"On top of all that boris.. he really should learn to speak English...."         DSOTM perhaps you might also note this earlier statement above from boris : "These words are chilling, for their shameless, delued deception."

In a debate (speech)  "typos" and  malapropisms are to be expected, and normally unworthy of comment!!   However, I suggest you read Abbots speech  here, because  I would suggest that contextually the use of "fragrant" within:  "with fragrant [sic] exceptions "  is fitting and grammatical..

Take a look at these two statements below, and remember Abbott is  pointing out that for a couple of centuries  Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people personal generosity and warmth, BUT with  some exceptions which were, good/welcome/sweet etc.  Inserting your  interpretation translates as:

Yet for two centuries – with exposed actions contrary to decency exceptions,  Which is the exact opposite of the intended meaning which is:

Yet for two centuries – with fragrant [sic] exceptions, of course.

I  think "fragrant" is correct within the speech, I would prefer "sweet" though, and  that "flagrant"  DSTOM would be  grammatically incorrect.

Perhabs the earlier term from B1G is applicable : "delued deception"

nɥºɾ

"he didn't call Aboriginal people strangers, he said we treat strangers better than Aboriginal people."
I agree with you LL49."

"No, he said we extend our welcome more to strangers than we welcome aboriginal people."
I disagree FN, read the speech and post the link/excerpt for your version. Here is an excerpt from the actual speech:

"Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people the personal generosity and warmth of welcome that we have habitually extended to the stranger in our midst.”   This what LL49 indicated, and with which I agree.

The speech also contains this:

"I pay tribute to former prime minister John Howard for first proposing to recognise indigenous people in the constitution."

"I pay tribute to former prime minister Kevin Rudd for the national apology."

"I commend former prime minister Julia Gillard for continuing these annual Closing the Gap statements to focus the parliament’s attention on problems that might otherwise be neglected or glossed over."

nɥºɾ

---

@monman12 wrote:

 "On top of all that boris.. he really should learn to speak English...."         DSOTM perhaps you might also note this earlier statement above from boris : "These words are chilling, for their shameless, delued deception."

 

In a debate (speech)  "typos" and  malapropisms are to be expected, and normally unworthy of comment!!   However, I suggest you read Abbots speech  here, because  I would suggest that contextually the use of "fragrant" within:  "with fragrant [sic] exceptions "  is fitting and grammatical..

 

Take a look at these two statements below, and remember Abbott is  pointing out that for a couple of centuries  Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people personal generosity and warmth, BUT with  some exceptions which were, good/welcome/sweet etc.  Inserting your  interpretation translates as:

Yet for two centuries – with exposed actions contrary to decency exceptions,  Which is the exact opposite of the intended meaning which is:

Yet for two centuries – with fragrant [sic] exceptions, of course.

I  think "fragrant" is correct within the speech, I would prefer "sweet" though, and  that "flagrant"  DSTOM would be  grammatically incorrect.

Perhabs the earlier term from B1G is applicable : "delued deception"

nɥºɾ

 

---

I would prefer you stop making your posts personal, the article was not written by me. thank you.

---

@boris1gary wrote:

---

@monman12 wrote:

 "On top of all that boris.. he really should learn to speak English...."         DSOTM perhaps you might also note this earlier statement above from boris : "These words are chilling, for their shameless, delued deception."

 

In a debate (speech)  "typos" and  malapropisms are to be expected, and normally unworthy of comment!!   However, I suggest you read Abbots speech  here, because  I would suggest that contextually the use of "fragrant" within:  "with fragrant [sic] exceptions "  is fitting and grammatical..

 

Take a look at these two statements below, and remember Abbott is  pointing out that for a couple of centuries  Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people personal generosity and warmth, BUT with  some exceptions which were, good/welcome/sweet etc.  Inserting your  interpretation translates as:

Yet for two centuries – with exposed actions contrary to decency exceptions,  Which is the exact opposite of the intended meaning which is:

Yet for two centuries – with fragrant [sic] exceptions, of course.

I  think "fragrant" is correct within the speech, I would prefer "sweet" though, and  that "flagrant"  DSTOM would be  grammatically incorrect.

Perhabs the earlier term from B1G is applicable : "delued deception"

nɥºɾ

 

---

I would prefer you stop making your posts personal, the article was not written by me. thank you.

---

yeh it is propaganda from that site you keep pasting from

---

@*mrgrizz* wrote:

---

@boris1gary wrote:

---

@monman12 wrote:

 "On top of all that boris.. he really should learn to speak English...."         DSOTM perhaps you might also note this earlier statement above from boris : "These words are chilling, for their shameless, delued deception."

 

In a debate (speech)  "typos" and  malapropisms are to be expected, and normally unworthy of comment!!   However, I suggest you read Abbots speech  here, because  I would suggest that contextually the use of "fragrant" within:  "with fragrant [sic] exceptions "  is fitting and grammatical..

 

Take a look at these two statements below, and remember Abbott is  pointing out that for a couple of centuries  Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people personal generosity and warmth, BUT with  some exceptions which were, good/welcome/sweet etc.  Inserting your  interpretation translates as:

Yet for two centuries – with exposed actions contrary to decency exceptions,  Which is the exact opposite of the intended meaning which is:

Yet for two centuries – with fragrant [sic] exceptions, of course.

I  think "fragrant" is correct within the speech, I would prefer "sweet" though, and  that "flagrant"  DSTOM would be  grammatically incorrect.

Perhabs the earlier term from B1G is applicable : "delued deception"

nɥºɾ

 

---

I would prefer you stop making your posts personal, the article was not written by me. thank you.

---

yeh it is propaganda from that site you keep pasting from

---

and the point of the above is...............

---

@boris1gary wrote:

---

@monman12 wrote:

 "On top of all that boris.. he really should learn to speak English...."         DSOTM perhaps you might also note this earlier statement above from boris : "These words are chilling, for their shameless, delued deception."

 

In a debate (speech)  "typos" and  malapropisms are to be expected, and normally unworthy of comment!!   However, I suggest you read Abbots speech  here, because  I would suggest that contextually the use of "fragrant" within:  "with fragrant [sic] exceptions "  is fitting and grammatical..

 

Take a look at these two statements below, and remember Abbott is  pointing out that for a couple of centuries  Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people personal generosity and warmth, BUT with  some exceptions which were, good/welcome/sweet etc.  Inserting your  interpretation translates as:

Yet for two centuries – with exposed actions contrary to decency exceptions,  Which is the exact opposite of the intended meaning which is:

Yet for two centuries – with fragrant [sic] exceptions, of course.

I  think "fragrant" is correct within the speech, I would prefer "sweet" though, and  that "flagrant"  DSTOM would be  grammatically incorrect.

Perhabs the earlier term from B1G is applicable : "delued deception"

nɥºɾ

 

---

I would prefer you stop making your posts personal, the article was not written by me. thank you.

---

delued deception, that would be what?

---

@monman12 wrote:

"he didn't call Aboriginal people strangers, he said we treat strangers better than Aboriginal people."
I agree with you LL49."

"No, he said we extend our welcome more to strangers than we welcome aboriginal people."
I disagree FN, read the speech and post the link/excerpt for your version. Here is an excerpt from the actual speech:

"Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people the personal generosity and warmth of welcome that we have habitually extended to the stranger in our midst.”   This what LL49 indicated, and with which I agree.

 

The speech also contains this:

"I pay tribute to former prime minister John Howard for first proposing to recognise indigenous people in the constitution."

"I pay tribute to former prime minister Kevin Rudd for the national apology."

"I commend former prime minister Julia Gillard for continuing these annual Closing the Gap statements to focus the parliament’s attention on problems that might otherwise be neglected or glossed over."

nɥºɾ

 

---

The one true point he makes is that he has failed to extend his welcome to aboriginal people. It was he who turned up late and promptly fell asleep in the chair when some aboriginal women put in the effort of appearing before parliament (or a parliamentary committee) to tell their story.

---

@languidlady49 wrote:

he didn't call Aboriginal people strangers, he said we treat strangers better than Aboriginal people.

---

He said:  Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people the personal generosity and warmth of welcome that we have habitually extended to the stranger in our midst.”

I'm sorry, but the inference I draw from that is that Aboriginal people are the one category of 'strangers in our midst' that we do not treat well.

It may not be what he intended to imply - but we all know that unless we choose our words carefully  what we mean to say may not always be what people understand from what we actually say.

 However, I suggest you read Abbots speech here, because  I would suggest that contextually the use of "fragrant" within:  "with fragrant [sic] exceptions "  is fitting and grammatical.

Or, in other words, the few occasions when we have  treated Aboriginal people with the habitual kindness we show to 'the stranger in our midst' have been occasions when they didn't offend our olfactory senses.

"The one true point he makes is that he has failed to extend his welcome to aboriginal people"

Codswallop.

""Australians had collectively failed to show to Aboriginal people the personal generosity and warmth of welcome that we have habitually extended to the stranger in our midst.”

He has said AUSTRALIANS collectively failed to show the same degree  of   generosity and warmth of welcome to Aboriginal people that they would to others (strangers) within the country (midst) i.e discrimination.

Meaning non indigenous Australians collectively,  not just him.

nɥºɾ