This thread shalt not be filled with crap

Australia has formally apologised to the stolen generations with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd reading a speech in Federal Parliament this morning.

For / Against?

smh.com.au link

I dunno about it really, it's not like I knew any of them personally....

Against.

For

Against. Don't apologize for something I had nothing to do with, on my behalf. I'm sure as hell not sorry.

But since he's now declared that all shall be equal, will we be abolishing all over discriminatory funding to this ethnic minority?

I think Sorry can be thrown around without meaning as long as it makes people happy. The only reason you would hold it off this long is Ego and gay pride (go John).

touche Raven

Not for or against the apology itself, but I don't need anyone apologising on MY behalf. I didn't do anything wrong, and at least half of my great grandparents came here after it happened anyway.

EDIT: What Raven said.

Neither for nor against really.

Look if it were me, I'd be pissed - but an apology from someone who didn't perpetrate the crimes I'm pissed about wouldn't mean s*** to me
I as an Australian will be even more pissed if/when some class action law suit is filed and we as tax payers have to fork out more money to the indigenous people of this land, even if they weren't directly affected by or apart of the stolen generation

Against. I know this took place back in the salad days but I'm sure it was done for good reasons.

100% For. If nothing else it will shut a lot of people up and it costs us next to nothing.

Rudd only apologised for Parliaments and Governments. At no point in his speech did he apologise on behalf of non-indigenous Australians.

I commend the move, if it is meant in the spirit it seems - of reconciliation (and finally putting an end to it).

I don't, however, like hearing comments from Indigenous spokespeople saying that the next step ultimately must include compensation.

The Govt and Opposition have agreed to implement a bi-partisan set of policies to extend beyond the current parliamentary term, to improve the livelihood of all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Is. people (not just the stolen ones and their families)...and they still complain.

Sad.

For.

If your mum, or dad, or brother or sister died, I would say to you "Oh, I'm sorry", even though I wasn't responsible for their death. It's the same basic principle here.

I cannot comprehend the people who are saying "Well I'm not apologising for something I had nothing to do with, and yeah what are they complaining about anyway, look at all the money they get from us etc etc etc blah blah blah". Yeah, they sure have it good. I wish I was one of them, in fact.

Like Raven said, if it means the loss of all rights they have over other races (white Asian brown or other blacks) then I'm all for it. Otherwise against, I doubt the whole incident was nearly as widespread as has been claimed.

There's no point to apologising, it's just words from a bunch of people who didn't do anything. It's like me apologising for Khel touching children, it's meaningless. I firmly believe that there is only one reason that many Aboriginals want an apology, because it a legal acknowledgement, and acceptance of guilt.

I'd rather ensure that it's remembered, sorrowfully, as a moment of time that we should never forget and never allow to surface again.

I doubt the whole incident was nearly as widespread as has been claimed

Mmm, and only a few hundred Jews were killed in the holocaust.

Raven hit the nail on the head.

I still object to the notion they were stolen.

Mmm, and only a few hundred Jews were killed in the holocaust.

Apples and Oranges.

Holocaust sent healthy, civilised people who contributed to society, science and learning to their immediate deaths. This generation was removed from a culture which in 10 000 years could not develop written language, permanent structures or any advancements in science or maths. A culture where often there was only one, and sometimes no parents alive/around to nurture the child. they were removed from a culture which did not educate their children to live in the 20th century.

last edited by fade at 11:10:10 13/Feb/08

Taking children didn't completely stop till the early 70's in some places.

The apology is for all past harm, not just stolen children. Compensation is not the focus of today's apology, it's about having the guts to move forward from the whole sad saga and reconcile our past so that the future can deal with the future and not dwell on the past.

I wasn't comparing the Holocaust to the Stolen Generation, I was comparing the tendency to minimise terrible historical events.

Wouldn't saying sorry admit to being in the wrong and then open up all legal types of ramifications?

Past harm? So the English should apologise scots for the 12th century rout?
So the romans should apologise to france for conquering them?

All the English did was conquer. It's what civilisations have done forever, and there is nothing wrong with it. Winners should reap the rewards.

There's no point to apologising, it's just words from a bunch of people who didn't do anything.

There's some point, if it means everyone shuts up about it forEVER and we never have to hear about it again EVER.

Starting ... now

There's some point, if it means everyone shuts up about it forEVER and we never have to hear about it again EVER.

Starting ... now

I wish Trog. They will find something else to complain about tomorrow. Give them an inch, and they will take a mile.

How about some of that equality they all scream about. Lets abolish Abstudy, extra centrelink, and all other extra $$ they get from our tax dollars.

last edited by fade at 11:20:33 13/Feb/08

then they would need more dollahs brah

There's some point, if it means everyone shuts up about it forEVER and we never have to hear about it again EVER.

is that your way of saying it's pointless?

Apples and Oranges.

Holocaust sent healthy, civilised people who contributed to society, science and learning to their immediate deaths. This generation was removed from a culture which in 10 000 years could not develop written language, permanent structures or any advancements in science or maths.

....and that is about as bigoted as you can get. They were a prosperous culture and race that had lived in some of the most inhospitable environmental conditions on Earth. We white folk of today would have none and buckleys of surviving without modern tools, they survived 40,000 years without these tools. If anything it shows a greater resilience and ingenuity than we possess to master these obstacles to sustaining life.

There was also a thriving population prior to our arrival. It didn't start to decline until we got here. To say they never led a successful life and culture is to the lessor extent poor education and to the upper extend pure and unadulterated stupidity.

The major social disharmony and disruption affecting aborigines today stem from white government and white public attitudes and policies, not because they, the aborigines, asked for it. Aborigines had a strict moral code firmly entrenched in their societies which on our arrival was derided, denigrated and dissolved which has led to a vacuum in aboriginal self-confidence, identity and personal responsibility. Something that plagued them then and plagues them now.

We white folk of today would have none and buckleys of surviving without modern tools

... did we white folk not land here and managed to survive?

clearly we adapt better than they do, look at them these days

I think there's two seperate idea's here. I think the vast majority of people would say that taking children from their familys based only on race is a terrible thing and must never be allowed to happen again and that along with all the other terrible s*** we've done to the Aboriginals over the years we all probably regret that previous generations did that. I don't think that statement is particularly controversial and I don't think anyone has the balls in this day and age and defend the previous racist policies.

But what most people seem to be saying is that they don't personally feel responsible and they certainly shouldn't (though anyone who had the opportunity to vote for a government pre-1963 should probably feel just a tad guilty). What I think people should appreciate though is that there's a difference between personal responsability and supporting the govt. in apologising for previous mistakes. I think if you agree with the sentiment in the previous paragraph then you should definitely support the apology not as a personal gesture but as a recognition that previous govts made terrible mistakes.

As for me personally? I walked for the sorry cause back in '99 or whenever that happened and so I support the govt. I think we need to get over this though and start prodding the Aboriginal community to figure out what role they want to have in a wider Aust. society.

We white folk of today would have none and buckleys of surviving without modern tools, they survived 40,000 years without these tools. If anything it shows a greater resilience and ingenuity than we possess to master these obstacles to sustaining life.

haha what?

do you seriously believe they purposely refrained from technologically advancing? they just did what they had to do, like any people would in the same situation and conditions if they didn't know any better. if we had to abandon our technology and live in the bush, we'd just do it. asif we'd fail to survive. maybe you'd perish, but I wouldn't

They were a prosperous culture and race that had lived in some of the most inhospitable environmental conditions on Earth.

Define prosperous? Did develop anything of lasting influence? explore, discover, invent?

We white folk of today would have none and buckleys of surviving without modern tools, they survived 40,000 years without hese tools.

You mean, what aboriginal accomplished in 40 000 years was surpassed in 4000 years of european, asian and other cultures? s***, I think the Mesopotamians accomplished more in 400 years.

Did develop anything of lasting influence? explore, discover, invent?

Rock paintings are lasting to this day! Granted, a 5 year old could probably draw a crisper picture, but hey... pretty pictures.

I bet they Explored alot of Australia, they just were unable to record it / efficently pass the information down the generations. Discover in the same veign.
And the Boomerang is a pretty cool invention, They invented Pointy sticks too!

Time to move on, no more Sorry's, no more extra money. They've had their time to adapt. Or Implement a similar system to other countries.
Aborigine + Aborigine Parents = Aborigine = Full benefits (We're not going to be able to just cut them off cold turkey)
Aborigine + Non-Aborigine parent = Half-Blood = 1/2 Benefits.
Half-Blood + Aborigine = Half-Blood
Half + Half = No Benefits.
Half + Non-Aborigine = No benefits.

Sure, we'll still be paying a lot for a long time and there will be certin circles around for even longer. However it's a Start.

Against. Don't apologize for something I had nothing to do with, on my behalf. I'm sure as hell not sorry.

The apology was on behalf of the government, not the general population, in that sense Im for it. People are getting more caught up in the act of saying sorry itself, rather than the symbolism. This is the first time the government has stood up, taken responsibility for the policies of the past and admitted mistakes were made that destroyed hundreds of familys and displaced 50,000 aboriginal children.

I have a number of friends that hava aboriginal lineage and some horrific stories about their families. If the goverment making an offical apology is in anyway a help in the process of over coming feelings of hate and resentment then why not? Im not saying that it should cancel out history, or the hurt, but like Rudd said, its a necessary event in the development of our country.

But since he's now declared that all shall be equal, will we be abolishing all over discriminatory funding to this ethnic minority?

Really good point, and I was thinking about this on the way to work this morning after I had listened to the speech. If the government has come out and said sorry, does that mean we stop literally paying for mistakes for through welfare? I have never seen one official form that didnt need to identify me as a 'non aboriginal australian'. Its like reverse descrimination, and Its completely unfair.
There are plenty of caucasian, etc etc australians that need assistance, why do they only qualify to a lesser extent?

^ I think you would acknowledge Jim, that on the whole very few city folk would have any hope living a sustainable life with not a single modern tool today even on the Australian coast let alone the centre.

To be honest Jim, the Europeans more than likely wouldn't have discovered Gunpowder had they not be shown it by the Chinese via the Middle East nor adopted agriculture had they not be shown it by the Middle Eastern traders. Quite possibly they'd still be hunter/gatherer societies for they certainly never invented it and never looked as though they were going to at the time.

To deny that it can and at many times does take outside cultures to create or spawn advancement in ones own society is rather naive. Furthermore it should not be seen in derogatory terms if they hadn't achieved the same level of advancement as those introducing the change. People from different places come across different discoveries well before others all the time. It called diversity.

Why are you denying these people your understanding of this when you appear to have such for others. It's not as though we Australians invented computers or flight yet we're happy and proud to accept these new discoveries and without being looked down upon by the others.

Against.

for

what the government did of the time was wrong;

its the least the government could do

fade, you are one f***en bigot.

we're happy and proud to accept these new discoveries and without being looked down upon by the others.

Yes we are. Which is why we're better.

We dont see change and say "Oh thats Evil, we'll just sit here and drink instead"
We see change and say "Wow, Thats really good, it can help everyone. Lets adopt these new practices for the beterment of ourselves and our people"

All I am doing is challenging your definition of prosperous? and secondly, Accomplishments are subjective - i personally think writing, medicine, exploration, maths and physics is much more important than a curved stick.

Please correct me if a boomerang is more important than inoculation though

last edited by fade at 11:55:32 13/Feb/08

for.. but it should be the queen or the governor general that makes the apology ;D

I'm not denying them anything - I'm just remarking on your assertion that surviving without the 'tools' we have is some kinf of achievment. It's not. You either survive, or you don't.

I think you would acknowledge Jim, that on the whole very few city folk would have any hope living a sustainable life with not a single modern tool today even on the Australian coast let alone the centre.

I strongly disagree with this. As far as I'm aware, no race of human is born with instincts that enable it to engage in behaviour that increases it's chance of survival without technology. Like I said, if we didn't have what we have now, we'd just adapt and survive with what we would have.

To be honest Jim, the Europeans more than likely wouldn't have discovered Gunpowder had they not be shown it by the Chinese via the Middle East nor adopted agriculture had they not be shown it by the Middle Eastern traders. Quite possibly they'd still be hunter/gatherer societies for they certainly never invented it and never looked as though they were going to at the time.

Everyone alive gets shown stuff by other people. Nobody is born knowing anything other than how to breath or suck on a teat. Given the human blueprint, it's inevitable that someone would 'invent' gunpowder, and it's completely irrational to assert that a particular race would never have invented it.

100% for.

We imposed change, we didn't offer it with an option of saying no. The changes we made obviously were the wrong changes to make in respect to them. We are expecting them to make dramatic cultural and social changes in a very short time span whereas we had more than enough centuries if not millenniums.

I think that every f***wit against should have their children stolen on the premise that they must be passing on to them an ignorant view.

Against. What a waste of time. Champagne KRudd.

I think that every f***wit against should have their children stolen on the premise that they must be passing on to them an ignorant view.

completely ignorant comment

To be honest Jim, the Europeans more than likely wouldn't have discovered Gunpowder had they not be shown it by the Chinese via the Middle East nor adopted agriculture had they not be shown it by the Middle Eastern traders. Quite possibly they'd still be hunter/gatherer societies for they certainly never invented it and never looked as though they were going to at the time.

you're prooving the point though, the euro's did go and discover the asian's and the gunpowder and advanced, one way or another

while the aboriginals were still the same for 11ty billion years

For: Because that level of disruption and harm should never be forced upon a culture.
Against: Because I didn't f***ing do it, get the c***s that made the decisions up on a podium and apologise.

Also, I'm glad K-Rudd repeatidly said "Our nation, Australia" because at times I got confused about where I was living. Worst speech ever, sounds like it was written up by a 5 year old - especially when it came to story telling time.

Hey if they wanted to remain uncivilised, lets take all the s*** we gave them and push it off a cliff
let them go back to their natural ways

Against. What a waste of time. Champagne KRudd.

lolz, poor infi

casa ban!@

he is only repeating something from another thread...

I strongly disagree with this. As far as I'm aware, no race of human is born with instincts that enable it to engage in behaviour that increases it's chance of survival without technology. Like I said, if we didn't have what we have now, we'd just adapt and survive with what we would have.

I never said that. I said how many would survive today had they been thrown back to the same conditions as the aborigines. I'm telling you now, not as many as you seem to allude. Remember a lot of white settlers died all throughtout Australia and they had some bloody mean tools and were a lot hardier than you and me. Part of our eventual success in surviving in this land was by taking on board knowledge and lessons learnt from the aborigines.

Furthermore, to me a culture lasting 40,000 years and was continuing to expand it's population base at the time we came here is not a failure.

Everyone alive gets shown stuff by other people. Nobody is born knowing anything other than how to breath or suck on a teat. Given the human blueprint, it's inevitable that someone would 'invent' gunpowder, and it's completely irrational to assert that a particular race would never have invented it.

Never said they wouldn't eventually but any alteration in the timeline is sure to have had an impact on where we are today.

I am stating that advancement for many did occur due to outside influences. Why is that so hard to grasp and apply the very same to aborigines. They may have not needed or were unable to at the time to further advance the society due to 1) being particularly isolated due to geography and thus not as susceptible to outside influence and 2) already successfully living a life that sustained their dreams, hopes, aspirations, happiness and well being and so they were satisfied with their lot. Nothing wrong with that.

jim is a prude

i am against this apology

Care to explain why then? rather than just re-posting a s***ty email forward written by a semi-literate bogan bigot.

against.

they (the government at the time) were doing what they thought was right. and i'm not convinced they were wrong. britney spears can't have her kids, why the f*** should someone who continued drinking right through pregnancy get to keep their kids?

are you asking why to me dan?

You dont know me very well then if i need to explain why :P

who ever said a boomerang isnt advanced, it flys AND comes back
f***, they hunted kangaroos with them

I'm telling you now, not as many as you seem to allude

I'm telling you now, more than you seem to allude to

Remember a lot of white settlers died all throughtout Australia and they had some bloody mean tools and were a lot hardier than you and me.

how many died, exactly? how many aboriginals die for the same reason, exactly? you don't know - so stop making claims that require you know.

anyway - whites are still here, in spite of the harshness of this country. plus, I'd hazard a guess that what the whites tried to do here when they arrived, was harder than what aborigines did anyway. it's generally easier to live day to day and survive than build a modern society and expand rapidly.

Furthermore, to me a culture lasting 40,000 years and was continuing to expand it's population base at the time we came here is not a failure.

I didn't say it was, nor do I think it is. again, all I'm doing is arguing against the idea that aboriginees made some kind of accomplishment by living here without technology, that white people would be unable to. it's such a ridiculous assertion, particularly given your apparent disdain for making racially-based conclusions of any kind.

I am stating that advancement for many did occur due to outside influences. Why is that so hard to grasp and apply the very same to aborigines. They may have not needed or were unable to at the time to further advance the society due to 1) being particularly isolated due to geography and thus not as susceptible to outside influence and 2) already successfully living a life that sustained their dreams, hopes, aspirations, happiness and well being and so they were satisfied with their lot. Nothing wrong with that.

completely agree

Hunting/gathering FTW... I don't buy the technology argument.

That being said, I can't be sorry for something I didn't do.

I'm for is if there won't be monetary compensation. But I doubt that it'll just stop at accepting the applogies.... I'd like to prove wrong of course...

Remember a lot of white settlers died all throughtout Australia and they had some bloody mean tools and were a lot hardier than you and me.

Yeh but they were English; if you brought a boatload of your average english people to Australia in the middle of summer of course they're all going to die

Hello floodgates

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/sorry-just-the-start-qld-elders/2008/02/13/1202760347550.html

Brisbane's Aboriginal elders, members of the Stolen Generation and their families see this morning's "Sorry" speech from Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as the start - not the end - of the process from the Federal Government.

To be honest Jim, the Europeans more than likely wouldn't have discovered Gunpowder had they not be shown it by the Chinese via the Middle East nor adopted agriculture had they not be shown it by the Middle Eastern traders. Quite possibly they'd still be hunter/gatherer societies for they certainly never invented it and never looked as though they were going to at the time.

Wow... Thats a really interesting statement.

I never knew that 8000 years ago, Middle Eastern traders were wandering around scotland showing the basics of agriculture to the first scottish villages.

And it's of course not possible that Egypt was who taught Middle Easterners how to farm somewhere after 9500BC.


last edited by Xyzzy at 13:04:19 13/Feb/08

Jim, do you have one aboriginal testicle?

All the aborigines have been angling for is compensation. They have never said once that they don't want compensation. They want more money to go to their own indigenous corporations so they can control what it is spent on.

There should be two options available: Western life (includes money, government benefits etc. but has the reciprocal rules of mutual obligation, employment, mandatory education, Western laws and justice) or traditional lifestyle (leave them alone, no government funding, no education requirements, just go about their business but no drain on the taxpayer).

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

For...

It was an apology on behalf of the government for something that the government did, that by today's standards is not something we'd do or be proud of. Splitting up the functioning (they were happy, that's more functioning then most modern families) family's was never go to achieve any thing except make a generation of orphans. Institutionalised orphans regardless of colour struggle to achieve outside that environment. (Hence why orphanages do not exist any more in Australia and many other countries).

Watch a doco on say the Romanian orphanages and then tell me orphanages are a great idea.

As for the people waffling on about but they meant well. Just because you did it with the best of intentions does not mean you can't be sorry in hindsight. (ps. intentions count for nothing, I am sure the Germans manning the gas ovens were doing it with the best of intentions.. every debate needs as many Hitler references as possible).

For the people saying but it wasn't us... you're right it was the government and that's who apologized, The Government.

I do not have anything to be sorry for in relation to this topic, nor does anyone else on this forum (well I am assuming that the few fossils on here weren't part of that system). In saying that, you may or may not feel sympathy for what was done to some of these families (different issue). You may or may not feel that the "stolen generation" is a cause for modern indigenous problems (different issue).

But if you think there was nothing to say sorry for then you are saying it was a good plan and lets do it again now. No major party will have that in their platform because it won't stand up to social, academic or any other measure you put against it.

And forgetting all of the above.
From a pragmatic point of view, if this opens dialogues it cost us nothing and might lead to solutions (personally its only a symbol, but meh I seen weirder things work with school kids gg pack mentality).

@infi: What a ridiculous generalisation to make. You say it like there are no people of indigenous descent that just wanted the acknowledgement and aren't looking for a financial hand out.

Against; I didn't do it. That said I don't particularly care as long as I am not saddled with paying with today's dollars for a judgement call made half a century ago. If it makes a few people who have been kicked in the hearts by old school governments happy then go for it.

Its wiggish history to apply today's values (which are significantly different!) to the decisions made in the 50s, 60s and even 70s. People forget that there has been a pretty severe cultural change in the last three decades - have a look at Kingswood Country as a good example for how mainstream attitudes have changed.

Now, onto the argument that the aboriginal people did nothing for 40k years, it is kind of hard to debate the fact that they made as few technological advances as possible to survive. We are effectively talking about one of the last stone age cultures on earth.

They lacked contact with other people and ideas, but most importantly they lacked exposure to war. The most technologically advanced nations and cultures on earth all have a bloody history of conquest as the driving force behind their binding need to innovate.

last edited by Hogfather at 13:24:17 13/Feb/08

I said how many would survive today had they been thrown back to the same conditions as the aborigines

Edit:
I would also ask the reverse, how many aboriginals "of today" would survive today had they been thrown back to the same conditions as they were 40k years ago? I'd say not many either. Your comparison is irrelevant really because it's all just conjectures of what ifs.

As you know there are plenty of older civilisations through out the planet that have survived many many conquerers - english included. What I find ironic is that the refusal of some indigeneous people to even consider fusing thier own cultures and adapt the new way yet the government are sitting on the fence and let this continue - yet we make other immigrants do silly "Australianess test (LOL is that even a word?)" and adapt the Australian way of life or get bounced. Should they say sorry to those people that been made to adandon their cultures as well?.

How come the chinese that came over seems to be able to have adopted the way of life, obey the laws (of course there are criminals but they're exist anywhere) and keep their own identity?

Could they have adopted the "white way of life (as you called it)" if they really really try? I would say so, but of couse it's easier to blame other people for "stunting" and "preventing" them from growth blah blah blah.

Adaptation is what made human the top of the food chain not resistance to adapt.




last edited by Opec at 13:31:09 13/Feb/08

last edited by Opec at 13:38:47 13/Feb/08

You say it like there are no people of indigenous descent that just wanted the acknowledgement and aren't looking for a financial hand out.

You say that like Aboriginal people don't expect a massive amount of government money to correct past policy wrongs.

ps. The aborigines I have dealt with in business or as employees have always been modern people who are totally over it.

last edited by infi at 13:30:39 13/Feb/08

They had tribal war's all the time.

They had tribal war's all the time.

Are you seriously comparing aboriginal tribal warfare to the endless conflict cycles of Europe and Asia?

You say that like Aboriginal people don't expect a massive amount of government money to correct past policy wrongs.

ps. The aborigines I have dealt with in business or as employees have always been modern people who are totally over it.

ps. You're a racist c***.

I never knew that 8000 years ago, Middle Eastern traders were wandering around scotland showing the basics of agriculture to the first scottish villages.

They didn't so what's your point. Agriculture was spawned from areas such as the Middle East, Asia and MesoAmerica, from which it spread throughout other regions due to trade. Middle Easterners traded with Southern Europe and passed on their knowledge of agriculture, a historical fact. From Southern Europe it spread to northern and Western Europe, with the British Isles being last due to their geographical and logistical isolation to the continent of the time. It took many generations later before trade with Western Europe influenced agriculture in Britain.

I have no problem with this apology just like I didn't have a problem with the government apology for the treatment by previous governments of returned vietnam war vets. governments make mistakes. when they realise that they should man up and say so.

and they (europeans, asians etc) traded by developing routes after exploring. aboriginals didnt have the nous to explore, or the ability to develop into a civilised societyn on their own so they were left behind, their own fault.

last edited by fade at 13:39:26 13/Feb/08

last edited by fade at 13:39:43 13/Feb/08

How come the chinese that came over seems to be able to have adopted the way of life, obey the laws (of course there are criminals but they're exist anywhere) and keep their own identity?

I think you need to read up a bit more about the segregation, animosity and racism we as a nation had inflicted on the Chinese. It was not till after the war and well and truly into the 70's before we acknowledged Asians on the whole were not something to worry or fear so much about.

Isn't this compensation thing just a massive case of 'ouch I fell at the supermarket... how much can I get if I take them to court' kinda deal? I'd love to see the outrage if Krudd takes away their extra centrelink dosh

ps. You're a racist c***.

haha good one, my best mate is an islander. i would expect you to keep it civil too.

haha, the classic "I'm not a racist, my X is an X".

your best mate of all your genetically inferior mates, or your best mate outright?

Against.

But then, this rudd government has been useless so far and is screwing the rest of the country up, may as well f*** it completely by putting us on the end of a trillion dollar law suit as well.

Whether or not you feel sorry for the stolen generation, what are you Apologising for. I know what you think your apologising for, but YOU didn't do it.

They're empty words generations too late that legally screw us.

I'm sorry, but not about the stolen generation, i'm sorry krudd is in governemnet.

I think you need to read up a bit more about the segregation, animosity and racism we as a nation had inflicted on the Chinese. It was not till after the war and well and truly into the 70's before we acknowledged Asians on the whole were not something to worry or fear so much about.

But my point is that given the amount of time that the chinese/asian/italian/ immegrants that been here seem to be able to adapt in some way and retained thier identity. But we still have some communities of indigeious people _in the city_ (remote ones don't count because they choose to live there) that just refused to do adapt and just blanky blame the "whites law" of thier plight? I'm saying who should get the blame? Their culture or us (the non indigeous) ??

But in any case you point seems to make it out that the indigineous culture was triving for 40k years on harsh lands and probaly superior yet a large majority still havn't found a way to adapt to their new environment given that gov. is assisting them both finacially and culturally?

I don't see how this would make them any better than the europeans/asians/etc who had to adapt and change and fused (even you said it yourself) to their new way of doing things? I can't see how you can say that a) culture is better and more resililian than b).

And according to your reply, should the Gov. apologised to all of those people as well? I mean where do we stop? I don't see how other non-white immegrants demand publically for gov. to appologised to them what make this particular group of people more special than the other that the gov. policy had hurt?.

They're empty words generations too late that legally screw us.

Why do so many people still think there's legal liability in the apology as it was presented? Do you know something the pollies that spent months drafting it don't? Care to share?

your best mate of all your genetically inferior mates, or your best mate outright?

haha Jim :)

But then, this rudd government has been useless so far and is screwing the rest of the country up

And what proof do you have of this? Considering virtually no legislation has passed how could he? Do you just hate for the sake of it or do you base it on actual evidence? Or are you one of these people that hates that the majority have spoken and you don't agree so you have become bitter, blind and resentful.

Spot the liberal supporter

Wow... Thats a really interesting statement.

I never knew that 8000 years ago, Middle Eastern traders were wandering around scotland showing the basics of agriculture to the first scottish villages.

And it's of course not possible that Egypt was who taught Middle Easterners how to farm somewhere after 9500BC.

And you probably think the first foreigners to settle at all in Australia were european?

The chinese discovered and spread many of the things that westerners have claimed fames for.

you may want to check out http://www.amazon.com/1421-Year-China-Discovered-America/dp/006054094X/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a as it's an interesting read (i believe thats the right book, confirm when i get home).

It's basically re-written modern history.

opec knows he is my best mate out of all the genetically inferior ones

So did any of you f*****s even watch the speech he gave?

I was against it and always have been however I think he did quite a good job of it and selected his words carefully. It has been said there will be NO compensation however policies will be introduced to really help educate them and provide housing etc etc. Kev apologised on behalf of past governments which imo was a good thing. Instead of throwing just money at them, real changes to how they live will be implemented. Also he didn't make an attempt to apologise personally on behalf of all non-indigenous australians which was what I was concerned would happen.

Overall I think it was handled very well. They knew it could possibly open floodgates but they specifically said there would not be any further compensation beyond helping the communities improve their quality of life.

Probably more I meant to say but meh.

i listened to it where i get all of my important morning news, on nova

yes, it was very well written, my boy krud knows how to talk propper n that

hes certainly a lot more charismatic than carp old johnny

and they traded by developing routes after exploring. aboriginals didnt have the nous to explore, or the ability to develop similar abilities on their own so they were left behind, their own fault.

You're an idiot fade. By your analogy that means white Eurpoeans are even dumber when compared to the Aborigines or even the Chinese considering they all discovered Australia well before them which indicates they explored further a field earlier in their history.

You also seem to neglect the fact that Australia is an Island nation, whereas Africa (the cradle of humanity), Europe and Asia are all connected by land and at one stage so was America connected to Asia and Europe through land and ice bridges.

You also seem to forget that the majority of hunter/gatherer societies were either forced to change due to the infringement by and pressure from Agriculture based societies or the massive reduction of wild food supplies as shown in Europe. Aborigines were subjected to none of this.

The videos of both Rudd's and Nelson's speeches can be seen here (links down the side) http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/13/2161325.htm?section=australia

why are you even arguing about who taught who what and who would last longer out in the desert

it's completely f***ing irrelevant, retard

Why do so many people still think there's legal liability in the apology as it was presented? Do you know something the pollies that spent months drafting it don't? Care to share?

Because sorry is an admission of guilt. you think the Canadians didn't spend months drafting theirs? didn't stop them getting screwed.

And what proof do you have of this? Considering virtually no legislation has passed how could he? Do you just hate for the sake of it or do you base it on actual evidence? Or are you one of these people that hates that the majority have spoken and you don't agree so you have become bitter, blind and resentful.

Well lets see, so far he's been in 3 months? and he's already given up and is calling on 1000 people from the general populous to come in and give him ideas to fix his problems.

just AWESOME.

Are you one of those who will counter this with an actual point, or just general slander? Considering all your other posts, slander.

haha, the classic "I'm not a racist, my X is an X".

"Now, I'm no racist, but f*** them n*****s sure can run fast!"

Giri: It's awesome how you say that the government is totally useless. How can you possibly judge them as being useless in such a short amount of time?

Stupidly, I don't pay very much attention to politics. I voted for Labor because I like what the party stands for as a whole, and if I didn't, my entire family would likely disown me. I don't really have an opionion for or against. I like the way Rudd talks. He seems confident, he seems to know what's up. On the surface, he seems like he's made of the right stuff. But no f***ing way can I say "OMG THIS GOVERNMENT IS SO USELESS!", because it's been such a short length of time.

Just come out and admit it: You're a liberal supporter, and are biased. You don't like Labor. It's ok, you can say that, nobody's gonna judge you. But don't try and hide it by saying that the governments actions have been useless so far, because it's just too short of a timespan to judge yet.

The Stolen Generation sucked. I don't see how the apology is really a bad thing. At least now he's come out and said "Yep it sucked. I apologise for the previous government's actions, but rest assured it won't happen again". There's not much else that he can do really, and it's definitely better than not saying anything at all.

last edited by Pharcyde at 14:07:52 13/Feb/08

In this thread, Dan is agreeing with Paveway.

Because sorry is an admission of guilt. you think the Canadians didn't spend months drafting theirs? didn't stop them getting screwed.

Well, they are guilty. Whether or not it was any of them personally, it was certainly past government that caused it to happen.

Well lets see, so far he's been in 3 months? and he's already given up and is calling on 1000 people from the general populous to come in and give him ideas to fix his problems.

Why is that so bad? Calling on the experience and knowledge of 1000 people can't be that bad a thing.

opec knows he is my best mate out of all the genetically inferior ones

i'm the best of the genetically inferior bunch.

Um what is the racist statement? I merely think that a government "apology" shouldn't be the hingepin for the success, failure or otherwise of the Indigenous people.

I suppose the trendy thing to do is to support the apology because it is such a healing symbolic moment. Were indigenous folk prevented from achieving and functioning prior to this apology? Will this apology all of a sudden facilitate this?

What a wonderful little fairytale.

it's completely f***ing irrelevant, retard

Because retards abound on the topic who are attempting to base their arguments on a crap load of bollocks. But hey, I'm sure you'll set us all straight with all your informed, well articulated, well researched commentary. Which all us others, by your example, appear unable to do.

who are attempting to base their arguments on a crap load of bollocks

pretty rich

Well lets see, so far he's been in 3 months? and he's already given up and is calling on 1000 people from the general populous to come in and give him ideas to fix his problems.

haha, yor an idiot!

I suppose the trendy thing to do is to support the apology because it is such a healing symbolic moment. Were indigenous folk prevented from achieving and functioning prior to this apology? Will this apology all of a sudden facilitate this?

Can be argued that they were indeed prevented and that the apology (and following policies) will certainly help facilitate it.

Please expand your argument. How did the absence of an apology act as a barrier?

Totally against it.

But whilst we're at it, lets cut all the damned government hand outs given to Aboriginal or Torres Straight islanders.

Opposition Ministers response :

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=379155

Rudds speech :

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=379056

Hello, as far as the indigenous Australians are concerned, I'm a huge racist. Unfortunately, my contact with these great and hardy people have been limited to 'hey bro, gimme a smoke bro' with vaguely threatening overtones. I went camping on Stradbroke island and we had to chase 6 of the bastards down the beach with a baseball bat at two in the morning as they were making off with our esky. For f***s sake.

I am bigoted. I've made no effort to understand what it's like to be colored in Australia. I have no idea of their hardships. I've no idea how difficult it must be to adjust in the 20th century, but i do care that these people are constantly impacting negatively on my life.

There will always be people who think like me. It's up to them to get off their sorry arses, stop drinking, get educated and please please please stop raping children.

As for for / against, I really don't give a s*** as long as it does not impact me.

Probably a bit much to expect ninemsn to put the Opposition Ministers speech in there I guess

I'm partial to it. One thing I've learned is the easiest way to subvert conflict is to say sorry. But if they ask for more compensation though they're just going to leave a bitter aftertaste and prove alot of peoples points, so I don't know what the whole spiel about it being the "start" of somthing is. If start = "money" I'll be pissed. We pay them enough. working and paying tax is a way I contribute to our community and I'm sick of seeing more of our money splashed their way like some huge as child support debt. I feel sorry for them but I didn't f*** them.

it should just be enough for you that it reportedly got lots of booing compared to lots of cheering for rudd

This extract from today's Crikey's commentary sort of explains Nelson's rationale:

Brendan Nelson’s reply was a curious affair. Doubtless many people won’t be happy with it – apparently he was booed before he’d even started speaking in some places – but it seemed to come as close as possible to reconciling the (quite irreconcilable) views of reactionaries and progressives in the ranks behind him.

To accommodate the recalcitrants in his party – some of whom didn’t bother showing up – Nelson needed to make the two key points that are so endlessly harped on by opponents of an apology: that many of those who removed Aboriginal children did so with good, or at least mixed, intentions, and that some of those removed were done so for their own protection.

Obviously there was a perception Nelson had to fight that because the Howard Government opposed the apology, he is also associated with that. Tough gig.

The comment that i was replying to said that :-

To be honest Jim, the Europeans more than likely wouldn't have discovered Gunpowder had they not be shown it by the Chinese via the Middle East nor adopted agriculture had they not be shown it by the Middle Eastern traders. Quite possibly they'd still be hunter/gatherer societies for they certainly never invented it and never looked as though they were going to at the time.

My reply was basically saying you're full of s*** because European society was very firmly Agrarian long before Middle Eastern traders would have had any real effect. Did europeans(or lets call them by the more appropriate name for the time... Romans) learn better techniques from ME traders? Absolutely. Would the loss of that have made us hunter/gatherers? I highly doubt it.

Having read your statement again i realised you may not have been implying that farming was because of China.

^ no I never suggested the Chinese passes farming onto Europeans. However I do stick by that middle eastern traders were the ones that brought agriculture to neolithic Europe which is well before the Romans I might add. It's a known archaeological fact.

im sorry...








for not caring

Can we start another list in this thread, like in the last plane on a treadmill discussion? We only need to put giririsss on it.

Fade your a f***ing idiot

Don't you mean you're?

And Ross, you're an illiterate, f***ing idiot.

Rudds speech :

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=379056

That's missing bits, he drivelled on for 20 minutes yapping about story time of some old granny and our great nation, our great country, our land, our great country, our nation, our great country, our land, our great country and our nation.

Haven't any of you read the legal opinions of some of the leading legal eagles in Australia. They all give the opinion that there is not one skerrick of the Apology will have any bearing on compensation claims, absolute zilch, zero, none.

Go read the Front Page of the Australian at least. It details far better informed opinions than the rubbish being sprouted here on the topic concerning the Apology opening the floodgates to compensation.

Go read the Front Page of the Australian at least. It details far better informed opinions than the rubbish being sprouted here on the topic concerning the Apology opening the floodgates to compensation.

I'm sure most people here would be happy to admit their opinion is uninformed, especially on legal issues. From what I can see in this thread most people are just offering a "gut feeling opinion" about what is going on.

If you don't like opinions, uninformed or otherwise, time to turn the internets off

^Yep... I even thought from reading fade's first few posts that he was commenting on the apology to Aborigines for invading their country.

Go read the Front Page of the Australian at least. It details far better informed opinions than the rubbish being sprouted here on the topic concerning the Apology opening the floodgates to compensation.

LOL yeah right since when does that ever stop people from any legal preceedings? If you look hard enough and the pay out is big enough you WILL always find lawyers that will take on a case winable or not. Yes some lawyers do live up to thier sterotype shock horror. I hope I'm wrong but human nature always prevail.

What happens when lawyers take Viagra?

They grow taller!!! BAHAHA

linky

While the Prime Minister made it clear that today was about acknowledgement and saying sorry for past wrongs, he also promised that his Government would take what he called the first steps toward a bipartisan approach - a new approach to tackling Indigenous problems.

In that spirit, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made an offer to the leader of the Opposition, saying he wanted him to be part of a new commission, beginning with the problem of housing.

Dr Brendan Nelson accepted this offer as co-chair of the special committee when he addressed the Parliament to respond to the Prime Minster's speech.

"Our generation does not own these actions nor should it feel guilt for what was done, in many certainly but not all cases, with the best of intentions," he said.

"But in saying we are sorry, and deeply so, we remind ourselves that each generation lives in ignorance of the long-term consequences of its decisions and its actions.

"Even when motivated by inherent humanity and decency to reach out to the dispossessed in extreme adversity, our actions can have unintended consequences.

"As such, many decent Australians are hurt by accusations of theft in relation to their good intentions."

Not everyone was supportive of the apology. Liberal backbencher Wilson Tuckey criticised the event before he came into the Parliament and then left before the apology was delivered.

LOL yeah right since when does that ever stop people from any legal preceedings? If you look hard enough and the pay out is big enough you WILL always find lawyers that will take on a case winable or not. Yes some lawyers do live up to thier sterotype shock horror. I hope I'm wrong but human nature always prevail.

The apology was given in parliament, rather than at a public speech, because that prevents them being able to use it as the basis for court. Because it was said in parliament, it's inadmissable.

The apology was given in parliament, rather than at a public speech, because that prevents them being able to use it as the basis for court. Because it was said in parliament, it's inadmissable.

Maybe. Like I said I hope I'm wrong but there're always legal loophole if you look hard enough. I didn't say it's suppose to be logical.

wow alot of people on these forums have lost my respect after reading some of your comments. :S

wow alot of people on these forums have lost my respect after reading some of your comments. :S

Maybe you should post your comments and thoughts too

wow alot of people on these forums have lost my respect after reading some of your comments. :S

imagine if everyone posted that! yeah it's so wrong to have different opinions.

To be honest Jim, the Europeans more than likely wouldn't have discovered Gunpowder had they not be shown it by the Chinese via the Middle East nor adopted agriculture had they not be shown it by the Middle Eastern traders. Quite possibly they'd still be hunter/gatherer societies for they certainly never invented it and never looked as though they were going to at the time.

considering agriculture was developed independently in several different places across the globe I don't think that's a particularly accurate statement. the necessary circumstances for the rise of agriculture most likely would have occurred in Europe before 2008AD without outside influences... possibly a little later than the Middle East but to say we might be hunter-gatherers without learning farming from them is a pretty huge statement.

have a read of 'Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies' by Jared Diamond.

edit: ps. if the apology will make people happy and won't cost us anything (ie. no compensation) and it's only on behalf of the Australian government as a legal entity then who really cares, its hardly a big deal =/

last edited by taggs at 18:24:02 13/Feb/08

Stolen Pushbikes
Stolen Cars
Stolen Alcohol
Stolen Cigarettes
Stolen Money
Stolen Tax Dollars

The only thing that the stolen generation WON'T steal off us is our F*&ken jobs.

^
Lolz. Amen.

uh, we didn't steal their continent or anything did we... i'm no bleeding heart liberal but c'mon that's just down right retarded.

The apology was given in parliament, rather than at a public speech, because that prevents them being able to use it as the basis for court. Because it was said in parliament, it's inadmissable.

i don't think privilege extends that far, i think it only really covers things like slander.

i feel for nelson a bit on this one, cause i think he was on the money with his reply.

what nobody seems to really want to admit, is that there were very real reasons for the removal of these children. i really do think people have no idea of the actual conditions these children are growing up in (and certainly were back then). conditions certainly haven't improved since then in aboriginal communities. even 100 years ago when this sort of s*** started, it was known that sexual abuse was common. alcoholism and drugs are serious problems.

i really don't agree with the use of the phrase "stolen generation" in rudd's apology, as its clearly loaded and not really accurate in a lot of cases. i really don't think rudd (and the same kinda thing can be levelled at howard) has the balls to take it to the left and play hardball to try fix the issues. apologising for this isn't the answer, because it was just a flawed solution to a problem which still exists (and is probably worse) today. the problem is far worse than the solution ever was. rudd, of course, wasn't prepared to put that in the apology. and nelson barely touched on it.

what someone needs to do is say "remote aboriginal society, right now, is completely f***ed up. f*** this leftish bulls*** and lets get our hands dirty and fix this s***". but apparently thats racist.

Nothing but a political ploy on the labour partys behalf to claim support.

It should be noted now that the aboriginals will now ask for financial compenstation as they have always done in the past. It is as though the social security benefits we afford aboriginals are not enough in there own eyes.

This crap has never and will not ever end.

Why should an entire nation be held responsible for the actions of a political body that enacted these practices in the 60's??? I agree with this point..

I didn't see their name on it.

... JK! *runs*

Against what happened.
Against the apology on my behalf.
Against compensation.
Against inequality.
Against the winners of the war having to apologize for owning.
And against the fact that I now have to say sorry every time I win a round in RA3 or CTF.

FU Krudd.

Against.

Considering most civilisations today are built on one toppling another you don't see 3/4 of the countries in the world apologising.

We should have to apologise for something we didn't do
The amount of benefits they're getting is payment in itself.. imo take them away now they "got what they wanted", see how they fair without it.

against

wow alot of people on these forums have lost my respect after reading some of your comments. :S

oh noes :'( i'm sure they care

haha big bear

Don't care about a sorry. Its like 'im sorry to hear your great aunt died'. no-one ever met her, so no-one really cares.
STRONGLY AGAINST even a single cent more of my tax dollars going to any indigenous person. They can get a job and work hard too like the rest of us if they want money.

I'm all for it, it gives the aborignal people one less excuse to blame "whitey" for holding them back. Every step the government take towards laying the blame solely on the aboriginal leaders and the community themselves is a step in the right direction.

I think that every f***wit against should have their children stolen on the premise that they must be passing on to them an ignorant view.

Hmmm...I'd say you're the biggest f***wit in this thread.

My background is Irish (dad's side + grew up there) and Boer/dutch (mothers side).

The British persecuted the Irish for a lot longer than they/the Australians did anything to the Aboriginals. They did the same things too. Everything from attempting to wipe out the Irish culture and language to taking their children away and raising them in England or just plain killing Irish people.

During the boer wars the British setup some of the first concentration camps (if not the first of their kind) where people died of disease and starvation (mostly women and children). There were plenty of other atrocities, but that's a whole lot of source gathering. Again, children were in some cases removed from families.

At the end of the day s*** happened that shouldn't have. But people who are alive today aren't responsible for the decisions of the past and as a result I would not expect some sort of apology from the British govt. to me. And I don't think an apology should have been given to the Aboriginals.

Edit: Also I don't condone it. I think it is sad it happened. Good thing that Rudd only apologised on behalf of the govt. but at the same time IMO he is indirectly apologising on behalf of everyone any way because he represents us.

last edited by Twisted at 20:14:16 13/Feb/08

also

the stolen generation used to have corrobories
now they have car robberies

say it

This just in:

Leaders push for 'sorry' compo

Aboriginal leader Patrick Dodson has urged the Federal Government to follow today's apology with compensation for the stolen generations.

Mr Dodson, the former chairman of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, said anyone treated badly under the law deserved to pursue recompense.

He said the debate leading up to today's apology to indigenous people had not been edifying.

"There is an exaggerated anxiety that there will be an avalanche of demands for monetary compensation," he said in an address to the National Press Club in Canberra.

"Even if the courts said there was a case for compensation would the scale cripple our economic future?

"Any group of people who have been treated badly under laws made legitimately by the crown deserve to pursue compensation judicially, legally or politically and they deserve our support."

Mr Dodson said the whole issue of making good on the past, including compensation for the stolen generation, wasn't easily pursued.

He said there were many "blemishes" on indigenous Australia but they could be fixed.

"These blemishes, however, are not tattoos or birthmarks. They are removable stains on the fabric of our society and we must begin the task immediately."

He listed a number of areas that needed to be looked at closely including housing needs, appalling health figures and life expectancies, drug dependency and the number of young indigenous men in prison.

That bit was as I expected already really, but the part that I found interesting was at the end

Monash University law professor Susan Kneebone, however, said any compensation claims were unlikely to succeed.

Professor Kneebone said people who wished to make a claim had to establish a link between any harm they've suffered and the government policy.

"I'm sure people will be encouraged by the apology to claim compensation,"she said.

"But I don't think that as a matter of law it is going to make it any easier for people to actually establish their claims."

Claims brought in the past have been rarely successful, according to Professor Kneebone.

She said the only successful claims have been when people could specifically establish they had suffered some harm.

Professor Kneebone said a South Australian case, which showed that a man taken away as a child had suffered differently from other family members, was a rare successful claim.

She said Australia's "conservative court system" would also make it "enormously difficult" for claims to succeed.

The saga continues... (sorry Troggy)

i hope they are all unsuccessful

Leaders push for 'sorry' compo

Whoa. I'm so totally surprised. Really. Truly.

i hope they are all unsuccessful

of course you do, you heartless bastard

Leaders push for 'sorry' compo

Shock horror...asking for money. That doesn't sound like an aboriginal at all :p

Why is it heartless? Do you think giving some old guy $600,000 would be tax-payer's money well spent?

I never said that. I said how many would survive today had they been thrown back to the same conditions as the aborigines. I'm telling you now, not as many as you seem to allude. Remember a lot of white settlers died all throughtout Australia and they had some bloody mean tools and were a lot hardier than you and me. Part of our eventual success in surviving in this land was by taking on board knowledge and lessons learnt from the aborigines.

there would be mass deaths because it is not possible to sustain 21 million in australia with aboriginal level tech. if we assume the aboriginals were at a malthusian limit then we would be looking at a massive correction with the population decreasing by around 20 million people.

Why is it heartless? Do you think giving some old guy $600,000 would be tax-payer's money well spent?

If they can prove to a court that:

could specifically establish they had suffered some harm

then yes, taxpayer money well spent.

like they will

I think it's irrelevant.

I don't think that because the word "sorry" has been said, now everyone can sleep better and quality of life for all aboriginals will increase dramatically.
At the time, the Aus govt decided that rather than the two cultures be separated, that is, the Aboriginals remain in the remote communities, pursuing traditional ways of life, that instead, they would bring them into the "modern" times, with health care, education and the like. I think it was done with the best of intentions and I think the secondary stories about the care workers who refuse to say sorry because they thought it was right were interesting and just as important to keep in mind. It's interesting now that it seems to have returned to the "old ways" of living in the traditional remote communities and look what's happened - health, employment and education are at an all-time low.

The current situation is absolutely appalling, but I don't think that this apology will do anything to help that. Even Noel Pearson has said on multiple occasions that he thought people in the remote communities, where alcohol, substance and child abuse were at a high had to start to fix those problems before something like this was done?

there would be mass deaths because it is not possible to sustain 21 million in australia with aboriginal level tech. if we assume the aboriginals were at a malthusian limit then we would be looking at a massive correction with the population decreasing by around 20 million people.

n-hey!

we're talking about whether or not your average australian today would be capable of surviving in the conditions aborigines did before any euros arrived, not whether our actual current population would survive or not if it's tech was suddenly taken away

i thought we were talking about kevin saying sorry to them today

we're talking about yo momma
oh boy

STRONGLY AGAINST even a single cent more of my tax dollars going to any indigenous person.

I'm not strongly against tax dollars going to any indigenous person. I'm just strongly against any dollars going to someone BECAUSE they're an indigenous person.

Why should someone who's finding it hard to get a job because they're black be treated differently than someone who's finding it just as hard to get a job because they're old, or asian, or any of the other eleventy one reasons why people get discriminated against?

If that means that a larger percentage of black people than white people are on benefits because the workforce doesn't want to hire them, well i wouldn't say thats fine but from a welfare perspective thats not a problem. So long as they're fulfilling their obligations(and if they're not they should be hammered just like a white guy would be).

we're talking about yo momma
oh boy

You didn't just go there! Oh how could you Jim!

You've ruined my opin....
wait... never mind. carry on.

i think today's average aussie would do alright surviving off the land, even before the white man's liberation of this great country from the oppressive, earth-scorching natives.

provided they were situated near some fresh water and could light a fire, then definately yes

Maybe 2 people out of my circle of friends couldn't IMO.
I would like to know how many Aboriginals, that live in modern society, could.

I know the ones in the townships (Like Doomagee) actively hunt Turtles/Goanna's and all sorts of other stuff that White Australian's are prohibited from hunting. So they would survive.

"I think that Brendan Nelson actually spoilt it today ... when he raised those very negative issues," she told Sky News.

"I think a lot of our men were unhappy about the matter raised there that were making them all out to be pedophiles and women bashers, that was the reason that he got the reaction he did."

^ hahaha

agreed xyzzy. equality does not equal extra assistance to minority groups

The thing that pisses me off is I thought racism would die over the next few decades as the older a******s kicked the bucket but judging from the posts in this thread it is alive and well in the minds and actions of these a******s. I don't care where your daddy's touched you its no excuse for a point of view that is so fundamentally wrong!

last edited by Ross at 00:35:16 14/Feb/08

What I want to know is when San-Bernidino is going to release the commemerative Reconciliation g00n-bag/flag0n?

Some of you people don't seem to get it.

You tell these people to harden up and get a job. Yet you say they are all lazy welfare leaches. You tell these people to get an education, yet you say they are all stupid. You tell these people to look after their houses, yet you say they are all only going to trash it. You tell these people that they should say no to booze, yet you say they are all drunks.
It goes on.

What I'm trying to say, is that it is very hard to feel respectful of yourself when people you meet are constantly putting you down. Some say it outright, others just give looks. Unfortunately the people who give s***, give it often. While those that don't stay quiet.

The apology isn't simply about saying sorry. It was also about recognizing that there is massive equality problems with indigenous Australians. It was saying that the methods the government have been trying are simply not working.

It mentioned that the psychological impact to many of these people ran deep, in runs through generations.

Remember this isn't something that happened far far back in Australian history. There are people still alive today that have been directly impacted by what happened. Some of these people still serve in government, others live very scared lives.


Some of you people should man up and grow some compassion. Understand the people around you better.

I already summed up my view in the other thread:

I'm so sick of people calling me racist for opposing this appology.

My family only came to this country 25 years ago (and have worked our asses off since and contributed much to the economy and society), so not even my ancestors were Austrlaian when this happened. And now, somebody is appologising on my behalf because I'm a white Australian? These do-gooders are saying a group should be subjected to something on the grounds of race.

Now who's the racist?

I think some of the views discussed in this thread demonstrate the typical imperialistic flaws in western (and other modern) thinking. People are so quick to assume our way is best. To dump s*** into the environment, carve it up and kill everything to build giant cities and roads. Who's to say the way the aborigine's lived is wrong? It's just different. Sure, they didn't have ships, writing, scientific process or other things that we in the western world consider 'better'. But they did have an incredibly complex and original view of time. They also managed to survive in one of the most inhopsitable landscapes on earth.

Our European ancestors settled down in a nice wet climate with plenty of food and water. Since it was easier for them to get by, they would have had more time to do other things, and their brains would have been freed up for thinking more often. So they used domesticated animals, became agrarian etc and had even MORE time on their hands. This allowed us to further develope our fields of science. Dairy would have been a MASSIVE key to the success of Europeans, that makes for some interesting reading. So while our ancestors were able to apply their brains to scientific advancement, Indigenous Australians were applying their brains to wringing every bit of sustenance they could out of their environment in a sustainable fashion. They know incredibly elaborate and complex methods of surviving in the Australian environment. Ultimately, we learned how to fight the land and force what we want out of it, Aborigines learned how to live by making the most of what the land offered.

To belittle Aboriginal culture due to a lack of tangable technological advancements is really only exposing your own ignorance and stupidity. If a bunch of europeans were isolated on a land like Australia with nothing more than an Upper Paleolithic tool set, they wouldn't get much further than the Aboriginese did in however many years they have been here (20,000 to 50,000 depending on who you believe).

The problems with Indigenous society today is trying to cope with a way of life that is so alien to their way of thinking. If you were dumped on the Australian coast line 300 years ago and made to assimilate into Aborigine society, they'd all be bitching about having to share their hunted and gathered food with you or how socially inappropriate you were because you were struggling to live in their world.

Now let me clarify that I'm by no means some do-gooder bleeding-heart who's out there sooking it up. As far as the apology is concerned, they'll get it as soon as they apologise to me for them wiping out super mammals on the Australian continent. Some of the comments on here were just so painfully ignorant that it almost made me ashamed to be European.

Edit:

As far as I'm aware, no race of human is born with instincts that enable it to engage in behaviour that increases it's chance of survival without technology

LOL, this makes no sense. Is the instinct to run from something scary not an instinct that enables a human to increase its chance of survival without technology?

Also, all races are born with roughly the same instincts. Lol.

last edited by Crizane Tribal at 01:05:33 14/Feb/08

oh sorry, i didn't realise gang raping 10 year-olds was culture now? i take back what i said.

and...

Sure, they didn't have ships, writing, scientific process or other things that we in the western world consider 'better'. But they did have an incredibly complex and original view of time.

You can get the same out of a bong and a couple of arts students.

The current situation is absolutely appalling, but I don't think that this apology will do anything to help that. Even Noel Pearson has said on multiple occasions that he thought people in the remote communities, where alcohol, substance and child abuse were at a high had to start to fix those problems before something like this was done?

wow...

173 posts and lu lu was the only person to really tap into what this is about for the Labour Govt and where it's actually going..

hang on a second.. someone else mentioned child rape, but it was in justification asto why he doesn't like the race so he = lose.

for a community of computer users you guys sure aren't too good at pulling small bits of info together to peice together the bigger picture.

I'll put it in caps for for those who missed it, and I hope the admins do it again in the future:

TO CHILD RAPE - AUSTRALIA SAYS NO ya ignorant rednecks !!

im glad i stayed out of this thread.

The flaw there, Nitro, is that the students wouldn't actually have any f***ing idea of what they were talking about.

Everyone alive gets shown stuff by other people. Nobody is born knowing anything other than how to breath or suck on a teat. Given the human blueprint, it's inevitable that someone would 'invent' gunpowder, and it's completely irrational to assert that a particular race would never have invented it.

Sorry to pick on you again, Jim, but this point is fundamentally flawed. Inventions and evolutions only happen out of necessity. Changes don't just occur for no reason or spontaneously because scientific advancement follows some sort of roadmap. The invention of gunpowder is not inevitable, it must come from a dire need to do so. The potential to invent many things will genetically exist, for example; spears. Any primitive society since the days of Homo Erectus have used spears. However, even though they all had spears, it doesn't mean they all threw them. It all comes down to necessity. Perhaps those who throw spears live in an environment where the animals were fast and had accute senses. The inability to get close to stab with a spear would have necessitated the need to throw a spear. If a group of humans lived in a place where the animals were incredibly docile and slow, the humans wouldn't need to develop the technology of spear throwing, so they probably wouldn't.

I find the biggest flaw in people's understanding of evolution and technological advancement is that people tend to look at it from the present, backwards. So they see "ah this is us here at the end of the line, so they had to achieve all this to get here". It's better to look at it from a point in the past and forwards. Inventions are usually a result of a need to overcome sort of obstacle or weakness. Just because all humans that throw spears do so with the pointy end at the front doesn't mean we have some sort of 'pointy end forwards' gene or some sort of predisposition to do so.

last edited by Crizane Tribal at 01:55:01 14/Feb/08

sorry is only appropriate to the relative time lag since the event.

I would prolly not say sorry if your mother died 50 years ago, 10 years ago, yes, 10 years ago but she was 110 y/o, prolly not.

Point is, the "western civilization" that we live in today, society demands owning up to past government mistakes for around about the last 50-100 years.
Apologies have occurred (whether by action or words) from
japanese to chinese (in their own way... 21 times)
America to japanese civilians
german to jews/rest of the world
Catholic church to jews

etc...
there may be more that have been documented and many more that should be said, but it is fair to say that Australia should take the moral high ground, as it gives greater merit when demanding for others to do likewise in our little neighbourhood, ie Burma / China / china again / etc...

Catholic church to jews

... so how about the Jews apologise for betraying Jesus? =P

LOL, this makes no sense. Is the instinct to run from something scary not an instinct that enables a human to increase its chance of survival without technology?

learn to read something in context, doofus

Sorry to pick on you again, Jim, but this point is fundamentally flawed. Inventions and evolutions only happen out of necessity. Changes don't just occur for no reason or spontaneously because scientific advancement follows some sort of roadmap. The invention of gunpowder is not inevitable, it must come from a dire need to do so. The potential to invent many things will genetically exist, for example; spears. Any primitive society since the days of Homo Erectus have used spears. However, even though they all had spears, it doesn't mean they all threw them. It all comes down to necessity. Perhaps those who throw spears live in an environment where the animals were fast and had accute senses. The inability to get close to stab with a spear would have necessitated the need to throw a spear. If a group of humans lived in a place where the animals were incredibly docile and slow, the humans wouldn't need to develop the technology of spear throwing, so they probably wouldn't.

I find the biggest flaw in people's understanding of evolution and technological advancement is that people tend to look at it from the present, backwards. So they see "ah this is us here at the end of the line, so they had to achieve all this to get here". It's better to look at it from a point in the past and forwards. Inventions are usually a result of a need to overcome sort of obstacle or weakness. Just because all humans that throw spears do so with the pointy end at the front doesn't mean we have some sort of 'pointy end forwards' gene or some sort of predisposition to do so.

This is not entirely true. A lot of technology is developed by great minds, just because they can, and some stuff is made by accident. I guess some technology comes from a "need" like you said, and then sometimes the technology would create a "need".

I'm trying hard not to get involved in some of the debates here (mostly off topic) but it seems a lot of arguments are also people taking either a nature or nurture stance, when in fact you can't really have one without the other.

The invention of gunpowder is not inevitable, it must come from a dire need to do so.

Are you saying people sat down and mixed s*** together until they got gunpowder?

Sorry to pick on you again, Jim, but this point is fundamentally flawed. Inventions and evolutions only happen out of necessity.

heh I missed this

I don't see how you coming along and making some clearly inaccurate claims, means that my point was flawed.

Some things are accidental coming out of research for purely academic reasons .. eg. x-ray were an accident from some guy looking at cathodes or some such (sif I can remember year 12 physics).

Other's like super glue were accidents, but accidents that happened while developing technology for a "need" For super glue I believe it was opticially clear covers for gun sights, more efficient killing of people is great for development.

But I'd still argue most inventions are to solve a need.

so... does this then mean that white people of today wouldn't survive in australia like aborigines did? or that the europeans wouldn't have discovered gunpowder?

I think Kevin Rudd will get air over his wings and take off.

Why no more jokes?

Quite clearly Da Vinci came up with the first drawings of a helicopter out of necessity.

Superglue was invented for the military, but it was a medical thing for bonding skin until it could be stitched. afaik... and X-rays probably came out of the discovery of Radium, which was when the Curie's used a Radium paperweight to hold down some photography paper and noticed it would leave an imprint through the stack of paper. White people didn't invent gunpowder.

So in conclusion, thanks to all those people who voted labor, you've screwed us all.

yeah the country is falling apart, oh noes

people vote labor in for the services and the "feel good" vibe, then they vote libs back in to fix the whole mess up.

it's just one of those cycle things.

Haha, spot the members of the Liberal Defense Force.

labor are directly responsible for whats about to unfold thanks to this apology which from what I can tell, the majority do not support

Oh my f***ing lol.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has proposed a wage freeze for federal MPs, recommending Parliamentary salaries not rise until at least the middle of next year.

Mr Rudd says it is a modest measure but one that is important in setting an example in the fight against inflation.

This is just another example of the blatant populism infesting Rudd's policies. He wants to feel the battlers' pain. I think I'm going to be sick.

oh mr rudd, can you do anything wrong?

infi you'd have to be the most bitter supporter of a political party that lost ever. But then a liberal party member would go I am giving myself a pay rise and then go sorry guys we are going to tighten the belt on all of you, you know inflation and stuff...

ps. who fixed up the mess made by Fraser and Howard (as treasurer) ?
... crickets ... They were going ok to be fair until they went on a feel good splurge, the 82/83 splurge by Fraser as a percentage of GDP I believe is still a record.

Doesn't matter anyway, our trade deficit is huge and with some big shark sovereign funds floating around (eg. china) we might all be comrade's in a year or 2.

was there a point in there somewhere?

You suck.

Howard sucks hard.

No matter who wins we lose.

nothing to add here just wanted to get on this HUGELY out of control thread.
there i'm in
:-)

crazy morton your post is more relevant to the topic than all of sfb's posts put together

obes, i'm guessing you're forgetting old mate whitlam. the hero of the labor party.

the guy who tried to secure billions and billions from some shady loan shark from the mid east to spend crazy amounts on infrastructure that wasn't really needed. attempting to bypass treasury even to do so.

obes, i'm guessing you're forgetting old mate whitlam. the hero of the labor party.

the guy who tried to secure billions and billions from some shady loan shark from the mid east to spend crazy amounts on infrastructure that wasn't really needed. attempting to bypass treasury even to do so.

look a bit harder infi chifley was worse. he planned to nationalize the banks and maintained war rations for four years after the war.

before we all condemn rudd for opening the flood gates, let's just see how this plays out

the purse strings have not been loosened as yet; my impression if anything is they're tighter.

Holy f*** I've never seen Chifley brought up up an online political e-fight before. That's old school! What's next, United Australia Party refs!?

Holy f*** I've never seen Chifley brought up up an online political e-fight before. That's old school! What's next, United Australia Party refs!?

i loled =)

shut up hogfather, you communist

Are you saying people sat down and mixed s*** together until they got gunpowder?

No, I'm saying that they either discovered it by accident and found a need for it and used it, or they needed something explosive so they conducted experiments till they found something that met their needs. According to wiki, it was an accident which occured while trying to conduct research into something else. What I'm saying is that a group (race, culture or whatever you want to call them) would not discover gunpowder unless they discovered it by accident and happened to have a use for it, or they needed something explosive and had the time and resources to research it.

This is not entirely true. A lot of technology is developed by great minds, just because they can, and some stuff is made by accident. I guess some technology comes from a "need" like you said, and then sometimes the technology would create a "need".

Name a major technological advancement that did not come about or was sustained by need (or perceived need). You bring up a good point though, a lot of things ARE invented by accident, but they are sustained and put into use by a need or advantage gained by their use. Things are also invented at random or just out of free time or boredom. But these things need to have a benefit or use if they are to be utilised. Our European ancestors are a prime example of this. And yes, technology does indeed create needs. We have built giant cities that use phenominal amounts of electricity and are spread really far appart so we NEED a good energy source (since oil is going to run out eventually). And so now, we persue new avenues of energy production.

learn to read something in context, doofus

Maybe you should learn to explain things accurately so people can interperet things in the way that you intend *shrug*. All I hear is "Oh lawl I'm not wrong, you just don't understand what I'm saying". I expect better from you, Jim :P

fair enough

I wasn't talking about interpretation, I was talking about simple context. the whole reason we're on this tangent is cos of a side point that somefatbastard made that I disagreed with. if you'd follow that through instead of looking at my comment as a standalone thing, you'd probably get what I meant by it

No, I'm saying that they either discovered it by accident and found a need for it and used it, or they needed something explosive so they conducted experiments till they found something that met their needs. According to wiki, it was an accident which occured while trying to conduct research into something else.

they were looking for eternal life, not explosions which completely negates the idea that everything is only ever invented because you need it.

What I'm saying is that a group (race, culture or whatever you want to call them) would not discover gunpowder unless they discovered it by accident and happened to have a use for it, or they needed something explosive and had the time and resources to research it.

I still disagree with what you're saying here, particularly in the context of this discussion about aborgines. what you're saying is that aborigines were as primitive as they were purely because they had no need to be otherwise.

this is obviously bollocks if you look at their drawings and read even an inkling of their own recorded history. they could definitely have made good use of gunpowder, for example - and history shows that they needed it.

Yet what of Billy McMahon ?

I demand Jim says sorry for QGL downtime.

I blame blahnana ...

He has allocated to much of the server farm to goat porn

Did you mean: hasn't

crazy old infi would have been outraged if poor battling krudd had given himself and all his cronies a payrise (i bet johnny would never not give himself a payrise)

krudd couldnt win eitehr way

well, hes won with me

payrises happen every year. we all expect it.

shut up hogfather, you communist

ZOMGs irony; my last name is McCarthy!

pretty sure Rudd doesn't need a payrise when the mrs is worth about $55 million.

nevermind the other pollies who have mortgages and no sugar mumma

yeah something tells me his political stunt wasn't popular with his own backbenchers.

They're not exactly hard done by though...

f***ing come off it, like they NEED a pay rise

i'm sure they are on the poverty line.

union membership isn't cheap you know

ok does ANYONE need a payrise? or is it just rich people don't need a payrise?

f***ing come off it, like they NEED a pay rise

i'm sure they are on the poverty line.

need to attract intelligent people who can make a difference. Pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

The PM salary is around $250k, which is a complete joke. Should be $500k+

couldnt agree with spidz more

oh yeah? have you even tried?

being PM is a c*** of a job. Nobody would do it just for the money even if it was a million clams a yr.

hehe

John Howard said he'd be PM for free (seriously). I'd do it for free, too, get to fix up some serious problems in Australia and have people listen to you about what needs to be done and why.

Awesome job.

You don't want people in power because of the money. Worst idea ever.

You want people in there because they want to be, because they want to make a difference, because they are willing to make a sacrifice.

The magical world where people don't need money to live. It's a wonderful place.

yeah, cos making a sacrifice means not making enough money to live
ya dill

ya dill

I see you're going really oldschool with the insults today Jim.

The magical world where people don't need money to live. It's a wonderful place.

Thats right, because you can't get hookers and crack with food stamps.

yeah my aim is to have infi in tears by 9am and completely ruin his weekend

His weekend was ruined when Howard lost. Now he spends his days wishing for an alternate fantasy world.

Sure beats this current fantasy world. :P

Actually I am enjoying the current government in power, it's funnier and more blunder ridden than Superbad!

Meanwhile life goes on...

infi, which political party do you support? i can't quite tell from your posts

dont be sad infi, im sure you will be able to become mates with a labor senator soon enough for some sweet sweet business deal action!

http://www.santosantoro.com/ContactSanto/Default.aspx

say hi to santo for me!

i see you're taking the glasses angle russ, nice one

My uncle knows Santo very well, I'll get him to say hi for you Spook.

Ah! Santo, a man with zero credibility, zero integrity and absolutely zero points on his moral compass.

The only thing you can say about the British is that they sure hated n*****s.

Against, for several reasons:
- I didnt do it
- Compensation claims will help to cripple the country or at least drain money that could be better spent elsewhere.
- Saying sorry is like white Australia saying sorry to Aboriginal Australia, I could have sworn we were one people.. but saying sorry will only seperate people.
- There were often good reasons for children taken away, believe it or not the aboroginal people did live in some very bad conditions.. the children were taken and then educated. I recall an aboriginal complaining that his mother was taken away and was taught english... omg taught english.
- This will no doubt bring a fresh start to the flag debate. Congradulations to us for being the only country in the word with 2 flags.

I do not envy the welfer people the task of removing aboriginal children from neglected homes at all...

Against, for several reasons:
- I didnt do it
- Compensation claims will help to cripple the country or at least drain money that could be better spent elsewhere.
- Saying sorry is like white Australia saying sorry to Aboriginal Australia, I could have sworn we were one people.. but saying sorry will only seperate people.
- There were often good reasons for children taken away, believe it or not the aboroginal people did live in some very bad conditions.. the children were taken and then educated. I recall an aboriginal complaining that his mother was taken away and was taught english... omg taught english.
- This will no doubt bring a fresh start to the flag debate. Congradulations to us for being the only country in the word with 2 flags.

I do not envy the welfer people the task of removing aboriginal children from neglected homes at all...

thank god your retardedness is all the way in tassie

please stay there and try not to breed

People who are opposing the apology are mostly the same people opposing the labor party, i.e, liberal fanatics, ie, infi, the c*********, i.e, howard cock sucker.

People who are opposing the apology are mostly the same people opposing the labor party, i.e, liberal fanatics, ie, infi, the c*********, i.e, howard cock sucker.

and people supporting the apology likely have shares in VB and can't wait for them to blow any compo payouts.

nothing really wrong with that post spook
and his location is set to victoria, not tassie. his nick is kind of close to tasi tho, maybe that's where you got confused!

and jim sounds like he lives inside a condom.

People supporting the apology are mostly apologists in general. They are good at it, so they like to do it often.

Tip-toe around. Don't offend anyone. If there is room for misunderstanding just apologise! (And bring a cheque book.)

yeah i agree with infi here (damn it). and an unqualified apology implies that half the hype surrounding the whole thing is true. the whole spark for this was that report back when howard was pm (fairly early on if i recall correctly). it was massively exagerated. it used words like genocide to describe the forced removal of children, which is completely wrong and really quite damaging to admit to unqualified. it brought out the heavily loaded term stolen generations.

not to mention the apology fails to really acknowledge the reasons behind it in the first place. and it fails to achknowledge that the same problems still exist today. it also hinders efforts to FIX the problems, because clearly it will require the removal of children from abuseful situations. i think to look at what happened 30+ years ago in isolation from what is happening today is totally unhelpful. it perpetuates the belief that aboriginal society is removed from the rest of australian society and that is some how sacred. which is bulls***.

i don't see old mate kevin will now have the balls to take on the massive challenge for fear of destroying all this goodwill hes created with the aboriginies.

oh! infi you're so full of it and nF you're just a twirp.

With arguments like 'twirp' it's hard to disagree.

/also, spelled twerp.

People who are opposing the apology are mostly the same people opposing the labor party, i.e, liberal fanatics, ie, infi, the c*********, i.e, howard cock sucker.

Well, sorry to prove you wrong. I'm a swinging voter (although I voted labor this time around), don't really like many of liberals policies and really didn't like Howard.

Again, it's like me saying sorry for when Khel touches you inappropriately; just some words. All in all, it's a meaningless statement from people who didn't do anything.

Besides, the point of the apology seems to be something along the lines of "well now we can forget the horrors of the past". In my opinion, the better thing to do is to never forget, and to reflect upon the horrors of the past so we never make that mistake again.

lol great counter arguement there Spook.

Yes my location does say Victoria, so make all the tassie jokes you like.. I will probably join in :)

I can see a government apology in 20 years to the generation that weren't taken, and were subsequently raped and abused for 20 years and then gre up and perpetuated the abuse.

The main difference between taking children away from damaging abusive households and 'the stolen generation' is that the stolen generation's kids were taken away indiscriminately een mas. Many children were in a caring family unit. It was also the treatment afterwards, they weren't placed in house holds to help abused children. They were jammed into camps and forced into religions.

there was an article in the australian about it again today. some idiot trying to say that removing mostly young girls (12 years old) from a situation where they were likely to be molested (aka, statuary rape) was a sinister attempt to control their sexual activity. oh yeah, their rights were really being trodden on there. everyone should have the right to be raped on the pretext of tradition.

what made it the stolen generation, was that it was legally allowed to remove children without going to court to test it. considering that abuse is (and was back then) endemic (almost pandemic) to these communities i don't see why that should be demonised as much as it is. the really tragic thing is that because docs is completely useless, and because theres this bulls*** fear of upsetting people or stiring the pot there are children out there right now who should and even now legally should be removed from those communities but aren't.

everyone should have the right to be raped on the pretext of tradition.

It's only bad when you're the victim.

i guess that raises a point. are there flipside cases we don't hear about? aborigines who remained, i mean. was their life better for it? i agree that back then there was likely a lack of cultural sensitivity, but is what we have now better? is being revisionist about aboriginal society back then and throughout the last 200 years the right thing to do.

i think people now days want to simplify history, but putting everything into boxes. classify s*** into good or bad, by completely ignoring the fine details. ned kelly is a f***ing national hero, not the cop killer he actually was. go australia. back on topic, the various governments of the first 75 years of the last century are considered racist because they dared to intervene into the darker side aboriginal society. if you raise that dark part of history now (aka, brendan nelson) you're considered to be racist or best extremely unhelpful. how the f*** is not having the full picture more helpful.

the only good that could come from this apology would be a public holiday, THAT would be worth saying sorry for

god dam paveway, i think you've got it chap

best idea i've heard regarding this whole sorry crap

f*** yeah paveway

You know, that could work. The people with heart are happy that people have said sorry, the rest are happy they get a public holiday. Except business owners, but they can go f*** themselves.

no f*** you!

dam straight Tollaz0r, i for one am feeling pretty heartless with this whole sorry crap.. but i just don't care..

throw in a holiday and i've got reason to care.. and i'll be interested to hear about it on the news.. heck, i might even pretend to care

i just won't be playing beach cricket on said holiday

i dare them to make it a public holiday... then i dare them to make me pay it.

Spidz: The PM salary is around $250k, which is a complete joke. Should be $500k+

personally, I'd like it to pay zero.

the kind of person who's up for the task shouldn't be doing it for the money.

How much is George W making?

last edited by koopz at 23:12:53 18/Feb/08

Ah the 3 day weekend, long live Australian culture.

personally, I'd like it to pay zero.

the kind of person who's up for the task shouldn't be doing it for the money.

So you just want insanely rich people who do it for, at best a hobby and at worst, because they can exploit the position for more money? That's a f***ing fantastic idea.

Spidz: The PM salary is around $250k, which is a complete joke. Should be $500k+


personally, I'd like it to pay zero.

the kind of person who's up for the task shouldn't be doing it for the money.

How much is George W making?



So uhh... how do they eat? Live? Dress themselves? If they're not getting paid anything.. and the country is in their hands so surely they don't have time for weekend work at pizza hut, how are they supposed to live otherwise? Whoever said 250k is not enough is right.

nah not paying any money isn't really fair

they should be made to live off the base wage amount, then they can see how it all really works for alot of people

but it wouldn't really work, most of them have made their money as pro liars (read: lawyers) or doctors

but it wouldn't really work, most of them have made their money as pro liars (read: lawyers) or doctors

Doctors and Lawyers don't, generally, make enough. They'd be major players of, or at the very least completely funded by, lobbyist organisations. At least at $250,000k p/a a polly with a tiny shred of morals can refuse a bribe, but when the organisation that owns your soul comes along and tells you to make a mandate that supports them and hurts their opponents, what are you going to do?

Really, the only people who think that Pollys get paid too much are idiots.

he's right, it'd be pretty easy for a big corporation to influence someone who gets paid so little

Do you really think the PM pays for the clothes he wears or the food he eats?

Aye, the PM gets paid and would have heaps of perks also. I bet those perks really add up $'s wise.

so lemme get this straight... if a pm gets $250k/year he would be susceptable to bribes from evil corporations but if he got ~$500k/year he wouldn't!? yeh... i'd be the same... i'd be all like 'if only i had another 250k a year... i'd be so happy!' :P

I'm pretty sure the PM's salary is closer to $350k. The opposition leader is ~$250k.

his salary might be 250k a year but he gets a f***ing MASSIVE pension when he's done with it all

no, now they only get 9% super like everyone else.

The latest determination for PEO salaries may be helpful in this discussion.

so lemme get this straight... if a pm gets $250k/year he would be susceptable to bribes from evil corporations but if he got ~$500k/year he wouldn't!? yeh... i'd be the same... i'd be all like 'if only i had another 250k a year... i'd be so happy!' :P

Two things.

1) You can use your argument all the way to 0 dollars.

2) I was commenting against the "the pm should get paid $0".

we should just pay federal politicians 1million a year, but that would covers their super and all their benefits, including travel and mail outs when they are in office and after they leave.

that way they would be more careful with wasting money on mail bombs and travel junkets.

you might bump that up a bit for ministers and shadow ministers but not too much.

i think people now days want to simplify history, but putting everything into boxes. classify s*** into good or bad, by completely ignoring the fine details. ned kelly is a f***ing national hero, not the cop killer he actually was. go australia. back on topic, the various governments of the first 75 years of the last century are considered racist because they dared to intervene into the darker side aboriginal society. if you raise that dark part of history now (aka, brendan nelson) you're considered to be racist or best extremely unhelpful. how the f*** is not having the full picture more helpful.

Who's been sayin Neds a national hero? I personally think of him as a famous villain who generates a good amount of tourism for Glenrownen.. But even in the re-enactments in his home town he's never lorded as a hero -- Mainly a tough bad prick with a large bad ass family who killed cops with a steel bracket on their melons. Even going through the Melbourne jail tours where they show you the cell he was kept in and the gallows he was hung on, never hailed as a hero. Just a famous bad c***.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=ned+kelly+hero&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Google isn't always right Jim. He was a crook. I fail to see the nobility in being a convicted murder that ended up with a long drop and quick stop.

yeah I agree, I was posting that link in direct response to:

Who's been sayin Neds a national hero? I personally think of him as a famous villain ... never hailed as a hero

some of those links are an interesting read actually

20 things that culturally define Australia

can the holiday be in october when we really need it?