Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Apr 28^th, 2020 at 2:53am:

This cherry-picked line is the only raving about Cook landing at Botany bay.
29 April. Captain Cook's journal:
"Men women and children on the south shore abreast of the Ship to which place I went in the boats in hopes of speaking with them accompaned by Mr Banks Dr Solander and Tupia- as we approached the shore they all made off except two Men who seem'd resolved to oppose our landing -"

Jasin wrote on Apr 27^th, 2020 at 7:09pm:


But, if someone came here to write about the aboriginal tin mining and copper smelting.

Woukd that be better, it's only a matter of time methinks.

If, listen very carefully, IF there was any hard evidence of aboriginal farming.
Do you think it woukd not be shouted from the rooftops?

If, there was any hard evidence that aboriginals constructed silos or grain storage, 
Do you think it would not be cheered and spoken across the globe?

But there is no evidence.
Even by people really, really, REALLY  trying to find some.

Now, without even a tiny shred of evidence, not one tiny little bit.
It's either the result of lies or a way to make yourself appear important.

How many archeologists have found any evidence of aboriginal farming or grain storage?

And yet, they can find the remnants of a farming house in England 1000 years after the farm was used.
And after the land was under a freeway

If it was there, it woukd be found.
As it has not been found, it does not exist
Pascoe is a liar and an opportunist.
Anyone who supports him is an idiot.

Simples.

Brian Ross wrote on Apr 28^th, 2020 at 12:24pm:


I know full well what Piltdown is - I took a little licence there... it being apt to consider that Pascoe seeks to be both a Homo Sapiens and a Cro-Magnon at the same time, and goes out of his way to seek the appearance of the latter.  As I said a Homo Sapiens skull fitted to a jawbone that never shuts up about unproven and unprovable things...much like Jasun and his assertions that the Indigenous would not have had the big fires etc... unproven and unprovable.

"Terra Nullius was not about social organisation it  was a legalistic slight of hand to dispossess the Indigenous Australians of an entire continent. 

Gobbledee-gook to say the same thing really... and point proven by your viewing treaties with other 'hunter-gather groups' - they were more numerous, often more organised, and more aggressive about hanging on to  their long-term residential land, and the treaties were often honoured more in the breach than in the keeping anyway.... Just legalistic sleight of hand.

Which way do you want it?  Either a treaty is legalistic sleight of hand or a non-treaty is - or should it be both?  In that case, upon what basis?

The Maoris got a Treaty - they fought pitched battles with the Pakeha - and besides - no amount of attempted re-writing can change what was past....

Now move on, boy - what exactly is Piltdown looking for here?  What does he hope to gain for his diaphanous 'Indigenous connection' passed down once verbally by a distant uncle long, long ago in a faraway galaxy?

What are his plans to actually assist the struggling Indigenes with their endemic problems? Or does he just think they should be handed sovereignty over the entire land and we just forget what everyone else has put into it?

What amazes me is that their spokespeople talk about things they could share etc - but only on terms that involve surrender.

Never gonna happen... 

Brian Ross wrote on Apr 28^th, 2020 at 4:21pm:


Please - by all means - lay them out for us!!

I don't find anything difficult, Brian - it seems you do.. the first step called accepting facts and not assertions.... all you've done for ages now is called me a racist without any justification - name calling is the last refuge of the incompetent - and thus far you have made no attempt to discuss these things you say...

Something seriously wrong with your mental processes, boy.

As I said - it's not racist in any way to disagree on the basis of a body of evidence that refutes the assertion made... and there is a basic rule in jurisprudence - if they lie once, you can never trust one thing they say.  If a German said they won WW II ..... or a Japanese said the US started the Pacific War.... the weight of evidence would say the opposite - and to say so is not racist.

Where you bin all your life, Laden?

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Apr 28^th, 2020 at 8:56pm:


Well they did live in a pristine environment where the waterways were crystal clear before Whitey drained them, turned them to muddy-brown,  introduced Carp, allowed hooved animals to ruin the edges (where breeding occurs for native fish) and basically turned them to crap.

It's obvious that Technology in the hands of Whitey has sent this world to it's current Turd standards.

Blacks own all the lands of the planet.
Yellows own all the Cities of the planet.
Browns own all the Temples... etc.

Whitey hugs the coastline of Australia because Whitey knows he belongs 'down under' the sea. 
Go on Whitey, down you go. Show us your 'superior technology and intellect'.
...nah, Whitey in Australia can only 'replicate' being British or American (all about Flight and the Skies).

C'mon Whitey Australia - show us how you can build some Subs better than the French. 

Well the use of Piltdown here is apt... read on... kinda like Minnesota Fats eh?  Piltdown Pascoe has a ring to it...

What does this 'prior ownership of the land' mean in reality?  In this day and age, given the vast improvements made to it - absolutely nothing.... including no right to demand payment or arbitrary confiscation of owned land.

Before you can claim 'rent' you have to pay for the improvements....

Indeed - but has Piltdown done RIGHT?  Or is he a strap-hanger on some lucrative venture to raid the national treasury without taking into consideration all the realities and the effects on everyone else?

Is he actually helping Aborigines?  Or is he just blowing it in the wind in the hope that political fear and short-sightedness will give them everything they demand without thought for all the rest, as the feminists have shown can be such a successful approach?

Will Saint Pascoe resolve the very REAL issues for the Indigenous these days?  Or will he just be another strap-hanger out for a quid?

I'll bet he'd be 'hurt' over such a rendering of his assertions and motives...

Details please - fixed ones - what exactly do these people WANT?  Other than to vent and make up fantasies? To 'do things their way' - WTF does that mean (no answer yet - just empty rhetoric)?  To believe they have an entitlement to a free ride (over and above the current one) that nobody else who has contributed to this nation is entitled™ to?  That they should be paid 'rent' on land that others have developed and made worthy of rent?

Hit me with some details, pilgrims... I'm sick of the rhetoric and bullshit...