The issue of Slavery in the United States is used to guilt trip Whites into feeling forever guilty about their treatment of Blacks, when in reality it was the Jews who were behind it.
The “Stolen Generations” myth is used to make White Australians feel forever guilty about their alleged mistreatment of Aboriginals. It’s a bit like the Australian version of “Slavery”, if you know what I mean!
Although I don’t agree with everything Andrew Bolt (above) says in the following three (older) articles, they are worth reproducing since they show what a load of crap this “Stolen Generation” myth truly is:
TOO many Aboriginal children have been sacrificed to the myth of the ”stolen generation” and the truth must be told before more die.
If Prime Minister Kevin Rudd can’t find real members of the “stolen generations” to say sorry to, no problem.
The media will just invent some for him. Or, in the case of Prof Lowitja O’Donoghue, reinvent.
Twice in the past week the ABC has reported O’Donoghue’s angry demand that the new Rudd Government say that “sorry”, and pay compensation.
And both times it called her “a prominent member of the stolen generations”.
In fact, O’Donoghue, former head of ATSIC and now working with Rudd on his apology, is a prominent member of a generation of activists who claimed to have been stolen.
Indeed, she best symbolises how little truth there is behind the “stolen generations” myth — a myth so toxic that it’s implicated this month in the ghastly deaths of yet two more Aboriginal children. And the ABC best symbolises how determined much of the media is not to notice.
O’Donoghue was for years our most famous member of the “stolen generations”, becoming co-patron of the National Sorry Day Committee.
It was Prof Peter Read, the historian who invented the “stolen generations” phrase, who in a 1996 speech singled out both O’Donoghue and the late Charlie Perkins as the two great examples of the 100,000 Aborigines he suggested were stolen from their parents for racist reasons.
Perkins, who rose to head the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, actually denied he’d been stolen. His mother had instead pleaded with missionaries to send her talented son to a boarding school to get him the education he used so brilliantly.
THE “stolen generations” myth has made us leave Aboriginal children to be bashed, raped and killed. In fact, it’s hurt more children than were ever proved stolen just for being Aboriginal.
I’ve often been told mine is a “racist” position, but perhaps the deniers will at least listen to Adam Giles.
Giles rejects being racially typecast as the “first indigenous Chief Minister” of the Northern Territory, but his heritage does license him to say what desperately needs saying.
He says he’s astonished only one Aboriginal child in the NT has been adopted in the past decade.
“You mean to tell me when we’ve got all these alleged cases of chronic child sexual abuse, children running around on petrol, going on the streets at night sexualising themselves in some circumstances, and there’s only one permanent adoption, for fear of Stolen Generation? That is not standing up for kids.”
That, he says, must change.
The worst about Giles’ comments is that they’re called “controversial” by the media.
“Controversial?” Taking a raped child to safety and giving them a loving home is controversial? Shouldn’t it be controversial to leave them?
Apparently no, which is why the “stolen generations” theory is deadly.
The “stolen generations” were best defined by Professor Robert Manne: Children of “mixed-descent” rescued “not from harm … but from their Aboriginality” by authorities who wished “to help keep White Australia pure”.
Many activists put the number of these “stolen” children at 100,000 since 1910. Manne later estimated 25,000.
I’ve repeatedly challenged Manne and other activists to name just 10 such children. No one has managed. Manne tried three times, but produced cases that didn’t fit his own definition – even children evacuated in war-time from areas threatened by Japanese bombing.
This was the reaction to Andrew Bolt exposing the Stolen Generation myth. When facts don’t support the politically correct mythology, why not sue for “Racial Vilification”? It seems to work:
HERALD Sun columnist Andrew Bolt has lost an action brought in the Federal Court in which the columnist was accused of breaching the Racial Discrimination Act.
Bolt was found to have contravened Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.
Nine aboriginal applicants brought a class-action against Bolt and the Herald and Weekly Times claiming Bolt wrote they sought professional advantage from the colour of their skin.
There were cheers and applause in the court when Justice Mordecai Bromberg read out his verdict.
He found that “fair-skinned Aboriginal people (or some of them) were reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to have been offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated by the imputations conveyed in the newspaper articles” published in the Herald Sun.
In a brief statement outside the Melbourne court after the judgment, Bolt said “This is a terrible day for freedom of speech in this country.”
“It is particularly a restriction on the freedom of all Australians to discuss multiculturalism and how people identify themselves,” he said.
There you go! Freedom and Democracy in action! You’ve gotta love it don’t ya?!
What else could you expect from Jewish Federal Court Justice Mordecai Bromberg?