-
Want to help us with this year's BoS Trials? Let us know before 30 June. See this thread for details -
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
Merlin... again (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter 400miles
- Start date
thorrnydevil
Ancient Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
Yeah, actually, it does matter if your an Australian citizen or not
gretel mentioned this on rove, so it definitely happened. apparently he pulled his hat off and under it (written on his shaved head) it said 'sorry' and he had an aboriginal flag.
this was taking it too far and any respect i had for him the first time for sticking up for what he believed in i have now lost.
this was taking it too far and any respect i had for him the first time for sticking up for what he believed in i have now lost.
thorrnydevil
Ancient Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
But it does. He doesn't vote in our elections right? Can we agree on that? OK. If he can't vote, he doesn't have a say in which party holds power. OK? So, if he doesn't use this right given to us, by our government, why should he be able to demonstrate, against our government, which he decided not to vote for. He could of voted Greens, who are against mandatory detention, but guess what, HE DIDN'T!!! He pro-actively decided not to vote, then pro-actively tries to "FREE TA REFUGEES". Do you see my point? If you don't vote, you don't use your democratic voice, hence you veto your right to bad mouth a Government policy-as you didn't try to put a government in. OK, now I'm confused!nerd2die4 said:
thorrnydevil
Ancient Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
Did I say that? No, I didn't. Of course he'd have a bigger voice by going on TV and making a fool of himself, or as some of you think a martyr. What I said is, if he doesn't vote in our elections, he's not using his democratic voice. So, because he's not using his voice, why should he be able to participate and demonstrate against our government, which for the 50 millionth time, he didn't vote in. If he did vote (making him a citizen) I wouldn't be saying this, but the fact of the matter is, he didn't. I'm sorry if you misinterpreted what I said and may god have mercy on your soul!
Kulazzi
Active Member
so...........ur saying in order for him to be able to protest and demonstrate against the Howard government he HAS to be an australian citizen and then he can use his "democratic voice"?
thorrnydevil
Ancient Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
Yeah basically, if he doesn't vote in a government, then he shouldn't be able to bad mouth the government that got voted in by the people, using their "democratic voice".
Kulazzi
Active Member
erm.............well......................I think regardless of what status a person is in everyone still has the right to speak out. Just cos he cannot vote, it doesn't mean he has to shut up, he can perfectly cry out loud if he needs to (which is what he's doing), he needs to be heard so the the govn. can wake up and hear what he's saying, he's the only one who can do all this b/c he's already famously known on Big Brother and he knows he'd get a lot of attention doing this.
thorrnydevil
Ancient Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1,521
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
Its not that he cannot vote, he CHOSE NOT to vote, key words being "CHOSE" and "NOT".
Kulazzi
Active Member
ok, so first u were saying he has to become an Aussie citizen and to be able to vote to have his words heard. And now ur saying he CHOSE NOT to vote? Well, don't u have to be an aussie citizen anyway to be able to vote, and u mentioned that he isn't? Please make ur statements/arguments more clear........
and I said Regardless of what status a person is in, everyone still has the right to speak out, please note the key sentence
and I said Regardless of what status a person is in, everyone still has the right to speak out, please note the key sentence
Merlin is one person who was on Big Brother. Fantastic. His actions are sure to motivate the supposedly 'mindless suburbanites' (taken from past comments on this forum) who watched that show...
Heh it is kind of funny. As he cannot vote he is publically criticised and as a result his ideas (which are far from being newsworthy within this country) are broadcast nationally, yet if he could cast a vote his voice would be swept under the carpet like every other individual activist who seeks the popular protest (however worthwhile). What a country (and what a strategy, if that is the case).
Heh it is kind of funny. As he cannot vote he is publically criticised and as a result his ideas (which are far from being newsworthy within this country) are broadcast nationally, yet if he could cast a vote his voice would be swept under the carpet like every other individual activist who seeks the popular protest (however worthwhile). What a country (and what a strategy, if that is the case).
Last edited:
yulia
i'm sorry for your face.
i walked past merlin in glebe. my friends were disappointed that i didn't punch him. but i don't watch bb so...
tWiStEdD
deity of ultimate reason
ha. you proved my point nicely there crazyhomo. petty victories, meaningless debate.... ever thought about taking up politics? its just that you seem to conform to what is politically 'in' these days... i.e. a whole lot of steam, but little progress...
crazyhomo
under pressure
you mean, i am able to point out when people like yourself clearly haven't thought their ideas through? i guess it must be frustrating for a confessed 'controversy addict' to be completely shut down so often. one could understand that they might resort to making up statements to discredit said shut down, even if they have nothing to back it uptWiStEdD said:
ditto!nerd2die4 said:
hasnt anyone here commented on policies of other countries, how bout whats happening in Sudan? should we all keep our mouth shut because we're not citizens of that country?
Last edited:
Katjif
pondering dystopic life
Mon opinion
This discussion/argument has gotten totally out of control, so figured that I would put in my two cents worth anyway.
Basically, from my point of view, everyone on this forum has the "right" to free speech, therefore we need to stop slagging each other off. Ok, I might not agree with quite a lot of people, but that does not make their opinion any less valid. Sure, some people may not have the 'intellectual ability' of others, but that doesn't neccessarily interfere with their ability to make a judgement (whether that judgement be informed or not).
So, from someone who (SHOCK HORROR) has lived close to Redfern, this is my digression..
1) As a white Australian, I would NOT walk around certain parts of Redfern alone, or even with other white friends. HOWEVER are there not other places that are predominantly 'white' that you would not like to walk down a back alley way at night? People, of course there are!
2) Personally, I understand Howard's decision not to say sorry, on behalf of others. I would not like someone to say sorry on behalf of me. At the time, the white people believed that they were doing the correct thing. They honestly felt that by removing aboriginal children from their homes and placing them with white parents, they were preparing them for a better future. Was this wrong? I think so. But did they know at the time? No. Of course, it is open to opinion whether or not Howard should have said /should say sorry, but ultimately I don't believe that recognition frome one little bushy eyebrowed white guy should make a difference. A huge amount of white Australians have supported the movement to say sorry (eg. The walk(s) for reconciliation) and in my opinion, Howard saying it, won't make an iota of difference.
3) TJ Hickey's death was a tragedy. I know people who were/are involved in the police side of this case, and I honestly believe that it was an accident. Of course, perhaps had the child not been Aboriginal then the officers would have not chased as hard, but that is simply a reflection of our society. Whether we like it or not, in Redfern paticularly, Aboriginals (children and adults) do commit more crimes than some in other areas. Unfortunately, police in this area are probably more likely to chase after someone who runs, than someone who doesn't.
4) The Riots. This is an area of contention, however, once again my view only, is that the riots were totally misconstrued by the media. They were slandered and should not have been. On the other hand, I also think that they were totally inappropriate and in the long run, did nothing to help Mrs.Hickey's cause, however unfortunately in this case, the members of that community felt that it was their only course of action. It is quite a sad world we live in, when riots are felt to be the only option.
5) Merlin. Well, Merlin's just some skinny little German white kid, right? Look, I didn't actually watch BB, just fleeting episodes, however I can admire his attempt to make BB less of a scripted show and more "reality". That said, I know Gretel Killeen personally, and do not believe that it was right to put her in such a position. I also heard her remarks on Rove, and I think that coming from someone who was simply trying to do her job, they were appropriate. Would we prefer it if Gretel had simply gone on with the show and ignored Merlin? No, we appreciate the fact that she did attempt to speak to him. Do I think that perhaps Gretel was a little curt with him? Definately. But she was caught completely off-guard and I think handled the situation paticularly well.
I think the fact that Merlin is living or has even visited Australia, gives him the 'right' to comment on Australia, just as I have the right to comment on Canada's treatment of the Inuits and natives, after having lived there for a peroid of time. It does not matter if you do not vote. Are we saying that citizens of America, for example, who choose not to vote, should not comment on Bush or Kerry? That would be a little far-fetched wouldn't it?
Ultimately, whichever way you look at these topics, that is YOUR choice. When you comment on these forums, express your opinion, the reasons why/why not, but don't try to change someone's opinion. If they change themselves, that's cool, but don't force it. Afterall, if I saw you on the street and didn't like the colour of your shirt, I wouldn't tell you to change would I?
Digression complete.
This discussion/argument has gotten totally out of control, so figured that I would put in my two cents worth anyway.
Basically, from my point of view, everyone on this forum has the "right" to free speech, therefore we need to stop slagging each other off. Ok, I might not agree with quite a lot of people, but that does not make their opinion any less valid. Sure, some people may not have the 'intellectual ability' of others, but that doesn't neccessarily interfere with their ability to make a judgement (whether that judgement be informed or not).
So, from someone who (SHOCK HORROR) has lived close to Redfern, this is my digression..
1) As a white Australian, I would NOT walk around certain parts of Redfern alone, or even with other white friends. HOWEVER are there not other places that are predominantly 'white' that you would not like to walk down a back alley way at night? People, of course there are!
2) Personally, I understand Howard's decision not to say sorry, on behalf of others. I would not like someone to say sorry on behalf of me. At the time, the white people believed that they were doing the correct thing. They honestly felt that by removing aboriginal children from their homes and placing them with white parents, they were preparing them for a better future. Was this wrong? I think so. But did they know at the time? No. Of course, it is open to opinion whether or not Howard should have said /should say sorry, but ultimately I don't believe that recognition frome one little bushy eyebrowed white guy should make a difference. A huge amount of white Australians have supported the movement to say sorry (eg. The walk(s) for reconciliation) and in my opinion, Howard saying it, won't make an iota of difference.
3) TJ Hickey's death was a tragedy. I know people who were/are involved in the police side of this case, and I honestly believe that it was an accident. Of course, perhaps had the child not been Aboriginal then the officers would have not chased as hard, but that is simply a reflection of our society. Whether we like it or not, in Redfern paticularly, Aboriginals (children and adults) do commit more crimes than some in other areas. Unfortunately, police in this area are probably more likely to chase after someone who runs, than someone who doesn't.
4) The Riots. This is an area of contention, however, once again my view only, is that the riots were totally misconstrued by the media. They were slandered and should not have been. On the other hand, I also think that they were totally inappropriate and in the long run, did nothing to help Mrs.Hickey's cause, however unfortunately in this case, the members of that community felt that it was their only course of action. It is quite a sad world we live in, when riots are felt to be the only option.
5) Merlin. Well, Merlin's just some skinny little German white kid, right? Look, I didn't actually watch BB, just fleeting episodes, however I can admire his attempt to make BB less of a scripted show and more "reality". That said, I know Gretel Killeen personally, and do not believe that it was right to put her in such a position. I also heard her remarks on Rove, and I think that coming from someone who was simply trying to do her job, they were appropriate. Would we prefer it if Gretel had simply gone on with the show and ignored Merlin? No, we appreciate the fact that she did attempt to speak to him. Do I think that perhaps Gretel was a little curt with him? Definately. But she was caught completely off-guard and I think handled the situation paticularly well.
I think the fact that Merlin is living or has even visited Australia, gives him the 'right' to comment on Australia, just as I have the right to comment on Canada's treatment of the Inuits and natives, after having lived there for a peroid of time. It does not matter if you do not vote. Are we saying that citizens of America, for example, who choose not to vote, should not comment on Bush or Kerry? That would be a little far-fetched wouldn't it?
Ultimately, whichever way you look at these topics, that is YOUR choice. When you comment on these forums, express your opinion, the reasons why/why not, but don't try to change someone's opinion. If they change themselves, that's cool, but don't force it. Afterall, if I saw you on the street and didn't like the colour of your shirt, I wouldn't tell you to change would I?
Digression complete.