# Australia Day 2017



## Tisme (13 January 2017)

OK so Australia Day started 1935 and the aborigines started protesting it in 1937. Sometime over the past recent history we became all flag waving nationalistic, so its nice to see the latest lamb ad:


----------



## Bill M (13 January 2017)

Great little video Tisme, thanks.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> OK so Australia Day started 1935 and the aborigines started protesting it in 1937. Sometime over the past recent history we became all flag waving nationalistic, so its nice to see the latest lamb ad:






Love it tisme. 

gg


----------



## OmegaTrader (13 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> OK so Australia Day started 1935 and the aborigines started protesting it in 1937. Sometime over the past recent history we became all flag waving nationalistic, so its nice to see the latest lamb ad:





It is all good being on a morally high horse.

But it raises further questions...

1)what are we actually doing about it???

Do we:

Rescind the land rights?
Pay a tax to aboriginals??
How far back in history do we go??


Have a look at what has happened in Palestine when people applied that reasoning..


2) If someone has 10% aborignal are they still an aborginal??

3) Eventually won't every country around the world end up being multicultural 1000s+ years
Then most people will  be aboriginal in genetics.

Also don't forget Rudd's border policy.....


----------



## SirRumpole (13 January 2017)

Good Ad ! I miss Richie though.


----------



## luutzu (13 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> OK so Australia Day started 1935 and the aborigines started protesting it in 1937. Sometime over the past recent history we became all flag waving nationalistic, so its nice to see the latest lamb ad:





Is it just me or are the Muslims missing? Too early and current for that?


----------



## sptrawler (13 January 2017)

I thought they were the last boat that was coming in.


----------



## macca (13 January 2017)

Yeah, I reckon last boat too.

The Poms brought the lambs so how was it on the BBQ first?


----------



## Tisme (13 January 2017)

macca said:


> Yeah, I reckon last boat too.
> 
> The Poms brought the lambs so how was it on the BBQ first?




Good point!! I call the ad historically flawed coz of that


----------



## Logique (13 January 2017)

Love that video, it sends a message of tolerance, thanks Tisme. The fireworks were from Fyshwick, so funny.

Would you believe the Cronulla riots were in 2005, so long ago, but they cast such a long shadow.  Please can Australia Day 2017 engender the spirit of that video.


----------



## luutzu (13 January 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I thought they were the last boat that was coming in.




I think you're right. Strange though that there's no Border Force pulling them back away


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

Keeping the dream alive, another pro Ozzie series:

*please do not watch if you are offended by course language

*


----------



## Wysiwyg (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> OK so Australia Day started 1935 and the aborigines started protesting it in 1937.



The truth is Aboriginals aren't accepting as the ones in that ad. The ad. which is meant to represent multi ethnic society. The present push is for a signed treaty and that will be the turning point fo "acceptance" of other races of people that have invaded this island continent.
,


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> fo "acceptance" of other races of people that have invaded this island continent.




The aborigines came from Africa, and so they too 'invaded' Australia.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...frica-the-first-in-asia-and-australia/245392/


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> The truth is Aboriginals aren't accepting as the ones in that ad. The ad. which is meant to represent multi ethnic society. The present push is for a signed treaty and that will be the turning point fo "acceptance" of other races of people that have invaded this island continent.
> ,




Pejorative terms like "invasion" are predicated on a section of society who consider the colonisation of Australia as an unfair situation. They could well be correct, however there is a degree of "so what" to consider. 

Just because the continent was avoided by early navigators as of no merit, doesn't bestow a guardianship on the inhabitants who were unable to return to their previous homelands in Melanesia and beyond because of climate change and lack of engineering skills.

Between 1967 and 1971 only "full blooded" Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were officially considered as such for census, before that full bloods they were excluded. The abs statistics prior to 1971 have been retrospectively manipulated to include and estimated "aboriginal" population, but admits to not knowing the actual "full blood" numbers, rather settling for enumerated half and full blood estimates. 

It would be interesting to find out the true numbers of genetically undiluted aborigines back in the day and present and wonder how such a huge place could have been "owned" by a socialistic race who had no concept of ownership or possession.


----------



## luutzu (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The aborigines came from Africa, and so they too 'invaded' Australia.
> 
> http://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...frica-the-first-in-asia-and-australia/245392/




No they didn't.

Since all human walked out of Africa; since the ancestors of the Aborigines walked out of it *before *Europeans, it follows that the Aborigines settled Down Under when it was vacant (slightly different from Terra Nullius and I don't see anyone and they don't really own it because they "says" so).

That is, since the Aborigines were to the first human race to have left Africa, they were the first humans to have settled in what became Australia. Whoever came after took it from them.

Unless we define taking land from kangaroos and other mammals an invasion.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> No they didn't.
> 
> Since all human walked out of Africa; since the ancestors of the Aborigines walked out of it *before *Europeans, it follows that the Aborigines settled Down Under when it was vacant (slightly different from Terra Nullius and I don't see anyone and they don't really own it because they "says" so).
> 
> ...




You are quite welcome to give your house back to the aborigines if that makes you feel better.


----------



## luutzu (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> Pejorative terms like "invasion" are predicated on a section of society who consider the colonisation of Australia as an unfair situation. They could well be correct, however there is a degree of "so what" to consider.
> 
> Just because the continent was avoided by early navigators as of no merit, doesn't bestow a guardianship on the inhabitants who were unable to return to their previous homelands in Melanesia and beyond because of climate change and lack of engineering skills.
> 
> ...




I'm sure the numbers are around, hidden somewhere. You don't publish these kind of figures so that some dude could later compare the before and after. 

I saw houses in the country and outback where the main residence is just your typical manor with acres and acres of land just sitting there. Fenced off and let the cows roamed free. Some property don't even have any cows or other animals.

Maybe I should turn up and take those vacant land since the "owners" doesn't look like they even uses it.


----------



## luutzu (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> You are quite welcome to give your house back to the aborigines if that makes you feel better.




My house belong to the Queen. So are yours.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> I'm sure the numbers are around, hidden somewhere. You don't publish these kind of figures so that some dude could later compare the before and after.
> 
> I saw houses in the country and outback where the main residence is just your typical manor with acres and acres of land just sitting there. Fenced off and let the cows roamed free. Some property don't even have any cows or other animals.
> 
> Maybe I should turn up and take those vacant land since the "owners" doesn't look like they even uses it.




 You can if you can prove squatters rights ... our nation was built on that law.


----------



## luutzu (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> You can if you can prove squatters rights ... our nation was built on that law.




Cool. No need to bring a few rifles, the Royal Navy and a few convicts to scare off the landlord then?

On a serious note, we all know what happened. Shouldn't justify it with some idiotic notion of civilised versus savages; ownership-no-ownership; vacant land and whatever.

Being honest about real politiks, imperialism and survival of the deadliest... that's more preferable to these weak excuses and denials. Be like the Yanks back in the 1930s and just accept that if the Nazi were to beat England in that invasion, they'd be prepared for peace with a new Europe under the Fuhrer and his 1000 year Reich.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> No they didn't.
> 
> Since all human walked out of Africa; since the ancestors of the Aborigines walked out of it *before *Europeans, it follows that the Aborigines settled Down Under when it was vacant (slightly different from Terra Nullius and I don't see anyone and they don't really own it because they "says" so).
> 
> ...




There is some who consider the aborigine is actually a separate evolution of modern man to the modern man that left Africa 70k years ago. It's suggested the aborigine independently evolved for a mix of Indonesian and Chinese homo erectus and colonised Oz, before the modern man wave from Africa arrived, eventually seeing homo erectus in SE Asia diluted out of existence through interbreeding 50k years ago, thus why there is no significant genetic linkers from fossilised human remnants.


----------



## luutzu (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> There is some who consider the aborigine is actually a separate evolution of modern man to the modern man that left Africa 70k years ago. It's suggested the aborigine independently evolved for a mix of Indonesian and Chinese homo erectus and colonised Oz, before the modern man wave from Africa arrived, eventually seeing homo erectus in SE Asia diluted out of existence through interbreeding 50k years ago, thus why there is no significant genetic linkers from fossilised human remnants.




Say what? You mean the Chinese and Indonesian have already colonised Australia? So the offshore base building is just preparation to retake what was theirs all along?

You do realised that the Chinese claimed all of the seas of China because it has China in it, that and some nine-dash lines.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Say what? You mean the Chinese and Indonesian have already colonised Australia? So the offshore base building is just preparation to retake what was theirs all along?
> 
> You do realised that the Chinese claimed all of the seas of China because it has China in it, that and some nine-dash lines.




I had a feeling if I threw you a racist bone, you'd latch onto. LOL

 I like your logic, as flawed as it is.


----------



## luutzu (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I had a feeling if I threw you a racist bone, you'd latch onto. LOL
> 
> I like your logic, as flawed as it is.




Can't be too careful with you, especially around the holidays and Australia Day where family get together and memories of the good old days are rekindled and ignited.


----------



## Wysiwyg (16 January 2017)

Would make no difference to me if there was no Australia Day. Just another paid day off. If anything the day should be to appreciate the freedom and quality of life we work to maintain. Dumb ass idea to make it in memory of the English coming to these shores.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> Dumb ass idea to make it in memory of the English coming to these shores.




Yep, should celebrate Federation instead.


----------



## Logique (17 January 2017)

Cook's was not even the first European landing.  On 26 February 1606, Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon aboard the _Duyfken_, made landfall near the modern town of Weipa in Nth QLD.

And plenty of opinion that the Portugese were secretly here a century earlier. 

Anzac Day feels like to true national day to me.


----------



## Tisme (17 January 2017)

Logique said:


> Cook's was not even the first European landing.  On 26 February 1606, Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon aboard the _Duyfken_, made landfall near the modern town of Weipa in Nth QLD.
> 
> And plenty of opinion that the Portugese were secretly here a century earlier.
> 
> Anzac Day feels like to true national day to me.




  Fabled Portuguese galleon wrecked off South Stradbroke near Jumpinpin


----------



## luutzu (17 January 2017)

Logique said:


> Cook's was not even the first European landing.  On 26 February 1606, Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon aboard the _Duyfken_, made landfall near the modern town of Weipa in Nth QLD.
> 
> And plenty of opinion that the Portugese were secretly here a century earlier.
> 
> Anzac Day feels like to true national day to me.





Of foreigners, the Ming Chinese was here first.

https://www.nla.gov.au/faq/does-the-national-library-have-ancient-chinese-maps-of-australia


----------



## Tisme (19 January 2017)

> Australians have been so generous in the#PutThemBackUp crowdfunding campaign started today – to put these two Australian girls back on an#AustraliaDay billboard – that it reached its $50,000 target in just seven hours. Now it's raised more than $100,000 and is still climbing.https://gu.com/p/5ynp6/au


----------



## SirRumpole (19 January 2017)

Tisme said:


>




I'd really like everyone to enjoy Australia day whatever their race, religion etc, but really the sight of burkas, hijabs whatever turns me off, not because of the people wearing them but the fact that they are a symbol of religious slavery and oppression and in a free country no one should be required to wear clothing that identifies a particular religion or the wearer's status in that religion , ie women.

I'm all for a burka ban, the sooner we get rid of such archaic symbolism and the religion that spawns them, the better.


----------



## Tisme (19 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Of foreigners, the Ming Chinese was here first.
> 
> https://www.nla.gov.au/faq/does-the-national-library-have-ancient-chinese-maps-of-australia




You being a Chinaphobe and all, you would know that they rewrite history at whimsy. They retrospectively invented everything, discovered everything, landed on the moon first, owned the industrial revolution, gave women equal rights first, ethics in business and democracy, etc. 

These are the same people whose entrenched culture means they never cut lines, never resort to "no speaka da inglish" when it suits them, never make false declarations at customs, never won't pay for services rendered, never finagle the facts etc.

They probably invented Australian Rules Football too.


----------



## luutzu (19 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> You being a Chinaphobe and all, you would know that they rewrite history at whimsy. They retrospectively invented everything, discovered everything, landed on the moon first, owned the industrial revolution, gave women equal rights first, ethics in business and democracy, etc.
> 
> These are the same people whose entrenched culture means they never cut lines, never resort to "no speaka da inglish" when it suits them, never make false declarations at customs, never won't pay for services rendered, never finagle the facts etc.
> 
> They probably invented Australian Rules Football too.







We know each a bit too well McGee.


----------



## luutzu (19 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I'd really like everyone to enjoy Australia day whatever their race, religion etc, but really the sight of burkas, hijabs whatever turns me off, not because of the people wearing them but the fact that they are a symbol of religious slavery and oppression and in a free country no one should be required to wear clothing that identifies a particular religion or the wearer's status in that religion , ie women.
> 
> I'm all for a burka ban, the sooner we get rid of such archaic symbolism and the religion that spawns them, the better.




Bikinis and hot pants is the way they ought to do it. Freedom, baby!


----------



## SirRumpole (19 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Bikinis and hot pants is the way they ought to do it. Freedom, baby!




Freedom is deciding for yourself what you can wear.


----------



## Tisme (19 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Freedom is deciding for yourself what you can wear.




 They will never be free of the spiritual bonds that bind them to Islam first, nation second. Their history is just too entwined with skyfairies.


----------



## Tisme (19 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Bikinis and hot pants is the way they ought to do it. Freedom, baby!





Now you are talkin'. Can we have those crochet kinis back... please, pretty please?


----------



## Wysiwyg (19 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> They will never be free of the spiritual bonds that bind them to Islam first, nation second.



 That is what makes the Australia Day flag waving gesture so false. Islam and its concrete block teachings first. What about a couple of youths on the ad. wearing a kippah or bearing a crucifix.


----------



## luutzu (19 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> Now you are talkin'. Can we have those crochet kinis back... please, pretty please?




Looks great to me. What do you say Rumpy?

I'd second them being worn all day, and night, except Sunday because... the Lord would've wanted it that way. Respect and all while at Church.


----------



## luutzu (19 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> You being a Chinaphobe and all, you would know that they rewrite history at whimsy. They retrospectively invented everything, discovered everything, landed on the moon first, owned the industrial revolution, gave women equal rights first, ethics in business and democracy, etc.
> 
> These are the same people whose entrenched culture means they never cut lines, never resort to "no speaka da inglish" when it suits them, never make false declarations at customs, never won't pay for services rendered, never finagle the facts etc.
> 
> They probably invented Australian Rules Football too.




Shouldn't it be Sinophile or something? Not Chinaphobe.

There's a Chinese that actually launched himself to the Moon back in the early ADs too. Didn't make it. Too much fireworks   oh btw, they did discovered gun powder first too.

Not sure about the giving women equal rights and stuff. But it's not like the Western male gave it to their women, it was demanded and WW2 kinda make it a necessity to "give", what with there being ammo to make and baseball to play; and recently, low wages that an average household need two income just to pay the bills and save a couple buck.

Ethics in business... haha... funny man. Next you're telling me there's safety and health concerns in Western business practices too.

Democracy... no the Greeks gave that to the world. The world lost it since the Caesars came into power... And haven't found it since.

Only a few more days to the age of Trump, and a few more after that for flag waving and memories of the good old days


----------



## SirRumpole (19 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Looks great to me. What do you say Rumpy?
> 
> I'd second them being worn all day, and night, except Sunday because... the Lord would've wanted it that way. Respect and all while at Church.




I would not argue a woman's right to wear those if she wanted to.


----------



## luutzu (19 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I would not argue a woman's right to wear those if she wanted to.





It's decided then.

So who's going to tell our women what we've decided they ought to wear?

Maybe call Pauline?  Noco, you got her on speed dial yea?


----------



## noco (19 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> It's decided then.
> 
> So who's going to tell our women what we've decided they ought to wear?
> 
> Maybe call Pauline?  Noco, you got her on speed dial yea?




Firstly you are off beat with me having direct contact with Pauline Hanson just because I, along with a great majority, support much of what she says.......There is a political revolution coming like nothing you have sen before. 

Perhaps take your wife (if you have one) over to Iran or Arabia and parade her down in the main square in a bikini out fit or even shorts and blouse and see what the reaction is....I doubt whether you will be bringing her home alive.

When you are in Rome you do what the Romans do...When you are in Australia you do what normal Australians do......It is our country and if the burka offends the majority of Australians, then it should be banned.


----------



## OmegaTrader (20 January 2017)

1)I don't care what anyone wears or what religion they have as long as they don't push me around.
As soon as they do that I don't care who they are they better be prepared for a fight
We all want freedom but don't want other to wear what they want?
Hypocritical???

2) Eventually we will all be intermixed genetically, but at the moment the aboriginal question is a very hard one. Money hasn't worked, the bureaucrats have eaten it all up. Land in the city is off limits, land in the bush no one wants is being given as well as welfare in compensation.

But the stupid law allows miners to mine/frack under your land, without veto. Which adds even more hassles. Fracking has been stopped essentially, but mining has not.

A very hard question indeed.


3) This is the order of beating up english> irish> greek/italians> asians

Now everyone is beating up muslims as flavour of the month.
Aboriginals are still being beaten up after all this time.

in a metaphorical sense mainly.

now the abused have become the abusers.

People seem to forget the abuse their grandparents suffered as migrants.


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2017)

noco said:


> Firstly you are off beat with me having direct contact with Pauline Hanson just because I, along with a great majority, support much of what she says.......There is a political revolution coming like nothing you have sen before.
> 
> Perhaps take your wife (if you have one) over to Iran or Arabia and parade her down in the main square in a bikini out fit or even shorts and blouse and see what the reaction is....I doubt whether you will be bringing her home alive.
> 
> When you are in Rome you do what the Romans do...When you are in Australia you do what normal Australians do......It is our country and if the burka offends the majority of Australians, then it should be banned.




You probably didn't intend to but you're kinda comparing Australia to a couple of Theocracies. They don't much care for personal freedom and women's rights or anyone's rights beside those of the ruling family and friends. 

Aren't we Romans priding ourselves for our tolerance? So when they're in this Rome, them Roman can wear whatever as long as they don't stop our babes from wearing what we prefer them to wear. 

There might be a revolution coming, but it won't be led by Hanson or any current politicians though. Pauline is pretty much just another politician using the suffering and anger of her electorates to get to power. Once there, who'd want to rock that gravy train?


----------



## Wysiwyg (20 January 2017)

OmegaTrader said:


> but at the moment the aboriginal question is a very hard one. Money hasn't worked, the bureaucrats have eaten it all up.



I want the appointment of Ken Wyatt to the Aboriginal Health (and aged care) portfolio to make a real difference. The turning point where a large majority that have fallen into that destructive cycle of booze and hopelessness to take a leap up with self worth, achievable goals and a self attained better quality of life. He has to be the one to get the elders and the wiling to sow the seeds of change. Stan Grant is another who has a voice of reason. I sincerely wish they can help make great leaps forward.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> them Roman can wear whatever as long as they don't stop our babes from wearing what we prefer them to wear.




It's basically Muslim men and their religion that force women to wear burkas, as I said it's a symbol of religious slavery. I don't care what women wear as long as they have a genuine choice and don't get dictated to by Imams and possessive husbands.


----------



## noco (20 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It's basically Muslim men and their religion that force women to wear burkas, as I said it's a symbol of religious slavery. I don't care what women wear as long as they have a genuine choice and don't get dictated to by Imams and possessive husbands.




The problem is this kind of dress worn by Muslim women could also be used by male Muslim terrorists with explosives strapped around their waists and they would not hesitate to use it.


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2017)

noco said:


> The problem is this kind of dress worn by Muslim women could also be used by male Muslim terrorists with explosives strapped around their waists and they would not hesitate to use it.




Terrorists can't hide their weapons in other ways? Like in an esky or a barbie or a ute and other Aussie things.


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It's basically Muslim men and their religion that force women to wear burkas, as I said it's a symbol of religious slavery. I don't care what women wear as long as they have a genuine choice and don't get dictated to by Imams and possessive husbands.




I know enough, and have overheard quite a few, Muslim/Arab women talking to their husbands... and trust me, they do not sound like they're the submissive mousy type.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> I know enough, and have overheard quite a few, Muslim/Arab women talking to their husbands... and trust me, they do not sound like they're the submissive mousy type.




Anecdotal based on limited sample. Do women really want to go around clothed head to foot if it wasn't for the fact that their religion or husbands say so ? Some might but I think it would be the minority.


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2017)

I'm not saying that religion or/and cultural tradition or practices have nothing to do with it. 

Maybe that's what normalised it for them rather than abuse and threats and force.

We can't just assume that it must be forced. I mean, how many women would feel comfortable wearing bikinis? Or how many parents would want their daughters in short shorts. Some might consider that kind of promotion (s)exploitation of women more than liberal, girl power whatever.

btw, don't catholic nuns wear similar clothing? Headcovers and such?


----------



## Tisme (20 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Anecdotal based on limited sample. Do women really want to go around clothed head to foot if it wasn't for the fact that their religion or husbands say so ? Some might but I think it would be the minority.



Patty Hurst


----------



## OmegaTrader (20 January 2017)

1) stop making excuses for rascism, let people wear what they want..

2) how many irish and english men have died from terrorism in ireland??? they have been killing each other for 1000's of years.They didn't have burqas.Stop singling out muslims.  Another excuse for racism

3) study history to open the mind. Look beyond today to past generations.  Look beyond now.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> Patty Hurst




I presume you mean the Stockholm Syndrome ?

A very good analogy in the Muslim case.


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I presume you mean the Stockholm Syndrome ?
> 
> A very good analogy in the Muslim case.




Know why we're bombing some 7 Muslims/Arab countries, forcing millions of Arabs into refugee camps all over the place... and nobody gives a damn?

Could be that otherwise sensible people are being fed bs so they don't give a damn; heck, they might even egg the war on. 

It's crazy how the majority of the population, being poor and could use a few billion or two to ease the mortgage, put a bit more food on the table, maybe some clean water... how they don't get too upset about hundreds of billions being spent bombing the Allah out of people who probably couldn't locate the West on a map, if they happen to somehow ran into some book with a map in it.

Anyway, we're in the age of Trump in a few hours. Making America, who was never not great, great again. And I'm guessing that America is an extension of Western culture and ideals. That shiny city on the hill will soon get brass-plated. It'll shine alright.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Know why we're bombing some 7 Muslims/Arab countries, forcing millions of Arabs into refugee camps all over the place... and nobody gives a damn?




That statement doesn't really square with the point of the "Stockholm Syndrome" within Muslim families. 

Child marriages, arranged marriages, death threats for leaving your husband male domination, all lead to a type of accepted slavery for women. What they have got isn't much, but it's better than the alternative ; ie ostracism and the possibility of one of your brothers "honour murdering" you.

A life of slavery as incubators enforced by threats and intimidation. What a life.


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> That statement doesn't really square with the point of the "Stockholm Syndrome" within Muslim families.
> 
> Child marriages, arranged marriages, death threats for leaving your husband male domination, all lead to a type of accepted slavery for women. What they have got isn't much, but it's better than the alternative ; ie ostracism and the possibility of one of your brothers "honour murdering" you.
> 
> A life of slavery as incubators enforced by threats and intimidation. What a life.




And we know all that how?

That's what they are? That's what in their Koran? The media told us?

Look at Trump's pick for his administration. Look at Trump himself.

Are they representative of what American is all about? Look at the Christian Bible... all Christian follow it, word for word? Do they pick out only the good bits, or the bad bits, or just pay lip service?

Like I said, people just will not permit endless war unless it's driven into them that the enemy is everywhere, are evil, vile, barbaric blah blah blah. Once that's in the popular consciousness, you can then go drone, overthrow, take their stuff, put them in concentration camp, or refugee camp... and then blame the neglected national health, the increasing poverty level at home... blame it all on that same enemy.

Been there, done that. Just we plebs never learn.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Like I said, people just will not permit endless war unless it's driven into them that the enemy is everywhere, are evil, vile, barbaric blah blah blah. Once that's in the popular consciousness, you can then go drone, overthrow, take their stuff, put them in concentration camp, or refugee camp... and then blame the neglected national health, the increasing poverty level at home... blame it all on that same enemy.




If you think I'm justifying war on the basis of how Muslims treat women, then you have the wrong end of the stick. I want Muslims (and Christians) to realise that they are slaves to archaic beliefs which they should throw off. If Muslims aren't violent to me to to others in general then they can do what they want within the law, but that doesn't excuse such practices of child marriages or arranged marriages or other practices that enslave women and children to religious beliefs and won't stop me or others pointing out how objectionable such things are. If you think that's an enticement to commit violence against Muslims, then you have a distorted view PC of what freedom of speech means. 

Furthermore, criticising me for criticising bad Muslim practises implies that you endorse those practises, so if you endorse child marriages and arranged marriages then please have the courage to admit it.


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> If you think I'm justifying war on the basis of how Muslims treat women, then you have the wrong end of the stick. I want Muslims (and Christians) to realise that they are slaves to archaic beliefs which they should throw off. If Muslims aren't violent to me to to others in general then they can do what they want within the law, but that doesn't excuse such practices of child marriages or arranged marriages or other practices that enslave women and children to religious beliefs and won't stop me or others pointing out how objectionable such things are. If you think that's an enticement to commit violence against Muslims, then you have a distorted view PC of what freedom of speech means.
> 
> Furthermore, criticising me for criticising bad Muslim practises implies that you endorse those practises, so if you endorse child marriages and arranged marriages then please have the courage to admit it.




I didn't criticise you SirR. I know where you're coming from. And I think I've said this before, that it's great to see people hating those kind of practises - terrorism is bad, oppressing women, forced child marriages, welfare cheats, blindly following some old book as interpreted by some high priests... all those are bad and those who hate it, are by definition, generally good.

So I certainly am not criticising you, and even have some understanding for the outright racist out there.

What I'm criticising is our media and our masters of war. The warmongers, king makers, empire builders, the arms industry... they all colluded to spread half truths, selective facts and generally bad behaviours committed by some Arabs or terrorists... then leave it hanging there for "us to decide" if the wars are justified or not.

Of course wars are "understandable" if almost all Muslims are potential terrorists, and those that aren't terrorists are abusive religious nuts aiming to take over the world through breeding and welfare. How do you take over the world having lots of kids and relying on welfare to feed them anyway. If that were ever possible, the poor billions of people living on less than a dollar a day would be running the world and making policies a long time ago.

Anyway, these disinformation propaganda is just what state do when they want to justify wars. To believe it is to believe someone saying that a racist Trump being elected mean Americans are all like him. Or seeing that many in his cabinet are White supremacist, anti-gay, anti-poor people.... that that's what Americans are, or that's what Western value is. Would we want to be painted with that brush?

Of course there are Islamic terrorism, there are religious nuts in Islam, or just simple crazies and sociopaths who uses certain part or interpret certain ways the texts and religion to their own violent purposes... we can't take those selective facts and paint an entire billion+ people with it.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 January 2017)

Fair enough then. Shake ?


----------



## noco (21 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> I didn't criticise you SirR. I know where you're coming from. And I think I've said this before, that it's great to see people hating those kind of practises - terrorism is bad, oppressing women, forced child marriages, welfare cheats, blindly following some old book as interpreted by some high priests... all those are bad and those who hate it, are by definition, generally good.
> 
> So I certainly am not criticising you, and even have some understanding for the outright racist out there.
> 
> ...




The Islamic terrorists are the Islamic army doing the dirty work for the "PEACE LOVING" Muslims through out the world including Australia.


----------



## Tisme (21 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Anecdotal based on limited sample. Do women really want to go around clothed head to foot if it wasn't for the fact that their religion or husbands say so ? Some might but I think it would be the minority.




I think there is a certain amount of defiance in many of the women wearing their desert wear..... once again Patty protesting for her captors. 

Sure it's supposed to be modesty dress, pride and all that BS. But we all know it's a combination of fear, peer group acceptance and look at me, look at me I can see most of :you but you can't see me.

There is also the other physiological things to consider : does it hide battered wives, does is hide bad hygiene, hide ugly, hide disease, etc,. 

Other factors: does it hide shame of being married to a zealot.


----------



## Tisme (21 January 2017)

noco said:


> The Islamic terrorists are the Islamic army doing the dirty work for the "PEACE LOVING" Muslims through out the world including Australia.




The problem is that there is good muslim people who are fighting and being killed trying to stop the ar5eholes..... you know, like Pauline is trying to constrain the damage the Liberal, Labor and Greens are doing to us as we speak.


----------



## luutzu (21 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Fair enough then. Shake ?



 We don't shake in our culture, we hug


----------



## noco (21 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> We don't shake in our culture, we hug




But be careful who you hug for they may have explosives strapped around their waist...I don't think you would be allowed to hug a female Muslim dressed from head to toe wearing a Burka.


----------



## luutzu (21 January 2017)

noco said:


> But be careful who you hug for they may have explosives strapped around their waist...I don't think you would be allowed to hug a female Muslim dressed from head to toe wearing a Burka.




Have some faith in our Aussie security departments noco. They're tapping all our lines and putting "red light" cameras at every major intersections around Mosques 

Should move to wear I live... safest place in Australia. Well, most watched place I reckon.


----------



## noco (21 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Have some faith in our Aussie security departments noco. They're tapping all our lines and putting "red light" cameras at every major intersections around Mosques
> 
> Should move to wear I live... safest place in Australia. Well, most watched place I reckon.




No thanks...I would not move to the unknown......I am happy where I am now...Not many Muslims here thank Christ.


----------



## luutzu (21 January 2017)

noco said:


> No thanks...I would not move to the unknown......I am happy where I am now...Not many Muslims here thank Christ.




Yea... I'm moving soon too. Don't want to risk having my (wrong) door knocked down one day


----------



## noco (21 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Yea... I'm moving soon too. Don't want to risk having my (wrong) door knocked down one day




Why are you moving?...I thought you said you lived in the safest place in Australia.


----------



## luutzu (21 January 2017)

noco said:


> Why are you moving?...I thought you said you lived in the safest place in Australia.




Thought I gave the reason above already (door getting knocked down when AFP/ASIO uses Apple Maps instead of Google Maps )

That and Cabramatta is safer though. I'd be among my drug-pushing people.

You know I know people who asks me if it's safe there, still.


----------



## noco (21 January 2017)

luutzu said:


> Thought I gave the reason above already (door getting knocked down when AFP/ASIO uses Apple Maps instead of Google Maps )
> 
> That and Cabramatta is safer though. I'd be among my drug-pushing people.
> 
> You know I know people who asks me if it's safe there, still.




Sydney would be last place I would want to live.


luutzu said:


> Thought I gave the reason above already (door getting knocked down when AFP/ASIO uses Apple Maps instead of Google Maps )
> 
> That and Cabramatta is safer though. I'd be among my drug-pushing people.
> 
> You know I know people who asks me if it's safe there, still.




Sydney is the last place I would want to live......Too many rat bags down there.


----------



## luutzu (21 January 2017)

noco said:


> Sydney would be last place I would want to live.
> 
> 
> Sydney is the last place I would want to live......Too many rat bags down there.




I don't think the people in the North Shore and Point Piper like you calling them that.

You're missing out noco. It's the best place in the world. A modern harbour city with only one bridge and a funny looking opera house... what's not to like?

Went to the Opera House recently so the kids could watch Operation Ouch. The place seems a bit over-rated. Not that i've been to a lot of opera houses. 

The Quay and its restaurants... they definitely have way too much pavings and not enough trees or greeneries. Way too hot for any of those overpriced takeaway restaurants.

Bought the kids each an ice-cream... $17 for three single-scoop    I know I'm cheap, but come on man, some $6 for an ice cream?

Good thing the train ride was cheap. Oh wait. 

But beside the high costs of everything, best place in the world.


----------



## Tisme (23 January 2017)

I'm guessing we will see a bit of this on the day. It's a disgrace that people would spend good money on a piece of acrylic cloth, made using coal fired power and then release nasty chemicals into the atmosphere by burning....buy cotton if you must be delinquent.


----------



## Wysiwyg (23 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm guessing we will see a bit of this on the day. It's a disgrace that people would spend good money on a piece of acrylic cloth, made using coal fired power and then release nasty chemicals into the atmosphere by burning....buy cotton if you must be delinquent.



Trouble is when the idiot gets burnt the very people they despise have to medically treat them. Oh the irony.


----------



## Tisme (23 January 2017)

Wysiwyg said:


> Trouble is when the idiot gets burnt the very people they despise have to medically treat them. Oh the irony.




Well given that these types are really just attention seekers, that should be rather satisfying as a retell tale. Greenies burning acrylic flags made from mineral oil seems so hypocritical to me. Maybe it's a dislike of Crucis stars and Union Jack cantons?

Beside that who really really cares about a bunch of dopes lighting up a piece of material made and printed for cheap in China? It's not like the major 20th century wars were fought for a flag design that only became the national rag in 1954 and prohibited to modification in 1998.


----------



## Bill M (26 January 2017)

Change The Date
---
Former minister says Australia needs to scrape off the 'barnacle' of January 26
Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...-to-march-former-minister#M5dVjPw9fCRPcrer.99
---
and
---
On January 26, 1788 the First Fleet arrived at Port Jackson, and Arthur Phillip raised the Union Jack on the land of the Eora nation. This was an invasion that had catastrophic and tragic consequences for all the peoples and nations who had lived here for tens of thousands of years, and for their descendants.
http://greens.org.au/change-the-date
---

Good idea or not?


----------



## noco (26 January 2017)

It is unbelievable that Anna Bligh has received an Australia day honour after she had almost sent the state broke....Wonders will never cease.


https://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/a/34270490/qlds-first-female-premier-honoured/#page1


----------



## PZ99 (26 January 2017)

Happy to see an honour for Ray Meagher even though I never watched Home and Away until he was given the doodleburger treatment 

We probably could change the date although it appears we might eventually become a republic so maybe it can be used for whatever day that might be - which is probably today anyway. LOL


----------



## pixel (26 January 2017)

noco said:


> It is unbelievable that Anna Bligh has received an Australia day honour



I take it then you also disapprove of Julia Gillard's AC.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/2017...-gillard-appointed-an-ac-20170119-gtunse.html
Wake up, Man! This isn't the 1800's and Queen Victoria isn't the only woman allowed to have an opinion


----------



## noco (27 January 2017)

The left wing extremist and Greens are at it again.

I ask any sane person, what do they hope to gain from these protests?

The Aboriginal community have never been better off than they have  in the last 70 years.

What has happened 229 years ago cannot be undone so why not just accept it.

If the Indonesians or the Japanese had come here first their would now not be one aborigine left..Look how the Indonesian are treating the indigenous people of West Papua.....Why aren't you lefties and Greenies protesting in Indonesia?......They raping young gitrls and killing lots of people who attempt any protest..... .I think the Aborigines here  should consider themselves lucky as to the outcome in recent times after the British "INVASION"

Be a fair dinkum Aussie and stop all this ranting about nothing.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3427626...ney-invasion-day-protests-turn-violent/#page1


----------



## SirRumpole (27 January 2017)

noco said:


> Be a fair dinkum Aussie and stop all this ranting about nothing.




The perpetual victim syndrome is not doing the Aboriginals any good. It's just an excuse to perpetually put the hand out. The world has changed and so people need to change with it.


----------



## noco (27 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The perpetual victim syndrome is not doing the Aboriginals any good. It's just an excuse to perpetually put the hand out. The world has changed and so people need to change with it.



 So what in your view should happen?


----------



## SirRumpole (27 January 2017)

noco said:


> So what in your view should happen?




We spend about 6 times per person on indigenous welfare than we do for everyone else.

That's one thing that could change.


----------



## luutzu (27 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> We spend about 6 times per person on indigenous welfare than we do for everyone else.
> 
> That's one thing that could change.




I have a feeling that that maths is the same maths saying we spent $11billion or whatever on refugees in Nauru.

I guess it's true that the taxpayers paid that much out, just the trickling down... well, who likes a leaking tap right?


----------



## noco (27 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> We spend about 6 times per person on indigenous welfare than we do for everyone else.
> 
> That's one thing that could change.




I think you are thinking along the same lines as Pauline Hanson...Good on you Rumpy.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 January 2017)

noco said:


> I think you are thinking along the same lines as Pauline Hanson...Good on you Rumpy.




On some things, maybe...


----------



## ReXXar (27 January 2017)

noco said:


> The left wing extremist and Greens are at it again.
> 
> I ask any sane person, what do they hope to gain from these protests?
> 
> ...




I'm not a leftie and swings between different views all the time.  But I think you're missing the point that the Aboriginals' view is that when considering the first landing, we shouldn't be here in the first place.

Who knows if life would've been better or worse, this is something we can only speculate, Japanese only bombed Darwin because Australia allowed US warships to dock there.  If my neighbour wants to build a tent in his backyard while I want to build an apartment, that's not a valid justification for taking his land on the basis that his life will be worse than mine.  Its all perspective.  Some people like to do walkabout in the bush, some people like to sit in an office and make money, nobody is right or wrong.


----------



## noco (28 January 2017)

ReXXar said:


> I'm not a leftie and swings between different views all the time.  But I think you're missing the point that the Aboriginals' view is that when considering the first landing, we shouldn't be here in the first place.
> 
> Who knows if life would've been better or worse, this is something we can only speculate, Japanese only bombed Darwin because Australia allowed US warships to dock there.  If my neighbour wants to build a tent in his backyard while I want to build an apartment, that's not a valid justification for taking his land on the basis that his life will be worse than mine.  Its all perspective.  Some people like to do walkabout in the bush, some people like to sit in an office and make money, nobody is right or wrong.




I am well aware of what you are saying but my point is what should happen now......Do you expect all white people to leave Australia and hand everything back to the Aborigines?

It may have been wrong in the the first place but it happened 229 years ago and it cannot be undone, so why blame the current white people.

So will demonstrating in the streets by the Greens and left wing socialists gain anything for the Aborigines...I would say not so the demonstrations are purely political


----------



## Bill M (28 January 2017)

noco said:


> I am well aware of what you are saying but my point is what should happen now......Do you expect all white people to leave Australia and hand everything back to the Aborigines?
> 
> It may have been wrong in the the first place but it happened 229 years ago and it cannot be undone, so why blame the current white people.
> 
> So will demonstrating in the streets by the Greens and left wing socialists gain anything for the Aborigines...I would say not so the demonstrations are purely political



I thought that all the Aboriginal people want is to have the date changed. If one section of the community don't like the date then why not change it? For me I couldn't care a toss which day it is and if it makes everybody happy then why not change it? Any day would be great to celebrate Australia Day.

Perhaps we should make it the first Monday of of every February. That way we can all have a long weekend every year without all those sickies been taken in between. Could fix 2 problems with just a minor adjustment.


----------



## Tisme (28 January 2017)

Change it back to whatever day it was before the First Fleet? Same with the flag. Daylight saving = same. State boundaries ditto.

Everything,..... just simply change all things back to 1787; bring back aboriginal ownership of industry, farming, banks, power stations, trains, public service, ad nauseum.


----------



## noco (28 January 2017)

Bill M said:


> I thought that all the Aboriginal people want is to have the date changed. If one section of the community don't like the date then why not change it? For me I couldn't care a toss which day it is and if it makes everybody happy then why not change it? Any day would be great to celebrate Australia Day.
> 
> Perhaps we should make it the first Monday of of every February. That way we can all have a long weekend every year without all those sickies been taken in between. Could fix 2 problems with just a minor adjustment.




I recall up to about 1991, Australia day was always on a Monday nearest to the 26th.....Who or why it was changed I have no answer.
I was a keen cricketer before that date and played in the Gold Field ashes for 18 year straight...we always had Australia day on the Monday as we played the full 3 days.

Perhaps it should be reinstated to the old way....But all in all I can't see why all the fuss is being made about changing the date...What difference is it going to make.

Labour day was changed a few years ago from May 1 to some date in October and the unions screamed blue murder.

*In 2004, a *Newspoll* that asked if the date of Australia Day should be moved to one that is not associated with European settlement found 79% of respondents favoured no change, 15% favoured change, and 6% were uncommitted.*[56]* Historian *Geoffrey Blainey* said he believed 26 January worked well as Australia Day and that: "My view is that it is much more successful now than it's ever been."*[57]

A 2017 poll conducted for _The Guardian_ revealed only 15% of Australians supported changing the date of Australia Day, with 83% supporting keeping the name "Australia Day". The poll also found that the majority (68%) felt positive about Australia Day, 19% were indifferent and 7% had mixed feelings, with 6% of people feeling negative about Australia Day. Among Indigenous Australians, however, only 23% felt positive about Australia Day, 31% were negative and 30% had mixed feelings, while 54% favoured a change of date.[8]


----------



## Logique (28 January 2017)

It mostly provides a long weekend before school goes back. There's never going to be much support for changing the date.

Change the date? The moaners would just find something else to grizzle about.


----------



## Tisme (28 January 2017)

noco said:


> I recall up to about 1991, Australia day was always on a Monday nearest to the 26th.....Who or why it was changed I have no answer.
> I was a keen cricketer before that date and played in the Gold Field ashes for 18 year straight...we always had Australia day on the Monday as we played the full 3 days.




1988 onwards all states agreed on 26th and celebrated on the day unless a weekend then the holiday Monday. 

In 1991 26th fell on a Saturday so therefore a Monday long weekend.

Celebrated:

1988 Tues
1989 Thurs
1990 Fri
1991  Mon
1992 Mon
1993 Tues
etc


----------



## luutzu (29 January 2017)

noco said:


> I am well aware of what you are saying but my point is what should happen now......Do you expect all white people to leave Australia and hand everything back to the Aborigines?
> 
> It may have been wrong in the the first place but it happened 229 years ago and it cannot be undone, so why blame the current white people.
> 
> So will demonstrating in the streets by the Greens and left wing socialists gain anything for the Aborigines...I would say not so the demonstrations are purely political




Nobody blame the current white people, they don't even blame you noco, even though you may have been born around the time 

Serious though, it's a bit insensitive to celebrate a national day on the day imperialism found this big massive land with nobody to own it, then start to make that happen, for real.

Maybe celebrate it on Federation Day like SirR, I think, was suggesting.

But main issue is this talk of the Aborigines hating and blaming the Whiteys of today. Sure, if I'm Aborigines I wouldn't like the day too much either, but people do forgive and maybe get serious about helping the Aborigines that's still left instead of just saying "Sorry" then do bugger all beside praising those idiots who sue a university that tries to address some economic disadvantages; or our former Captain who thought it's their problem if they can't make a decent living where previous policies drove them out into.

But yea, Australia has come a long way... though we're starting, again, to not care for the poor whites homeless either.


----------



## luutzu (29 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> Change it back to whatever day it was before the First Fleet? Same with the flag. Daylight saving = same. State boundaries ditto.
> 
> Everything,..... just simply change all things back to 1787; bring back aboriginal ownership of industry, farming, banks, power stations, trains, public service, ad nauseum.




We still have public service?

I'm not too sure how much more superior the civilised, industrial way of life are compare to nomads such as the Aborigines.

For most, the exception being the few well-heeled and those of inherited wealth, for most life in this civilised world is a bit of a nightmare.

Work all day, most of the year just to make enough to pay for housing and food... then maybe at the end of the year, could save enough to take a short trip somewhere. 

When you take that holiday and try new food, see new sight, get away from the big smoke to enjoy nature... well the nomads kinda does that as a way of life, without saving up and paying for everything.

But yes, work hard, be that cog in that big machine that build empires and civilisation... just don't get sick, or fall, or injured, and don't wake up late, or stay up late... then if you work hard enough you might get the have enough at the end of your life to retire and enjoy life doing nothing.

I guess the downside is you get people with better weapons coming in to liberated you and your stuff.


----------



## noco (29 January 2017)

The indigenous community should stop whinging, get their ass's into gear and become part of One Nation...we all have the same red blood......It is only the color of our skin....Get an education and get out and do their bit like everybody else.
We live in a democracy and the polls are showing no change of the date....So I think we should all get over it and let things lie. ....But knowing how the stirrers operate they will continue to had fuel to the fire to create more division in the community....What a shame we have to tolerate this sort of crap....The gay marriage hype has fizzled out so the stirrers have to find something new.

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.a...y/news-story/804ea545c7a853519570332c6950802c


----------



## Tink (29 January 2017)

My house belongs to the Queen, and so does yours.
That made me laugh, and it is true

As I have said, our laws are based on our Christian heritage.
Sadly, the radical left don't agree with Western Civilisation, which includes private property
Our heritage and traditions can only be understood in the context of Western Civilisation..

---------------------------------------------------

_The arrival of the First Fleet is one of the most important events in Australian history as it represents the first step in our development as a liberal, Western democracy based on English common law and a Westminster Parliamentary system.

The rights and freedoms we now take for granted, including freedom of assembly and speech, the right to a fair and timely trial, and the right to vote and elect a representative government, trace their origins to events that occurred on January 26, 1788.

As argued by the Perth legal academic, Augusto Zimmerman, “When the penal colony of New South Wales was established in 1788, the laws of England were transplanted into Australia” and “As a result, the legal sociopolitical institutions of Australia found their primary roots in the legal and sociopolitical traditions of England”…

The arrival of the First Fleet, in addition to bequeathing the nation with an English legal and political system also heralded the arrival of Christianity. 
According to the 2011 census Christianity, at approximately 61 per cent, is the largest religion and around Australia, parliaments begin with the Lord’s Prayer.

Christian concepts like the dignity of the person, the right to individual liberty and a commitment to social justice and the common good also underpin our legal and political systems and way of life._


----------



## luutzu (29 January 2017)

Tink said:


> My house belongs to the Queen, and so does yours.
> That made me laugh, and it is true
> 
> As I have said, our laws are based on our Christian heritage.
> ...




Christ taught imperialism and high finance on that Mount too?

Christ encourage making money at all cost, as long as somebody else is paying for that cost?

When Jesus was kicking the money changers from his Father's temple, he then sat back and thought... wouldn't it be cool if there's a few of these temple in every city around the world, but they be made of grand sandstone and marble, adorn with glitter and gold; that and a trust fund or two... all so that the homeless and the beggars can feel its glow while freezing to death. That and no homos! Father didn't create them! That and no Muslims! I hate Arabs.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

I realize how much you lefties like Andrew Bolt, but no one can deny he is so very correct on this occasion.

The ABC are trying to make out that the changing of the date from  Jan. 26 is gaining momentum which is totally incorrect...The polls are showing overwhelming the people of Australia do not want change.

So for FFS drop this stupidity and let sleeping dogs lie.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...y/news-story/bf0b75524e50cc7ee9578df96139b6b2

*THE ABC is now using its huge power to campaign to change the date of Australia Day.

Its website even claims: “Momentum is building to change the date of out of respect for indigenous Australians — many of whom view 26 January as ‘Invasion Day’.” What “momentum”? A McNair poll showed just 15 per cent of Australians want the date changed. And they are wrong for seven reasons.

1. It solves nothing.

Many protesters complain that the date marks the British “invasion”. But it happened and nothing will change that.

2. It does not “heal wounds”.

The victim industry relies on always being victims to get power. Australia has already formally apologised to Aborigines and handed over a third of the country to forms of native title. Shifting the date will just lead to more demands — including, ultimately, apartheid.

3. It will encourage more fake history.

Protesters claim Australia Day celebrates “genocide” and the “stolen generations”. There was no genocide and no historian has met my challenge to name even 10 children stolen from their parents just for being Aboriginal. While many Aborigines did suffer from colonisation, most now lead lives immeasurably richer, freer and less painful thanks to British settlement.

4. It will encourage more false division by “race”.

Most Aborigines have both European and Aboriginal ancestors, because most Aborigines marry non-Aborigines. It misrepresents reality to categorise them as simply black victims of white oppressors. They, too, are often descendants of “oppressors”.

5. It will help Leftists who hate our freedoms.

Much that makes our society so free and rich comes from British settlement. That’s why anti-capitalists dominate the change-the-date movement.

6. It will undermine Aborigines who support Australia Day.

Aboriginal leaders such as Robert Isaacs wisely say it’s time to “get past the hurts of the past”, and trashing Australia Day is merely “causing division”.

7. It is a dangerous distraction.

Changing the date will be like the Sorry marches and apologies — a lazy substitute for the hard work of fixing the real problems facing Aboriginal Australians, including terrible domestic violence, unemployment and crime.

It also falsely assumes that what really holds back Aborigines is white racism and not Aboriginal culture.*


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> I realize how much you lefties like Andrew Bolt,
> *
> 3. It will encourage more fake history.
> ....*
> Protesters claim Australia Day celebrates “genocide” and the “stolen generations”. There was no genocide and* no historian has met my challenge to name even 10 children stolen from their parents just for being Aboriginal. ....*




I think that sums up Andrew's gross arrogance to a (tittle) tee. He assumes in the absence of data that fits his predispositions, that he is right and others are wrong....stupid, dumb, albeit childish logic . The idea that no one with a clue would be bothered trying to communicate with a bully such as him, seems to escape him. He also seems to have a problem understanding that selling newspapers doesn't equate to him being held in high esteem.

Perhaps Andrew could do some of his own homework for a change rather than count of lunatics as sources.

Caveats via weasel words aside ("just being aboriginal)", personally I can name more than 10 western australian (full blood) kids I knew, who were brought to my suburb in Perth form the Kimberlies when I myself was a kid. I was never aware of any casts and white kids from the same NW WA area being fostered out for their own good.


----------



## Ves (30 January 2017)

noco said:
			
		

> The ABC are trying to make out that the changing of the date from Jan. 26 is gaining momentum *which is totally incorrect...*




Don't really care about the Australia Day debate -  but I don't think something has to be a 'majority opinion'  to be 'gaining momentum.'

If something goes from 3% to 15% or whatever,  it factually is 'gaining momentum.'

I'm not really sure how it's incorrect unless it's losing support.


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

Ves said:


> Don't really care about the Australia Day debate -  but I don't think something has to be a 'majority opinion'  to be 'gaining momentum.'
> 
> If something goes from 3% to 15% or whatever,  it factually is 'gaining momentum.'
> 
> I'm not really sure how it's incorrect unless it's losing support.




Truthfully, I can say I haven't canvased any face on face opinions, but the people who have mentioned it in conversation contributed to a score of 100% against change, all with derision at the very idea.

Like yourself  I am ambivalent, because to me Oz Day seems to have taken on a cult status since the nineties. 

I'm fairly sure the 26th was a convenient date when the whole working nation had a 4 week plus xmas holiday, so not so memorable to me. 

Back in the day we built tariffs around our right to leisure and family. These days govt aided business groups lament the Friday sickie as costing $30bn, when they know retail, tourism, services etc sales probably ballooned over the 4 days and the mad Monday spend at supermarkets. But that won't find copy space in the print news.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think that sums up Andrew's gross arrogance to a (tittle) tee. He assumes in the absence of data that fits his predispositions, that he is right and others are wrong....stupid, dumb, albeit childish logic . The idea that no one with a clue would be bothered trying to communicate with a bully such as him, seems to escape him. He also seems to have a problem understanding that selling newspapers doesn't equate to him being held in high esteem.
> 
> Perhaps Andrew could do some of his own homework for a change rather than count of lunatics as sources.
> 
> Caveats via weasel words aside ("just being aboriginal)", personally I can name more than 10 western australian (full blood) kids I knew, who were brought to my suburb in Perth form the Kimberlies when I myself was a kid. I was never aware of any casts and white kids from the same NW WA area being fostered out for their own good.




You at it again.....You just cannot help yourself when you dislike someone else's opinion so you revert the common assault on Andrew Bolt with character assassination, ridicule and intimidation just as you do with some other members of the ASF.

If the same comments had come from the good old Guardian commo newspaper, you would would have agreed, but oh no it was from Andrew Bolt who has spoken the truth and you lefties don't like it.

It is the riff raff that is stirring up trouble.

Time to wake up and accept that people do not want to change the Australia day from the Jan.26....So get over it.


----------



## pixel (30 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think that sums up Andrew's gross arrogance to a (tittle) tee. He assumes in the absence of data that fits his predispositions, that he is right and others are wrong....stupid, dumb, albeit childish logic . The idea that no one with a clue would be bothered trying to communicate with a bully such as him, seems to escape him. He also seems to have a problem understanding that selling newspapers doesn't equate to him being held in high esteem.
> 
> Perhaps Andrew could do some of his own homework for a change rather than count of lunatics as sources.
> 
> Caveats via weasel words aside ("just being aboriginal)", personally I can name more than 10 western australian (full blood) kids I knew, who were brought to my suburb in Perth form the Kimberlies when I myself was a kid. I was never aware of any casts and white kids from the same NW WA area being fostered out for their own good.



If Andrew Bolt had "done his homework" in Primary School, learning the 4 R's (The 4th being _Reason_), he might have lifted his IQ above 50.
He should do Australia a favour and move to Trumpington. Better still if he took his disciples and groupies with him. Australia would be a more harmonious place. More *conservative *too, as in conserving the old virtues of giving everyone a "*Fair Go, Mate!*"


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> Time to wake up and accept that people do not want to change the Australia day from the Jan.26....So get over it





As long as they get a holiday during the warm weather I don't think people care what day it is.

March 1 was mentioned, which seems ok to me.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

pixel said:


> If Andrew Bolt had "done his homework" in Primary School, learning the 4 R's (The 4th being _Reason_), he might have lifted his IQ above 50.
> He should do Australia a favour and move to Trumpington. Better still if he took his disciples and groupies with him. Australia would be a more harmonious place. More *conservative *too, as in conserving the old virtues of giving everyone a "*Fair Go, Mate!*"




Geez pixel, you are as bad as Tisme......You blokes just cannot stand the truth so, like tisme, you revert to the cheap way of discrediting someone who does not fall into line with your thinking.

We all may have a different opinion on certain matters but you behavior does not do you any credit whatsoever. 

The moderator, Joe Blow, is trying to stamp out this practice whether it be an ASF member or some one like Andrew Bolt, but you lefties just cannot help yourselves....A typical Fabian Mulitov cocktail.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> but you lefties just cannot help yourselves..




Now noco, no name calling please, you naughty boy.


----------



## Ves (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> The moderator, Joe Blow, is trying to stamp out this practice whether it be an ASF member or some one like Andrew Bolt, *but you lefties just cannot help yourselves....A typical Fabian Mulitov cocktail*.



I'm not sure if you read these threads Joe.

But having this extract posted by Noco over and over again at the slightest hint of disagreement is getting tiresome.

I don't mind it being said if someone flairs up and goes too far,  but to have it continuously posted in response to posts that are within the rules, but are made by those on the other side of the political spectrum, is going a bit far.  Noco isn't a mod.

Especially when the bolded bit at the end is included - it's nothing but pure antagonism.


----------



## overhang (30 January 2017)

I'm opposed to changing the date but Bolts arguments are quite weak.  

It's triple J you've got to worry about though, they have already once voted on changing the date of their hottest 100 countdown out of respect to Aboriginals and are going to vote every year if I recall on changing the date of the countdown.  Triple J are an activist on the issue.

I feel like its a very small minority of individuals both white and black that have been telling others how they should be feeling on Australia day and every year this number is gaining more traction. 

I'm surprised business groups haven't gotten behind the change the date yet though given how much they lose in sick days for long weekends.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Now noco, no name calling please, you naughty boy.




What is wrong with saying lefties?...How else would you like me say it?

Come Fabians come on come on......How does that sound...Now you can call me a naughty boy.

...You are certainly not a conservative.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

Ves said:


> I'm not sure if you read these threads Joe.
> 
> But having this extract posted by Noco over and over again at the slightest hint of disagreement is getting tiresome.
> 
> ...




Now that is the pot calling the kettle black......You gentlemen from the 'LEFT', have I got it right this time, are past masters at it


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> What is wrong with saying lefties?...How else would you like me say it?




Would you like me to call you a facist ?



> Come Fabians come on come on......How does that sound...Now you can call me a naughty boy.
> 
> ...You are certainly not a conservative.




You are certainly not a "liberal". Your point is ?


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Would you like me to call you a facist ?
> 
> 
> 
> You are certainly not a "liberal". Your point is ?




So what is your interpretation of a fascist?

You are certainly not a Liberal if you are constantly biased towards the Green/Labor coalition and constantly show your dislike for the Liberal Party.

I have proven right in saying the Green/Labor coalition follow the rules of the Fabian society as Wayne pointed out this morning....That is something that cannot be denied.

Look here you gentlemen form the ????? or what ever, I am sure you would like to remove me from the ASF so you have complete dominance to carry out your propaganda to the naive but it ain't gonna happen


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> So what is your interpretation of a fascist?




Someone who supports extra judicial murder would be a candidate.



> You are certainly not a Liberal if you are constantly biased towards the Green/Labor coalition and constantly show your dislike for the Liberal Party.




The use of the small l liberal obviously went over your head.


----------



## pixel (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> discrediting someone who does not fall into line with your thinking



We don't need to discredit Bolt. He does a mighty fine job doing it himself.


noco said:


> You blokes just cannot stand the truth


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Someone who supports extra judicial murder would be a candidate.
> 
> 
> 
> The use of the small l liberal obviously went over your head.




I think you have gone a bit too far this time...What a disgrace.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> I think you have gone a bit too far this time...What a disgrace.




Just go back and read what you posted in other threads and tell me you don't mean it.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Just go back and read what you posted in other threads and tell me you don't mean it.




Mean What?

The thread is about 2017 Australia day....Not me champ......You are way off topic again.

Please tell me how I am supposed to describe a left wing socialist?

Or is this a typical tit for tat with no end.


----------



## ReXXar (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> I am well aware of what you are saying but my point is what should happen now......Do you expect all white people to leave Australia and hand everything back to the Aborigines?
> 
> It may have been wrong in the the first place but it happened 229 years ago and it cannot be undone, so why blame the current white people.
> 
> So will demonstrating in the streets by the Greens and left wing socialists gain anything for the Aborigines...I would say not so the demonstrations are purely political




Since there is no objective definition of "right" or "wrong", I don't think it was wrong in the first place, the strong dominates the weak, its been like there for millions of years and will continue for another million years, its evolution.  If people cared about right or wrong, we would've even exist nowadays.

The problem with Aboriginals is that their culture is incompatible to live in a Western individualist and capitalist society.  For example, I used to work in Tonga and people there have no concept of savings because everything is shared, there's literally no locks on doors and people adopt neighbour's children etc.  if somebody have their own savings account instead of sharing the money with family it is seen as a selfish thing to do and just not acceptable.  I've seen countless consultants come in trying to increase savings rate and increase the banking population, but they all failed because its impossible to do so without a fundamental change in the Tongan culture, which is a culture of sharing that has kept them alive for thousands of years.  And that's the problem with Aboriginals today, the culture is just not compatible.  So for them to live in this incompatible culture, they always feel unnatural and disadvantaged, they have to force themselves to behave in a way they don't want to fit in, so they carry a grudge against other white people today because we're getting the benefits from our ancestors and they're not.

What's the solution?  Things would've been easier if we just killed them all and bred them out entirely, or take their children and train them in our individualist culture and capitalist system from birth.  Or ship them to some random island and isolate them from our incompatible system.  I read somewhere when Mao took over Xinjiang Province in China where there are Muslim rebels, he basically razed any village to the ground for any Chinese soldiers killed, sure enough he pacified the region in a few months, because no one is alive to fight back!!  Sure it sounds bad but after a few hundred years nobody would care.  I think we killed every single Aboriginal in Tasmania, and the entire native Tasmanian language was wiped out along with it.  No one cares about that these days and Tasmania doesn't have any problems with Aboriginals because there is no more left.  Problem solved.


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> "You at it again......




let me paraphrase your argument:

..., expressing an opinion that is different to my own obstinancy"


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> Geez pixel, you are as bad as Tisme......
> 
> The moderator, Joe Blow, is trying to stamp out this practice whether it be an ASF member or some one like Andrew Bolt, but you lefties just cannot help yourselves....A typical Fabian Mulitov cocktail.




I have a couple of women in tow who seem to like me being bad, so thanks for the compliment Noco.

I'm sure Joe can handle himself without a dog whistling deputy playing sheriff.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I have a couple of women in tow who seem to like me being bad, so thanks for the compliment Noco.
> 
> I'm sure Joe can handle himself without a dog whistling deputy playing sheriff.




*Andrew Bolt is entitled to his opinion just as you  are, the problem is you just don't like him telling it as it is.

When you revert to a juvenile description of Andrew Bolt it only serves to prove your dislike for him...It is totally unnecessary really......You can get your message through by proving he is wrong rather than trying to discredit the man.....Play the ball and not the man chum.

Quoted by Tisme.*
↑
*I think that sums up Andrew's gross arrogance to a (tittle) tee. He assumes in the absence of data that fits his predispositions, that he is right and others are wrong....stupid, dumb, albeit childish logic . The idea that no one with a clue would be bothered trying to communicate with a bully such as him, seems to escape him. He also seems to have a problem understanding that selling newspapers doesn't equate to him being held in high esteem.

Perhaps Andrew could do some of his own homework for a change rather than count of lunatics as sources.

Caveats via weasel words aside ("just being aboriginal)", personally I can name more than 10 western australian (full blood) kids I knew, who were brought to my suburb in Perth form the Kimberlies when I myself was a kid. I was never aware of any casts and white kids from the same NW WA area being fostered out for their own good.
Click to expand...*

*Your rhetoric has meant nothing.....The only thing I derived from your post was absolute abuse.*


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> ...You are certainly not a conservative.




I wonder what you do call someone who finds comfort, pertinacitly sharing same political opinions, same social justice attitudes, same prejudices, same everything .... a socialist unionist seems to be that person?

The oxymoron argument of personal liberty, while shackled to a thought machine is rather and interesting psychosis.


----------



## noco (30 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I wonder what you do call someone who finds comfort, pertinacitly sharing same political opinions, same social justice attitudes, same prejudices, same everything .... a socialist unionist seems to be that person?
> 
> The oxymoron argument of personal liberty, while shackled to a thought machine is rather and interesting psychosis.




LMAO...ROFL......One has to see the funny side of you tisme.


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

noco said:


> *Andrew Bolt is entitled to his opinion just as you  are, the problem is you just don't like him telling it as it is.
> 
> When you revert to a juvenile description of Andrew Bolt it only serves to prove your dislike for him...It is totally unnecessary really......You can get your message through by proving he is wrong rather than trying to discredit the man.....Play the ball and not the man chum.
> 
> ...





I'm not sure that Andrew Bolt and Australia Day are a good fit. He hardly embodies the spirit of the skilled Australian males who established this country. He has an effeminate gossiping tenacity and behaves like a fish wife ... the kind of bloke who is avoided down the pub and at a bbq because of the unease malaise that real ozzie men feel deep in their gut. 

He's a divisive character who would rather break and polarise than build community.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> He's a divisive character who would rather break and polarise than build community.




Typical of most media "personalities", although in his case the personality is very limited.

They like to run the country from an armchair in a studio somewhere without going through the actual formalities of getting elected.

Derryn Hinch is an exception, I have some admiration for him , he at least did some work and put his reputation on the line by contesting an election.


----------



## noco (31 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm not sure that Andrew Bolt and Australia Day are a good fit. He hardly embodies the spirit of the skilled Australian males who established this country. He has an effeminate gossiping tenacity and behaves like a fish wife ... the kind of bloke who is avoided down the pub and at a bbq because of the unease malaise that real ozzie men feel deep in their gut.
> 
> He's a divisive character who would rather break and polarise than build community.




Instead of abusing and character assassinating the man why don't you be more objective and prove what he is saying is wrong......You don't seem to have the answers lately......The thread is about 2017 Australia day not Andrew Bolt....Your rhetoric of late is becoming monotonous.

You are off topic.


----------



## Tisme (31 January 2017)

noco said:


> why don't you be more objective and prove what he is saying is wrong......You don't seem to have the answers lately......The thread is about 2017 Australia day not Andrew Bolt....
> 
> .




But it is you who got on your high horse because I debunked his outrageous contention that aboriginals weren't forced from their families. I can only assume you don't read anything when enraged at the perspicacity of others ... a more frequent display than not and no doubt blamed on a "Fabian/Bill Shorten" conspiracy.

You hijacked the thread by introducing hate via Andrew Bolt trash journalism, and now you are crying tears...I mean really....... you are just going to have to take your medicine like any good boy found wanting.

You are obviously a socialist trolling for effect, but unhappy at everyone seeing through your cunning stunts.


----------



## noco (31 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> But it is you who got on your high horse because I debunked his outrageous contention that aboriginals weren't forced from their families. I can only assume you don't read anything when enraged at the perspicacity of others ... a more frequent display than not and no doubt blamed on a "Fabian/Bill Shorten" conspiracy.
> 
> You hijacked the thread by introducing hate via Andrew Bolt trash journalism, and now you are crying tears...I mean really....... you are just going to have to take your medicine like any good boy found wanting.
> 
> You are obviously a socialist trolling for effect, but unhappy at everyone seeing through your cunning stunts.




What is wrong with you lately tisme?..You don't seem to be able to comprehend. 

Once again you are attacking Andrew Bolt and myself....You seem to have this obsession when there is a post you don't like.

Don't you anything better to to do? ...You just don't seem to be able to help yourself.

I remind you again you are off TOPIC ...The Thread is about Australia Day 2017.

If you don't like what Andrew Bolt has stated, then come up with some proof that he is wrong otherwise STFU.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 January 2017)

noco said:


> If you don't like what Andrew Bolt has stated, then come up with some proof that he is wrong otherwise STFU.




Reverting to harassment again ?

Like you others have a right to say what they want, and you cannot shut them up by your usual bullying tone.


----------



## PZ99 (31 January 2017)

(Some one knocked off all the bacon... lol)


----------



## noco (31 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Reverting to harassment again ?
> 
> Like you others have a right to say what they want, and you cannot shut them up by your usual bullying tone.




Opinions are one thing...Personal attacks are something else....Play the ball and not the man..

Have a subjective discussion without the character assassinations, ridicule and intimidation.

My comments are not about bullying, but about fairness which in many cases on this forum are very seldom demonstrated...The harassment is more from the likes of you and tisme.

If tisme does not agree with what Andrew Bolt has stated, then let him prove where Bolt is wrong.....Many of you gentlemen on the other side of politics just don't have the answers so you revert to the one and only thing you know best.

Ah yes as Richo once stated, "WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO WIN".


----------



## SirRumpole (31 January 2017)

noco said:


> If tisme does not agree with what Andrew Bolt has stated, then let him prove where Bolt is wrong...





Bolt expresses his opinion, eg "I like coffee". You can't disprove that Bolt likes coffee but you have the right not to like coffee.

Get it ?


----------



## luutzu (31 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Bolt expresses his opinion, eg "I like coffee". You can't disprove that Bolt likes coffee but you have the right not to like coffee.
> 
> Get it ?




No.

You can not like coffee, that's fine by noco. But you (we) shouldn't call Bolt an overpaid, overhyped latte sipping prick who likes coffee.


----------



## noco (31 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Bolt expresses his opinion, eg "I like coffee". You can't disprove that Bolt likes coffee but you have the right not to like coffee.
> 
> Get it ?




What in the hell has that got to do with Australia Day 2107.......You are way off beat.....You still can't let go without having some crazy  final word.

THE THREAD.........AUSTRALIA DAY 2017.

Do you get it?


----------



## Tisme (31 January 2017)

noco said:


> What is wrong with you lately tisme?..You don't seem to be able to comprehend.
> 
> '................
> If you don't like what Andrew Bolt has stated, then come up with some proof that he is wrong otherwise STFU.




I'm not to pleased about you telling me to "shut the f#5k up". That's a bit contentious and bad advice for an active male.

Insofar as the consistency I have always found Andrew's columns asinie and responded to trolls using his tripe for bait accordingly. He doesn't need you to defend his obviously carefully constructed persona as the oracle for lazy brains and the less educated.

Socialists in sheeps clothing ....sheeesh


----------



## noco (31 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm not to pleased about you telling me to "shut the f#5k up". That's a bit contentious and bad advice for an active male.
> 
> Insofar as the consistency I have always found Andrew's columns asinie and responded to trolls using his tripe for bait accordingly. He doesn't need you to defend his obviously carefully constructed persona as the oracle for lazy brains and the less educated.
> 
> Socialists in sheeps clothing ....sheeesh




I used that that  saying STFU if you cannot have some sensible debate on what Bolt states......If you could just come up with something to prove Bolt is wrong then I will withdraw that language but it seems all you know when you don't have answers is to ridicule, belittle and discredit....You are a past master at it.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 January 2017)

noco said:


> I used that that saying STFU if you cannot have some sensible debate on what Bolt states......I




Maybe you should just STFU if someone quotes from the ABC or Guardian instead of going into your anti Fabian rants.


----------



## PZ99 (31 January 2017)

Looks like Australia day 2017 will be the start of the resurgence of noisy Aussie fork sales.







I might tip ASX:STFU for the February tipping comp


----------



## noco (31 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe you should just STFU if someone quotes from the ABC or Guardian instead of going into your anti Fabian rants.




Rumpy, give it a break hey......The rhetoric you and tisme keep coming up with is absolutely meaningless.

You can have the the last say if you want to but I am not going to lower myself to your standard...It so juvenile.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 January 2017)

noco said:


> Rumpy, give it a break hey......The rhetoric you and tisme keep coming up with is absolutely meaningless.
> 
> You can have the the last say if you want to but I am not going to lower myself to your standard...It so juvenile.


----------



## Tisme (31 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Looks like Australia day 2017 will be the start of the resurgence of noisy Aussie fork sales.
> 
> 
> 
> ...






As the fork said to the spoon, that ain't no ladle, that's my knife.


----------



## Tisme (31 January 2017)

noco said:


> I used that that  saying STFU if you cannot have some sensible debate on what Bolt states......If you could just come up with something to prove Bolt is wrong then I will withdraw that language but it seems all you know when you don't have answers is to ridicule, belittle and discredit....You are a past master at it.




So you are the self appointed umpire when you use inflammatory and base language to demand an answer suited to your own twisted logic? This is rather strange given your persistent broadcasting to the admins and mods that your are the prefect of polite and fair.


----------



## Ves (31 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> So you are the self appointed umpire when you use inflammatory and base language to demand an answer suited to your own twisted logic? This is rather strange given your persistent broadcasting to the admins and mods that your are the prefect of polite and fair.



At least he doesn't get angry like us mere mortals!!!


----------



## Tisme (31 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


>




Pfft, so infantile Rumpole.


----------



## Tisme (31 January 2017)

Ves said:


> At least he doesn't get angry like us mere mortals!!!




There's that I suppose.

but then how much time does one have to be angry when one is a


----------



## Tisme (28 August 2017)

Doing the rounds on farcebook:


----------



## Tisme (10 January 2018)




----------



## Tisme (10 January 2018)




----------



## Tisme (12 January 2018)




----------



## Logique (16 January 2018)

Australia Day 2018. The objections are Greens Party grandstanding, nothing more.

Since when did the city-based Greens speak for the Aboriginal community about 26 January?  Bess Price doesn't think so, nor Jacinta Price, nor Warren Mundine, nor the indigenous communities they represent.

What would changing the date achieve - would it quieten the Greens posturing? Not one bit. They'd still internet troll any Aboriginal not falling into line with the preferred narrative, like they're doing to Jacinta Price now.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2018)

The Greens really are vandals of the great Australian character that allowed their impoverished and ethnically backwater families here in the first place.

They even parasitically use black people like indentured servants to carry the burden of their communist manifesto. There was a women in the USA who tried to hoodwink everyone that she was black to enjoy the pity brigades attention, the Greens are like that.

Of course they are only communal with other people's money = taxpayers

https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/invasion-day-events-around-australia



> This year marks 230 years since British military forces invaded Gadigal land and declared British rule over this continent. One hundred and fifty years later a group of Aboriginal men and women met in the Australia Hall in Sydney to declare January 26 a Day of Mourning.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2018)

Greens protesting a date that has never been acceptable, no matter what day it is.

Historically ignorant because they never bothered to research true Australian history

see also https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/australia-day-2017.32831/page-8#post-970459


----------

