First Contact

[bluecat*dancing]

Did anyone watch "First Contact" on SBS last night and/or the reaction on NITV? It's a three part series in which a group of people who have had no contact with Indigenous people spend time in various Aboriginal communities over a period of 28 days. I was shaking my head at the rudeness and ignorance of some of the participants.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-19/sbs-program-first-contact-sparks-social-media-frenzy/5901890

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

lobs, I apologise to you. My comments were only made on the basis of the program we were commenting on. Did you also read my comments on all the other stolen children - it wasn't JUST Aboriginal children.

I still stand by my view, and the comments made by the Aborignal leaders on Insight, and that is :

The Aboriginal people have to make an effort too. It's not a one way street.

It is very encouraging to see the efforts that those groups have and still are putting into making things right, but as the women showed that had full strength alcohol banned, it was THEY that stood up and GOT IT DONE and not because of any funding or input from the Government. When asked why can that effort could not be duplicated around Australia, the Aboriginal speaker said "well, it's difficult because there are many tribes and clans out there". - WHAT DIFFERENCE SHOULD THAT MAKE? Was he saying that some tribes / clans would never accept interference from their women?

---

I think he said there are MANY.

---

Que? MANY / many 

---

You possibly changed the meaning of what he was actually saying by your last comment..............WHAT DIFFERENCE SHOULD THAT MAKE? Was he saying that some tribes / clans would never accept interference from their women?

What he actually said was..............."well, it's difficult because there are many tribes and clans out there".

---

and that is EXACTLY WHAT I SAID. He obviously thought that was the reason the help could not be implemented across Australia - and I ASK WHY? Is it because some tribes / clans are more difficult to reach? Is it language barrier? He could send some of those kids that he claims speak 12 different languages. Is it because some tribes and clans would not take kindly to interference from the other Tribes /Clans? Is it because some tribes would resent input from their women?

[azureline**]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

lobs, I apologise to you. My comments were only made on the basis of the program we were commenting on. Did you also read my comments on all the other stolen children - it wasn't JUST Aboriginal children.

I still stand by my view, and the comments made by the Aborignal leaders on Insight, and that is :

The Aboriginal people have to make an effort too. It's not a one way street.

It is very encouraging to see the efforts that those groups have and still are putting into making things right, but as the women showed that had full strength alcohol banned, it was THEY that stood up and GOT IT DONE and not because of any funding or input from the Government. When asked why can that effort could not be duplicated around Australia, the Aboriginal speaker said "well, it's difficult because there are many tribes and clans out there". - WHAT DIFFERENCE SHOULD THAT MAKE? Was he saying that some tribes / clans would never accept interference from their women?

---

I think he said there are MANY.

---

Que? MANY / many 

---

You possibly changed the meaning of what he was actually saying by your last comment..............WHAT DIFFERENCE SHOULD THAT MAKE? Was he saying that some tribes / clans would never accept interference from their women?

What he actually said was..............."well, it's difficult because there are many tribes and clans out there".

---

and that is EXACTLY WHAT I SAID. He obviously thought that was the reason the help could not be implemented across Australia - and I ASK WHY? Is it because some tribes / clans are more difficult to reach? Is it language barrier? He could send some of those kids that he claims speak 12 different languages. Is it because some tribes and clans would not take kindly to interference from the other Tribes /Clans? Is it because some tribes would resent input from their women?

---

It is exactly what he said it was...................... it's difficult because there are so many of them. We don't get to decide what he meant by putting words to it.

[the_great_she_elephant]

Not in reply to any one poster, but there is a fundamental issue here.

Is it a coincidence that the Aborigional People of Australia, the Maori Peopl of New Zealand and the Frist Nation People of America have all, to varying degrees, suffered from social problems including alcohol abuse?

If it is not a coincidence then do they share some flaw in their genes that makes them less reponsible citizens or is there some other reason?

Could it possibly be that the one thing they have in common and which has led to these problems is the experience of dispossession, disempowerment and a sense of hopelessness.

It is worth remembering that until fairly recently the Irish were also stereotyped as feckless drunks  - and they, too were the victims of colonisation.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

lobs, I apologise to you. My comments were only made on the basis of the program we were commenting on. Did you also read my comments on all the other stolen children - it wasn't JUST Aboriginal children.

I still stand by my view, and the comments made by the Aborignal leaders on Insight, and that is :

The Aboriginal people have to make an effort too. It's not a one way street.

It is very encouraging to see the efforts that those groups have and still are putting into making things right, but as the women showed that had full strength alcohol banned, it was THEY that stood up and GOT IT DONE and not because of any funding or input from the Government. When asked why can that effort could not be duplicated around Australia, the Aboriginal speaker said "well, it's difficult because there are many tribes and clans out there". - WHAT DIFFERENCE SHOULD THAT MAKE? Was he saying that some tribes / clans would never accept interference from their women?

---

I think he said there are MANY.

---

No, I didn't say "MANY". I said 5 families that I knew of at that time and all 5 were the same as far as their HATRED for whites and their utter disregard for the homes they had been GIVEN. 

sorry .... I mistook what you were referring to.

[azureline**]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

lobs, I apologise to you. My comments were only made on the basis of the program we were commenting on. Did you also read my comments on all the other stolen children - it wasn't JUST Aboriginal children.

I still stand by my view, and the comments made by the Aborignal leaders on Insight, and that is :

The Aboriginal people have to make an effort too. It's not a one way street.

It is very encouraging to see the efforts that those groups have and still are putting into making things right, but as the women showed that had full strength alcohol banned, it was THEY that stood up and GOT IT DONE and not because of any funding or input from the Government. When asked why can that effort could not be duplicated around Australia, the Aboriginal speaker said "well, it's difficult because there are many tribes and clans out there". - WHAT DIFFERENCE SHOULD THAT MAKE? Was he saying that some tribes / clans would never accept interference from their women?

---

I think he said there are MANY.

---

No, I didn't say "MANY". I said 5 families that I knew of at that time and all 5 were the same as far as their HATRED for whites and their utter disregard for the homes they had been GIVEN. 

---

?? I was quoting the Aboriginal speaker................. the Aboriginal speaker said "well, it's difficult because there are many tribes and clans out there

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

Not in reply to any one poster, but there is a fundamental issue here.

Is it a coincidence that the Aborigional People of Australia, the Maori Peopl of New Zealand and the Frist Nation People of America have all, to varying degrees, suffered from social problems including alcohol abuse?

If it is not a coincidence then do they share some flaw in their genes that makes them less reponsible citizens or is there some other reason?

Could it possibly be that the one thing they have in common and which has led to these problems is the experience of dispossession, disempowerment and a sense of hopelessness.

It is worth remembering that until fairly recently the Irish were also stereotyped as feckless drunks  - and they, too were the victims of colonisation.

---

Name me ONE country that has not been invaded (at least once) and their land taken away from them. The Irish themselves invaded Scotland at one stage. England has been invaded by just about everyone. Did I tell you that I am a direct descendant of an Icena Lord. My family owned half of Norfolk and Suffolk until those Romans took over - do you think I might stand a chance at an ownership claim?

[gleee58]

You know what's a clue to how closed the mind can be?

When one has to jump in to defend their stance instead of taking a minute to give some thought about whether they have missed the point it's a fair guess that the mind is closed to gaining an understanding.

You go right ahead and judge the entire aboriginal people based on the 5 you say caused you a bad experience.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@gleee58 wrote:

You know what's a clue to how closed the mind can be?

When one has to jump in to defend their stance instead of taking a minute to give some thought about whether they have missed the point it's a fair guess that the mind is closed to gaining an understanding.

You go right ahead and judge the entire aboriginal people based on the 5 you say caused you a bad experience.

---

A closed mind. Let's see! ............ No, I won't go there.................You see, I 'took a minute to give some thought' to what I otherwise would have written.

There you go again, putting words into what I have said. I never claimed 5 families had caused me a bad experience - I  said ONE family, and that I knew of 4 others that had caused OTHERS to have bad experience.

The comments I make are from my own experience and from the admissions made on those (and other) programs that I  watched - how else can one make decisions?

One comment that sticks in my mind -"we had 50 murders in this area during the year {I forget which years she said} maybe 2007." That's 50 (FIFTY) murders of Aboriginals BY Aboriginals - and that comment? Not from some third hand or biased source - right from woman in charge of STANDING UP ABOUT the alcohol ban. FIFTY murders in the one small area  - THAT'S EQUIVALENT TO almost 1 every week..

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

Not in reply to any one poster, but there is a fundamental issue here.

Is it a coincidence that the Aborigional People of Australia, the Maori Peopl of New Zealand and the Frist Nation People of America have all, to varying degrees, suffered from social problems including alcohol abuse?

If it is not a coincidence then do they share some flaw in their genes that makes them less reponsible citizens or is there some other reason?

Could it possibly be that the one thing they have in common and which has led to these problems is the experience of dispossession, disempowerment and a sense of hopelessness.

It is worth remembering that until fairly recently the Irish were also stereotyped as feckless drunks  - and they, too were the victims of colonisation.

---

Name me ONE country that has not been invaded (at least once) and their land taken away from them. The Irish themselves invaded Scotland at one stage. England has been invaded by just about everyone. Did I tell you that I am a direct descendant of an Icena Lord. My family owned half of Norfolk and Suffolk until those Romans took over - do you think I might stand a chance at an ownership claim?

---

And  in  2000 years from now the indigenous people of Australia will probably have come to terms with the injustices done them through colonisation. 

Of course in a couple of hundred years from now we may all be living under Sharia law and there will be an Islamic "Rabbit" on social media telling us all what ungrateful little sods we are not to appreciate the benefits it has brought us.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

ele wrote:"Of course in a couple of hundred years from now we may all be living under Sharia law and there will be an Islamic "Rabbit" on social media telling us all what ungrateful little sods we are not to appreciate the benefits it has brought us."

No, I am not converting to Islam.

Please don't mistake me for being on the side of colonisation and what happened all over the world at the hands of English, Spanish, Dutch and Portugese. I think it was appaling. BUT, can I (or you) do anything about it? NO!

I for one realise that if England had not been invaded so many times - (we) they would possibly still be living in stick huts. So, in that case I MAINTAIN THAT England (amongst others) benefitted from being invaded by more advanced societies. Do you not agree?

And, like the man or not, the truth of our PM's statement about "when we arrived there was only bush" is CORRECT. Unless someone is hiding some buildings that no-one knows about. I am not talking about the people that were here and their culture(s), and neither do I think Tony was either. I prefer to think that he was talking about infrastructure - roads, electricity, sewage, water etc.

Now, go ahead all of you - pick me to bits for that.