Aussie Constitution to Be Made Racist !

It's five years today since Kevin Rudd as prime minister made a landmark apology to the ''Stolen Generations'' and Indigenous Australians as a whole for the mistreatment and suffering endured since European settlers landed two centuries ago. Former Labor speechwriter, Troy Bramston, rhapsodises that the apology and the attendant Closing the Gap policy commitment is a reminder of what is rare in modern  politics. ''Rudd was far from a perfect prime minister; he made many mistakes and misjudgements. But his national apology to the Stolen Generations was his finest moment." There was small problem with the speech -- one that Bramston and many others do not even allude to. For all the speeches, no one has yet been able to identify even 10 children stolen from their parents by racist officials simply on the grounds that they were Aboriginal.

In 2010, for instance, I posted on my Blog on August 30th an article entitled You'd Have "Stolen'' too! which seriously looked into this matter and using Keith Windschuttle's informative research published as a book, ''The Fabrication of Aboriginal History'', to debunk these atrocity stories. Now, we hear that this isn't the end of it.....it seems we have misguided ''reformers'' saying, '' there is more to be done.'' By that they mean to "rework the outdated and racist wording of the Constitution.'' In the capital, Canberra, today MPs will take the next step towards that reform. In fact, as Keith Windschuttle noted, there is nothing racist in the Constitution, despite the claims of a Gillard-appointed panel demanding change.

The passage the panel identifies as racially offensive is Section 51 (xxvi). This reads: 
                The Parliament shall, subject to the Constitution, have power to make laws for the peaceful order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: The people of any race, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws.

Unless this panel failed to research its topic properly, it should have been well aware that not once since Federation has this section lent support to discrimination or racial abuse of Aboriginal people. Every time state and Commonwealth laws in this field have been tested in the High Court, their intention has been found to be for the benefit of the Aboriginal people. What really is happening is not the removal of racist provisions but the attempted addition of them!  And so today MPs will start start the debate over this and another innocuous paragraph to repeal a perfectly good section which lets the government make special laws for, quote, ''people of any race'', inserting sections that recognises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, bans racial discrimination and affirms English is our national language, while recognising that Indigenous languages were the nation's first tongues.

Two questions:
          1) Do you think we should treat each other equally, regardless of ''race'' or ''ethnicity?
          2) Then why do you want a new Constitution that treats people differently, on the grounds of race. It's pure stupidity brought on by the Greens and their fellow travellers wanting to keep indigenous people separate, as they had been before European settlement. They want to treat indigenous people like museum artefacts - something quaint to look at with their traditional dancing and weapons but not part of modern Australia. A number of progressive indigenous leaders have said privately that they found all the ''recognition- of-the-traditional-owners'' at the beginning of government speeches patronising and insulting. And when asked why they didn't speak out publicly against these greenie activist assholes, they said they would have been howled down by the Aboriginal Industry of leftists ad Greens. ''It would be too much of a burden to bear,'' said one.

The Way I See It....the myth of the "Stolen Generations" as I wrote in my previous posting, was spun from the distortion of missionary workers receiving, not kidnapping, half-caste children. The treatment of half-caste children by their parents was well known and was appalling. It would have been a crime not to rescue them and send them into mission stations for caring. Indeed, even today we still ''remove'' or ''steal'' a disproportionate number of Aboriginal children for a good moral purpose: they are in trouble, abused and need help.

It's not just the ''Stolen Generations'' media beat-up but even Philip Noyce's distorted-history film, Rabbit Proof Fence that has robbed children of pride in their country; that this film and repetition of this myth has given newcomers less reason to embrace us, that it has made villains of caring heroes who once saved children abandoned by everyone else, and that it tells Aboriginal children that this is such a genocidal society that they should not even want to join in, even if they dared. Worst still this fiction is actually killing children!

Listen to other Aboriginal leaders such as Wesley Aird, Mick Gooda and Linda Burney, who all have said a fear of the ''stolen generations' tag ''has made us too scared to save Aboriginal children right now.'' And why? Because I believe, we don't want to admit that Aboriginal children were once rescued not from their Aboriginality, but from harm like this. We refuse to remove them from harm today, to avoid admitting this may be why we removed them yesterday. Changing the Constitution will only complicate things further.