Let me make it clear that I'm no Irving. The holocaust most certainly existed and was one of the most disgusting testaments to man's inhumanity to man ever. However, not every situation which exists in the popular mind is necessarily as portrayed by the revisionists.
Was there anything so ridiculous as this National Apology Day? As expected, once the thing was done, in they came for the cash:
Exactly - the big handout to people who are only tangentially connected with the so called "Stolen Generations". Within Australia, even the existence of a concerted campaign to remove children from families is still hotly debated:
The Australian Governments of the time acted on field recommendations, which saw half-caste children rejected by aboriginal tribes and left to die. It was not the removal of full-bloods, as has been suggested - the tribes themselves were discriminating against the half-castes. Just as Social Services today will put abused and abandoned children into care, so it was then.
The very fact that the children were placed with white families, though muddled and showing not a great deal of understanding of aboriginal culture, nevertheless reflected the basically altruistic outlook of later white society, an altruism which eventually resulted in Sorry Day.
What's at issue here is that authorities of the time saw a situation and opted for a solution which, in hindsight, doesn't look too good. Why ascribe beastly motives for this policy when the motives really were altruistic at the time, albeit with some ignorance?
Either way, why on earth would a current government need to apologize? This modern habit of taking responsibility for the crimes of others in the past really needs to be examined.
Now to this business of tribal land and cash compensation for that.
Interesting how that only happens near national monuments like Ayer's Rock and where the oil companies want to drill. There's so much greed and hypocrisy among the aboriginals.
To portray the aboriginals as innocent sufferers is to rewrite history in a new PC light. Waves of tribes came in, warred with the incumbents and then were themselves pushed further inland. Negritos, Murrayans and Carpentarians are three that spring to mind.
This means different tribes and their offshoots and they fought [click to read]:
So to suggest that the aborigines:
The various aboriginal tribes are chalk and cheese. There are peaceful elements, as there are with all peoples and then there are other elements. I suggest that those who are trying to differentiate on the basis of skin colour for the purpose of dragging money out of another skin colour are the true racists.
A non-racist would say all people are equal, with the same right to compensation as any other people. So who is trying to perpetuate these racial differences and for what ulterior motive?
Could it possibly be for the good old payola? Useful thing, racism.
But some Aborigines say it should have been accompanied with compensation for their suffering.
Exactly - the big handout to people who are only tangentially connected with the so called "Stolen Generations". Within Australia, even the existence of a concerted campaign to remove children from families is still hotly debated:
Some conservative journalists, such as Andrew Bolt, have publicly questioned the very existence of the Stolen Generation. Bolt considers that it is a "preposterous and obscene" myth and that there was actually no policy in any state or territory at any time for the systematic removal of "half-caste" Aboriginal children.
The Australian Governments of the time acted on field recommendations, which saw half-caste children rejected by aboriginal tribes and left to die. It was not the removal of full-bloods, as has been suggested - the tribes themselves were discriminating against the half-castes. Just as Social Services today will put abused and abandoned children into care, so it was then.
The very fact that the children were placed with white families, though muddled and showing not a great deal of understanding of aboriginal culture, nevertheless reflected the basically altruistic outlook of later white society, an altruism which eventually resulted in Sorry Day.
What's at issue here is that authorities of the time saw a situation and opted for a solution which, in hindsight, doesn't look too good. Why ascribe beastly motives for this policy when the motives really were altruistic at the time, albeit with some ignorance?
Either way, why on earth would a current government need to apologize? This modern habit of taking responsibility for the crimes of others in the past really needs to be examined.
Now to this business of tribal land and cash compensation for that.
Interesting how that only happens near national monuments like Ayer's Rock and where the oil companies want to drill. There's so much greed and hypocrisy among the aboriginals.
To portray the aboriginals as innocent sufferers is to rewrite history in a new PC light. Waves of tribes came in, warred with the incumbents and then were themselves pushed further inland. Negritos, Murrayans and Carpentarians are three that spring to mind.
Some 250 Aboriginal languages have been identified in Australia and more than 800 Papuan idioms are thought to exist in New Guinea.
This means different tribes and their offshoots and they fought [click to read]:
So to suggest that the aborigines:
1. are one people, the Koori;
2. never visited atrocities on each other or were peaceful and "soft"
... is revisionist history which can most charitably be described as muddled.
The various aboriginal tribes are chalk and cheese. There are peaceful elements, as there are with all peoples and then there are other elements. I suggest that those who are trying to differentiate on the basis of skin colour for the purpose of dragging money out of another skin colour are the true racists.
A non-racist would say all people are equal, with the same right to compensation as any other people. So who is trying to perpetuate these racial differences and for what ulterior motive?
Could it possibly be for the good old payola? Useful thing, racism.