Is something amiss?

[Suspense]

Politicians pay tribute to Vietnam veterans

Prime Minister John Howard has apologised to Australia's 50,000 Vietnam War veterans.

"The sad fact is Mr Speaker that those who served in Vietnam were not welcomed back as they should have been at the time," Mr Howard said.

"And I think the nation collectively Mr Speaker, whatever out views may be - and I include those who supported the war, as well as those who opposed it - that we collectively failed those men at the time and they are owed our regrets and our apologies for that failure."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1717464.htm

Vs.

THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP:
Australians of this generation should not be required to accept guilt and blame for past actions and policies over which they had no control.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/special/rsjproject/rsjlibrary/car/arc/speeches/opening/howard.htm


Can the Aboriginals expect a formal apology on behalf of the nation soon, Mr. Howard?

 

[just maybe]

I was about to say the same thing.

Astoundingly delicious hypocrisy. Creamy, rich, dripping double standards.

 

[Suspense]

Indeed. Howard seems to think that this generations' non-aboriginal australians should not be held responsible for the actions of past generations, which I completely agree with. I didn't take aboriginal children away from their parents, I didn't rape any aboriginal women and I didn't slaughter any Aboriginals either.

But, why is it too much to ask for the same "Apology on behalf of the nation" for the actions of Australians at that time?

I didn't treat Vietnam War vets poorly or shun them, but issuing them with an apology on behalf of the nation for how they were treated at the time is the right thing to do.

Why can't he extend that apologetic nature to the Aboriginal people, seeing as he as already gone against his own reasoning for not apologising to them. Unless the colour of their skin has something to do with it...but that is mere supposition.

 

[FrediKanoute]

Indeed. Howard seems to think that this generations' non-aboriginal australians should not be held responsible for the actions of past generations, which I completely agree with. I didn't take aboriginal children away from their parents, I didn't rape any aboriginal women and I didn't slaughter any Aboriginals either.

But, why is it too much to ask for the same "Apology on behalf of the nation" for the actions of Australians at that time?

I didn't treat Vietnam War vets poorly or shun them, but issuing them with an apology on behalf of the nation for how they were treated at the time is the right thing to do.

Why can't he extend that apologetic nature to the Aboriginal people, seeing as he as already gone against his own reasoning for not apologising to them. Unless the colour of their skin has something to do with it...but that is mere supposition.

He's a bigot!

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Its the same argument as "why can Australians feel pride on ANZAC Day or Remembrance day but not by the same token feel guilt or shame for the plight of the indigenous Australians and the Stolen Generation."

 

[- PC -]

This folla got his apology at least

 

[Fire]

Is it me, or does that picture say "Australian War Memorial. Reproduction not permitted"?

 

[- PC -]

Is it me, or does that picture say "Australian War Memorial. Reproduction not permitted"?

Its you



If the mods deem it to be breaching copyright I am sure they will remove it. I got it from google...what is their status?

 

[Fire]

Its you



If the mods deem it to be breaching copyright I am sure they will remove it. I got it from google...what is their status?

I'm not being a nazi on this; just about everything is a breach of copyright nowadays with the ridiculous laws. Hell, uploading a JPEG, any JPEG onto a website is an infringement on copyright.

But you would want to be careful about the ones which specify that they don't want to be reproduced, particularly ones which show specific person or persons. You are liable, and in any event it isn't completely respectful for those in it.

Google wouldn’t reproduce this image, they would just link you to the site that does. I am guessing it was the Australian War Memorial site, or a site with an affiliation with them. Unless of course you got it from another website which was illegally showing it.

Again I aint trying to have a go at you, and I didn't intend to go on a rant when I first posted, but you might want to be more careful.

 

[- PC -]

I'm not being a nazi on this;

Again I aint trying to have a go at you, and I didn't intend to go on a rant when I first posted, but you might want to be more careful.

No, no problem. I did think about it before I posted it . I got it from a site called Diggerhistory. I am of the belief ( and stand to be corrected) that the ''not to be reprinted'' is for any profit use of the pic. That is how I understand the copyright laws.

As to the ''cultural sensitivities'' ..... why did he sit for the photo?

 

[fabulousphil]

When can the australians of irish, english heritage who were transported here against their will receive their apology, in fact some were innocent of their crimes, should their descendants be compensated.

When can the millions of irish catholics and their descendants who helped build this country but were treated as second class citizens by the ruling class receive their apology.

What about the pearl divers in Broome..... the kanakas and japanese and malay and their descendants where is their apology for the way they were treated, i believe they should be compensated .... at the very least.



And so on and so forth..... etc etc etc

 

[Demonic Ascent]

When can the australians of irish, english heritage who were transported here against their will receive their apology, in fact some were innocent of their crimes, should their descendants be compensated.

When can the millions of irish catholics and their descendants who helped build this country but were treated as second class citizens by the ruling class receive their apology.

What about the pearl divers in Broome..... the kanakas and japanese and malay and their descendants where is their apology for the way they were treated, i believe they should be compensated .... at the very least.



And so on and so forth..... etc etc etc

Ridiculous argument.

Every other country in the world that was occupied by Europeans and had the native population suppressed has made some type of treaty or apology with the indigenous peoples. Including the US and New Zealand.

The main difference is the english and irish can back to their own countries and cultures while the indigenous lands and cultures were destroyed.