Australia Day to Become "Invasion Day"- Labor teaching kids to hate themselves and their country….

Peter Garret sells counterfeit Midnight Oil to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders:

Education Minister Peter Garrett will announce today that “the significance of January 26” will become a non-negotiable part of history classes under the new national curriculum. 

Yes, but make sure all perspectives are really taught –warns Andrew Bolt

The left  will not only take us  over the cliff, it will take us out of existence!

14 thoughts on “Australia Day to Become "Invasion Day"- Labor teaching kids to hate themselves and their country….”

  1. Anyone else remember this? Maybe you are too young.

    I think Hawke was in power then: not sure.

    Now we have a divisive bogan – party running the country!

    This is all so stupid!

    And Kevvy’s apology was too.

    These morons seem to have forgotten that so many Aussies – since the 1950’s – came from overseas and had nothing to do with any of it. It’s an insult to our multi-ethnic society.

    And why is it that only western colonialists get hammered when we know just how much colonialism was perpetrated by Islam?

  2. I met a bloke in the park when I was walking the dog. He calimed to be my ‘landlord’ because he was part Aboriginal and on the Land Council. He then went on to tell me his father was Scottish- but I didn’t get the opportunity to question him about his ‘land rights’ in Scotland because he went chasing after a bit of 19 year old tottie who had moved into the house next door earlier in the day. He was in his sixties- silly old bugger. And these are the sort of imbeciles that are calling all the shots theses days- God help Australia!

  3. In a civilized society, the” befuddled and confused” likes of Garrett would be “taken into Care” for their own and indeed Australian Societies protection.

    Australia is no longer a civilized society, proof of this can be found in the fact that Garrett and his like thinkers now RULE over those who should be protected from his and his fellow LOONS ideological manifestations.

    UP is now DOWN

    Australia 2012. BTW “Happy Harmony Day” or sumpthing.

  4. Not quite, Aussie. Harmony Day comes on 21st March …

    A Diverse Australia

    Managed by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, Harmony Day is celebrated around Australia on 21 March. It is a day where all Australians celebrate our cultural diversity.

    Definitely a day for pork bangers.

  5. Students need to understand the real history of Australia. This history includes the fact that Australia was invaded and that horrible massacres of the indigenous people occurred. This is the truth, and not ‘teaching them to hate themselves’ at all!

    1. The truth is that Australia spends more than $ 100.000.00 per Aboriginal per annum.

      The truth is there is NO STOLEN GENERATION and there never was one.

      The truth is also that unity unites a nation, not ‘diversity’.

      You may be entitled to whatever your belief is, Annie, just like you may believe that a JooLiar tax will keep us safe from globull worming, but that doesn’t make it real and it doesn’t make it fact. Its still bull.

  6. Look.

    I do not believe that in order to defend Australia against Jihad we must also necessarily subscribe to the view that Might Makes Right, that The End Justifies the Means (ANY means, up to and including poisonings and forced removals, which did happen, all over Australia), and that NOTHING bad was ever done in the course of the European takeover of this continent.

    Really, the proposition that nothing really bad was ever done to Aboriginal people by the non-Aboriginal people (or that ALL acts of violence etc by whites against blacks, were totally justified and justifiable punishment of black bad behaviour -i.e. the blacks provoked and deserved anything and everything that was done to them, that might be construed as bad or cruel – runs entirely contrary to the Christian reading of human nature and human history. To propose that the blacks were ALL BAD and that the whites were ALL GOOD is just as laughable as to propose that the whites were ALL BAD and that the blacks were ALL GOOD . All it’s doing is replacing one fallacy with another fallacy.

    HAS ANY large group of humans ever taken over, and imposed their own system of law and government upon, a very large expanse of land that was very thoroughly named, inhabited and utilised by many other culturally and ethnically distinct groups of people, without resistance from the incumbents, and major bloodshed -often coupled with the use of deceit – on the part of the incomers? Seriously? Our forebears were not saints and they were not angels. And a great many of them were quite openly contemptuous of the Christian faith, practising it not at all or paying it mere lip service; many were contemptuous of what what they held to be the naive and ridiculous Christian view – held, for a long time, only by a persistent and courageous minority – that Aboriginal people were not some species of subhuman vermin who might be killed in large numbers with a perfectly clear conscience, or if human, ineducable and irredeemable savages, but, rather, fully human beings possessing immortal souls capable of salvation).

    At the same time as people like Strehlow were translating the New Testament into Arrernte, there were still lots of white Australians comfortably telling themselves that the language of the blacks was mere primitive gibberish, simple, and limited; perhaps closer to animal noises, than human speech, even not really qualifying to be called ‘language’ at all, not like English or Latin or French.

    In the euphemisms of the colonial frontier – e.g ‘pacify’ or ‘disperse’ (usually with showers of hot lead, or with arsenic pudding or strychnine baits) – I see myself a hideous analogue to the doublespeak of Islam. The use of the ‘native police’ – often deliberately brutalised – is rather nastily reminiscent of the use of janissaries.

    Further: there are cases of broken promises. There are historical, fully documented cases in which land that was ‘given’ to Aboriginal groups, and on which those groups were making a go of things, supporting themselves economically, raising healthy families, playing the white man’s game by the white man’s rules (farming, living in houses, etc), was neatly whisked out from under them by various official subterfuges – see Coranderrk, see Poonindie (which certain sardonic observers, at the time, when they saw its inhabitants dispossessed and the land then snapped up by white farmers, dubbed ‘Naboth’s Vineyard’).

    I commend to people John Harris’s monumental history, ‘One Blood’, which is an account of the encounter between Christian evangelists and aboriginal people, from the late 18th century onward. The ‘One Blood’ is a phrase from St Paul’s sermon to the Athenians in the book of Acts. It is a phrase that reappears over and over in the writings of active Christians who seriously sought to communicate the Christian faith to aboriginal people; and the reason they used it , usually in their conversation with and sermons addressed to NON-aboriginal people, was because from the late 18th to the mid 20th century they were contending with a quite widespread assumption, among quite a lot of Anglo-Australians, that any sort of missionary work was pointless because Aboriginal people were not human at all, or at best subhuman, ineducable, and without any redeeming qualities or potential whatsoever.

    Harris is the son of the man who translated the Gospel of Mark into the Nunggubuyu language.

    Harris’s book was recommended to me by an Aboriginal Christian lady, deeply evangelical in faith, one Auntie Jeanie Phillips. She stated flatly that it is an accurate account; that it fits with the stories of past experience that she has heard from her own family members and from other people she has encountered, across Australia.

    PS – I’ve read a LOT. All kinds of things, from the early 19th century onward. Wages WERE, in a great many cases, embezzled. And a significant number of Aboriginal children WERE removed from their families for no reason other than that they were Aboriginal.

    From reading such things as reports in colonial newspapers, and early pioneer reminiscences, I see all too many patterns and practices in the European colonisation of Australia that replicate perfectly the patterns of the ugly game of Empire whenever it is played by nations.

    Islam has turned those patterns and practices into a religion, forsooth, and therefore practises them utterly without shame; other empires have merely deployed them ad hoc, some with a clear or a seared conscience, some (the semi-Christian ones) with a rather bad conscience.

    The thing that does distinguish from Islamic imperialism (or from other pagan imperial movements) the English-speakers’ invasion and successful conquest of Australia and subjugation of its original inhabitans – and invasion and conquest and subjugation is the simplest way to describe it, because what resulted looks very much like the outcome of a successful invasion (the near-obliteration, culturally and demographically, of the previous inhabitants and their almost total replacement by another population from a very long way away) – is that it was done with a bad consicence. The dispossessions, forced removals, rapes, murders and defraudings went on to the tune of an ongoing chorus of dissent and protest and questioning, generally coming from thoughtful Christians, some of whom had taken the trouble to learn Aboriginal languages and were genuinely attempting to communicate the gospel, translate scripture, help the survivors to stay alive, etc.

    That counterpoint of protest and the fact that AngloAustralian society ultimately resolved the contradiction by accepting that the conquered should be treated decently, is the only real reason why things changed: why Aboriginal people today, unlike the descendants of dhimmi populations swamped by the empire of Islam, enjoy legal and civil equality with non-Aboriginal people. Why they as individuals can own land under our system (for a long time, they were prevented from doing this), receive the same wage as a white person for the same work (for a long time, this was not the case), and vote.

    People like Windschuttle are pleased to condemn those who testified to – and criticised – European violence against and other abuses of Aboriginal people, as naive do-gooders, and to dismiss their principled objections and protests (on the subject of frontier violence, for example) as fabricated or exaggerated. I have read their writings, in quantity. I know what kind of people they were. Windschuttle is wrong on that particular count; damnably and wilfully wrong. He proposes a switch whereby the colonial squattocracy and their servants – who were generally condemned, at the time, by the colonial clergy, as a pretty godless lot (and, to be blunt, they WERE)- were nice Christian gentlemen who wouldn’t hurt a fly, and people like Archbishop Bede Polding , or Lancelot Threlkeld, or William Ridley, or Strehlow or John Gribble, or Salvado, are evil hypocrites, in the same league as the worst kind of corrupt televangelist.

    I know personally a dear little old lady, Ruth Hegarty, who grew up in the infamous ‘dormitory system’ on a ‘reserve’. I’ve read her two books and I have conversed with her in person. She is a fervent Christian. she holds that injustices were done to her people. I think she is right.

    If you are a Christian person, then you cannot ultimately trumpet the idea that the End Justifies the Means. Our theology does not, actually, support that (for a full discussion, see D B Hart, ‘The Doors of the Sea). Nor can we endorse the social darwinistic or popular Nietzschean view that Might Confers Right…because that road leads to the confession of Lord Voldemort, ‘there is neither good nor evil, there is only Power, and those too weak to seek it’.

    Nor can you, if you know your theology, claim the conquest of Canaan as a paradigm and as a justification; tempting as it is to do so, and non-indigenous America has been particularly prone to that temptation (with Native Americans cast in the role of the evil Canannites who had to be exterminated so that the righteous might inhabit the Promised Land), I think it is more accurate theologically to see that particular set of events as a one-off. There is nothing in the teachings of Our Lord to suggest that he would have wanted his followers to use it as a template. Christians were to ‘teach’ all nations…NOT ‘conquer’ all nations.

    In just war theory, you can take land from which you have been attacked by an unprovoked aggressor; Aboriginal people had not invaded England! Our forebears crossed thousands of miles of sea to someone else’s country entirely: to a place where every rock and every spring had a name. (See Dr Luise A Hercus, ‘The Land is a Map’, to realize that Australia was in fact as thoroughly humanised and inhabited and history-haunted a landscape, in the eyes and in the daily life of its original inhabitants, as downtown London or deepest Somerset were to Londoners and Somerset farmers).

    Thought experiment. Go to a beach. Assume that one pace represents 25 years (a generation, so to speak). Take eight to ten steps. That represents the average number of generations that the most long-present persons who have no documented indigenous ancestor, can claim their family was present in this land. Then take 1392 more steps along the beach – count them out. That represents, roughly speaking, the number of generations that have elapsed since the most distant ancestors of at least some – and probably most – Aboriginal people today, first came to this continent. When people try to minimise or trivialise that awesome depth of human presence here, that stands behind Aboriginal people, I am – as a person deeply aware of history – simply flummoxed.

    I would not teach children a whitewashed airbrushed version of the last 240 years.

    Because a whitewashed pollyanna-esque or panglossian version, is false as hell.

    I wouldn’t gloss over the destructive aspects of aboriginal culture either; but if I were going to talk about those, I’d ask an Aboriginal Christian to explain how he or she is going about challenging them.

    My own mindset is defined by Luther’s maxim: simul justus et peccator, both justified and sinning.

    Human history in this place contains both evil and good. Non-indigenous Australians have done great and good things; at the same time there have also been those who did great evil. And aboriginal people did – very often – suffer real injustices.

    Ngaala maaman ngiyan yira moonbooli Moodlooga
    Kooranyi noonak karl.
    Noonak waangk, yoowarl-koorl, birdiyar.
    Ngaala boodja noonook woorn noonak koorunyi kaalak
    Nyinyak ngaalang nidja kedela ngaala mereny:
    Nyinya-nyinyak ngaalang : ngaala wara waarniny
    Ngaalak nyinya nyinyak, baalang ngiyan waarn wara ngaalang.
    Yoowart koorl ngaalang moort-moort djooroot:
    Maaman maar-barang ngaalang.
    Noonak waangk birdiyar.
    Noonak moorditj, noonak ngaangk yira
    Kalyokool, kalyokool.

    The Lord’s Prayer: in the Noongar language of south-west Western Australia.

  7. Dumbles,

    I’m not buying any.

    I don’t believe that our kids should be raised with a guilt trip.

    I don’t believe we should be forced buying the land over and over again, especially not from a multitude of dysfunctional tribes who never owned it, are fed by us, and to this day can’t get themselves to respect us or share our values, with few exceptions.

    We have gone far beyond our obligations, ethically, morally, financially, judicially and in many other ways to make it up to the noble savages, most of whom were cannibals only hundred years ago.

    Also please keep in mind that a large part (if not most) Australians are recent arrivals who had no part in any way with earlier squabbles , or call it transgressions if you prefer, and they (like me) will not buy into it either.

    Community cohesion does not mean special rights for special interest groups and discrimination against those who provide the goods and services which we all enjoy.

    Unity makes us strong, diversity in the form of segregation and Islamic multiculti (which is in fact totalitarian monoculture) takes us over the cliff.

    That is why the Muslims seek bleeding hearts and left wing loons who buy into their revisionist history and their claims of ownership, which, if you give in to their demands, leaves nothing for us, only annihilation.

  8. For sheik,
    You need to conduct a bit more research on the stolen generation. It is reasonably well documented here that government policy back in those days did actually include taking children from their mothers against the will of the both the child and the mother. Black children were not the only ones affected. It also happened to the white kids. Spare me the rhetoric about my use of the term black and white as that is the usage in vogue at that time in our history. Many of these institutions also had a cemetery attatched where the bodies of little children were buried often in unmarked graves and whose passing were not mourned. Prime Minister Rudd gave an apology not only to the aborigines, but also to the white adults who survived their ordeal. My wife and her three siblings were such children. I have met plenty of others as a result. Like the holocaust survivors, they are alive despite all claims to the contrary. The graves also exist and may be visited in some of those defunct institutions. They are not a figment of anyone’s imagination.

  9. Napoleon once said, History is lies apon lies that are agreed apon

    Mr Churcill once said, history is writen by the victors

    both agree history isnt actually history, just the version they want you to know,

    you all seem brain washed into not questioning your version of history, why? I guess you wont even question yourself, why?

    All Australians whether they just got here or not are all living off the dispossesion of Aboriginals, the mining boom keeps you all comfy, you might say well it was taken and its the past but it isnt, we were one of the last england invaded and they knew what they are obligated to do but ignored their own laws,
    No treaty, terra nullius bedunked in our highest court, never declared war, english common law never protected or counted Aboriginal ( although they counted cattle) so is this colony legal, if you dont question these fundamental issues around the founding of current Australia then you ARE continuing the disempowerment of Aboriginal people, if it wasnt for the stolen gold, oil, gas, coal, uranium, diamonds and so on all Australians would be poor, so yes it does involve recent arrivals, if you want to see the knowledge destroyed read THE BIGGEST ESTATE ON EARTH, if you want to understand Australias history watch THE FIRST AUSTRALIANS because you dont get taught Australian history in Australian schools at any level, and again the public are brain washed into not questioning that obvious denile of truth, if it was a normal war (would need official declaration) Australia wouldnt feel the need to hide it, I expect any person moving to a new country to learn the history of that new country, I assumed wrong, is respect lacking around the world to? The only divide I see is Aboriginals wanting and serching for the truth, and imigrants (aussies included) happy to ignore what ever gets in the way of money, it has only resulted in Aboriginals continuing to learn and the majority of the rest choose to keep their haed in the sand, you will have no one to blame but yourselfs for being ignorant when Aborignals gain their basic rights as first peoples, they should cut all Australians out of minerals and they can work hard to gain wealth like they say they do, not get proped up by stolen wealth, and Aussies can beg to Aborignials for the hand out they are so used to

Comments are closed.