Macccca
wazzlewoozle
hahahaha. does no one else enjoy the irony of the people who tell me i'm petty, and then calls me a git in the next sentence?katie_tully said:
-
Finished your HSC? Check out our University Discussion, Non-School forums or help out next year's HSC students! -
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
Merlin... again (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter 400miles
- Start date
Macccca
wazzlewoozle
hahahaha. does no one else enjoy the irony of the people who tell him he's petty, and then calls him a git in the next sentence?katie_tully said:
K
katie_tully
Guest
Oh, no shit sherlock? That wasnt half supposed to be there, was it.
Jillie
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 22
OMG...
Thorrnydevil - Just becuase not as many people were killed in this case, as in others in the world, in no way means that it should be any less of an issue. I was actually shocked that you said something like that
I have never said that it was "us" (today) who are directly responsible for taking children, and killing people and so on - "we" did not do it, the "wrong" - but the wrong was done. Ignoring it, and getting over it, will not solve the problem. It will make it worse.
We DO have to admit that it was wrong. As decendants we are not "equally" to blame - but that sort of racism that happened, and still happens. And its because 'we' havn't said that its not okay - 'they' want an appology - they want to be treated better - and they have a right to want that.
Egg_666 - you are my hero
Thorrnydevil - Just becuase not as many people were killed in this case, as in others in the world, in no way means that it should be any less of an issue. I was actually shocked that you said something like that
I have never said that it was "us" (today) who are directly responsible for taking children, and killing people and so on - "we" did not do it, the "wrong" - but the wrong was done. Ignoring it, and getting over it, will not solve the problem. It will make it worse.
We DO have to admit that it was wrong. As decendants we are not "equally" to blame - but that sort of racism that happened, and still happens. And its because 'we' havn't said that its not okay - 'they' want an appology - they want to be treated better - and they have a right to want that.
Egg_666 - you are my hero
Egg_666
Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Messages
- 72
Just a quick edition to my other post that i realised no one would read because they wouldnt realise it had been changed.
"You cant unify a group of people who are on disastrously different economic, educational and health levels. This breeds discontent from those that are worse off. As a result we have clearly defined boundaries between social groups, not seperated because of race, colour or religion, but because of poverty. And because these people were all worse off, they experience greater poverty as a whole.
They are split through poverty, because their race was segregated.
No longer is racism the guiding force behind inequality, but poverty is the great unequaliser. This is because poverty maintains itself, even increases itself. Some may see the world as one divided by race, but it is only divided through poverty that came from the racist, divisionist policies of the past."
"You cant unify a group of people who are on disastrously different economic, educational and health levels. This breeds discontent from those that are worse off. As a result we have clearly defined boundaries between social groups, not seperated because of race, colour or religion, but because of poverty. And because these people were all worse off, they experience greater poverty as a whole.
They are split through poverty, because their race was segregated.
No longer is racism the guiding force behind inequality, but poverty is the great unequaliser. This is because poverty maintains itself, even increases itself. Some may see the world as one divided by race, but it is only divided through poverty that came from the racist, divisionist policies of the past."
K
katie_tully
Guest
I'm getting sick of this, mainly because it is going around, and around, and around and around and around and fuuuuuuuuuuuuuck, Im dizzy.
If you think saying sorry is so damn important, then the next indigenous person you see, go up to them and apologise. And the next after that. And the next after that.
Do not say John Howard has to say sorry on behalf of the Australian people, BECAUSE NOT ALL AUSTRALIANS AGREE. That's going against democracy and freedom of speech if our government is forced into speaking on behalf of a nation, when a lot of people disagree.
If you think saying sorry is so important, than by all means say sorry. Don't criticise others because of their standpoint.
Also; If you think grammar is so important, you're in the wrong place. Dont detract from the argument.
I also refered to "whites", funny how nobody seems to get offended when Europeans are refered to as "whites", but blacks seems to be the naughty word of the week.
If you think saying sorry is so damn important, then the next indigenous person you see, go up to them and apologise. And the next after that. And the next after that.
Do not say John Howard has to say sorry on behalf of the Australian people, BECAUSE NOT ALL AUSTRALIANS AGREE. That's going against democracy and freedom of speech if our government is forced into speaking on behalf of a nation, when a lot of people disagree.
If you think saying sorry is so important, than by all means say sorry. Don't criticise others because of their standpoint.
Also; If you think grammar is so important, you're in the wrong place. Dont detract from the argument.
I also refered to "whites", funny how nobody seems to get offended when Europeans are refered to as "whites", but blacks seems to be the naughty word of the week.
This argument is flawed. The PM has agreed, on behalf of all Australians, to the FTA - when not all Australians agree. In fact, there is a significant minority who disagree.katie_tully said:
This argument basically means that everyone needs to agree for the government to act - that's not democracy. We have delegated to the government, by electing them, the responsibility to act on behalf of all Australians in what they believe is Australia's best interests. This will frequently mean they act when many Australians disagree - how many people do you think thought that increasing the price of medicine (as was supported by the ALP not long ago) was a good idea? How many Australians disagreed with joining the invasion of Iraq? Despite much disagreement, the government both spoke and acted in both these cases.
Furthermore, the argument can be inverted to support the reverse conclusion. I've modified your post to show how:
"Do not say John Howard can't say sorry on behalf of the Australian people, BECAUSE NOT ALL AUSTRALIANS AGREE. That's going against democracy and freedom of speech if our government is prevented from speaking on behalf of a nation, just because a lot of people disagree."
See my point? Note that I am not advocating a particular action here - I am simply pointing out that your argument does not support your conclusion.
K
katie_tully
Guest
I'm not saying everybody has to agree, but I'm saying he shouldn't say sorry on behalf of the Australian people, if a majority of us disagree. He may well go and say sorry, even if alot of people disagree ... but John Howard doesn't represent what alot of Australians think.
If the people who feel so strongy about this want to apologise, then go ahead, but I don't think it's the responsibility of John Howard to stand up and say sorry, and nor do I think that it's our moral responsibility to say sorry because we're australian, and being part of Australia apparently means embracing what's happened in the past and apologising for it.
How many of these people who are arguing so strongly towards saying sorry go up, on an individual basis to indigenous people they see on the street and say sorry?
If the people who feel so strongy about this want to apologise, then go ahead, but I don't think it's the responsibility of John Howard to stand up and say sorry, and nor do I think that it's our moral responsibility to say sorry because we're australian, and being part of Australia apparently means embracing what's happened in the past and apologising for it.
How many of these people who are arguing so strongly towards saying sorry go up, on an individual basis to indigenous people they see on the street and say sorry?
V
vanbasten
Guest
Mah. Leave the Abos alone, they just want to commit crime and social disorder in peace (hmmm?) If it were up to me, I would bring in Communism (or a more viable variant i.e. Socialism) and get rid of the lot of them. Enough of this pish-posh business - "OOOOH they were here first, they've been here for thousands of years....". If you ask me, thats all the more reason to get rid of them.
But then again, who's asking me.......
But then again, who's asking me.......
K
katie_tully
Guest
PMSL...
I love you man.
I love you man.
Egg_666
Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Messages
- 72
Dammit, I hate when you write things and get distracted, move to another page and it disappears. But to summarise what i wrote before it buggered off.
Often the government is forced to act against the majority will of the people. But this is not a move of an evil, one-sided dictatorship. It is an act to LEAD the people rather than simply follow views.
In 1947, 83% of Australians opposed the rescue of the hapless survivors of the Nazi Holocaust. Yet the government led the way, instead of bowing to uninformed opinion.
In 1973, 63% of Australians did not want Cambodian or Vietnamese Refugees coming here, even though we had helped to destroy the countries in the first place. And yet again, the Australian government led the way to what was obviously right.
CM Tutor is exactly right. Governments have a right to LEAD as well as agree to the opinion of the citizens. If we cant trust our leaders to do whats right for us, then we are voting for the wrong people.
And thats what I am trying to say here. What is right for us is to begin to mold a solution for the aboriginal issue, not backlog it because of an outdated belief that apologising will not change anything, even make it worse. Therefore, we are voting for the wrong people.
And, Katie, to your remarkbly closeminded, obviously sarcastic, idea about apoligising on an individual level. This problem is greater than just you or I. It must be confronted at a national level, with a massive and coordinated response. Not a mishposh of little groups vying to do the best for those who need it.
Katie. When you talk about yourself, or even a group that you are involved in, you are allowed to say things about the group. You are allowed to criticise, you are allowed to joke, (If its a democratic group). Do you know why? Because you are in a better position to judge than those outside the group.
Go ahead call them "Whites", so will I. We can make jokes about White people, because we are criticising ourselves, and therefore not meaning to be taken literally.
Did you ever wonder why African Americans call each other "nigger". Because even though it was meant as insulting when said by Whites, it shows a lack of respect for the word's meaning, thereby belittling it.
Its the same reason behind why Merlin should be allowed to speak his mind. He is part of the Australian community. He cant insult CITIZENS, because he aint one, but he CAN talk about Australia because he inside the Australian community and has an opinion formed by what he has seen, or heard. An opinion with a greater base for verity than outsiders would have.
Often the government is forced to act against the majority will of the people. But this is not a move of an evil, one-sided dictatorship. It is an act to LEAD the people rather than simply follow views.
In 1947, 83% of Australians opposed the rescue of the hapless survivors of the Nazi Holocaust. Yet the government led the way, instead of bowing to uninformed opinion.
In 1973, 63% of Australians did not want Cambodian or Vietnamese Refugees coming here, even though we had helped to destroy the countries in the first place. And yet again, the Australian government led the way to what was obviously right.
CM Tutor is exactly right. Governments have a right to LEAD as well as agree to the opinion of the citizens. If we cant trust our leaders to do whats right for us, then we are voting for the wrong people.
And thats what I am trying to say here. What is right for us is to begin to mold a solution for the aboriginal issue, not backlog it because of an outdated belief that apologising will not change anything, even make it worse. Therefore, we are voting for the wrong people.
And, Katie, to your remarkbly closeminded, obviously sarcastic, idea about apoligising on an individual level. This problem is greater than just you or I. It must be confronted at a national level, with a massive and coordinated response. Not a mishposh of little groups vying to do the best for those who need it.
Katie. When you talk about yourself, or even a group that you are involved in, you are allowed to say things about the group. You are allowed to criticise, you are allowed to joke, (If its a democratic group). Do you know why? Because you are in a better position to judge than those outside the group.
Go ahead call them "Whites", so will I. We can make jokes about White people, because we are criticising ourselves, and therefore not meaning to be taken literally.
Did you ever wonder why African Americans call each other "nigger". Because even though it was meant as insulting when said by Whites, it shows a lack of respect for the word's meaning, thereby belittling it.
Its the same reason behind why Merlin should be allowed to speak his mind. He is part of the Australian community. He cant insult CITIZENS, because he aint one, but he CAN talk about Australia because he inside the Australian community and has an opinion formed by what he has seen, or heard. An opinion with a greater base for verity than outsiders would have.
K
katie_tully
Guest
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. They feel so strongly about it, but do they go and apologise in person? I highly doubt it. If that's the case, why don't they?
Egg_666
Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Messages
- 72
are Australians are all geese, exactly the same without any intellectual or social differences?... please dont make me answer thatkatie_tully said:
Who is they? you mean people like me? who feel stronly about apologising? If you do... DID YOU NOT READ WHAT I SAID just one post before???katie_tully said:
This issue is bigger than ONE person apologising, its about a nation realising its mistake and attempting to fix it. Me apologising means nothing.... Me giving 100 dollars to a fund for aborigines means nothing. BUT IF EVERYONE DOES IT... thats 100 x 19 mil... 1.9 bil... NOW THATS A LOT OF MONEY... AND A LOT OF APOLOGY.... both of which could really help a starving, helpless population... living well below the poverty line (think about what the poverty line really means, thats the minimum required to live marginally... now think whats below that) RIGHT ON OUR VERY COUCH, BACKYARD, DOORSTEP.... and we sit here and do nothin (as a nation).
K
katie_tully
Guest
THE NATION HAS NOT MADE A MISTAKE. TODAYS GENERATION IS NOT, I REPEAT NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR PAST EVENTS. WE DON'T HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE UP FOR THE FACT THAT INJUSTICES HAVE HAPPENED IN THE PAST.Egg_666 said:
I AM NOT SAYING SORRY AND I AM NOT GIVING A CENT TO THE CAUSE. WHY? BECAUSE I'D RATHER SPEND MY MONEY ON SOMETHING THAT LOOKS TO BE A LITTLE MORE PRODUCTIVE, SUCH AS CANCER RESEARCH, CAREFLIGHT. SOMETHING THAT I GIVE A DAMN ABOUT, BECAUSE TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH I DO NOT CARE. I AGREE, WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM WAS GHASTLY, AND SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED, HOWEVER I, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WHAT SO EVER AM GOING TO ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT HAPPENED.
THIRDLY; IT'S A QUESTION. IT'S NOT AN ARGUABLE QUESTION, IT'S A CLOSED QUESTION. YES OR NO. DO, YOU, THE PEOPLE WHO THINK THE WHOLE NATION SHOULD APOLOGISE, MAKE AN INDIVIDUAL EFFORT TO SAY SORRY? IF NO, THEN WHY NOT? SURE, IT ISN'T GOING TO FIX THE PROBLEM, BECAUSE ACCORDING TO YOU, IT'S A NATIONAL EFFORT...BUT YOU STILL HAVENT MANAGED TO EFFECTIVELY ANSWER WHY IT IS YOU DON'T SEE THE NEED TO APOLOGISE TO AN INDIGENOUS PERSON ON THE STREET IF YOU FEEL THEY SO DESERVE AN APOLOGY.
K
katie_tully
Guest
Oh...What's this?? I got a bad rep? For reading the post and then arguing?? Ahh allow me to give this "anonymous person" a newsflash;
I DON'T FUCKING CARE Bad rep all you want people, if it makes you feel better
I DON'T FUCKING CARE
Bad rep all you want people, if it makes you feel better
K
katie_tully
Guest
Actually, I might justify my reasoning behind not giving these people one god damn cent;
I live in a highly indigenous area. I think I've paid enough towards them, after they stole my phone, wallet and bashed and hospitalised a friend infront of me all because she put an AVO out on their ex boyfriend for raping her when she was 12.
I think friends, family and other people in the area have given the ones in our area enough monetry rewards in the form of personal possessions...Infact, out here we're just going to start handing them our wallets on a silver platter, with a complementary syringe.
I offer my condolences to those indigenous who have, directly been affected by what has happened...For the rest of you who feel as though we owe you something, fuck off.
I live in a highly indigenous area. I think I've paid enough towards them, after they stole my phone, wallet and bashed and hospitalised a friend infront of me all because she put an AVO out on their ex boyfriend for raping her when she was 12.
I think friends, family and other people in the area have given the ones in our area enough monetry rewards in the form of personal possessions...Infact, out here we're just going to start handing them our wallets on a silver platter, with a complementary syringe.
I offer my condolences to those indigenous who have, directly been affected by what has happened...For the rest of you who feel as though we owe you something, fuck off.
Egg_666
Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Messages
- 72
wrong... and u prove my point nicely... the nation means past present future.katie_tully said:
it DID make a mistake, one that needs to be fixed.
katie_tully said:
I am not saying your a responsible for the events, no one is. And you DO NOT have a RESPONSIBILITY to make up for the fact... blah blah....katie_tully said:
YOU ARE ENTIRELY CORRECT ON THAT. and i understnad what your saying. YOU ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE. But that DOESNT mean you DONT (double negative) have a moral obligation to use some of what you recieved because of the persecution of aboriginals. Give something back to those who lost out because of what you received. Its a moral thing, not a legally binding issue. Thats why there is mroe than one side. I morally believe that we should try and help those that lost out because of what our forefathers did. Dont you think that we should at least be trying to do at least a little something to help? I mean after all... what helps them helps australia in the end as well... its win-win... less crime, poverty, a more educated nation... its a step towards the goal of democracy.
because apologising on an individual level means and does nothing. I have said this before... its not the apology itself that will open the gates of heaven and deliver australia to heaven on earth. Its the spirit of cooperation and the aims to solve the problem that will occur from the apology, that will help this nation, and its people, aboriginal or not.katie_tully said:
by the way, the bad remark or whatever was me, i just found the button and wanted to test what it did... if i knew how to do it non-anonymously i would have
Egg_666
Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Messages
- 72
what you've been through sounds terrible... but there is a difference between a donation, and having something stolen off you.
Donations go to different places then wallets and phones...
Donations imply a spirit of giving, and as a result, show the donatee that there are people that care for them outside of their own friends and family
Having something stolen implies a spirit of hostility... and through spirit, positive spirit... we will find a solution
Donations go to different places then wallets and phones...
Donations imply a spirit of giving, and as a result, show the donatee that there are people that care for them outside of their own friends and family
Having something stolen implies a spirit of hostility... and through spirit, positive spirit... we will find a solution
K
katie_tully
Guest
Can we agree to disagree on this? Coz it's going around and around and around..
As for rep points...I think they start at 0 and you get 2 for a good rep or something, and when you get a bad rep it goes down. I dont know, i just know mine's at a constant red dot.
It doesnt tell you who gives them to you, you just get a message ...
As for rep points...I think they start at 0 and you get 2 for a good rep or something, and when you get a bad rep it goes down. I dont know, i just know mine's at a constant red dot.
It doesnt tell you who gives them to you, you just get a message ...