ttbn,

With all due respect Sir. I have known Joe Lane for
as long as I've been on this forum. I am fully
aware of his background as a researcher and of his
reputation. He's also fully aware of my qualifications
credentials, credential, and experience. We've known
each other for over a decade.

You again - make assumptions about other people that you know
nothing about and attribute to them things that are neither
fair nor true - simply because their views do not agree
with yours. That is and has been your mode of operation
on this forum.

Questioning Joe's stance on some aspects of this country's
history is not meant to be taken in any derogatory way
against Joe. It's part and parcel of reasoned discussion.
And presenting views from reputable historical
sources as evidence is part of reasoned arguments in
discussions. Joe knows that it's up to him to dispute the
facts given in the sources being provided.
He does not need your help.

You have been sarcastic of others who have come to the defense
of people - yet you are guilty of consistently doing the
same thing that you accuse others of doing - with your
labeling and smear tactics.

Give it a rest.

Either join in the discussion and provide your own
evidence to dispute what's being presented - or
putting it politely - put a sock in it!

LOUDmouth,

Come on! Out with it. What are your credentials?

If you are the sort of person who tells people what he knows rather than what he thinks then you're the sort of person I want to enter into discourse with.

I've been telling everybody you would make a great Arts grad if only you were able to qualify for entry into the program.

But you telling me you had a dozen degrees in subjects A, B, C, D and E and then telling me three months later that you had a dozen degrees in U, V, W, X and Y has left me pondering whether you in fact have any credentials at all.

Come on LOUDmouth, we're all amateur psych's on The Forum (except individual who happens to be a patient) so out with it, what's the deal, are you the real McCoy?

SR,

Ah yes, privilege: before the Bridge was built, access to Hindmarsh Island was by ferry only. On weekends, there was a two- or three hour wait for non-residents to get on the ferry. On the day the Bridge opened, it was revealed that residents of the Island, mostly environmentalists, had permits to drive straight to the head of the queue and get straight onto the ferry. Ah, privilege.

Now, anybody can drive straight over, no waiting for anybody, no special privileges for anybody. Lovely. Quite a beautiful, graceful bridge too. I always make a point of driving over it whenever I go down that way. Why ? Because I can.

Joe

Dear loudmouth2,

Come on mate is was an utter travesty even leaving aside any cultural issues.

And what do you do when you do drive over it? It may as well be a gated community with a very expensive driveway which other people paid for.

It was useful for one thing. My right-wing German father-in-law was always antagonistic to Aboriginal issues but after visiting Hindmarsh Island he said he can't imagine too many local indigenous people would be living in a waterside house with and expensive yacht moored on their private jetty.

At least he had some sense of social justice which seems to elude you whenever this issue is raised.

SR,

Actually, there is a large chunk of land on the Island under the control of Ngarrindjeri people - about a mile onto the Island, on the left, maybe twenty hectares: it used to belong (I think) to the Uni of SA but they gave it over or leased it out to this particular group.

The site has visitor-accommodation, but seemed to be deserted every time I've ever been there. The usual.

A lot of people live on the Island, many not particularly wealthy - river shacks and retirement cottages. Even around the Marina, a lot of the properties are cheek-by-jowl, with many properties going for between $ 400,000 and $ 700,000; vacant land is offered for between $ 140 and $ 200 per square metre. Not particularly affluent.

Is that it ? No other whinge ?

Joe

Joe