains of attempts by other explorers to settle here and were either killed or driven away.
The same goes with this merry go-round you and SR are on.
From what I see, there is NO history or evidence AT ALL to suggest the blacks farmed in a way we would recognise as farming today.
I believe for farming be effective, even back then, you needed domesticated animals of a stature able to do work, and able to be controlled and directed by humans/blacks.
Again no evidence of that because there were no animals that were suitable.
So we come back to the blacks wandering, following the tucker around, seeds where ever they grew and animals wherever they roamed or went.
So I've said before, why is it in allegedly, 60,000 years, there is absolutely no trace of anything worth hanging a hat on.
Historically, all we have is a bunch people telling us this is a sacred site, that is a sacred site, that's a meeting place, oh and that's a sacred site as well.
Basically everything's a sacred site or belongs to the blacks, when the blacks were nomadic and did not believe in owning anything more than they could carry.
So this farcical of a joke the blacks are a party to, is on us and all because of ignorance, greed and power.
Native title?
Yeah right!

Pascoe's bogus historical and personal ancestral claims have been debunked by Quadrant Magazine:

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/bennelong-papers/2019/11/the-epicentre-of-our-history/

"The issue of Pascoe’s own Aboriginal background has also been subject to extensive research. Pascoe claims that he is an indigenous writer of mixed Bunorong, Yuin and Aboriginal Tasmanian (Palawa) heritage. However, Pascoe’s statements about himself are inconsistent, claiming in some interviews his Aboriginality comes from his father’s line, but in others from his mother’s grandmother, and in yet others from both sides of his family.

An associate of the Dark Emu Exposed group, the Perth retired author Jan Holland, has researched Pascoe’s family records and made a persuasive case that his ancestry is all white, indeed, all English, and that he is not an Aborigine at all. She backs her claim with a long and thorough genealogical study containing 5500 words of text plus 75 original documents she has published online. A professional genealogist within the group checked her work and confirmed it is accurate. It can all be found on the website Australian History – Truth Matters."

[Continued next post]

"Holland’s genealogy traces the ancestral lines of Pascoe as far back as it needs to establish whether his Aboriginality is authentic or not. Once a line of descent comes to an English-born forbear, the genealogy goes no further, since the possibility of an Aboriginal heritage ends there. Here is Pascoe’s family lineage in these terms:

Bruce Pascoe. Born 11 October, 1947, Richmond Victoria

Ancestors on the paternal side of his family, and where born

Father

Alfred Francis Pascoe 1916 – 1989. Victoria

Grandparents

Joseph Harold Pascoe 1891 – 1933. Victoria

Claudina Alice Palmer 1883 – 1967. Victoria


Great-grandparents

Francis Pascoe 1859 – 1935. Victoria

Elizabeth Jane Hall 1868 – 1952. Victoria

Alfred William Palmer 1870 – 1938. Tasmania

Rebecca Arnold 1870 – 1944. Tasmania

Great-great-grandparents

Francis Pascoe 1814 – 1864. Cornwall, England

Jane Hampton 1827 – 1875. Cornwall, England

John Hall 1832 – 1881. Northumberland, England

Elizabeth Law b. abt. 1841 Durham, England

Thomas Edward Palmer 1830 – 1906. Devon, England

*Alice Berry 1837 – 1861. Tasmania

William Arnold 1834 – 1914. Dorset, England

*Emily Maria Berry 1846 – 1919 Tasmania


Great-great-great-grandparents

Joseph Berry 1811 – 1880. Lancashire, England

Sarah Wright 1819 – 1875. Suffolk, England

*Alice Berry and Emily Maria Berry are sisters – hence the same parents.

Ancestors on the maternal side of his family, and where born

Mother

Una Gloria Cowland Smith 1919 – ?. Victoria


Grandparents

John Smith 1864 – 1952. Leicestershire, England

Cecil Gertrude Cowland 1875 – 1963. Victoria

Great-grandparents

William Unwin Cowland 1824 – 1900. Essex, England

Sarah Matthews 1847 – 1879. Staffordshire, England

In short, there is no Aboriginal line of descent in any of Pascoe’s forebears. So it is not only his history that is bogus, but also his public biography."

Peter O’Brien debunks Pascoe's Dark Emu claims in this book: http://quadrant.org.au/bitter-harvestnow-on-sale/

SR's modus operandi is to try and nitpick opposer's arguments whilst ignoring the massive holes in his.

That the "research" in Dank Emu is so contorted and dishonest that no serious researcher would touch it with a barge pole is ignored.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You write;

“That the "research" in Dank Emu is so contorted and dishonest that no serious researcher would touch it with a barge pole is ignored.”

What a load of pitiful self validating rot.

What you are basically saying is you and the bulk of the other contrarians haven't read the book but are deciding in a moment of group think to claim it is fraudulent, contorted, dishonest, misquoting, untruthful etc.

But when challenged to give examples you are either unable to do so, or you shoot up links to anonymous sites, or if we can finally extradite one from you it proves to be utter crap, claiming Pascoe was referring to one passage from Mitchell's diary when it was another altogether.

Look at Big Nana talking about towns of 1,000 people. I have read Dark Emu and nowhere in the book does he use that figure or anything close to it. Yet here it is, repeated like it is gospel.

So mate, can you please give a single example where Pascoe has been untruthful in the book.

Dear Franku,

Same gos for you mate. Give one example from the book you have cited which debunks anything in Dark Emu.

Steele,

How about his claims to be Aboriginal?

What about all the references given by the author that you requested?

Official document after document and newspaper articles galore?

Dear Is Mise,

The author remains unverified. There doesn't seem to be a picture of her, a Linkdein account, or any reasonable bio you would expect of someone heading up a team of researchers. If she were a respected genealogist as Bolt attests she would rate a mention on any of the Australian professional genealogist lists in Australia. It appears she does not.

I would be keen to see any links to any bios on the woman because at the moment it is a pretty grey box.

Steele,

It may or mayn't be a grey box but what about all the official documents and references to Pascoe's claims?

She could be the reincarnation of Joseph Goebbels but that doesn't lessen the veracity of the documents that she offers nor the accuracy of the quoted articles.

Never mind attacking the woman, just prove her claims wrong and she's out the door.

Dear Is Mise,

And what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

I have been constantly asking for instances where Pascoe misquoted or invented or inaccurately delivered quotes from the explorer's diaries. Nothing. Loudmouth had a crack and crashed and burned.

Yet you are attempting to make the case that his aboriginality is pivotal to the truth of Dark Emu. Yet by the standard you have set above it most certainly doesn't.

How about a little consistency my friend.

Steele,

How about disproving all those official documents?

Just shew that the silly woman is wrong, that she is lying and you've proved that Pascoe isn't telling fibs about his ancestry and is not operating under false pretences.

Go on, you can do it.

Hi there Issy,

The onus is on the accuser to provide the evidence to prove the accusation. And as Steele has rightly pointed out, you or Joe or any of the extreme right forum posters has as yet to provide creditable evidence that a claim made by 'Beat Up'Bolt is true. Until that evidence is forthcoming lets accept Bruce Pascoe is indeed an indigenous Australian.
In the case of 'Beat Up'Bolt himself, it has been shown that this far right clown fabricated his so called "attack" by nasty lefties, this was done for political purposes. The clown should have been prosecuted for wasting police time and resources!
This accusation against a truly decent Australian in Bruce Pascoe, by a right wing fanatic is disgusting 'Beat Up'Bolt should be condemned for what he is, a grubby political smearmonger!

Issy, have we got you on board on this?

Paul,

I was born on the Left and I'll die on the Left, despite all the poseurs and frauds already within that broad church. I'm proud of the good intentions of my late parents who, I think, went to their graves unrepentantly Leninists. So please move on from your half-witted dichotomy of the world into 'yours' and the 'extreme right'. You're better than that, I'm sure :)

First, Pascoe has not provided any evidence that he is Indigenous. Second, nobody has provided any evidence that there ever was any farming, as conventionally defined, anywhere in Australia - nor was there, by the way, in most of the world until a thousand or so years ago, including across Europe. It's a very rare and precious form of economy.

As for this idiotic focus on what a few early observers have written (and now thoroughly misquoted and misinterpreted), doesn't it strike you as weird that some of the very people - like Sturt - who would have been in the forefront (as SA's Chief Secretary) of trying to eliminate all traces (how does anybody do that ?) of farming in SA, and elsewhere ?

And to cut to the chase, where is there any evidence of pre-European farming - what is conventionally perceived as 'farming' - anywhere in Australia ? Not just in the landscape, but in the culture ? In songs, rituals, legends, etc. ? In the very languages themselves ? Doesn't this mean anything to you ? How on earth could all that have been eliminated ? Yet there are multitudes of such rituals, language terms, etc., in relation to hunting/gathering societies ? In short, there is no evidence of farming; there is plenty of evidence of foraging.

And since 'self-determination', how many communities and groups have moved rapidly back to farming as their ancestors were supposed to know all about ? None ? Any difficulties experienced by missionaries or community-development workers etc. since the 1820s in trying to persuade people to set up gardens and orchards ? I wasted years trying that.

Too ridiculous.

Joe

Paul,There is documented evidence that Pascoe is not Aboriginal in anyway and he dithers so much on the subject that it appears that he doesn't know himself.

As for farming there is not one shred of evidence that Australian Aboriginals ever farmed anything..

Pascoe is a fraud.

Comrade Joe, I don't consider you or Issy to be of the extreme right, in fact we only have a couple of such on the forum. If you read what I said I actually separated you and Issy from those nutters; "you (Is Mise) or Joe, or any of the extreme right forum posters".

I see it as dangerous ground when asking someone for their "racial background", it was famously done in the past in another place at another time, its not done with white folk, why is it necessary with Bruce Pascoe? Yes, bring up the money aspect, but Pascoe contributes much value to the indigenous debate.

Why is Bolt not questioning, say the PM's background. Should someone assert Bolt is descended from baboons, should he be made prove he's not?

Issy and Joe, you both need to read Pascoe's book before passing judgement. I tried to fudge an exam once at school, having not read the novel, but rather the cryptic critique by someone else, like you guys, I too came a gutser', with a fail on that one. I questioned my English master as to my "F", his answer was; "You obviously haven't read the book, from me "Do I need to?"...."YES!". Pascoe's Aboriginalality is a far bigger deal for you guys than it is for me. He identifies as Aboriginal, so be it.

Paul,

What on earth has his book got to do with his bogus claim of Aboriginal descent?

I perused the book and it is badly written, badly edited etc., one only needs to work from the index.

However ,if I ever see a copy in an OP SHOP for $2 I promise that I'll buy it.

Then until you actually read the book Issy we can't have a decent debate about its contents. But until then you are trying to play the game sitting in the grandstand.

Paul,

What has the book got to do with the claim of Aboriginal ancestry?

Have you got a reference for your claim that the physical attack on Bolt in Melbourne was bogus?

SR,

Here are a collection of claims in the Dank Emu which are ridiculous:

"In his landmark book Dank Emu, Pascoe claims indigenous Australians were not hunter-gatherers but were sophisticated in the ways of food production, aquaculture, and land management. They were not nomads but lived in large towns in permanent dwellings. Their civilisation was, he wrote last year, “one that invented bread, society, language and the ability to live as 350 neighbouring nations without land war, not without rancour … but without a lust for land and power, without religious war, without slaves, without poverty but with a profound sense of responsibility for the health of Mother Earth for more than 120,000 years.” According to him they also invented democracy and government."

Just for starters 120 000 years ago predates the estimated emergence of modern humans. The rest is also laughable crap.

SR,

Paul,

https://www.dark-emu-exposed.org/home/ancient-australians-the-worlds-first-j3ljz-6tdcn-jjsce-4tc4a

SM,

Another one who has not read the book, an "F" my boy. Unless you can provide references to passages in Bruce Pascoe's book 'Dark Emu' which align with the above then its simply misquoting or lies. None of what you have posted is in the book in that context from my reading of it.

Where does it say; "indigenous Australians were not hunter-gatherers". No one including Pascoe is denying Aboriginal people were in large measure hunter-gatherers. The rest of your post is taken wildly out of context.

Issy, Joe, Shadow, my advice, join a library, the books are free to borrow and read. If you can't read then there is the children's section with picture book for you, 'Noddy and Big Ears in Fantasy Land' you will all enjoy.....your in fantasy land now with Pascoe's book!

Dear Shadow Minister,

As a generalist rather than an historian Pascoe gets a bit more licence from me on these things and I would agree there are some things he pushes to the limit but there isn't anything I have found that doesn't have a degree of validity.

There are plenty of examples of democracy within Aboriginal culture and of government. The fact that so many language groups had developed and remained in place at the time of the invasion shows there was not widespread wars wiping out tribe after tribe until the strongest prevailed. The Maori language is universal in NZ with some dialect differences between the North and South islands. In Australia there were over 300 distinct language groups.

As to the 120,000 years this comes from the palynologal work done in SE Australia which shows altered fire regimes starting about that time. While this is suggestive of human interaction with the land it is certainly not definitive (and is in dispute), however the claim is not without scientific basis.

Perhaps rather than quoting from he Australian you might buy the book so at least we can discuss what is and isn't in the thing rather than this second hand garbage you keep bringing to the table.

Dear Is Mise,

You keep dribbling out this inanity;

“I perused the book and it is badly written, badly edited etc., one only needs to work from the index.”

Yet you have repeatedly failed to give a single instance of poor writing or editing. Either put up or shut up would be my suggestion.

Steele,

What has the book got to do with Pascoe's claim of Aboriginal ancestry?

Dear Is Mise,

You raised it; “I perused the book and it is badly written, badly edited etc., one only needs to work from the index.”

And I responded; "you have repeatedly failed to give a single instance of poor writing or editing. Either put up or shut up would be my suggestion."

Your call.

Steele,

I didn't raise it, it was a comment but as this thread is about Pascoe's alleged Aboriginal descent; what has the book got to do about it?

You keep evading the issue despite having been given reference to official documents that disprove his claim.

Dear Is Mise,

You write;

“I didn't raise it, it was a comment but as this thread is about Pascoe's alleged Aboriginal descent; what has the book got to do about it?”

Well let's see how often you have directly referenced the book;

“My motivation is to seek the truth and to expose fraud, and, hopefully, to help stop the bull that Pascoe has written being taught as truth to school children.”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9019#296273

“In truth, I haven't read 'Dark Emu'; I have however perused it but I found it to be pretentious and badly written and badly edited and as it took ages for the local library to get a copy.”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9019#296306

“As I siad(sic) his book 'Dark Emu' is badly written, badly edited and , to be charitable, somewhat mishandles the truth.”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9019#296743

“Shew me where Mitchell writes about towns of a thousand; Pascoe's farming claim is the most demonstrably false of his often weird assumptions.”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9019#296797

Note the fact is that Dark Emu does not quote Mitchell writing about towns of a thousand which would have been evident if you have read the bloody thing.

You then spend another 5 posts talking about stooked grain from the book.

Then again;

“I perused the book and it is badly written, badly edited etc., one only needs to work from the index.”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9019#297261

You have raised the book multiple times so you really don't get to assert; “this thread is about Pascoe's alleged Aboriginal descent; what has the book got to do about it?” do you.

Dearest Issy, you made reference to Pascoe's book, claiming to have "perused" said book, where and with what we do not know, I suggested you used your electric toothbrush to do some kind of external scan to determine if it was "badly written, badly edited". As my learned colleague SteeleRedux has called for, using the appropriate legal jargon, put up or shut up! Me thinks it time to comply.

If you fail to comply with the above, the 'Court of Fair Go Mate', will have no alternative other than to award you, yet again a PORKY AWARD!, your umpteeth such award for 2019.....Unfortunately the presiding judge and executioner, that's me, is at this very moment donning the black cap! Sorry pal its coming your way!

What has the book got to do with Pascoe's claims of Aboriginal ancestry?

I'll have another look at the book, when I get a chance.

Pascoe occupies positions, with salaries and other benefits, as if he was Indigenous. He has not demonstrated in any way that he is. He is taking someone else's position, and claiming other people's benefits. The Left has adopted a crook as one of their own.

As for Aboriginal farming, anywhere one likes to look in all of Australia, there is no evidence of it, even if Pascoe's fraudulent claims were remotely accurate. There is simply no evidence anywhere of farming, no tools, no fences, no storage areas. No towns, no nations, no trade. No group anywhere has developed natural wallaby grass or kangaroo grass or Mitchell grass into more productive strains: that task is now, for the first time (in 120,000 years) being attempted.

No tool-makers, no organisation, etc. as one would expect from wide-scale and long-term [120,000 years] farming.

That's the [Marxist] economic infrastructure. Nor is there, anywhere, any cultural superstructure, no legends, songs, no planting or harvesting rituals, no farming-related words in any of the 300-500 Aboriginal languages.

However, this rubbish is now being taught as reality and history in Victorian schools. This is not going to end soon, or well. Not in my life-time.

Joe

Sorry Joe, that is not correct.

I have found the Arnhem Land National Aboriginal Choir performing the very song you asked for, as first performed at the annual Didgeridoo Festival in the year 7396BC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad54bH-nQTM

If not satisfied with the above, I have the 'Stony Desert Aboriginal Trio', performing a traditional Native song back in their traditional Stony Desert homeland, all in their native language with traditional instruments . p/s please excuse the setting it was filmed during a severe drought.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zWZu-QupWU

ENJOY!

Hi Steele,

My wife tells me she believes there are 17 dialects of the Maori language. Like all languages their language is always developing. An example is the word for the colour "pink" the traditional way to say pink is 'ma whero'....ma white, whero red, where as a modern speaker would use a derivative of the English word pink as in 'pinke'. Many words are becoming anglicised in that way. When she speaks Maori to another, she can quickly tell if they were traditionally taught, or learned the language through school, by the way they speak. many of the younger people are school taught.

Paul,

I am glad that you are learning to read and hope that you can graduate from your diet of childish fantasies like Noddy and Dank Emu and other left whinge fictions to real books. Then perhaps you could read my link which explains most of what you are asking.

Woke historians have redefined agriculture and aquaculture to include for example Budj Bim which is at best a sophisticated fish trap.

I ask you to provide genuine examples of agriculture, permanent dwellings etc from the millenia pre colonisation.

Secondly, my quote does not include "indigenous Australians were not hunter-gatherers" if you use "" then include the actual words not what you interpret otherwise you are being dishonest.

SR,

"As a generalist rather than an historian Pascoe gets a bit more licence from me on these things and I would agree there are some things he pushes to the limit"

In that sentence you admit that BP is firstly not a historian and secondly that much of what he suggests is based on conjecture which is exactly the point I was making.

There has never been any claim made that Bruce Pascoe is a historian, Steele correctly identifies him as a generalists. Pascoe is more enthusiastic about Aboriginal farming than I am. Although in his book 'Dark Emu' (recommended reading for several people here) he makes a number of valid points, and does offer evidence in the form of European accounts of Aboriginal husbandry. To what extent, and for what period, did indigenous people engage in some forms of basic "farming", is hard to say. There is no question in my mind that Aboriginal people were predominantly hunter/gathers, but not totally as Pascoe correctly asserts.

The reason people like Bolt and others want to denigrate Pascoe's work, and Pascoe himself, is not because it may not be true, but because it may give Aboriginal people more authority and legitimacy over the land than these types want to admit to. That is why they want to make it a right/left debate, rather that a historical or general argument.

Pascoe's hotly contested conjectures are being taught as unquestioned history in schools, and that's why it's become a right/left thing Paul1405. Otherwise it would all be a harmless bit of fun, like Pascoe appropriating aboriginality and gaining indigenous awards.

The propagation of Pascoe's conjectures, without question, suits the left's agenda, which is to form a basis for handing sovereignty of Australia to its pre-colonial race of inhabitants because they existed on this vast continent, but not the right's agenda that opposes sovereignty while supporting native-title and land-rights provisions ceding huge tracts of the continent to aborigines.

This is barely a revelation.

Paul,

"There has never been any claim made that Bruce Pascoe is a historian,..."

Come off it!!

Just Google "Pascoe the historian" or similar and up comes opinions that he is an historian.

Further to reading "Dark Emu", frankly I couldn't get into it, having read millions of words written by undergraduates I found his style boring and can only think that the award was on political grounds.

Sorry chaps, but thats my honest opinion of Pascoe's work, boring, ill written, repetitious and fanciful.

Dear Is Mise,

You write; "Sorry chaps, but thats(sic) my honest opinion of Pascoe's work, boring, ill written, repetitious and fanciful."

Well that is a walk back from earlier claims and is a naked attempt to insulate yourself to a degree from having to cough up concrete examples isn't it.

Ah well, progress of a kind I suppose.

Steele,

As I wrote earlier, I'll read the book in its entirety (force myself in fact) when I get the chance to buy a copy in the OpShop or a remainders sale.
I won't use/deface a library book as I like to highlight relevant portions and write notes in the text, margins etc., by the time I've reviewed a book it's not fit for general reading.

Don't get sic (sic).

Dear Lucifrase,

These are not “hotly contested conjectures” except by more or less a few far right morons with agendas.

People like Bolt is an example. He wrote;

“his book claims Aborigines were not what historians have said — primitive hunter-gatherers — but sophisticated farmers in towns of up to 1000 people. “

The figure of 1000 people doesn't even exist in the book which Bolt proudly states he has never read.

Have you read it?

Dear Is Mise,

You write;

“when I get the chance to buy a copy in the OpShop or a remainders sale.”

Well you might be waiting a while. I purchased two for Christmas presents and paid the same price I did a year ago. It is hugely successful with 3 reprint runs in 2014, 2 in 2015, 7 in 2016, 3 in 2017 and 2 in 2018 when I purchased mine. I suspect there has been a few since.

As to “(sic)” I was making the point that someone claiming that someone else's work is poorly written should make an effort to make sure their own is up to scratch.

Hi Steele, does this not get to you? Its like trying to play a football match with our side on the field, and the other mob locked in the dressing sheds, because they forgot to bring their footy gear with them. You and I are the only two here who have actually read the book. Poor old Issy, is in knots, firstly saying not to have read the book, then it was some nonsense that he found it worthless by looking in the index. Now he appears to claim he read part of the book I thought well if a library got in for me, I would at least take it home, and if I didn't want to read it, well I would return it unread, cost nothing. I'll give it to you Issy, when you get a book you like to draw dark glasses and beards etc on the characters in the book, like in your Noddy and Big Ears book, 'Dark Emu', is in fact and easy short book to read.

A PORKY AWARD First Class is award to Is Mise for outstanding back flipping and nonsense peddling.

Hi Paul,

So ....... neither Sturt nor Mitchell et al. mention farming ? None of the early observers claim that Aboriginal groups lived in agglomerations reaching a thousand people ?

And there is no real sign of any Aboriginal farming anywhere in Australia now ? No tools, no legends, none of the usual planting and harvesting rituals like everywhere else ? Perhaps Pascoe needs to write another book claiming these developments. I would recommend Engels' 'Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State' for a start to his reading.

Strange. In all early farming societies, in the Middle East or China or Mexico, there were conurbations with far more people than a thousand. When Cortez got to Mexico, the Aztecs' main city held more people than almost any city in Europe. Major farming societies develop, in time, into empires, with a huge range of products being exchanged (including slaves from conquered areas) in large towns and sometimes very big cities. In Africa, the city of Ibadan was larger than any European city when it was first 'discovered' by Europeans, with perhaps a couple of million people. Now that's a 'town'.

In 120,000 years, there would have been phenomenal development, and across the Continent, if there ever had been any farming over that time. Unless of course, Pascoe is claiming that the 500 language groups maintained their separate independence over that time. Really ? This gets more and more fanciful. But if you think there is some mileage in pushing this, Paul, keep going for it.

Cheers,

Joe

"These are not “hotly contested conjectures” except by more or less a few far right morons with agendas"

Yep, Steely, anybody who doesn't believe these conjecture's with their whole heart must be a moronic far-rightard.

I read it 3 years ago after a work colleague gave it to me, and we discussed it. At the time I was taken by its claims and immediately understood its relevance to the treaty/sovereignty question.

I object to it being taught in schools (and so soon after its publication) as uncontested truth, even if the same happened in the past to expunge memory of massacres. I think the writer's bona fides are relevant too, and believe you should consider that question as important. I guess all this makes me a moron.

SR, you claim that there is no mention of towns of 1000 people in the book, yet when I read a review of the book, amongst the long list of “ evidence” that aboriginal people were farmers, I found this

* TOWNS on the DARLING RIVER: On the Darling River, explorers saw similar towns to those seen by Sturt and Mitchell and estimated the population of each to be no less than a thousand. Peter Dargin estimated the population of the region as 3,000 but the journals of Sturt, Mitchell and others reveal that they passed many such populous villages.

Many people who have reviewed the book have made the same claims, so, though I cannot afford to buy this book just to answer your queries, I can presumably count on the reviewers to be honest.

Andrew Bolt is probably saying that he is not Aboriginal because he probably thinks Pascoe is Chinese. You have to keep in mind that Andrew Bolt is a very smart man. He went to Sydney Uni for six months, you know.

Mr Opinion, no, if you do your research you will find that Andrew Bolt is simply quoting the aboriginal tribes Pascoe claims to belong to. Tribes who deny he is aboriginal. Or don’t you think aboriginal leaders would know who belongs to their tribe?

Paul,

Simply shew that those who claim that Pascoe is not Aboriginal, you can do it just as SR can. are wrong.
Shew that your hero is not flying false colours and is, in fact, the Aboriginal that he claims to be.

Don't be the last to prove Pascoe's detractors wrong on this.

Big Nana,

The last thing I want to do is waste my time researching Andrew Bolt.

Paul,

On this relatively trivial issue, of whether or not Pascoe is Aboriginal: can you really imagine that someone in New Zealand could claim, say, to be Maori - and not be able to demonstrate it ? In the old days,wouldn't he end up in an umu ?

Mind you, that sort of fraud here is drearily common. I remember my late wife asking one of her students about who she might claim to be related to, clearly trying to establish whether or not she was Indigenous, and the woman threatened to take her to court if she asked that again. Twenty years later, that student is in a key education position in SA. I recall applicants for our program who were suspiciously vague about their links - their mother was 'stolen generation', that sort of waffle - but eventually got into other programs when we knocked them back.

Anyway, hopefully, back to more substantial issues :) . What real, solid evidence is there that there was ever any farming in Australia before 1788 ? i.e. that Aboriginal groups had recognisable land tenure, nations, governments, sovereignty, diplomacy, etc., a bit more solid 'evidence' than this flimsy 'mere' hunter-gatherer rationale ?

Joe

Not saying I am a fan of Bolt, but I don't care to diss him either.
I have found over time that the origins of his comments USUALLY come from some other source, and usually follows with references to their origins.
Sure, I'm sure he pads a little when he allows his emotions and personal opinions break out, but over-all, I think he is always guarded, and careful not to stuff up, by misquoting, or allowing someone to fault him.
Does no good for his image, (nor the ABC) his career and generally his own standing in the community at large.
I can relate to him, as I can only quote what I have heard, read or seen, and most of the time these occasions have been historical, and so no immediate knowledge or memory of the origins of my comments.
I do find him worthy of listening, as he does raise issues which are in the public arena, and most of the time he picks on the hypocrisy and ridiculous acts of peoples position and actions.

So loudmouth, are you saying that even a black cannot ask another "person" about their ancestry, for fear that they will fall foul of some stupid anti discrimination law?

Altrav,

Yes, I agree, that anybody claiming benefits as Indigenous should have their prerequisites checked. But sometimes, it's hardly worth the effort, since some non-Indigenous people have powerful Indigenous friends - who probably know bloody well that they're not indigenous but are happy to pass them off as such. All part of a patronage-clientage system - scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.

I would have thought that Pascoe would have plenty of friends in Victoria like that. But nobody spoke up for him ? Amazing.

Joe

Loudmouth, I took a different approach/angle, in search of the same outcomes.
And that was; If he is what he claims to be, and with so much negative press and so many people calling him a fraud and a con-man, (I'm not sure exactly how many) that he would have had law suites against his detractors, flying out the door by now.
So then, if he is not challenging these accusations and allegations of fraud and mis-representation, is he afraid that the truth will be discovered and him exposed and therefore confirming the accusations once and for all, and amongst other things, making him a 'persona non-grata'?

Paul,

Here's someone else who thinks that Pascoe is an historian.

"Turning history on its head
Academic conflict accidentally turned Bruce Pascoe into our most influential indigenous historian.

ByRICHARD GUILLIATT, the WEEKEND AUSTRALIAN magazine, 28th December 2019.

and what is more the newspaper is spreading the message.

Here's another history claim.

Title: ‘Young Dark Emu: A Truer History’
Author: Bruce Pascoe
Publisher: Magabala Books
Age Range: middle primary +, but actually this book is ageless.
Themes: Indigenous, Australian history, farming, agriculture, land management, pastoral industry."

See those mentions of history?

As you and Steele so rightly point out, Pascoe is not an historian, but he works at the imager or at the very least does not appear to correct those who erroneously so describe him.

Is this journalist serious or is this some kind of publicity stunt by this guys backers?
His rise to fame and fortune appear to have happened overnight, as is usually the custom and purview of marketing and lobbying.
Which leads me back to the question; Who is REALLY and actively behind this guy, and why?
The jury is still out about him and his claims of being of black descent, not to mention the veracity and accuracy of his book.

ALTRAV,

I wouldn't pick an argument with Loudmouth if I was you. He has a big box full of degrees in everything and he might pull one out and hit you over the head with it.

Mr O, I think you might have me mixed up with someone else.
Firstly I don't pick fights, they are a waste of time, I state my case and let the chips fall where they may.
If someone wants to 'pick a fight', they're more than welcome, but I would suggest it will be for nowt.
Another reason I would not be too quick to judge or disagree with Loudmouth, especially on this topic, is because he has the runs on the board, having not only been married to a lady who I believe was an indigenous person herself, (please correct me if I'm wrong) but also the extensive work/research he has done on the very topic being argued over, which I might remind one and all is not the basis of this thread or discussion.
This discussion is about whether this 'wannabee' is the real deal or not.
So let's all shtick to topic, and not try to shtick it to each other.

Hi Joe,

Some of the strongest advocates for the rights of indigenous people have been Europeans. In 1840 at the signing of the 'Treaty of Waitangi' two such individuals were Henry and Edward Williams and to a lesser extent the belligerent James Busby. Before you go off accusing the three of being "Marxists", the Williams were missionaries, and Busby was the Official British Resident.

The claims of "powerful Indigenous friends" who might they be? Who "are happy to pass them off as such. All part of a patronage-clientage system - scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." All this conspiracy theory is well and good, but without evidence its only ones imagination through their minds eye, is it not.

When dealing with any system/organisation it good to have so called powerful friends. Maybe 'Beat Up' Bolt had powerful friends in the Police Force when he created his bogus assault by crazed lefties charge. Now there's a bloke who wasted taxpayer money, lets check his pedigree to see if he should not be made to pay up.

Paul,

"When dealing with any system/organisation it good to have so called powerful friends. Maybe 'Beat Up' Bolt had powerful friends in the Police Force when he created his bogus assault by crazed lefties charge. Now there's a bloke who wasted taxpayer money, lets check his pedigree to see if he should not be made to pay up"

There you go with that allegation again.

Evidence?

Paul,

Why are you accusing the Williams of being Marxists ? That would never have entered my mind. And while we're on the subject, one of the Rev. Williamses put together a very comprehensive Maori dictionary. [I think the other one did something similar with the Tongan language]. I'm presuming it would be properly full of farming terms. Many hundreds of Aboriginal languages here have been compiled into dictionaries. I wonder if any of them have farming terms. Any at all.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Joe,

Why are you accusing the Williams of being Marxists ? No not I, see what I said was; "Before you (Joe) go off accusing the three of being "Marxists"..." You do have a propensity to often refer to those pesky Marxists, do you not? But that's by and by.

The Williams were a lot of things, but I doubt they were Marxists, they probably at that time at least had never heard of Karl, or any of the other Marx brothers. The Williams had a long association with the Anglican Church in NZ.

Hi Paul,

So neither of us accused the Revs. Williams of being Marxist. I'm glad that confusion has been resolved.

Joe

Hi Joe,

The Maori people affectionately referred to Henry Williams, as 'Four Eyes' he wore glasses, he is still very much revered today among Maori in the Bay of Islands region. I recall having a discussion with the Anglican Minister at the Marae a couple of years ago and he mentioned the Williams as being those most responsible for propagating the Anglican faith in Aotearoa. Sadly that good friend has passed away, he was only in his early 50's .

This thread seems to be over and none of Pascoe's champions offered any serious support to his claim to be Aboriginal, so it seems to be that he is bogus.

Dear Is Mise,

If it turns out that Bruce Pascoe's family stories about aboriginal heritage were not verifiable why would that change anything of what he put forward in Dark Emu.

It doesn't.

He took explorer records and painted a different picture to what we had been taught at school. There is certainly enough material in those diaries to support much of what he is putting to us. Why is this an issue?

Hi SR,

The problem is that there is no actual and conclusive evidence of Aboriginal farming anywhere in Australia. And to fall back on the excuse that all evidence has been destroyed by conspiring whitefellas, strains common sense. It's a big country, and there weren't all that many whitefellas in Australia in the first 150 years.

And that's no mystery why there was no evidence of farming: with endless thousands of square km of wallaby grass, and kangaroo grass, and Mitchell grass, and murnongs, why even think of planting it ?

And surely Pascoe is not claiming that Aboriginal people depended entirely on the seed 'crops' that they had planted ? And as well as hunting and fishing - yes, of course. Farming populations usually supplement their diets - and spare time - by hunting, trapping, fishing, etc. I wonder if Pascoe was aware of that.

Belief is one thing; evidence is quite another. The truth depends on evidence, not belief. Otherwise, the world - or parts of it - could indeed be flat.

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

Mate, you have been repeatedly invited to show where Pascoe misquoted or falsified the diaries of the early explorers because this was the very material he drew from.

As yet all you have done is attributed the wrong diary entry to one of Pascoe's passages, something you failed to apologise for, and otherwise nothing.

How about producing a smoking gun or two. I don't think you can and that is what is getting you and others cranky so you direct your attacks on his background.

Put up or shut up as they say in the classics.

SR,

Well, no, I didn't have a go at Pascoe's background in my last post: I was simply suggesting that there is, nowhere, anywhere in Australia, any evidence of traditional Aboriginal farming, and that it would have been impossible to destroy all evidence of farming, towns, rubbish heaps, fence-lines, etc.

And given that Sturt, Mitchell et al. were army officers, and bureaucrats, not farmers, I don't put much store in their observations - IF they ever did verge on suggesting farming. But I don't think they did from the original quotes that I have seen.

As for Pascoe's fraud, IF he has no Indigenous background but DOES occupy paid positions and collects awards as if he IS Indigenous, then yes, that certainly is an issue.

So double fraud :)

Joe

Steele,

"If it turns out that Bruce Pascoe's family stories about aboriginal heritage were not verifiable why would that change anything of what he put forward in Dark Emu"

It doesn't change any thing that he put forward in "Dark Emu", it remains as speculative and funny as ever.

Issy and Joe,

Both of you admit to not having read Pascoe's book. Now you try a new tack, discredit his work by say its impossible. That is like discrediting a book on the 1969 Moon landing without reading it, just not believing the event ever took place. You both look very silly on this.

Joe, Steele is repeatedly asking you for misquotes in 'Dark Emu', but not having read the book, you can't provide them, hence the new tack..."it can't be true" because I say so.

Paul,

I skimmed the book, looked up things in the index and reached my conclusions and as I said I'll read the book when I can get a cheap enough copy; none of my local libraries have a copy and it's not worth the inter library borrowing fee.

Issy, my iter-library transfer fee is 80c, what's yours? Anyway, read the book hopefully one day, and then draw your own conclusions. I read the book, it was an easy read, its not history as such, but Pascoe makes some interesting points. I have said all along I believe Aboriginal people were predominately hunter/gatherers. This is not about the question, farmers verse hunter/gatherers, but rather the hard right, people like Bolt, are shot scared of anything that might lead in someway to Aboriginal sovereignty over the land, something they vehemently oppose.

Paul, and your NOT?
You should be ashamed of yourself, under what pretext do you even begin to think that the blacks have any overarching rights over this country than the rest of us?
You are to be verbally attacked, and abused for espewing such vial and somewhat treasonous language and attitude.
Why do you say this rubbish when you know you're way off.
It is a well known fact that the blacks did not believe in land ownership, and were confused as to the concept.
So what gives you the right to make such outrageous and egregious statements, alienating the majority or white population of Australia.
Your comments and suggestion is counter to the whole concept of this land being conquered and taken, in the name of Queen Victoria, not an Elder of the outback.
When these words were spoken, this land now called Australia, immediately became the property of Queen Victoria and added to her list of countries already acquired by force or by claim.
So it is arrogant and somewhat treasonous of you or anyone else to imply that anyone but the current Queen is the rightfull owner of Australia.
The blacks definitely are not and should not be revered and treated as if they were.
Disgusting, poor show, very sad, and it shows you have a problem.

Altie old cock, you are running off at the mouth there over something I have not said. Re-read what I posted, and then hopefully with reasonable comprehension, you will see I simply made an observation about the hard right in relation to Aboriginal sovereignty, These guys, and you seem to also, shudder at the very mention of the word sovereignty in relation to Indigenous Australians.

For what its worth, without the outpouring of dramatics, the question is a complected one that requires more than a simple yes, no, answer. I did on a recent visit to Aotearoa have a informative discussion on that very topic with two learned (Maori) gentlemen. One with a very forthright view in support of Maori sovereignty, and the other with a far more pragmatic opinion. Both realise there would be great practical difficulties in implementing sovereignty, and both see it like me, not with that simple yes, no answer, but something that requires a lot of discussion with all stakeholders before coming to any kind of agreement.

Paul,

There have been archaeological investigations all over the country for more than a hundred years, encampments have been found, some dating back many thousands of years, such as Roonka on the mid-Murray here in SA. Ancient human remains have been found in very many places. Middens (ancient rubbish heaps) have been excavated thoroughly around all of our coasts. As far as I know, archaeologists have never found anything indicating farming anywhere in Australia. Anywhere.

No farming tools, i.e. hoes or spades, like hetiheti or karaune in NZ. They presumably would have been made of very hard wood, which probably had to be traded with some distant group. Any evidence of that ? Any evidence of sharp-edged harvesting tools or quarries for the mass-production of sharp-edged harvesting tools ? Any evidence of farming at all ? Not just a few observations by non-farmers passing through, creatively fashioned by Pascoe ?

Nor, by the way, have archaeologists found any evidence yet of massacre sites. I hope they keep looking.

That pretty much does it for me.

Joe

Although it's a more trivial matter than the farming fraud, it seems that Pascoe hasn't presented the slightest evidence that he has any Indigenous ancestry or relations, and in fact that his ancestry has been traced, presumably on Ancestry.com, solely back to England. And not even one convict in all that either. He's descended solely from free English settlers.

I'm baffled why Wyatt and Langton and Davis et al. oppose any examination of his appointment as an Aboriginal professor of Indigenous Studies. He's a whitefella, taking an Aboriginal job, and at a high level. He's shutting an Aboriginal person out of their rightful employment. And that means nothing ?

Are some people completely opportunist ? Or corrupt ? Or merely incompetent ? As long as something sounds alright, yeah, go with it, to hell with the truth ? He's one of ours, after all ? Yeah, slot him into an Aboriginal job, who's going to complain ?

AND nobody would have been allowed to carry out any sort of investigation if it were not for the AFP.

I wonder how many other whitefellas are out there in Aboriginal-designated jobs ?

Joe

Loudmouth, so are the AFP going to investigate or have I got it wrong?

Altrav,

It appears that the AFP have dropped the investigation into whether Pascoe improperly took benefits. Perhaps that's simply because the funds from which he is being paid don't specify how they are to be disbursed.

But meanwhile, there's this fascinating letter:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/bruce-pascoe-scandal-yolngu-now-denounce-this-aboriginal-historian-too/news-story/07f8fd7484f1fd5797df03f45362d225?fbclid=IwAR2kGwlv5txmqZabf78GQJgDRpIPNDLZsW_sdu58yF42xOzhOWYhZgJw3YI

Lot of legs in this fiasco yet.

Joe

Hi Joe,

Ethnicity is as much about identity as it is about blood. In my case I don't identify as aboriginal, yet last year my first cousin, told me I could, she has, good for her. My oldest son wants to be aboriginal, I told him; "just keep working boy". I suppose all families have secrets.

Loudmouth. c'mon, I know you're too polite to say or imply it, but I'm not!
This mongrel has mates in high places.
They are rorting the system, because he's as much a native as I am a koala.
They thought nothing of his appointment, and his appointee's must be in high or top level jobs.
Now we all know this whole thing is wrong, and yet whoever it is up there on the mountain, in the clouds, is so high up that he can tell the AFP to "drop it".
All we need is for someone to keep pecking away at this and we will see the very thing I am always complaining about, play out.
Corruption, nepotism, jobs for the boys, and so on.
This guy is sh!t from the very beginning when his name was first mentioned, he stank to high heaven.
I'm making a statement, that the guy is an opportunistic slime, not only because he is an impostor and nor do I care that he MAY be taking the job off a black fella, but that he is lying, cheating, stealing, and a host of other immoral and wrong doings.
I hope he gets exposed,along with his running mates, then and only then will I be satisfied that justice has prevailed.

Paul,

"Ethnicity is as much about identity as it is about blood."

Great, then everyone is aboriginal....

Paul,

Indigenous people can choose NOT to be Indigenous for whatever reasons (and if I were Indigenous and a graduate, I wouldn't unless i wanted to be pigeon-holed for life), but nobody who has no Indigenous ancestry at all, as in Pascoe's case, can choose to BE Indigenous.

Wishing doesn't make it so, Dorothy.

On top of all that, if one 'chooses' to claim Indigeneity because of the lucrative nature of a position, then that isn't wishful thinking - it's fraud.

Pascoe is a fraud, and I look forward to justice for Aboriginal people when his offences are exposed.

My god, he's done so much damage - perhaps irreparable - to their long-term cause.

Joe

In 1870 a raiding party of Apaches Indians captured a 11 year old German migrant boy Herman Lehmann. Lehmann was adopted by the Indians, and given the name "En Da" he spent 6 years with the Apaches. The boy became assimilated into Indian culture, rising to the position of petty chief. As a young warrior, one of his most memorable battles was a running fight with the Texas Rangers in 1875. In 1876 Lehmann killed an Apache medicine man avenging the killing of his adopted father. Fearing revenge, he fled from the Apaches and spent a year alone in hiding, before joining a band of Comanches, helping them to attack buffalo hunters in Texas. Given the name "Montechema" by the Comanches. In 1877 Lehmann moved with the Comanches to the indian reservation in present-day Oklahoma. In 1878, Lt. Col. John W. Davidson ordered that Lehmann be sent under guard to his white family in Texas. Davidson did not believe the young brave was Herman Lehmann, but in 1871 Mrs Lehmann had been in contact with General William T. Sherman who had granted her a private audience, where she plead for his assistance in finding her missing son, Mrs Lehmann never gave up hope for Herman's safe return. At first, Herman was sullen and wanted nothing to do with his mother and siblings. As he put it, "I was an Indian, and I did not like them because they were palefaces." Lehmann's readjustment to his original culture was slow and painful.

Was it reasonable for Herman Lehmann to claim for the rest of his life that he was an Indian?

Paul, I'm curious as to why you even ask, when all the facts and truths point to one and only one conclusion.
He was not, nor ever had been an Indian.
He was a young boy who was taken and assimilated and integrated into the Indian life and culture.
Tell you what, if it makes it any easier, think of him as an exchange student, that's a close example today.
Then there are the stories of children, mainly girls, being abducted and something strange happens after a while, they become attached, emotionally and otherwise to their captor.
Go figure!
No, I will not wane from my position on this matter.
If both parents are natives of a country, then there is NO dispute.
If only one is then, I'm sorry but you can twist and turn it any way you want, you are Australian, with only one parent a native.
You are definitely not a native, and simply saying you are or you relate to, or some other fantasy of an excuse, does not count, and is therefore irrelevant.
Joe, if we all used this formula, which is based on nature and not some far fetched notion of subjective, greed or fraud, you must agree, we would not have the thousands of wannabees we are getting now, stealing money from the actual, real and truthfull natives.

Paul,

No. On what planet is Lehmann's case similar to the Pascoe Fiasco ? How dare you !

Do you think there haven't been plenty of white fellas, including missionaries and administrators, who have felt so close to Indigenous people over long periods of time, and want so much to be thought of as Indigenous, that they persuade themselves that, in some way, they ARE Indigenous ?

But aren't. End of.

Joe

Joe, I was giving you a case where a person with no indigenous blood, had through contact come to see himself genuinely as indigenous. Regardless of what you and I, and that gate post bloke above may think Herman Lehmann through contact and nothing else had become an Indian in his own mind. Nothing anyone could say, could change his thinking.

Paul,

" .... in his own mind." Yes. So what ?

Joe

Joe, if he genuinely accepts himself as an Indian, then who are we to doubt him. He is an Indian by any stretch.

Bruce Pascoe may well qualify on the same grounds. Joe, ethnically what are you? Unless you are Aboriginal by blood, you cannot qualify as Australian on ethnic grounds, you can by nationality. Torres Strait Islanders by nationality are Australian, but their ethnicity is Melanesian. My wife is 80% ethnic Polynesian, who identifies as Maori, not an ethnic group at all, by nationality she is New Zealander. In your book what is she?

According to ALLRAGE Bruce Pascoe is;

a mongrel
sh!t (used to circumvent forum rules)
opportunistic slime
lying, cheating, stealing, and a host of other immoral and wrong doings.

I see he's not yet qualified as a "maggot" ah! ALLRAGE slipping old boy.

Paul,

That's all diversionary rubbish and you know it. Don't waste people's time.

Joe

Paul, in the interest of truth and fair play, I can prove and confirm all that I have said and my description about him, and also anyone else who tries to BS their way into something at the expense of the rightful people they are ripping off.
Can you challenge and debunk, or disprove my description of this low-life?
There's another title I have not yet used to describe him, you can add that one with the rest.

Hi Joe,

I gave you an instance from the other side of the world, a 150 years ago of a boy, Herman Lehmann, who was ethnically most likely Germanic. Through the circumstance of spending a critical period of his life with American Indians, came to see himself as Indian, not German. You don't agree that a person trough environmental and cultural factors (aka living with the tribe) can for all intention purposes become totally integrated into that group, becoming one of them.
Do you have no answer, so you claimed I was creating diversionary rubbish! Do you have suppressed fiery Gaelic blood, having a go at me like that?

Looking at all the evidence I have to say Bruce Pascoe is Aboriginal.

Paul,

That you give one example from 150 yrs ago of a german child that was essentially adopted by Indians is not a valid comparison to a kid that is neither of aboriginal descent nor culture that wants "to be aboriginal".

If you lower the bar to that extent, then there is no barrier to anyone wishing "to be aboriginal" and to claim all the benefits offered by the state especially as there is no reliable way to test how someone "feels".

Paul,

1. Of course, people can be integrated into another ethnic group, into its culture, as an enthusiastic participant, I'm sure you've done that with Maori culture - but that doesn't mean that they have become a member of that other ethnic group (or that you have become Maori).

2. Are you insinuating that Pascoe has somehow, without being related to any identifiable Indigenous person or group, become fully integrated into it ? Which group ? Yuin ? Bunyurong ? Pallawa ?

So your absurd and opportunist argument falls on two crucial grounds.

Pascoe has nothing but British ancestry. He started knocking around with Indigenous people barely thirty years ago. He has mates in high places, that's true, who have protected him and promoted his career - why, I can only guess.

So he's a fraud - but he's one of your frauds, so he's alright ?

Joe

The Indians of the USA have a system of identifying those that they consider to be genuine American Indians.

Some tribal groups are stricter than others and require 1/2 blood others only require 1/4, and others less, could be a good system to adopt in Australia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_quantum_laws

Hi Issy,

I understand what you say, in Hawaii, where native Hawaiians, I believe to be about 17,000 people, who have a high percentage of Hawaiian blood, up to 500k claim Hawaiian ancestry, the pure bloods cannot own tribal land, certainly not the other 300k to 500k. A read of European settlement history will explain why. However they can lease native land under the Homestead Act for 99 years. Until recently, last 10 years I believe, that applied to those with 50% Hawaiian blood, but with the decline in blood, that is now 25%.

Met a most interesting chap sometime ago, a 83? year old Native American of the Navajo tribe, seems they are the biggest tribe in US about 300k. He was in Aussie on a lecture tour, very enlightening on the situation today for Native Americans in their homeland.

Issy, I believe the ONLY system, which is a true and natural one, un-adulterated by foreign blood or superstitions or unfounded and frivolous reasoning, is the only way one is a pure blood or a pure native is when both mother and father are pure blood natives.
Anything else is false, and a lie.
So all these wannabee's out there, which we are expected to believe are native Aussies, are promoted as being in the hundreds of thousands, Oh yes, and of course we have over 60,000 graduate natives in uni.
What a joke!
It's no wonder idiots like Pascoe can confidently say he is a native Aussie, with so many other lying wannabee's out there, why not have a go at trying it on.
It sounds like he's only one of about well over a 100,000 other wannabee's.
60,000 uni grads, HAH!
What a mitigated exaggerated lie!
Well it sounds to me that Pascoe is saying "well if it's good enough for all these 10th, 20th, 50th casts to call themselves natives and receive all the benefits that go with that title, why not jump on the gravy train, these Aussies are so stupid and up em'selves, I'm a shoe-in, because they'll never notice, because they've all been sucked in, either by virtue signalling, or just plain ignorance".
Well some of us ain't that stupid, and if I had my way all the wannabee's like Pascoe, would not only be out on their ear, but named and shamed to boot, along with fraud charges, and in some cases jail time, which is what Pascoe's fate should be.

FYI
http://www.griffithreview.com/articles/andrew-bolts-disappointment/?fbclid=IwAR1zoIn8YjWKl9kpLkUALMguR5_tydIkV9Ue41RMPqvrg54wBE_gr6ZSnh8

Luciferase, sorry mate, that link you supplied, was the ramblings of someone trying desperately to convince the reader that he is what he says he is; A NATIVE AUSSIE.
What he does not realise is that, if he was born here, he is a native Aussie.
But he is trying too hard to convince us that he is a 'black fella'.
I for one see a desperate man trying desperately to save face.
The length of his story, just went on and on to the point where he lost me not long after I began reading it.
Anyway, the best thing he could have/should have done, was say nothing, for now I am convinced he is a fraud.
As the saying goes; "better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, rather than open it and have it confirmed".

Hi Luciferase,

Thank you for the link, it was a most rewarding read. Unlike ALTRAV I read Bruce Pascoe's response to 'Beat Up' Bolt in its entirety. Nothing that Pascoe can say will satisfy the red neck lynch mob we have here. All of the accusations levelled at Pascoe and his book 'Dark Emu' by honky white elitists, has nothing to do with history, or aboriginality, these people don't give a rats about indigenous people now, just like they didn't in the past. What they fear is RECOGNITION, and what that might entail. Some form of sovereignty is just too awful to contemplate in their minds. They have spent over 200 years suppressing the First Australians, trying to wipe them out, almost succeeded, putting them in their inferior place, almost succeeded, now they certainly don't want to see aboriginal people rise to any level of equality in society. Dreadful thought!

BTW; not one of the forums hard core anti Pascoe mob would read his book 'Dark Emu' The likes of 'Beat Up' Bolt had declared it too shocking for their gentile minds. It was unapproved reading!

Paul,

Thanks for giving us an indication of where all this fraud is heading :) A separate State ? i.e. a sovereign entity ? Funded by how ? You know, you can only get so far by shoving a stick up someone's arse, which is what so much of all this is about.

Altrav,

Yes, there are tens of thousands of Indigenous university graduates, two-thirds women, overwhelmingly in mainstream courses and in the cities, where they are from, and where they will work.

As to the roughly accurate figures: the federal Education Department, dependent on universities' figures which are dependent on students' 'ticking the box', are (in my humble view) usually around 20-25 % an under-estimate of 'real' totals, while the ABS Census figures are about 25-30 % an over-estimate.

So, fairly crudely, matching up those estimates, I would suggest that there could be at least 45-47,000 Indigenous university graduates by the end of this year, and fifty thousand by the end of 2022.

Joe

Loudmouth, I have always respected and appreciated your views and comments.
At this point I must mention my utter commitment to the truth, as much as I possibly can.
In saying this, I must challenge you on a point of opinion.
I have always clarified and explained about blood line and ancestry, and how it IS, not how individuals would like it to be, case in point is Pascoe.
If you are going to accept that, as I do, Pascoe is a fraud, or a "wannabee", then we must accept that anyone who is not of "pure blood", cannot/must not be thought of as anything but a "cast" and therefore not, as in this case, a true "native" Australian.
I am slowly eluding to the point that anyone who does not have native parents, does absolutely not qualify to call themselves an aborigine, and to that end, are NOT eligible to call themselves or be considered or referred to as "indigenous".
So again I say, under any test or assessment of whether someone is aborigine, or indigenous, ALL these so called uni grads or students are NOT aborigine or true natives of Australia, unless we accept they are born here, which then makes them Aussie with "SOME" aboriginal blood in them, but they are definitely NOT aborigine, or indigenous, but like Pascoe, if he has any black fella blood at all, in him, at best he like the uni grads, are wannabees!
I reject the submission that, "if I feel I am aborigine, then I am aborigine".
That, unfortunately in this day and age where thieves and con-men have invaded and taken over the govt and created scenarios where they and their mates can milk the Aussie purse un-checked, and un-abated, is at the root of all these wannabees suddenly appearing en-masse, where once there were none to speak of.
It is not only insulting, but a lie, a fraud, to call yourself something you are clearly not.
Tens of thousands of uni grads you refer to, I'm sorry but, even "fact check" will out or debunk that one.

Altrav,

You assert that " ... If you are going to accept that, as I do, Pascoe is a fraud, or a "wannabee", then we must accept that anyone who is not of "pure blood", cannot/must not be thought of as anything but a "cast" and therefore not, as in this case, a true "native" Australian."

No, not at all. If a person has an Aboriginal mother (and no father in sight), then he/she will always, from the beginning, consider him/herself to be Aboriginal, without questioning it. If they also have siblings in the same position, then that assumption is multiplied. Cousins, even more so. Grand-parents, more so. Uncles and aunts, more so again.

That applies to very many Aboriginal people. Yes, it gets a bit tenuous when it's the Aboriginal parent who shoots through, particularly if it's the father, so that a child is raised -with the best of intentions about cultural education - by a non-Aboriginal parent. Even more so if that non-Aboriginal parent re-marries, and to another non-Aboriginal parent. So yes, identity can get very stretched out.

One implication of my assertion that the ABS Census figures for Indigenous graduates are 25-30 % over-estimated, is that that over-estimation applies to the whole population, in equal steps: so the 2016 Census Indigenous population estimate of 649,000 also has to be trimmed down: perhaps to 500,000.

This makes some sense, since the rise from the 2011 Census (101,000) was greater than the number of births in the mean-time(73,265) - somehow, recorded numbers in older age-groups also rose, whereas in the real world, they would have all fallen due to inevitable mortality. So this next Census, in August next year, will probably assert 750-800,000, while in reality it may be closer to 550,000. 2.3 % of the Australian total.

But

{TBC}

[continued]

But of course, that 2016 recorded number of births - 73,265) was itself inflated by perhaps 25 %- the more accurate number of births was more like fifty to fifty five thousand. Subtract the total number of deaths between Censuses, perhaps 30,000, and it's possible that the Indigenous population actually rose by only twenty to twenty five thousand between 2011 and 2016. Not 101,000.

But these days, it's more like 'pick a figure' and run with it. More numbers, more Bruces, equals more funding , of course :)

So how many Bruces are out there, on the books, attracting funds ?

Joe

ALTRAV, are you a member of the Aryan race? You seem to be very much in tune with the concept as it was popularised in the late 19th and first half of the 20th centuries.

Joe, "you (assuming me) can only get so far by shoving a stick up someone's arse" I believe that is what your website does. With its total referencing to the falsehoods of white honky aboriginal controllers and such like. Not one word from an actual aboriginal person, and no disclaimer! People like the young and naive could be deceived into believing that it is in someway a truthful account. When you and I both know it is no such thing.

Paul,

On my web-site: www.firstsources.info

I typed up what I could find in the SA State Records by way of written documents, fifteen thousand pages of it. I'll leave the task of evaluating and critically analysing it all to others, such as yourself. With the occasional summary of my own, which I think I've earnt the right to make, as much as anyone else.

Thanks for the plug :)

Joe

Loudmouth, thanks for the clarification.
I find however, that your description of how the black fella defines his/her true race, somewhat ambiguous.
A simple deduction and objective breakdown and study of the facts, reveal that what you have described is a subjective and self serving assessment and of course based on a pre-conceived outcome.
There is no natural form of assessment that would concur with your explanation of how a person can simply call themselves a particular race, even though they are clearly not able to confirm this.
Many years ago, people like myself, would not have given this matter any thought what-so-ever, but unfortunately when there is so much in-your-face evidence of rorting and fraud, it suddenly becomes very much front and centre.
I will simply say I have read your take on this aboriginality issue, and accept it as your opinion.
I cannot go further than that, other than to say those who are wannabees make up the great and overwhelming majority of this group, and in doing so have brought attention to themselves and their fraud.
I will not accept the number of black uni students being bandied around, nor the number of true blacks quoted.
As I've said before, and is based on a natural and truthful base, unless your mother and father are true blacks, with no foreign blood, then they are aboriginals, or natives.
Now because most blacks are pairing up with Europeans, the true blacks are diminishing in numbers at a great rate.
The true number of REAL black fellas, is more like in the low tens of thousands, and with every passing year the number dwindles even further, until soon, they will be extinct.
Unless there are those true blacks who wish to become part of a very exclusive group in the future, and pair off with other blacks, keeping the blood line pure and uncontaminated.
They will be the ONLY true black fellas left on the planet and part of a very exclusive group of people, in their own right.

Joe, ALTRAV espouses pure racial theory just as Adolf Hitler and other Nazi's did. Why don't you jump on board a wave the flag as well.

Porky,

I read Pascoe's words in the above link in their entirety and it's nothing more than a vacuous ramble.

All that he needs to do is prove that the published records of his English descent are fake; should be easy for one with his education and familiarity with research.

Paul, in the interest of truth and factual intercourse, my submission is not based on theory, unlike the subjective version apparently being applied by the wannabees.
My submission is based on logic, objective, sound and practical reasoning, with clear examples based on the laws of nature, not the whims of a few with a clear and self-serving agenda.
I imagine that by dis-agreeing with me, you must obviously have an opinion, or version of your own to counter my submission.
I, and I'm sure many others would be keen to hear your views on how hereditary and blood lines and descendants should be described, as in the case of wannabees.

I tell you what, Pascoe is in deep do-do.
There is one hell of a cover up and I believe, one hell of a sh!t-storm about to hit the fan.
I read in today's paper where some woman dared to declare that Pascoe is a fake or a wannabee.
The problem was that she worked for some aboriginal govt department, and went and made this declaration with conviction, and without clearing it with her dept head or heads.
She of course has now got the arse for speaking out in an attempt to expose this scum-bag, and she didn't pull any punches.
This now has raised some eyebrows in high and low places, because it wasn't so much the fact she spoke out, but the speed at which she was removed or sacked.
Immediately!
So this whole mess goes all the way to the top of some govt department, where I believe his mates hide and are now looking for somewhere to crawl under, even further, like bloody cockroaches.
If this does not invoke some kind of investigation, then we can say without any doubt, that his appointment was rife with corruption, even nepotism.

The AFP find that no action on their part is warranted.
http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/complaint-dark-emu-author-bruce-pascoe-lied-about-aboriginal-heritage-finalised-by-afp/ar-BBZgWbH

and here's a link to the sacking.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/ken-wyatt-dumps-josephine-cashman-in-wake-of-dark-emu-scandal/news-story/99da205a4580e8c79e3e96600fda8734
but the saga ain't over yet!!

"Josephine Cashman has been sacked from her government advisory role, after allegations that she provided a FACKERD letter from a senior Aboriginal leader as part of a campaign to discredit the author Bruce Pascoe." (My capitals)

"In a brief statement, the minister for Indigenous affairs, Ken Wyatt, said Cashman’s actions were “not conducive to the constructive and collaborative approach” needed on the advisory council on an Indigenous voice to parliament."

"Wyatt said he had consulted the advisory group co-chairs, Prof Marcia Langton and Prof Tom Calma, and decided Cashman’s membership of the group was no longer tenable."

"The Australian Federal Police (AFP) has dismissed an allegation disputing the Aboriginal heritage of author and historian Bruce Pascoe."

The red necked lynch mob are not going to relay the real news, more the Murdoch gutter press version.

Now this is the kind of rubbish I expect from rubbish people.
There has already been more than enough questions and controversy over this guy and his credibility.
For someone like Cashman to stick her neck out and put her job and self on the line, for no good or justifiable reason is incomprehensible.
Of course she's right, and of course he's a grade 'A' fake and con-man.
I'd always believe a Cashman before a con-man.
There has been too much negativity about this guy for there to be nothing to investigate, which leads me to believe that he should be investigated.
It does not make sense that a person working within an organisation, makes an allegation against someone who is on the outside, and then gets sacked for doing so.
My corruption radar is going off it's face and it seems so obvious to me, based on previous and current attempts at the number of wannabees fraudulently availing themselves of financial and physical benefits normally allocated to REAL and ACTUAL native Australian, aborigines and no-one else.
No this stinks and I hope the ministers office, or the media or any other organisation outside of the influence of this department, get letters and pressure to either sack, this guy, or look into him and eventually lay charges on him and his running mates.
There is a crime here, all someone has to do is look into it and all will be exposed, and justice will have prevailed.
This has the feel of something bigger than Ben-Hur and it involves people in high places, so all the more reason to look into it and weed them out.

Typical ALTRAV, a person is guilty not through evidence but because of "questions and controversy". "Of course she's right", and why is that, because you want to believe her, even though her evidence is fabricated. The woman may have a personal grudge against the man, based on some previous perceived injustice.

"I'd always believe a Cashman before a con-man." and how did you determine Pascoe was a con man, yes that's right, from the guilt established by questions and controversy.

"There has been too much negativity about this guy for there to be nothing to investigate, which leads me to believe that he should be investigated." That's right again, its from 'Beat Up' Bolt, a bloke who fabricated his own assault by "lefties" to push his political agenda, and waste valuable police time.

"There is a crime here, (on the say so of a few red necked forum posters like ALTRAV and others including 'Beat Up' Bolt), "all someone has to do is"; stitch up the accused without evidence and the red necked ALTRAV, and forum lynch mob, along with the hard right racists Bolt will be satisfied.

Paul, WTF is wrong with you man?
Are you that obstropolous, that you just have to be THAT guy; the constant pain in the arse.
Your a lone wolf and wasting your time.
You have no idea of what you speak.
You fabricate these fictitious scenarios to justify your rancid attitude towards everyone and everything you disapprove of.
You know very well that there is something not right about this guy, yet you defend him.
She knows more about this guy than you will EVER know, and she has decided to step up and put her neck out and her job on the line, because why, according to you, she just got up one morning and thought she would commit professional suicide by denouncing a scum-bag that everyone else but you know him to be, just based on what we already know and have researched and discovered about him.
What is already on the record about this guy is enough to hang him with, but given that there are too many questions and not enough answers, and all of them point to foul play of some kind, is enough grounds for further investigation.
That inquiry has been pulled.
By whom and why?
So when you get your head out of your arse and admit that everyone else is right about this guy, and your not, you work out how your going to come to terms with backing a loser.

Porky,

"... its from 'Beat Up' Bolt, a bloke who fabricated his own assault by "lefties" to push his political agenda, and waste valuable police time."

Care to offer some evidence for that allegation, or is it BS like your allegations that the SSAA gets money from the US NRA??

IM,

The greens consider anyone (other than themselves) asking for proof as racist, sexism, and homophobic.

Shadow, when did you join the Greens? That description fits you to a tee.

ALTRAV, nothing of any substance has been put up to show Bruce Pascoe is not Aboriginal. Your rantings and ravings, nor your spin on the purity of race, something you picked up from uncle Adolf I imagine, it all means diddly-squat.

Unlike you Il Duce I make a presumption of innocence, until the evidence is produced to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. At least a couple of other red necks tried to put up some kind of nonsense as "proof" of Pascoe's guilt. But you sir rely on your distorted pathetic thinking and nothing else. No problem for me to shoot your pea brain thinking to bits.

No worries Issy, I believe the forumite Porky, who you keep addressing, will be along with the evidence shortly.

BRUCE PASCOE IS AN ABORIGINAL.

BRUCE PASCOE IS DEFINITELY NOT AN ABORIGINE!
There, that should be enough proof to shut you up.
As I said, she knows more about this guy than you do, and therefore if she say's he is a fake, (or a wannabee) then that's what he is.
Now because I agree with her, and she has done the research, and she says he is a fake, I say again, he is a fake, and this means:
BRUCE PASCOE IS DEFINITELY NOT AN ABORIGINE!

Porky,

Then there are the birth and other Official certificates that have been shewn, are they fake?
Who is faking them?
Now there is an interesting avenue for you to pursue to shew that some people will do anything to make their point.
Shew them up for what they are.

Methinks that Josephine Cashman was set up, I don't see her as being fool enough to forge a letter an think that she could get away with it.

The assumptions run thick and fast from the red neck lynch mob as per usual.

ALTRAV, you know nothing of me, or Ms Cashman, you know nothing of what she knows or don't know. What we do know, Cashman was sacked by the Minister for using a forged letter that you now rely upon as evidence!

Mate! You are a joke! As far as I'm aware the only certificates that have been produced are from the far right faker himself 'Beat Up' Bolt, a bloke whose credibility is zero.

BRUCE PASCOE IS AN ABORIGINAL.

A movie I can recommend is the 1997 film 'Rosewood', but check first with your lord and master 'Beat Up' Bolt if it is approved viewing, probely not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhTg98WzH5U

"Bruce Pascoe is a Bunurong, Yuin and Tasmanian man born in the Melbourne suburb of Richmond. He is a member of the Wathaurong Aboriginal Co-operative of southern Victoria and has been the director of the Australian Studies Project for the Commonwealth Schools Commission. Bruce has had a varied career as a teacher, farmer, fisherman, barman, fencing contractor, lecturer, Aboriginal language researcher, archaeological site worker and editor. His book Fog a Dox won the Young Adult category of the 2013 Prime Minister’s Literary Awards. His most recent book is Dark Emu: Black Seeds: agriculture or accident, which won the NSW Premier’s Book of the Year Award in 2016."

BRUCE PASCOE IS NOT AN ABORIGINE!
He is a fake!
He is a wannabee!
Your argument is without foundation.
Ms Cashman knows more about this clown than you do, this I am sure of.
The only way you can know more than her on this wannabee is if you actually grew up with him or know someone who did.
So far, NO-ONE has come forward to vouch for this clown, and in fact have distanced themselves from him.
I would caution ANYONE who decides to back him or take his side, it will cause them to become a person of interest in this whole sorry saga and risks going down with him when finally someone with the stones, decides to investigate and test his history and background.

Porky,

You are right BRUCE PASCOE IS AN ABORIGINAL, just not an ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIAN.

He's an Aboriginal pommie.