Why are we saying 'sorry' to the aboriginals?!

[noirua]

IMHO, what we are really worried about is a few individuals profiting from this "compensation" or, the compensation going to waste through drinking/pokies etc.

If Rudd can setup a fund properly that will benefit the WHOLE if not majority of the community, then please , go for it ...

trinity, you speak a lot more commonsense than most on this subject in just a few words.

 

[--B--]

If Rudd can setup a fund properly that will benefit the WHOLE if not majority of the community, then please , go for it ...

hang on.

the aboriginal community has banged on about saying 'sorry' as being a 'monumental step forward' and a symbolic gesture to bring us towards reconciliation.. 'reconciliation' has nothing to do with monetary compensation and is only about bringing us together so we we as a nation can move forward as one without this divide between us which has 'supposedly' been brought about by not saying sorry for past 'wrongs'.

this is not about setting up compensation funds to help the plight of the aboriginal people. if anything the buckets of money we throw at aboriginal people only further entrenches their victim mentality and this is the primary factor holding them back.

how on earth people can think setting up more 'funds' and throwing yet more money at these people will help is beyond me. i would sincerely like to hear someone explain the thinking behind this? assistance is one thing and im all for keeping such things in place however i truly belive its irresponsible to think more money will help this situation.

what is needed is for the aboriginal people to take responsibility for themselves, remove their victim mentality and stop blaming everyone but themselves and no amount of money or compensation funds will help in this regard.

 

[rederob]

OK....my turn.
Why did I steal their land?
I DIDN'T!
........
Please keep this forum updated on your progress towards liquidating your assets and injecting the bulk of the funds into aboriginal coffers.

bunyip
This thread is about saying "sorry" for a stolen generation (or two, or more).
You can always open another thread about land rights.
The High Court has already made a ruling on that issue, and if I am ever in a position where a claim is made on my land, then I'm sure that established legal processes will be followed.
Each year I make reasonable contributions to the tax office that will inevitably, in some small part, flow on to assist people in need. If the tax office wants more, then they can always do what they usually do in order to get more.
Equally off topic, I wonder why some of the very wealthy people that send their children to the school I send mine to seem so insistent that the government continue to prop it up with federal funds. Most aboriginal children go to state schools, but the federal government allocates over twice as much money to private schools. Many private schools in a year receive more governement funding in total than is allocated an an aboriginal community of similar population.

 

[2020hindsight]

Just an observation - more that they probably have a legitimate complaint than anything else.

This bloke has an extra $250K making $775K total (and more than that for the legal expenses.) That is what can happen if they go to court individually.

Tasmania's $9 mill (from memory) for all stolen generation in that state would seem to be a wise option you'd think.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/01/2152429.htm

More compo in Stolen Generations case
Posted 2 hours 5 minutes ago
Updated 11 minutes ago

A court has awarded a further $250,000 to an Aboriginal man who was taken from his parents as a baby.

Last August, Bruce Trevorrow was awarded $525,000 in compensation over the removal from his family 50 years ago.

The South Australian Supreme Court has now made a further order on an interest component.

On Christmas Day 1957, a young Mr Trevorrow was taken to hospital with stomach pains.

When he had recovered early the next year, he was put into state care without his parents' knowledge.

His later life was marred by crime, alcohol and depression.

Mr Trevorrow, who now lives in Victoria, became the first member of the Stolen Generations to successfully sue over his removal, fighting a 10-year legal battle.

His legal team had sought $800,000 as interest but expressed satisfaction with today's ruling.


Legal costs to exceed compo

The state was also ordered to pay Mr Trevorrow's lawyers' legal costs, which will exceed the total which Mr Trevorrow was awarded.

Lawyer Claire O'Connor says the case shows that a government compensation scheme would be more affordable and efficient than lengthy legal fights.

"It's not just the damages claim, it's the cost of lawyers, it's the cost of courts, it's the cost of the judge and his staff," she said.

"It costs not just financially, it costs personally so, yeah, I'd much rather have a compensation scheme."

 

[bunyip]

bunyip
This thread is about saying "sorry" for a stolen generation (or two, or more).
You can always open another thread about land rights.
The High Court has already made a ruling on that issue, and if I am ever in a position where a claim is made on my land, then I'm sure that established legal processes will be followed.
Each year I make reasonable contributions to the tax office that will inevitably, in some small part, flow on to assist people in need. If the tax office wants more, then they can always do what they usually do in order to get more.
Equally off topic, I wonder why some of the very wealthy people that send their children to the school I send mine to seem so insistent that the government continue to prop it up with federal funds. Most aboriginal children go to state schools, but the federal government allocates over twice as much money to private schools. Many private schools in a year receive more governement funding in total than is allocated an an aboriginal community of similar population.

Ironical isn’t it?

In the eyes of the law, we didn’t steal the land we occupy. But you disagree with the law by publicly stating that you did steal the land. And you’ve apologised for doing so.

Yet when you’re challenged to do the decent thing and give back the land you stole, you run for cover and hide behind the law you disagree with.

Gross hypocrisy - your credibility is looking very shaky indeed.



As for your advice that I’m off topic and should start another thread about land rights, perhaps you’re right. But I remind you that it was you, not me, who first introduced the land rights issue into this thread by stating that ‘we stole their land’.
Apart from that, land-stealing is one of the crimes that white Australia is being accused of, and is expected to feel sorry for. And since you, a white Australian, believe and admit that you stole their land, and in fact have apologised for it, then I believe there's sufficient correlation between the land rights issue and the sorry issue to debate both in the same thread.

Perhaps you may wish to start a new thread to discuss your grievances regarding the anomolies betwen government funding for state and private schools.

 

[2020hindsight]

you are a wand polisher

er , mods
up to you if you want to leave this post
I mean I'm big enough for you to leave it there
and my shoulders are broad enough,
and my wand is long enough lol.

but
a) I would have thought it contravenes some rule around here somewhere
and
b) others might think that they can call people names. - and before long we'd all be talking like cordelia lol - hardly in the interests of the ASF's image.

ps I could post a retort of course - but I won't.

 

[Superfly]

Ironical isn’t it?

In the eyes of the law, we didn’t steal the land we occupy. But you disagree with the law by publicly stating that you did steal the land. And you’ve apologised for doing so.

Yet when you’re challenged to do the decent thing and give back the land you stole, you run for cover and hide behind the law you disagree with.

Gross hypocrisy - your credibility is looking very shaky indeed.



As for your advice that I’m off topic and should start another thread about land rights, perhaps you’re right. But I remind you that it was you, not me, who first introduced the land rights issue into this thread by stating that ‘we stole their land’.
Apart from that, land-stealing is one of the crimes that white Australia is being accused of, and is expected to feel sorry for. And since you, a white Australian, believe and admit that you stole their land, and in fact have apologised for it, then I believe there's sufficient correlation between the land rights issue and the sorry issue to debate both in the same thread.

Perhaps you may wish to start a new thread to discuss your grievances regarding the anomolies betwen government funding for state and private schools.

:iagree: great reply / post

 

[bunyip]

er , mods
up to you if you want to leave this post
I mean I'm big enough for you to leave it there
and my shoulders are broad enough,
and my wand is long enough lol.

but
a) I would have thought it contravenes some rule around here somewhere
and
b) others might think that they can call people names. - and before long we'd all be talking like cordelia lol - hardly in the interests of the ASF's image.

ps I could post a retort of course - but I won't.

I haven't called anyone any names. I've expressed the opinion that he's demonstrated a hypocritical attitude that has shaken his credibility. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[2020hindsight]

I haven't called anyone any names. I've expressed the opinion that he's demonstrated a hypocritical attitude that has shaken his credibility. Nothing more, nothing less.

guess i'd better explain ...
nothing to do with you bunyip- just a coincidence that it's juxtaposed with your post .. - goes back to midweek.

 

[noirua]

The answer is to have a large fund for development and education purposes only. Sorry means little without these.

Sorry I broke your camera John. Are you going to buy me a new camera then Steve? Errrrrrrrr NO, I'm not that sorry.

 

[2020hindsight]

Just an observation - more that they probably have a legitimate complaint than anything else.

....Tasmania's $9 mill (from memory) for all stolen generation in that state would seem to be a wise option you'd think.

correction (after checking) ..
not $9 million but $5 mil, split 106 ways.= average of $50K each.
http://www.abc.net.au/message/news/stories/ms_news_2143738.htm

Stolen Generations claimants announced

The Tasmanian Premier Paul Lennon has announced 106 people will share in a $5 million scheme to compensate the state's Stolen Generations.

Mr Lennon announced the successful claimants in Launceston this morning, saying the move marked the completion of an important step forward for reconciliation.

Independent assessor, Ray Groom, reviewed 151 applications for compensation.

He found 84 people who were removed from their families as children were eligible for payment. Another 22 applications were approved as children of Stolen Generations victims... etc

 

[bunyip]

guess i'd better explain ...
nothing to do with you bunyip- just a coincidence that it's juxtaposed with your post .. - goes back to midweek.

Ahhhh.....My mistake, Hindsight.....If I'd read the quote at the top of your post I would have seen that you weren't referring to me.

Guess I'm just in a fighting mood today! lol
But not for long.....my wife and I are about to head off to town to meet our kids at our favourite restaurant. Over a nice lunch and a couple of beers, I'll relax and forget all about pointing out the double standards of those who apologise for stealing something, but refuse to give it back.

 

[2020hindsight]

Ahhhh.....My mistake, Hindsight.....If I'd read the quote at the top of your post I would have seen that you weren't referring to me.

Guess I'm just in a fighting mood today! lol
But not for long.....my wife and I are about to head off to town to meet our kids at our favourite restaurant. Over a nice lunch and a couple of beers, I'll relax and forget all about pointing out the double standards of those who apologise for stealing something, but refuse to give it back.

"bon happy-t1ts" to you all
(as Benny Hill used to say )

 

[rederob]

Ironical isn’t it?

In the eyes of the law, we didn’t steal the land we occupy. But you disagree with the law by publicly stating that you did steal the land. And you’ve apologised for doing so.

Yet when you’re challenged to do the decent thing and give back the land you stole, you run for cover and hide behind the law you disagree with.

Gross hypocrisy - your credibility is looking very shaky indeed.



As for your advice that I’m off topic and should start another thread about land rights, perhaps you’re right. But I remind you that it was you, not me, who first introduced the land rights issue into this thread by stating that ‘we stole their land’.
Apart from that, land-stealing is one of the crimes that white Australia is being accused of, and is expected to feel sorry for. And since you, a white Australian, believe and admit that you stole their land, and in fact have apologised for it, then I believe there's sufficient correlation between the land rights issue and the sorry issue to debate both in the same thread.

Perhaps you may wish to start a new thread to discuss your grievances regarding the anomalies between government funding for state and private schools.

I'll treat your remarks with with the disrespect they deserve.
First, in the eyes of the law we did indeed steal their land. On the 3rd of June 1992 the High Court of Australia brought down its decision in Mabo & Others vs the State of Queensland. And this was followed up with the Native Title Act of 1993.

Secondly, I never said said I stole their land: I said I offered the original owners nothing, for which I am sorry. Your subsequent ramblings are based on ignorance of the facts. If you can't comprehend simple statements, and have no knowledge of the law relating to native title, you might be better off not commenting.

Thirdly, this remains off topic.

Finally, my point about government funding of private schools was not about the anomalies that exist with the state system, but about the fact that people who decry handouts to aboriginals have no problem accepting similar levels of monies so they can send their children to the best schools in the country. There is far more hypocrisy from the well heeled than the not so well off.

 

[nioka]

Finally, my point about government funding of private schools was not about the anomalies that exist with the state system, but about the fact that people who decry handouts to aboriginals have no problem accepting similar levels of monies so they can send their children to the best schools in the country. There is far more hypocrisy from the well heeled than the not so well off.

The funding of private schools could be considered as those schools receiving only their SHARE of PUBLIC money towards the schooling of their children. The main cost of the private education system is still carried by the parents. It is not a handout and does yield financial benefits to the nation. Because those schools receive very little state assistance in some cases the federal government, in it's wisdom, does make up some of the difference. If it were not for the private schools some rural students would not get secondary education at all. Remember those people sending their kids to a private school pay taxes too and often at a high rate. Aussies believe in a fair go.
P.S. I never went to a private school myself. My parents couldn't afford one but I don't begrudge those that had the opportunity.
What has this got to do with saying sorry?

 

[bunyip]

I'll treat your remarks with with the disrespect they deserve.
First, in the eyes of the law we did indeed steal their land. On the 3rd of June 1992 the High Court of Australia brought down its decision in Mabo & Others vs the State of Queensland. And this was followed up with the Native Title Act of 1993.

Secondly, I never said said I stole their land: I said I offered the original owners nothing, for which I am sorry. Your subsequent ramblings are based on ignorance of the facts. If you can't comprehend simple statements, and have no knowledge of the law relating to native title, you might be better off not commenting.

Thirdly, this remains off topic.

Finally, my point about government funding of private schools was not about the anomalies that exist with the state system, but about the fact that people who decry handouts to aboriginals have no problem accepting similar levels of monies so they can send their children to the best schools in the country. There is far more hypocrisy from the well heeled than the not so well off.

And I, in turn, will treat your remarks with the disrespect they deserve.

Regardless of what was decided by the High Court in the Mabo case, the fact remains that I have legal title to my land, I didn’t steal it, I bought it, I am the legal owner, I am NOT considered to be in possession of stolen property. And if you were to go to the land court, the police, or any other authority, and claim that I AM illegally in possession of stolen property, and you pressed for charges to be brought against me, you’d be laughed at.

But don’t take my word for it – prove it or disprove it for yourself. Select a block of land that someone has legal title to. Go to the authorities and claim that the ‘owner/s’ is in possession of stolen property, and you insist that charges be brought against him/her/them. See how you go.



Secondly, I’ll accept your point that you didn’t actually say ‘I’ stole their land. What you said was ‘we’ stole their land…..a statement which obviously included yourself.

When I asked you to explain why YOU stole their land, you took the trouble to reply and state the reasons for your view. If you don't believe you stole their land, you would have emphatically said “I DIDN’T’, same as I said.

So it really doesn’t matter whether you used the word ‘I’ or ‘we’. Your words and your apology are clearly an admission that you feel you stole their land.

And since you believe you stole their land, and you’re so vocal in telling everyone else that they stole the land as well, by your reasoning then you are in possession of stolen property, and the only decent thing you can do is return that property to whoever you consider to be the rightful owners.
You claim to be sorry for offering the original owners nothing. Do something about it then. Don't hide behind laws that absolve you from all responsibility and obligation towards the original owners. Put your money where your mouth is. Show some sincerity. Rectify the situation immediately. Either give their land back to them, or reimburse them for the full value of the land. But don't continue your double standards by claiming to be sorry, while at the same time refusing to make recompense to the people you believe you've wronged.

As far as your other comments regarding funding for private and state schools, and the attitude of the well-heeled people who send their kids to private schools, etc etc......if you wish to continue voicing your views in this area then I suggest you start a new thread specific to that discussion.

 

[rederob]

And I, in turn, will treat your remarks with the disrespect they deserve.

Regardless of what was decided by the High Court in the Mabo case, the fact remains that I have legal title to my land, I didn’t steal it, I bought it, I am the legal owner, I am NOT considered to be in possession of stolen property. And if you were to go to the land court, the police, or any other authority, and claim that I AM illegally in possession of stolen property, and you pressed for charges to be brought against me, you’d be laughed at.

But don’t take my word for it – prove it or disprove it for yourself. Select a block of land that someone has legal title to. Go to the authorities and claim that the ‘owner/s’ is in possession of stolen property, and you insist that charges be brought against him/her/them. See how you go.



Secondly, I’ll accept your point that you didn’t actually say ‘I’ stole their land. What you said was ‘we’ stole their land…..a statement which obviously included yourself.

When I asked you to explain why YOU stole their land, you took the trouble to reply and state the reasons for your view. If you don't believe you stole their land, you would have emphatically said “I DIDN’T’, same as I said.

So it really doesn’t matter whether you used the word ‘I’ or ‘we’. Your words and your apology are clearly an admission that you feel you stole their land.

And since you believe you stole their land, and you’re so vocal in telling everyone else that they stole the land as well, by your reasoning then you are in possession of stolen property, and the only decent thing you can do is return that property to whoever you consider to be the rightful owners.
You claim to be sorry for offering the original owners nothing. Do something about it then. Don't hide behind laws that absolve you from all responsibility and obligation towards the original owners. Put your money where your mouth is. Show some sincerity. Rectify the situation immediately. Either give their land back to them, or reimburse them for the full value of the land. But don't continue your double standards by claiming to be sorry, while at the same time refusing to make recompense to the people you believe you've wronged.

As far as your other comments regarding funding for private and state schools, and the attitude of the well-heeled people who send their kids to private schools, etc etc......if you wish to continue voicing your views in this area then I suggest you start a new thread specific to that discussion.

Bunyip
Contortions of fact, and assumptions, seem to be your stock in trade.
However, as this is the "sorry" thread, I won't add to your misrepresentations.

Nokia, you ask, "What has this got to do with saying sorry?"
Agro began the thread thus:

doesn't anyone realize the amount of legal claims going to be filed..

this is going to be all tax funded too..

there are other priorities they should take precedence:

hospitals, education, training etc

this will never end

Clearly Agro was concerned about the public purse, perhaps more so than the matter of an apology per se.
Agro has included "education" in the list of priorities over any legal claims for saying "sorry".
I suggest that few people know that government funding of private schools - which have very little aboriginal representation - is greater on a per capita basis than for aboriginal communities.
We seem to have some very interesting priorities!

 

[bunyip]

Bunyip
Contortions of fact, and assumptions, seem to be your stock in trade.
However, as this is the "sorry" thread, I won't add to your misrepresentations.

Is that a fact? lol
I notice that you've been struggling to come up with any solid argument to refute my so called 'assumptions' and 'contortions of fact'.

But anyway, as you're only backing yourself further into a corner, it may indeed be better if you don't add anything further to this discussion or debate or whatever you wish to call it.

 

[bunyip]

One more thing, rederob.....I forgot to say thanks for your input into our debate. I've thoroughly enjoyed crossing swords with you again!
Cheers and all the best.

 

[BradK]

doesn't anyone realize the amount of legal claims going to be filed..

this is going to be all tax funded too..

there are other priorities they should take precedence:

hospitals, education, training etc

this will never end

We are personally not responsible for the actions of our forefathers.

But we have benefitted from them.

The legal argument? You are a populist ignorant fool that does not deserve a response. Did you get that from Pauline Hanson?