Liberals’ Separated Hearts
I doubt anyone has stolen the hearts of Brendan Nelson and some of his Liberal colleagues – they probably decided to separate themselves from their own hearts. But separated or stolen, their hearts are obviously off in cold storage somewhere, because they’re clearly nowhere to be found at the moment.
If ever there was a situation and a group of Australians who deserved just a tiny bit of generosity of spirit; just a brief pause in the waging of partisan ideological crusades, it is the Stolen Generations. But even that is beyond the modern-day federal ‘Liberal’ Party.
Even when the federal Liberal Party finally managed to agree to support a formal Parliamentary apology to the Stolen Generations – a group of Australians who have suffered hurt beyond what many of us can imagine at the hands of government officials – they still manage to show that a lot of them don’t really mean it, further compounding the continuing insults the ‘Liberals’ and their fellow history warriors have consciously inflicted over the last decade.
In an amazing display of bad faith and callous cold-heartedness, at the same time as saying they have decided to give in-principle support to an apology, Liberal Party MPs have now – presumably deliberately – tried to ignite a debate about wanting to replace the term Stolen Generations with the ludicrous term ‘separated generations.’
The comprehensive report of the “National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families” was tabled in May 1997, and the term Stolen Generations has been in widespread usage since then. In all that time, I’ve never heard the term ‘separated generations’, even from the former Coalition government which sought to deny, downplay and denigrate many aspects of the report.
The spokesperson for ANTaR (Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation) has rightly described this stance from the Liberals as a refusal to admit a shameful legacy.
This shabby stunt from the ‘Liberals’ is just the latest in a long line of efforts to falsely portray the deliberate, widespread practice of using racial grounds to justify the often permanent removal of children from their parents as just some sort of well meaning quasi child protection exercise which may have occasionally unintentionally gone wrong. I find it very hard to be polite about efforts which seek to create such an enormously misleading portrayal which is so far removed from the widely documented facts, particularly about a crime so heinous.
This sort of nit-picking and quibbling at the margins over terminology is a transparent effort to try to draw attention away from unpleasant truths and realities. If it was just some schoolyard debating, these sort of nonsensical word games would be merely pathetic. But it is exceptionally offensive when the people doing the quibbling are amongst the most privileged and powerful people in the land, and they are doing so in order to avoid conceding the blatant reality of an enormous and horrendous wrong that was perpetrated by people in positions of authority upon thousands of powerless people which still causes immense hurt and trauma to this day.
It is obvious from many public comments in letters to the editor, websites, and on talkback radio that many Australians have no compunction in expressing extremely antagonistic views towards Indigenous Australians, and do not know even a fragment of the history of what Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander people have experienced over the last century, let alone the one before that. We have no hope of fully reaching our potential as a nation until we as a community can come to terms with the facts of our nation’s history. Responsible political and community leaders look for opportunities to encourage people to recognise some of the realities of our history that many are widely ignorant of, as well as recognising some of its consequences. If senior politicians and so many in the community can’t cope with a simple thing like an apology, it’s no wonder we continue to fail so dismally on broader Indigenous issues.
Talk about a failure of leadership.
ELSEWHERE: Robert Merkel makes a similar point using many fewer words over at Larvatus Prodeo, with a long discussion thread leading off it.
This article ignores the Liberals completely and listens to some of the affected people directly – by Paul Toohey at The Australian’s website, with an even longer discussion thread following which reveals just how far Australia still is from anything approaching reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples, and indeed reconciliation with and recognition of our nation’s history.
UPDATE: Townsville based Liberal MP, Peter Lindsay, adds to the atmosphere of begrudingness surrounding his party’s ’support’ for an apology by suggesting Indigenous people should “express forgiveness to those who did this so many decades ago.”
43 Comments, Comment or Ping
Betty Du Bois
This “separated” terminology is a legacy of the John Herron days…Actual quote being “The proportion of separated Aboriginal children was no more than 10 per cent…” in the Govt response to “Bringing Them Home” three years after it was released
Feb 8th, 2008
tigtog
Great post, Andrew. This quibbling is prevarication, nothing more, and they should be ashamed of themselves.
Feb 8th, 2008
philip travers
Main chancers,Lab and Lib,if the Libs are in cold storage the ALP is taking in the Ultra Violet spectra.Methinks,whilst this is important,often those fronting this stuff are actually encouraging over-exposure of indigenous Australia.Can we suggest to the ABC to link Japan and Australia on whales using talkback radio.Not dismissing this problem,but prefer a resolution here on whales poste haste.
Feb 8th, 2008
Andrew Bartlett
That’s true Betty, but the other purpose of the Herron quote was to deny there was a ‘generation’ – stolen or separated – at all. I suppose one could be positive and say at least they’ve accepted the ‘generation’ bit.
Feb 8th, 2008
Tom
Didn’t realise whales used talkback radio!
:)
Feb 8th, 2008
CORAL
When I saw “Rabbit Proof Fence”, I got the impression that white folk took the aboriginal children away because they looked dirty and undernourished, and led a waif-like existence.
White people weren’t used to hunter/gatherer societies and many thought they were doing the children a favour.
It cannot be denied that aboriginal children went into servitude and were sometimes sexually abused by the landowners they served.
But many of the people I see crying on TV look as if they are at least 75% white.
How many apologies are needed before people move on?
Feb 8th, 2008
togret
Coral, your questions are answered here : http://www.reconcile.org.au/getsmart/pages/sorry/sorry–faq.php
Feb 8th, 2008
Marilyn
Gawd Coral, what the hell is 75% white and what on earth does it signify? Most of them were half white because they had white fathers who often raped the mothers and then refused the children or helped to steal them from their mothers.
How many years of sorrows do the mothers have to suffer dear?
Feb 8th, 2008
philip travers
Tom you are a genius,like Dom Knight of the SYDNEY Morning Herald.Wne enough moons have passed to see that the Aboriginal Flag as is is similar to the Japanese,someone,somewhere in the ABC,if not commericial, will decide that Talkback radio may bring a new perspective from both Japanese and Australians across a divide, thatneeds crossing for the sake of understanding,and resolving this.
Feb 9th, 2008
Tony
Coral & Marilyn
Australia is well aware of the rape committed in indigenous communities around the country. Recent events across northern Australia and Western NSW communities have horrified us all, and are a real problem for the women and children living in these communities. Our forefathers in what was seen then as “ acts of compassion” rescued and saved the lives of many young indigenous people living in poor conditions which lend to hundreds of lives being saved and or lifestyles improved. (now being referred to by the radical left as “The Stolen Generation”).
There is no doubt in the future we will be called upon again to apologise for supporting the “Handout Generation” where we took away self reliance from these communities and turned them into welfare communities. Something our children will not understand and will attack us with. Quite often acts although well intentioned, are not understood by future generations and come back to haunt us. Just look at ‘Redfern NSW’ Utopia for the Aboriginals ? or “No Mans Land” as the NSW Police refer to it.
#Coral a good book to read on this Subject is “Fabrication of Aboriginal History” Vol 1 by Keith Windschuttle or “Red over Black” and the Article in today’s Australian by Keith Windschuttle.
Tony
Feb 9th, 2008
Andrew Bartlett
Dear oh dear Tony – there you were on another thread just recently trying to suggest you were in favour of ’social justice’, and here you are peddling extremist racist mythology. The term “stolen generations” has been in common and widespread usage throughout Australia for a decade – your inference that is only used by the ‘radical left’ is as nonsensical as the rest of your comment.
I don’t see how Keith Windschuttle’s fabrications of history assist the issue, other than as a way of seeing how far people are willing to go to deny and cover-up the blatantly obvious.
It amazes me how the extreme right and those who want to fabricate history for ideological purposes have the gall to accuse others of relativism, when they are so ready to use this sort of ‘according to the values of the time’ excuse to justify actions which were undeniably racist, according to any common-sense reading of the term.
The documentation of the era is quite specific – this was a policy based at its core on racial grounds, not on any specifics of the living conditions the child was in at the time. Indeed it would be strange if it wasn’t, as so many other policies from around the same era was also based around the same notions of eugenics -the evidence of this is voluminous, from departmental documents to parliamentary debates and reports.
Tony wants to call all this “an act of compassion”, yet even Mr Windschuttle describes the attempts to “breed out” the aboriginality of people as “obnoxious”.
About the only thing that is more widely documented than the racist basis of the policy is the massive human hurt and harm that was done as a consequence.
Feb 9th, 2008
CORAL
Surely there is a middle road we could follow. Some of these things happened more than two centuries ago.
Most of us wouldn’t know what happened to our forebears one century ago, let alone bother to go around crying about it.
Move on. What’s so hard about that?
Marilyn:
In answer to your question: “How many years of sorrows do the mothers have to suffer dear?”
ANSWER:
None at this point in time. The mothers probably died many decades ago.
Feb 9th, 2008
GZG
Tony: Thanks for pointing out Keith Windschuttle’s (article in the Australian – it was certainly interesting to read an educated counter view (nothing wrong with knowing all sides of an argument rather than brainlessly dismissing opposing viewpoints).
Coral: “Stolen” or not, I concur with your last comments. We could be full time career apologists if we reviewed the multifarious sins of our distant forefathers.
Andrew: With respect, your emotional response to Tony’s post and cursory rejection of a detailed article by an apparently well educated historian would indicate that you may be just “huff & puff”, and have no real substance behind your stated convictions (or articles of faith?). Did you read today’s piece by KW by the way?
Feb 9th, 2008
Donna
Coral
Indigenous children were still being stolen as late as the 60s, and possibly later.
It’s recent history.
Feb 9th, 2008
Naomi Cartledge
.“But many of the people I see crying on TV look as if they are at least 75% white.
Coral,it’s comments like this that clearly shows ignorance, bias and racism. When you or I say we’re Australian, nobody asks us to prove our bon fides, we’re usually accepted at face value, so why this comment about indigenous people? It’s stupid, illogical and racist!
The following is how aboriginal people classify themselves; “An Aboriginal person is defined as a person who is a descendant of an indigenous inhabitant of Australia, identifies as an Aboriginal, and is recognized by Aboriginal members of the community in which she or he lives.”
“This definition is preferred by the vast majority of our people over the racial definitions of the assimilation era”.
“..from the traditional hunter to the Doctor of Philosophy; from the dark-skinned to the very fair; from the speaker of traditional languages to the radio announcer who speaks the Queen’s English. The lesson to be learned from this, is that we should not stereotype people;that people are different regardless of race.”
(The Little Red, Yellow & Black (and green and blue and white)Book!)
That is how aboriginal people perceive themselves. They are like the broader community, in that they come in different shapes, sizes, colours and have a variety of skills, educational abilities, community skills, and enjoy many types of relationships just like non-indigenous people.
CORAL, CHILDREN WERE BEING REMOVED AS LATE AS THE 70’s.Why don’t you do some reading for goodness sake.The stated aim of removing the aboriginal race, in order to assist the ‘die out’ was the reason for removals.
And Tony, why is it only the left who give a damn? I’m getting sick of this chant!
As for the mothers who may be still alive; my sons were born in the 60’s as were many aboriginal kids, and I’m still here as are some mothers of stolen children. One I know of is 81! She was stolen as were her 2 daughters!
Feb 9th, 2008
Andrew Bartlett
GZG: Of course I read Windschuttle’s piece – I quoted from it in my reponse. I’ve also read his book fabricating history.
I’m all for hearing all sides of an argument, but I am well and truly over giving any sort of credence or respect to views which are flagrantly wrong and/or deliberately inflammatory. Such statements do not enlighten, rather they act to prevent examination of all reality-based perspectives on an issue.
Being open to different perspectives does not mean one should give respect to views which expound or rely on ‘facts’ which are simply false. Its like giving respect to David Irving’s views.
You can call my response “emotional” if you like – in part it is, but that does not make in invalid. The emotion is anger, and I get angry because I am sick of attempts consciously and deliberately seek to deny grotesque and blatant injustices – as my original post indicated, I find it hard to be polite towards statements which deliberately seek to deny well-documented acts of major brutality and cruelty.
The core facts are clear and undeniable to anyone except those who are determined not to see. If they want to remain willfully blind they can, but don’t expect me to sit back and allow such poisonous rubbish to remain unchallenged. We’ve been doing that for far too long, and we’ll never solve the problems of today or develop in the future if we deliberately blind ourselves to the facts of the past.
Feb 9th, 2008
Pete from Perth
Hi Andrew,
Re your main article, yes, be angry. But, you should also feel sorrow for what’s become of the Liberal Party too.
No longer a broad church, they’re now the party of extreme economics and neo-nationalist social policy based on transparent racism. They’ve more in common now with Jack van Tongeren’s bunch of loons than anyone else. They’re friendless except for columnists at The Australian and The West.
Any normal human being would have either the compassion and human decency to say sorry for past governments mistakes — or at least have the reptilian smarts to know it’s tactically wise to fake that compassion convincingly given the current electoral mood to get it out of the way. It says much about how blinded by racism and ideology the modern Parliamentary Liberal party room is that neither instinct can make a dent.
Feb 10th, 2008
CORAL
Overlooking false claims of racism, I have a question for some of you people.
Why would the aboriginal people be given the right to vote (I think it was in 1969), and then have their children taken away from them in the 1970s for no good reason?
The 10-year-old girl who was recently raped by 6 males in Aurukun had been taken away after a previous rape. As soon as she was returned to her community, it happened again, and there was still NO PUNISHMENT for the perpetrators.
I think it is reasonable to suggest they got off because the court accepted their behaviour as a cultural norm.
Feb 10th, 2008
GZG
Naomi: When I say I’m an Australian, I indeed AM asked to prove it when I want a passport, medicare, Centrelink benefits or other entitlements intended for Australians. Following the reasoning behind your quoted classification scheme, I’d be entitled to handouts from the UK government simply because my grandfather was apparently Irish (and don’t ask for bona fides as I can’t find them but I do know some Irish folk).
Five, ten or 100 per cent makes little difference to whether one cares about one’s heritage, some care, some don’t.
And (on an anti-war note to connect with you), why were so many young Australians removed from their parents in the 60’s & 70’s to be sent to Vietnam? . . . um . . . sorry!
Andrew: Surely you meant you “read his book, The Fabrication of Aboriginal History Vol 1” but are unable to refute it other than to imply you give it no credence. I guess “consensus” reigns supreme as long as it suits your purpose.
I am sympathetic towards anyone who has lost parents whether they were abused or neglected by them or not. I am sorry that bad things did, do and will continue to happen (as long as you & I are not responsible, will that cut it Andrew?)
Feb 10th, 2008
zen
Ok. Let’s move on. Where?
I understand that any Australian government will always have ‘Aboriginal’ issues on their hands unless we fully recognise indigeneous Australian kids as Australian citizens with equal rights and a full access to ALL opportunities white Australian children do enjoy:safety houses, education (both public and private) music lessons, dancing classes, swimming pools, mobiles, PC, computer games, public libraries and many other facilities white parents may choose for the benefit and entertainment for their kids.
Yes, we owe apology to the indigeneous Australians; not only for the past but also for the present. The very recent death in police custody (in the back of police van) is yet another shameful record.
In Adelaide, only last week, the city council destroyed Aboriginal campsite in the parklands, dispersed the people, and took all their personal belongings. We call these people ‘homeless’ and ‘an eye sore’ for the tourists.. Apparently, the council acted according to the law and with full support of the community.
As to the apology, we are a bunch of hypocrites; we wholeheartedly supported apology of Japanese (very current) government to the ‘comfort women’ from the WWII; we fully supported the apology of the both Anglican and Catholic churches for pedophile priests predating on the, then, young and white boys; holocaust survivors and their children will expect apology for the generations to come..
We will probably lobby for the Japanese government to apologise to the whales and their babies but never to Aboriginal mothers.
Feb 10th, 2008
Tony
Andrew:
Wow reason went out the window then, must have hit an emotional nerve.
Extreme Racists Mythology?
Accusing Keith Windschuttle of fabricating history?
All acts were of a racist intent?
A bit radical don’t you think?
Maybe “Radical Left Wing”
Tony
Feb 10th, 2008
Jason
Yes, it looks like your ‘reason’ has gone out the window Tony. But if you can’t open your heart or your mind, at least try opening your eyes.
As many people have shown throughout history, sometimes simply telling the truth is a radical act. However, it’s hardly “Left Wing”. Speaking truth to power has meant telling the truth to oppressors of the left as often as oppressors the right, and to the dominant culture, regardless of ideological labels.
Facts are facts, and when denying them means denying atrocities, it is not surprising that people can get emotional. But emotion and reason are not automatically opposites. Sometimes, as in this case, one can inform the other.
Feb 10th, 2008
togret
I suppose it could be said that Windschuttle’s view on our history is of equal importance to that of any other person, and that this argy-bargy is merely the spats that academics have from time to time. Sometimes they are not spats, but merely scholars saying “What you said was interesting, but did you take into account this other bit of evidence …?”
However, when these disputes over methods or the evidence itself can be found in headlines claiming that the stolen generations were not stolen at all, and that the deaths of aboriginal people have been highly exaggerated, then it is more than academics disputing. It becomes part of the way we see our fellow citizens, and can influence the direction of public policy, with profound implications for people whose average level of well-being is much lower than that of the rest of us.
Windschuttle found that in the the past, back as far as the 1960s, historians such as Lyndall Ryan made errors in drawing numbers from the primary sources, and disputes others’ calculations and interpretations derived from the letters and diaries of early colonists in Tasmania. That’s what historians do.
I suppose what put me off Windschuttle to some extent was either hearing or readng, sorry, I don’t remember which, him declare that Tasmanian Aborigines could not have acted with “humanity and compassion” because such notions were “literally unthinkable” to them. I have a diary note, and believe those words are accurate quotes. He regarded them as inferior or defective, never having developed terms in their languages for owning land or owning property of any kind. Yet even he has to acknowledge that they defended what they saw as “their land” as best they could.
Windschuttle has lost credibility when he claims that there is only one ‘truth’ out there, and that he has found it. Everyone else is out of step.
Feb 11th, 2008
geoff
Well wait a minute. Andrew’s progressive Left attitude is expected. As are the emotive outbursts and shooting the messenger and denying the facts. It is the way of the Progs.
Of course STOLEN is wrong as is GENERATIONS. That is indisputable for any sane person. Emotive claptrap devised by the LW radicals that wrote the report in the first place; Lavarch and Wilson.
Then we have Read another LWer who admitted that his claims which started the whole thing re “genocide” and “stolen” etc are based on a fabrication.
Feb 11th, 2008
ken
I don’t have any problem with the apology, however the whole notion being sold of its time to “move on” concerns me more, as I ‘m sure the original apologists clearly wanted to link the apology with reparation. As with many things in politics the show is more important than the substance, so we’ll all feel good about the show (ain’t that getting good spin, cant wait for the first invitation to the sorry party) but conveniently forget about the real problem when the show is over.
While the PM’s obscenity of differing health and life expectancy outcomes and disadvantage is no doubt well intentioned, having swags of people stuck in the middle of nowhere, semi -literate, with nothing to do and totally dependent on the public purse, can only ever lead to exactly those sort of outcomes. Celebrating in Canberra by those back on the public gravy train won’t change diddly squat for those poor citizens.
No citizens can expect or have advocates expecting them to have the same access to services as every one else in such situations, it is simply resource wise untenable, we must find a way to enable all aboriginals to partake in some way that is acceptable to them in society as we know it. To do otherwise really means we need to say sorry to the kids being born now.
Can anyone tell me when stealing stopped and appropriate casework intervention started – as a stealer in the 1980’s I’d like to be in the clear.
Feb 11th, 2008
geoff
the apology should be focused on practical outcomes, not the symbolic bullshit that is gonna sound and look like Whitlam’s foray into Aboriginal Affairs on the part of Rudd.
If we’re going to say sorry to the Indigenous people why not say sorry to another fringe group like the fags and lesbos for not giving them the right to marriage in law!
The fringe group genie is out of the bottle now thanks to Mr Rudd. Godspeed to all you fringe dwelling, grant sucking demo-socialists. But don’t forget someone is gonna pay for it… It’ll be you!!!!
Feb 11th, 2008
GZG
Geoff
A “practical outcome” (presumably a positive one for Indigenous folk, and in particular, for the innocent children still suffering many faceted abuses) would certainly be better than an inappropriate apology.
Must be Our Blog Leader inspiring your emotionalism, nay, anger! Settle down, breathe calmly, then express yourself with decorum.
That done, please continue, I concede your point if not the package it came in.
Feb 11th, 2008
CORAL
Ken:
Yes, that makes a lot of sense.
While aboriginal communities remain in remote locations, access to services will remain difficult.
Recently, the Queensland government said it would send “teachers of excellence” into the aboriginal communities to bring them up to scratch, and pay them a lot more for their work.
At the moment, remote locations mostly attract young, inexperienced, unattached teachers.
But the biggest problem in educating aboriginal children is absenteeism. It doesn’t matter how good the teachers are, if a large percentage of the parents don’t send their kids to school on a regular basis.
Feb 11th, 2008
geoff
geez 2 geoff’s how we gonna tell the difference?
Feb 11th, 2008
Naomi Cartledge
Andrew #16. HEAR BLOODY HEAR! I hazard a guess that those of us involved in this discussion are predominantly non-aboriginal. In that case, it’s what the aboriginal people think, feel, experience and suffer from that’s important. There’s a difference between those kids, black and white who are removed due to danger, and those kids/babies who were removed only because they were ‘light black’ or ‘dark white’.Kids in one family were separated;a lighter skinned child taken and the darker children left with their families.Some women were raped by white men,frequently, and many were killed too as their pregnancy showed – that’s the mindset of 1800’s -1970? To my knowledge those in control made no secret of the intent-to get rid of the black race!
“Mr Neville(the Chief ProtectorWA)holds the view that within one hundred years the pure black will be extinct,but the half-caste problem is increasing every year.Therefore their idea is to keep the pure blacks segregated and absorb the half-castes into the white population.Perhaps it will take one hundred years,perhaps longer,but the race is dying.”That’s just one of many quotes!
Tomorrow I’m going to an Aboriginal Culture Centre before 9am and spend the time with many aboriginal and non-aboriginal people.I’m sure there’ll be tears and joy, it will be a positive environment to be in I feel.That’s day 1, we all have to roll up the sleeves from day 2, and keep the government accountable.
Please tell me what’s wrong with being emotional?On my death bed I’m sure it’ll be ‘emotional’ parts of my life I’ll think about, not Windshuttle’s book $$$selling denialism or the date of the last election or??He’s done $$$OK hasn’t he, as does Piers Ackerman,Gerard Henderson,Blaney etc?How about that gravy train?On the ABC board or???govt history ‘panel’?? Doing very nicely, thank you!We pay for that lot one way or another?
Feb 12th, 2008
Andrew Bartlett
Yeah, whatever Geoff – you can be a denialist as much as you like, but it doesn’t change the ample array of facts from documentary evidence of the time, as well as the memories and lived experiences of thousands of Indigenous Australians.
As for Windschuttle’s latest effort at fabrication, here’s some material from Crikey.com.au by Dr Naomi Parry, author of “Such a longing: Black and white welfare in NSW and Tasmania, 1880-1940″, who spent 8 years for her PhD on the treatment of Indigenous children compared with their white counterparts in the state welfare systems of NSW and Tasmania.
Feb 12th, 2008
togret
Many aboriginal schools in disadvantaged areas are so poorly equipped that if every eligible kids turned up, they’d have nowhere for them to sit.
That may be one reason for absenteeism. Another is the backsliding on bi-lingualism. Another is the experience of some of the parents who don’t value education because of their own experiences.
Feb 12th, 2008
Donna
The 10-year-old girl who was recently raped by ‘6 males in Aurukun had been taken away after a previous rape. As soon as she was returned to her community, it happened again, and there was still NO PUNISHMENT for the perpetrators.’
So what does this have to do with the stolen generation?
Feb 12th, 2008
Amanda
“Sorry: The First Step” combines the symbolic and the practical. The government is proposing both, not one over the other.
I liked the way Rudd followed up the symbolic apology with a detailed speech that outlined several specific, measurable goals. One was that all indigenous kids aged 4 years will be in pre-school within 5 years.
There’s nothing fluffy about that. It’s very concrete and much needed. It feels like we are moving on already.
Like other commenters here, I wonder whether traditional lifestyles in remote communities can be sustained into the future. Isolation from the main economy means that health and education levels must be low and that hand-out mentalities prevail. I suspect that future years will see Indigenous communities facing choices that will require them to give up some of this isolation in order to access the services (health and education) that underpin sustainable communities.
Let’s put our energy into moving on, not into nitpicking.
Feb 13th, 2008
togret
I’m sorry to have to say that Brendan Nelson has now lost me completely.
Either those were his words and I misjudged him earlier, or he was not able to prevail and say what he really thinks, in which case why is he still in the Liberal Party?
Disgusting. Shame, Brendan, shame
Feb 13th, 2008
Liz
Another author Tony, GZG, togret might like to read is Queenslander Raymond Evans – chapter after chapter of FACTS not “views” (as Geoff seems to think history is) about the policies – offical and unoffical – and exploitation, destruction and degradation visitied upon our first peoples.
I can’t believe anyone trying to make a credible argument about anything would offer up Windschuttle as evidence.
Feb 13th, 2008
CORAL
I have a slight correction to make. The 10-year-old girl was raped by 9 males, not 6. Three were adults, and 6 were juveniles.
An older aboriginal man speaking on TV today said he didn’t think he needed any compensation. He said the nuns and brothers educated him and looked after him well.
The teenagers who were taken away for apprenticeships were probably better served in many ways than the younger children left behind.
There are some remote schools that are hard to access due to infrastructure problems (dreadful roads and overcrowding etc). I cannot be sure of the actual percentage.
On the whole, I thought Brendan Nelson put forward a reasonably balanced view of aboriginal children in differing situations.
Feb 13th, 2008
geoff
I’m sorry Andrew… which geoff were you refering to?
let me know when you progressive denialists are ready to debate the truth… until then I’ll leave it to the other geoff to harangue you
Feb 13th, 2008
Marilyn
Yeah right Coral, like locking kids up in concentration camps in the desert was for their own bloody good, right?
You drive me and others to distraction with what appears to be a universal contempt for anyone who is not anglo-saxon and WASP.
Feb 17th, 2008
CORAL
You could try speaking for yourself, Marilyn, instead of insulting others.
In Brisbane today, aboriginal children are still highly represented among those being taken away from their parents – for excellent reasons, such as child abuse and neglect.
Feb 18th, 2008
Naomi Cartledge
Well,just to put some perspective on this one-sided argument about abuse of aboriginal kids, either sexual,other,or substance abuse. A study released today estimates that 1 in 10 high school students were binge drinking during the last week.Over 200,000 had taken illegal substances during the past month or so. I’d safely assume, that these young people are not from indigenous areas but the broader community. Sexual abuse of any child is repugnant to all decent people,but it happens in the broader community too. I don’t remember seeing any aboriginal person in the last roundup of those having pornagraphic images of children in their possesssion. To my knowledge,none of these people have been removed from their families;none have had their ‘land’ resumed;their families haven’t had half of their income quarantined;nor has the Racial Discrimination Act been removed, or the presumption of innocence or the laws of defamation or?The bloke from the NSW DPP office,jailed for 6 or 9 months didn’t have to hand over his house etc.The discrimination shown by the Howard government re the ruse for invading the NT is a disgrace,and doesn’t in itself show any concern for indigenous kids. The fact that there’s applications for mining leases for most of the NT is only a coincidence of course!Black & white men are abusing kids, in probably every community around the country. 1 in 4 girls, and 1 in 7 boys will be abused by aged 18.This was certainly my experience – 3 times in fact before aged 16,not by aboriginal men!I know of many similar occurrences!I’m sickened by abuse of kids; that’s exaccerbated by people taking advantage of this horror in order to take advantage.Wealthy mining mates my case in point!
Barely a handful of men have been charged,80% of medically examined kids have been referred to Specialists?When will that happen I wonder?
Feb 25th, 2008
CORAL
There is no denying that sexual abuse is largely ignored in our society. Adults don’t have the guts to speak up for their kids, and most cases go unreported.
Yes, there’s plenty of binge drinking going on among teenagers.
Not long ago, Andrew quite rightly pointed out that the Howard government had launched an anti-drug initiative, but did not bother addressing the greater problem of alcohol abuse.
Today’s teenagers are given too much money, too much power and too much freedom to do as they choose – a sad indictment on the modern world.
This is because parents are too self-obsessed and greedy to do what is best for their children.
Feb 25th, 2008