Oz Election Forums (ozforums.com.au)

fonzie wrote:

Deliberately obtuse is a good way of describing the way vested interests and their cheer squads  are deliberately trying to engineer a racial issue out of a BIPARTISAN effort.
If Howard is playing the race card then your efforts will only help to inflame the situation and divide the nation
If he isn't then your efforts may just derail the greatest attempt to fix the problem

Oh, don't try to play your binary thinking wedge games with me, young Fonzie. Criticism of what the government is doing does not equate to wanting to do nothing. Didn't your lot realise back when we were told "If you're not with us, you're against us" over Iraq, that false dichotomies aren't a compelling rhetorical tool?

So tell me, do you think Rex Wild QC is also trying to "derail" things, when he criticises the Government for the way it's implementing his report?

Here's a model that is working, no thanks at all to Howard's 11 years of inaction. Please take a look. This is the sort of thing that Wild wants to see implemented. The Howard plan is almost entirely the opposite of it in key respects.

Oh, and isn't it nice that the government now seems to agree with me and not you about the issue of compulsory medical checks? Glad the AMA managed to talk some sense into them.

KIna wrote:

Seems the Government is changing its policies by the second according to public critcism. Abbott now reverses this mornings Mandatory part of the health check.

Maybe someone pointed out to them it's illegal under common law, statute law, and contrary to just about every International Treaty we're party to? ;)

Why bother engaging this spiv in debate. There has been more than enough evidence cited to support the view that this issue has been politicised and this spiv has not addressed one of them. You will not get susbstance from a sycophant like this bloke, just circular arguments and anecdotal home spun yarns. It smacks of attention seeking behaviour rather than any  genuine attempt to engage in any sort of political debate. Give him a miss.

Last edited by Kapunda (2007-06-28 21:59:09)

Kapunda wrote:

Why bother engaging this spiv in debate. There has been more than enough evidence cited to support the view that this issue has been politicised and this spiv has not addressed one of them. You will not get susbstance from a sycophant like this bloke, just circular arguments and anecdotal home spun yarns. It smacks of attention seeking behaviour rather than any  genuine attempt to engage in any sort of political debate. Give him a miss.

I wondered when the site bully would turn up
Please enlighten us with some more of your positive outlook and instructive discourse

We need to watch the govt like a hawk on this issue, we know this govt has proved to be duplicitous in the past and often carrys hidden agendas and is the past master at manipulating and pressuring people and groups.

Crickey reckons this Election Stunt has won Howard a good number of votes to even-out the election race.
If so then most of the people can be fooled all the time - Tampa, BabyOverboard, Black BabyOverboard - well, they say we only get the govt we deserve, if you dont use it (democracy) you lose it. So which country do I move to if Howard wins the election?

The reason for the change from Mandatory 'health' [invasive sexual investigations] of Brough and the later non-mandatory 'health' checks of Abbott may well be in war between the two - has anybody read this article at Crickey?  So we need to beware of what turns up in their legislation.
http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20070 … rough.html

Howard's ulterior motive of undermining Aboriginal land rights (as we all suspected):
http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20070 … tail-.html
http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20070 … enius.html

You can also go here to add your comment to the GetUp site on this issue:

http://www.getup.org.au/blogs/view.php? … +very+soon

Last edited by KIna (2007-06-29 00:07:18)

I take it then Fonz #130, you don't agree.

Well I'm a bit disappointed I haven't been crucified as the Kiwi that called Aussies racist, but hey, I'd much rather an intelligent discussion, which is what this appears to be. (OK, I'll forget about the old bird in my '80's work, who wanted the White Australia policy bought back).

Fonz, you can't pull out "people voted for it" when you and I and everyone else here knows that Howard manipulated the electorate with the race card, appealing to the baser instincts, of which as Aristotle has said should never be a part of politics. Good grief, even I found myself agreeing with Howard in that Tampa day, wondering WTF were people from the other side of the world turning up here in boats falling apart saying they were refugees? I didn't agree with his terrorist assessment at all, but was wondering why they were here. Terrible now looking back at that, he duped so many people. That's not democracy mate, that's an asshole manipulating the electorate for political gain.

True swinging voters with no real ideological position are much harder to judge, but he will have trouble getting these voters back to him.  They, without question, were the target of all his attacks on the ALP, yet they have not come back and I don't believe this issue will get them moving.  Whatever shifted them to the ALP in the first place, it wasn't poor treatment of Aborigines.

I was getting a bit sick of the media saturation of this, IMO a bit undeserving given Howard's record. At the end of the day after all of this mind boggling leadership from Howard, we still have WC's and all the rest. Even Pearson mentioned WC's the other day as an aside. These are the issues that have truly decided people's votes, and although I'm happy that the spotlight is on Aboriginal people and their plight in this country, it won't be an issue that decides the election.

There is a disturbing similarity in methodolgy and personnel in the Aust governments involvement in the Solomon Islands [accused of deliberately destabilising the politcal situation there for its own ends] and with this Shock and Awe invasion [and witch hunt?] in Aboriginal Communities.

The plan seems to be:
Detablised the communities
Disenfranchise indivuals
Take control of communities
Amalgamate communities
Take over rights of communities and Aboriginals, remove veto
Further remove individuals from communities
Allow mining companies in

As usual and as we commonly see when Americans interfere with communities and countries - it is always for a Stated nobel cause. So we can imagine the Howard govt coming up with a number of victims, overblowing it into something and a rationale  to disassemble entire Aboriginal Communities.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jun20 … -j28.shtml

Last edited by KIna (2007-06-29 17:55:01)

What a week it's been. So much for my prediction that this issue would be dead and buried by now. The Gov't appears to be milking it for all it's worth.

Please excuse my cynicism here but the Howard Gov't has taught me to be so. Right now it seems that Howard and concerned Australians are "giving" to the Aboriginal community at Mutitjulu.

We should all know by now, from experience, that when Howard gives with one hand, he takes something else with another. And voters should know exactly what will be taken from the impoverished people at Mutitjulu, now, well-before the election.

It's well-known that Howard's been looking for a nuclear waste dump.

http://www.australianuranium.com.au/New … r_2005.htm

Also, who will take charge of the Uluru tourism operation? The Mutitjulu people, as traditional owners, should have a say in this.

Last edited by Jeanette (2007-06-30 00:19:10)

HOWARD GOVTS LAND GRAB PLAN

Now why would they bother with a land grab, what is the point?
Well, we saw the Govts uranium plan and nuclear plan in the above links.

There are some big dollars here - and there is some Uranium in the NT as well as other resources and, resources are booming. However - Uranium prices are expected to go astronomical over the next ten years. Some of these mining companies are huge. There is certainly a lot at stake here.

Gee - why let a group of Traditional Aboriginals ruin the party? Profits for foreign companies is all the go, hey.

Who are these companies that want to mine, they cant be that powerful can they. And, what is it with Mr Howard and Uranium and Nuclear energy - he is positively evangelical about it.

Well his first recorded contact with Westinghouse [they buy uranium, make nuclear power stations - recently bought by Toshiba] is when Howard was a minister in the Fraser Govt - he sold them cheap uranium I believe.

Certainly Westinghouse are now bullish about Australia:
"Westinghouse recently visited Australia to discuss near-term opportunities with the Government and regulatory authorities. "We have also had inquiries from individuals and/or groups within Australia pursuing the establishment and development of commercial nuclear power plants for electricity generation.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/stor … 53,00.html
http://diig-csis.org/news/article.asp?A … ID=60&


Howard has a long history with Uranium and with Westinghouse
http://alertandalarmed.blogspot.com/200 … artel.html

"In May 1977, Prime Minister Fraser announced that uranium customer states must be signatories to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, as a basis for the negotiation of bilateral safeguards. And Labor deliberated on what was to become its three-mine policy. None of these developments had any impact on the cartel's momentum. In July John Howard, fresh from a Ministerial debacle in the Business portfolio, was made Minister for Special Trade Negotiations. It was Howard's job to use uranium as a lever to gain better access to the European market.)"

Howard's has an interest in nuclear
July 2005
http://nucnews.net/nucnews/2005nn/0507nn/050709nn.txt

Who owns the Uranium Exploration rights in the NT, are they big and powerful company?

"Mega Uranium Bid
Mega also completed the acquisition of Future Metals and Energy, which holds historical resources totalling 6.4 million pounds U3O8 adjacent to Mega’s Georgetown Project in North Queensland, Australia. The acquisition was obtained for a total consideration of 1 million Mega shares.
In November 2006, Mega Uranium acquired a 6.25% equity interest in Northern Uranium (NTU – ASX) on this company’s A$ 4 million IPO at a price of A$ 0.20 per share. Northern Uranium’s flagship property is the Gardiner-Tanamii Super Project, spanning 9,950 km² and with potential similar to Australia’s Alligator Rivers region and Canada’s Athabasca Basin. In April 2007, Mega entered into a binding letter of Intent with Nu Energy Uranium (NU – ASX), by which it will acquire Nu Energy in exchange for 24.09 million common shares of Mega.Mega also recently acquired Canada-based Monster Copper with prospective uranium exploration projects in the Central Mineral Belt of Labrador, Canada. This month, Canada's Mega Uranium Ltd. made a A$16.2 million takeover bid for Hindmarsh Resources Ltd. in Australia. Adelaide-based Hindmarsh owns exploration rights in South Australia state and the Northern Territory, two of the regions most likely to allow development of new mines."

Check out all about these Uranium mining companies, where they are, there mines plans - and of course Australian and the Northern Territory are well represented in this document. Beware it is pdf 1mb - But a fascinating document!
http://www.goldletterint.com/documents/ … ranium.pdf
Beware it is pdf 1mb - But a fascinating document!

YOU would have to believe that if the Howard government got re-elected you can kiss goodbye to Land Rights.
That is what this Election Stunt is all about.

Last edited by KIna (2007-06-30 04:29:35)

Mr Howard's response is shown here to be totally political and details his sickening innaction in the past.
Just how low of a political animal can Mr Howard be?

"Howard's national emergency is a political one.
He has an election to win. The genuine national emergency he is hiding behind is the one his Government has ignored effortlessly for 11 years. Just read the public record."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/a-cy … 68798.html

AND the current shock and awe aboriginal diversion compare with Iraq:
"But the announcement of this crisis came in the same breath as the proposed neo-military solution, leaving no space for such discussion and focusing most attention on law and order."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/less … 68801.html

AND Howard's tricks again:
"The Prime Minister's Apocalypse Now descent upon the Northern Territory might carry more conviction - even some conviction - if he hadn't conned us so often before."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/hist … 68804.html

Using abused children to get elected
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/u … 64756.html

Last edited by KIna (2007-06-30 05:57:04)

LAND GRAB AND WITCH HUNT

One more important vote buying part of the govt plan must be to keep before the public eye during the election. That is where the Witch Hunt comes in.

And now we see Brough reckon police need EXTRA investigative powers! We are not dealing with sophisticated terrorists here! Powers beyond what has been found suitable in our democracy?

It is clear now Brough wants the Aboriginal communities to be a mini-Iraq Guantanamo Bay interogation centres outside the public eye and judiciary. This is becoming a very Sinister operation by the Govt - and is clearly nothing about stopping problems and helping the community - and everything about finding victims as fast as possible before an election!!!

The Invasion method employed to date quite obviously has nothing to with a long term solution (the 097 recommendations will do that) - It is Firstly about Grandstanding; Secondly - intimidating and Thirdly the precursor to the Witch Hunt.

ANY evidence or allegation gained in this way would be totally useless in a court of law and would ruin and taint any further chance of prosecuting anyone.

ANY intimate examination carried out in this setting (and in a way not acceptable or normal practice in normal 'white' society) and atomosphere can only be considered coerced, lead, coached, tainted and not by freewill - becasue of the intimidating presence, and implied punishment to parents who wont 'co-operate'. This process in itself would represent an abuse.

In fact the nature, style, and aggressive rehtoric accompanying this operation would in itself represent an abuse of the abused should they witch hunt victims and suspects. This is entirely the wrong method and setting to go about investigating child sexual abuse - and deliberately so.

It is about invasive examination of children by force, intimidation, threat or coerction it is about aggressive, coersive investigation and interrogation of what are simple minded people that would not be accepted in normal White society or in Australia generally.

Human rights are going to play second fiddle in this operation - where the ends are going to be said to justify they means - then a year later everything gets thrown out and the courts castigate the govt.

It is quite clear the Govt intends saturation pressure and intimidation to find victims. Having found a victim or two the Govt will then be most keen to lable some poor person a 'suspect' [aka the programmed character assasination of Justice Kirby] - proper justice, rule of evidence, procedure law etc have no part of this plan.

HAVING victims and suspects the govt can thus project sympathy and revenge to the electorate during the election campaign - and make it look like white knight heros [whilst trashing democracy and law in the process].

It wont matter if they have the whole thing messed up; innacurate, have the wrong suspects or unacceptable or false allegations. It is only required before the election - if it all falls apart afterwards as did the Baby Overboard it wont matter - as long as the election is won.

AND we only have to look at the orchestrated raid on the Tampa & follow up fake Baby Overboard incident to realise how brilliant the govt is in manipulating the public service, media and the context, 'truth' and emotion in order to win votes.

It would be axiomatic that anything that comes out of this operation must be viewed with the deepest suspicsion and scepticism.

If the Govt were serious it would have involved everybody, used the 97 recommendations and its  authors as its plan and, avoided the grand 'Shock and Awe' Tampa invasion of these communities.

In fact if any of the Govts ministers really cared they would have taken action any number of times these past 11 years - they have certainly known the depth and extent of the problems - it is only now, overnight, that they have suddenly decided it is a military emergency requiring bizare actions - including taking away the land and removing the permits system.

Last edited by Nhullunbuy (2007-07-01 01:41:30)