If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Alcohol and porn banned in aboriginal areas
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6224994.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,2108122,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12
I think this is outrageous tbh. John Howard is such a racist cunt. You get child abuse everywhere, and you cant just single out one community and ban something for aborigine areas but not white areas.
If pornography and alcohol lead to sexual violence, then surely they should ban it everywhere not just in certain areas. I dont think it does - well alcohol leads to violence, but its not fair to just ban it for them, but no others. Also isnt child pornography illegal anyway? I dont see how banning normal porn for them will make any difference to child abuse anyway. Its blatantly a token gesture which wll make no difference, yet pretty much trying to say that its just aborigines who abuse their children
http://www.guardian.co.uk/australia/story/0,,2108122,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12
Australia is to ban alcohol and pornography in Aboriginal areas in the Northern Territory in a bid to curb child sex abuse.
All Aboriginal children in the territory will be medically examined.
The new proposals follow a report last week which found evidence of abuse in each of the territory's 45 communities.
The report blamed high levels of alcohol and poverty for the situation, which Prime Minister John Howard has described as a national emergency.
I think this is outrageous tbh. John Howard is such a racist cunt. You get child abuse everywhere, and you cant just single out one community and ban something for aborigine areas but not white areas.
If pornography and alcohol lead to sexual violence, then surely they should ban it everywhere not just in certain areas. I dont think it does - well alcohol leads to violence, but its not fair to just ban it for them, but no others. Also isnt child pornography illegal anyway? I dont see how banning normal porn for them will make any difference to child abuse anyway. Its blatantly a token gesture which wll make no difference, yet pretty much trying to say that its just aborigines who abuse their children
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
Agreed. He cant select certain places over certain others. We know he is a nasty man anyway, this is just the icing on the cake.
And oh yeah, John Howard is a racist cunt too. Imagine if guns were banned in "black areas" in America because there is more gun crime there? There'd be outrage.
At what point does the international community say "this is not right"?
How the hell did it get like this. How on earth can these communities be helped?
As for this issue itself... I think the banning of alcohol is unnecessary. A twisted child molester is not going to need alcohol before carrying out acts of evil against a child. Whilst I'd agree that alcoholism must be tackled, this doesn't seem the right way forward to me. Poverty is the issue that must be dealt with, and I await with interest what Mr Howard has to say about that.
Why is it so good that some immigrants were not allowed in? You really do hold some xenophobic opinions. Whats so bad about Human Rights? Wouldn you rather not have any?
And yet they seem happy to accept my, white, brother in law and his family...
It's bollocks. racism is alive and well in Oz and numerous laws over the years have proven that. Do we need to talk about how they treated Aboriginal children not so long ago?
ETA and you wonder why I suggested that you are reactionary on race issues. There is a very good question which is often asked in cases like that you mention - why should we help these people, why should we house them, feed them, clothe them. Why should we offer them economic refugee status? The answer is simple. Because we can.
Being what he is, "Arbeit macht frei" would be my guess.
The immigrants were illegals. They weren't supposed to be there in the first place. If they want to go and live in Australia that much, they can apply legally, not try and sneak in on a ship. Of course, in the UK, you know what would happen. The Left, led by The Guardian and the BBC, would moan relentlessly about these people's "human rights" until the Government capitulated and let them all in. This despite the fact that not one of them would have any entitlement to be here. But of course, to Lefties, such facts don't matter. And why did those illegals deserve any compassion?
Perhaps the question should be, why didn't they?
Why should people be stopped from doing that, purely because of accident of birth?
Sad though it is, I often get the impression that your views are more based on race than on any compassionate (or lack of) grounds... either that or you are some sort of sociopath who wouldn't feed a starving child...
However, I can't condone illegal immigrants. If they are that desperate to improve their lives, I see no reason why they can't try going through the official channels and applying legally. Have you seen the pictures of immigrants coming through the English Channel on the back of lorries, sometimes underneath them? If they made one step wrong, they could be paralysed for life, or might die altogether. I can't condone anything which makes people take such horrendous risks with their lives.
People take these risks because death is imminant in their own country anyway. You think it's easy emigrating to other countries legally? It's quite hard even for us white people nevermind them.
Seeing as we were actually talking about Oz, do you have any idea how much it costs to get yourself a visa?
Are these the immigrants that subsequently drowned?
Errrr...the same reason anyone deserves compassion?
I reckon it's just a word he heard in the Daily Mail one time and has been spouting it as an attempted derogatory term in any thread he disagrees with since then. If lefty refers to someone who supports human rights, then I'm proud to be one, but I suspect that all the people of a more right-wing persuasion who are also advocates of human rights might be a little insulted by that insinuation.
On the whole boaty thing, I was under the impression that the people onboard were in fact asylum seekers, not illegal immigrants. Not that I'd expect SG to make the distinction, since they're all just johnny foreigners looking for a free meal ticket, obviously. :rolleyes:
On the question of why John Howard can get away with this obvious racism, I think he's been very careful in saying that certain areas of the country will have a pornography ban and alcohol ban, and it just so happens that these are the more Aboriginal areas. If he'd actually said that Aboriginies couldn't buy these items, but other ethnic groups could, there would be widespread condemnation at the highest level of politics. As it is, he's avoided it because everyone in politics is too gutless to point out what we all know is going on. I'd expect this type of shit in Zimbabwe, I wouldn't expect it in Australia.
mind if i ask you how you expect someone to apply for refugee statu immigration from a country where theres a war or a dictator? and to get papers from their government, in say a country like somalia where there isn't a government as we know it?
Are you aware the practically all immigrants who risk death by attempting to reach a country illegally by sea are escaping persecution, war or famine?
Considering the above, how exactly do you propose that a person in such position could
a) afford a passport
b) afford a visa
c) be given a passport
d) be granted a visa
I suppose they should just accept their fate and be murdered/starve to death because it would be just unnaceptable if they were to break the law wouldn't it? :rolleyes:
other than the point of the joke being missed i hear bagdad is quite cheap at this time of year
Yeah fuck 'em, let 'em drown fucking nig nogs, eh stargalaxy?