The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted.

Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate.

https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people


Quote:

... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ...

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:19pm:

The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted. Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate. https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people Quote: ... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ...

 
Piss off.

Gnads wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:20pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2nd, 2021 at 1:19pm: The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted. Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate. https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people Quote: ... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ...   Piss off.

Evidently Gnads' testicles have been squeezed by facts that finger his ancestors.

Different times, different attitudes. Fitting 21st century mores to old ones. Bugger those Danes, Romans etc. ::)

lee wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:28pm:

Different times, different attitudes. Fitting 21st century mores to old ones. Bugger those Danes, Romans etc. ::)

Murder and genocide were crimes at that time.

Bugger your extremist associates if you wish.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:36pm:

Murder and genocide were crimes at that time.

Link?

Aboriginal murderers of Whites honoured in Australia..

When the first whites legally settled in Australia.

Many were murdered by the primitives who didn't want to share.

Fortunately, whites were far, far more advanced and simply continued to populate the largely unpopulated country and advanced to the brilliant heights where we are today.

Without whites, Australia could have been taken over by a different culture who woukd have Truely decimated the primitives without concern.

They should rejoice in the white, civilized and advanced people who are their saviour.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:24pm:

Gnads wrote on Jun 2nd, 2021 at 1:20pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2nd, 2021 at 1:19pm: The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted. Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate. https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people Quote: ... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ...   Piss off. Evidently Gnads' testicles have been squeezed by facts that finger his ancestors.

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on your front bum.

lee wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:28pm:

Different times, different attitudes. Fitting 21st century mores to old ones. Bugger those Danes, Romans etc. ::)

I know. That's what you always say about Moh, no?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 11:32am:

lee wrote on Jun 2nd, 2021 at 1:28pm: Different times, different attitudes. Fitting 21st century mores to old ones. Bugger those Danes, Romans etc. ::) I know. That's what you always say about Moh, no?

Ministry of health???

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:19pm:

The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted. Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate. https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people Quote: ... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ...

Yes, let's worry about what happened in the 19th century, that way you don't have to think about the endemic violence and abuse within black communities today.

"an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples."

So which is it going to be?  A heartless genocide of innocents, or an all out war?

You really can't have it both ways... tell me now - did these fearless Aboriginal warriors spare any prisoners they took or any wounded etc?  Or did they kill any they could get their hands on...?????

How long ago was it legal by Aboriginal law (recently surfaced) to kill Whites?

All Aboriginal place names should be expunged.......

Here is an amazing article - amazing for its obfuscations and blatant 'spin'.. e.g.  "Tribal leaders such as Manalargenna, on the east coast, gave up attempts to deal with whites and became a feared resistance leader, Professor Ryan said. Such men led bloody raids by Aborigines on settler families as the conflict intensified.

They were met with attacks by hundreds of British soldiers as well as paramilitary roving parties."

https://www.smh.com.au/national/more-than-1000-died-in-tasmanian-war-says-historian-20120427-1xq5p.html

"Mr Windschuttle rejected armed conflict as a key cause of the devastation of Tasmanian Aborigines and discounted suggestions they could have mounted organised guerilla warfare. He found plausible records for 120 killings by settlers and counted 187 whites killed by Aborigines."

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 1:13pm:

"an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples." So which is it going to be?  A heartless genocide of innocents, or an all out war? You really can't have it both ways... tell me now - did these fearless Aboriginal warriors spare any prisoners they took or any wounded etc?  Or did they kill any they could get their hands on...????? How long ago was it legal by Aboriginal law (recently surfaced) to kill Whites? All Aboriginal place names should be expunged.......

Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 1:17pm:

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:13pm: "an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples." So which is it going to be?  A heartless genocide of innocents, or an all out war? You really can't have it both ways... tell me now - did these fearless Aboriginal warriors spare any prisoners they took or any wounded etc?  Or did they kill any they could get their hands on...????? How long ago was it legal by Aboriginal law (recently surfaced) to kill Whites? All Aboriginal place names should be expunged....... Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide.

So they are now clobbering each other in huge numbers as self-defence.   Your idea, no doubt, it's so stupid.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 1:17pm:

[quote author=The_Grappler link=1622603970/12#12 date=1622690017] Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide.

Not a good reader, huh?  Who'd 've thunk it?  How is it genocide if the Whites RETALIATED, but not genocide when the Aborigines tried to wipe the Whites out?

lee wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 11:53am:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 11:32am: lee wrote on Jun 2nd, 2021 at 1:28pm: Different times, different attitudes. Fitting 21st century mores to old ones. Bugger those Danes, Romans etc. ::) I know. That's what you always say about Moh, no? Ministry of health???

Exactly. Moh wasn't really a kiddy-fiddler, you say. It was different times.

But 19th century Australia, well. Where was the law against killing Boongs?

Ask Laugh that, Lee. Chase him around for a few pages asking where, on the King's land, anyone had to obey the British criminal code.

I dare you.

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 1:26pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:17pm: [quote author=The_Grappler link=1622603970/12#12 date=1622690017] Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide. Not a good reader, huh?  Who'd 've thunk it?  How is it genocide if the Whites RETALIATED, but not genocide when the Aborigines tried to wipe the Whites out?

Good point, dear. They tried to give Whitey smallpox, yes?

How diabolically cunning of them. Not cricket, no?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 3:40pm:

Chase him around for a few pages asking where, on the King's land, anyone had to obey the British criminal code.

it was the Law on genocide I was really interested in.  ;)

lee wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 5:59pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 3:40pm: Chase him around for a few pages asking where, on the King's land, anyone had to obey the British criminal code. it was the Law on genocide I was really interested in.  ;)

Cunning, no?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 3:43pm:

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:26pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:17pm: [quote author=The_Grappler link=1622603970/12#12 date=1622690017] Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide. Not a good reader, huh?  Who'd 've thunk it?  How is it genocide if the Whites RETALIATED, but not genocide when the Aborigines tried to wipe the Whites out? Good point, dear. They tried to give Whitey smallpox, yes? How diabolically cunning of them. Not cricket, no?

They "tried" to give anyone anything?

Please explain?

Who did - when and where?

Sorry to introduce reality into your Black Panther Party...

Good one shitter. Still complaining about the past.  8-)

The only reason you're complaining is because those whites you complain about and hate so much allowed you have your say.......but only after they built a civilised society, to which you still take for granted.  ;D ;D ;D
Beats sleeping in a dry river bed covered in vomit I suppose  ;)

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 1:26pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:17pm: [quote author=The_Grappler link=1622603970/12#12 date=1622690017] Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide. Not a good reader, huh?  Who'd 've thunk it?  How is it genocide if the Whites RETALIATED, but not genocide when the Aborigines tried to wipe the Whites out?

Whites were invaders moron.

The right to fight invaders is recognized internationally and universally.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 9:46am:

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:26pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:17pm: [quote author=The_Grappler link=1622603970/12#12 date=1622690017] Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide. Not a good reader, huh?  Who'd 've thunk it?  How is it genocide if the Whites RETALIATED, but not genocide when the Aborigines tried to wipe the Whites out? Whites were invaders moron. The right to fight invaders is recognized internationally and universally.

They lost. Idiot.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 9:46am:

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:26pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:17pm: [quote author=The_Grappler link=1622603970/12#12 date=1622690017] Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide. Not a good reader, huh?  Who'd 've thunk it?  How is it genocide if the Whites RETALIATED, but not genocide when the Aborigines tried to wipe the Whites out? Whites were invaders moron. The right to fight invaders is recognized internationally and universally.

They settled peacefully... essentially the first ones were cast adrift, moron.  Hardly an invasion.

And yes - they lost, so there is no going back.

"... and as part of the peace treaty with Nazi Germany, the Allies will return to them their concentration camps and their established civil rights under that government... in return for which the Nazis will keep the peace... now just sign here, Adolph, shake hands all around and all's good..."

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2021 at 3:43pm:

The Grappler wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:26pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 3rd, 2021 at 1:17pm: [quote author=The_Grappler link=1622603970/12#12 date=1622690017] Genocide is not a war. Any acts of violence by the Aboriginals was in protection of their existence from genocide. Not a good reader, huh?  Who'd 've thunk it?  How is it genocide if the Whites RETALIATED, but not genocide when the Aborigines tried to wipe the Whites out? Good point, dear. They tried to give Whitey smallpox, yes? How diabolically cunning of them. Not cricket, no?

That's how infection works... that old bug don't give one damn what colour your paint job is....

"Papa, little Johnny's got smallpox again!"

"I told him not to play with them Black kids... I'll tan his hide for him when he gets home!"

Grappler is an expert on infection. Grappler is infected with hate.

Grappler's hate is in his genes and his jeans.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:19pm:

The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted. Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate. https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people Quote: ... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ...

It is completely incorrect and misleading to generalize and accuse whites of genocide against Aboriginal people and to say "white killers" instead of "Anglo-Saxon killers".
Why do you act cowardly hesitant to tell the truth by making political correctness out of lies?
So the correct title of this topic would be: Anglo (Anglo-Saxon) murderers of Aborigines honored in Australia
The genocide against the Aborigines was systematically committed by the Anglo-Saxon population, and you cannot blame the French, Germans, Russians, Greeks, Italians, etc. for this terrible crime.
Despite all the undeniable historical facts, there is a trend of revisionist historical generalization in the Australian media, and even in academic circles where "Europeans" and "whites" are responsible for this crime, not to mention the British colonial empire and especially the Anglo-Saxon population, the greatest protagonists and defenders of the mass murder of Aboriginal people in Australia.
:)

Got it:

https://cdn-japantimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/np_file_69604-870x489.jpeg

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 1:47pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2nd, 2021 at 1:19pm: The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted. Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate. https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people Quote: ... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ... It is completely incorrect and misleading to generalize and accuse whites of genocide against Aboriginal people and to say "white killers" instead of "Anglo-Saxon killers". Why do you act cowardly hesitant to tell the truth by making political correctness out of lies? So the correct title of this topic would be: Anglo (Anglo-Saxon) murderers of Aborigines honored in Australia The genocide against the Aborigines was systematically committed by the Anglo-Saxon population, and you cannot blame the French, Germans, Russians, Greeks, Italians, etc. for this terrible crime. Despite all the undeniable historical facts, there is a trend of revisionist historical generalization in the Australian media, and even in academic circles where "Europeans" and "whites" are responsible for this crime, not to mention the British colonial empire and especially the Anglo-Saxon population, the greatest protagonists and defenders of the mass murder of Aboriginal people in Australia. :)

Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in
comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million?

How would you know if they are Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Celtic? Most settlers to Australia from the years before the 1940s were Anglo-Celtic.

rhino wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 2:28pm:

Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million?

The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions.

In fact the British invented scalping.

https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 2:37pm:

rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. [url]https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The English and the French,as many Indians as possible.[/url]

Until we invent a time machine Im going to focus on massacres occurring now, and that means Chinese massacres, particularly of the Uyrgurs, Im unsure why you support Chinese genocide.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 2:37pm:

rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions.

My people were Scandanavian. Try the Vikings if you want to pin something on me historically.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 2:35pm:

How would you know if they are Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Celtic? Most settlers to Australia from the years before the 1940s were Anglo-Celtic.

The term Anglo-Celtic is also a very cunning attempt by the genocidal Anglo-Saxons to shift the blame for their crimes on others, even on their Irish victims.
A huge difference should be noticed between the British and Irish colonists who were forcibly brought to the largest British Gulag in the history of the world called Australia.
The British were detained as convicted criminals, while the Irish were prisoners of war or dissidents fighting to liberate their country from British occupation (Robert Hughes "The fatal Shore" https://www.amazon.com.au/Fatal-Shore-Robert-Hughes/dp/0394506685)
From this perspective, the term Australian "Anglo-Celtic population" is morally unacceptable.
There is evidence of a large number of crimes and retaliation against the Irish by the Anglo-Saxon invaders and in Australia where the Irish have long been considered second-class citizens.
The British did not use Africans only as slaves.
The first British slaves in America were actually Irish.

„27. In August 2019, Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris marked the 400th anniversary of the first recorded import of enslaved Africans to Virginia by calling for a showdown with the "history of slavery and institutional racism" in her country.

Two days later, frequent Fox News contributor and right-wing author Janie Johnson (who has about 210,000 followers on Twitter) tweeted a rhetorical response to Harris, saying "What about the Irish as America's FIRST slaves?" He suggests that the Irish were slaves. in British colonial America before the African people "
:)

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 2:37pm:

rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible.

Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing.
:)

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:46pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :)

Foreign devils eh?

Wonder what Tibetans and Uighurs think?

How about that Tiananmen Square massacre?

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 2:37pm:

In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible.

So watch it, Dingdong. Tsk tsk    ::) ::)

rhino wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 2:43pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. My people were Scandanavian. Try the Vikings if you want to pin something on me historically.

Then shut up
;D

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:33pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:35pm: How would you know if they are Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Celtic? Most settlers to Australia from the years before the 1940s were Anglo-Celtic. The term Anglo-Celtic is also a very cunning attempt by the genocidal Anglo-Saxons to shift the blame for their crimes on others, even on their Irish victims. A huge difference should be noticed between the British and Irish colonists who were forcibly brought to the largest British Gulag in the history of the world called Australia. The British were detained as convicted criminals, while the Irish were prisoners of war or dissidents fighting to liberate their country from British occupation (Robert Hughes "The fatal Shore" https://www.amazon.com.au/Fatal-Shore-Robert-Hughes/dp/0394506685) From this perspective, the term Australian "Anglo-Celtic population" is morally unacceptable. There is evidence of a large number of crimes and retaliation against the Irish by the Anglo-Saxon invaders and in Australia where the Irish have long been considered second-class citizens. The British did not use Africans only as slaves. The first British slaves in America were actually Irish. „27. In August 2019, Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris marked the 400th anniversary of the first recorded import of enslaved Africans to Virginia by calling for a showdown with the "history of slavery and institutional racism" in her country. Two days later, frequent Fox News contributor and right-wing author Janie Johnson (who has about 210,000 followers on Twitter) tweeted a rhetorical response to Harris, saying "What about the Irish as America's FIRST slaves?" He suggests that the Irish were slaves. in British colonial America before the African people " :)

Your inferiority complex is showing, Fu Manchu.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:51pm:

athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:46pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :) Foreign devils eh? Wonder what Tibetans and Uighurs think? How about that Tiananmen Square massacre

China did not send pirates and drug dealers to occupy and rob the evil British Isles, but it was the other way around.
:)

Frank wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:58pm:

athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:33pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:35pm: How would you know if they are Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Celtic? Most settlers to Australia from the years before the 1940s were Anglo-Celtic. The term Anglo-Celtic is also a very cunning attempt by the genocidal Anglo-Saxons to shift the blame for their crimes on others, even on their Irish victims. A huge difference should be noticed between the British and Irish colonists who were forcibly brought to the largest British Gulag in the history of the world called Australia. The British were detained as convicted criminals, while the Irish were prisoners of war or dissidents fighting to liberate their country from British occupation (Robert Hughes "The fatal Shore" https://www.amazon.com.au/Fatal-Shore-Robert-Hughes/dp/0394506685) From this perspective, the term Australian "Anglo-Celtic population" is morally unacceptable. There is evidence of a large number of crimes and retaliation against the Irish by the Anglo-Saxon invaders and in Australia where the Irish have long been considered second-class citizens. The British did not use Africans only as slaves. The first British slaves in America were actually Irish. „27. In August 2019, Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris marked the 400th anniversary of the first recorded import of enslaved Africans to Virginia by calling for a showdown with the "history of slavery and institutional racism" in her country. Two days later, frequent Fox News contributor and right-wing author Janie Johnson (who has about 210,000 followers on Twitter) tweeted a rhetorical response to Harris, saying "What about the Irish as America's FIRST slaves?" He suggests that the Irish were slaves. in British colonial America before the African people " :) Your inferiority complex is showing, Fu Manchu.

??????????????????????????????????????????????
Please restrain from Anglo racist comments.
:D

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:59pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:51pm: athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:46pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :) Foreign devils eh? Wonder what Tibetans and Uighurs think? How about that Tiananmen Square massacre China did not send pirates and drug dealers to occupy and rob the evil British Isles, but it was the other way around. :)

Wonder what Tibetans and Uighurs think?

How about that Tiananmen Square massacre? It's June 4th... Do you have any commemorations planned?

https://www.snopes.com/tachyon/2018/08/irish-slaves.png?resize=865,452&quality=65

Frank wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:53pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. So watch it, Dingdong. Tsk tsk    ::) ::)

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 4:13pm:

https://www.snopes.com/tachyon/2018/08/irish-slaves.png?resize=865,452&quality=65

How about that Tiananmen Square massacre? It's June 4th... Do you have any commemorations planned?

.

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:53pm:

rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:43pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. My people were Scandanavian. Try the Vikings if you want to pin something on me historically. Then shut up ;D

This isnt Hong Kong, free speech rules and no slaves. Sucks doesnt it?  ;D

Some Australians work under the mistaken belief that they have a right to Freedom of Speech.  *SIGH* I'd love them to point out where that is annunciated in law.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 4:31pm:

Some Australians work under the mistaken belief that they have a right to Freedom of Speech.  *SIGH* I'd love them to point out where that is annunciated in law.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

As a lawyer once told me, there is free speech in Australia. However, free speech has consequences. Those consequences can have legal implications.

Is that a reasonable summation?

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 5:20pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 4:31pm: Some Australians work under the mistaken belief that they have a right to Freedom of Speech.  *SIGH* I'd love them to point out where that is annunciated in law.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) As a lawyer once told me, there is free speech in Australia. However, free speech has consequences. Those consequences can have legal implications. Is that a reasonable summation?

Yes and no.  There is no right to Freedom of Speech in Australia.  The Government can legislate to limit speech, as it has done in the past and impose censorship when ever it wants. There are also legal implications to the exercise of Freedom of Speech.   The Government has no imposed censorship on Political commentary.  These are things that most Australians do not understand.

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 4:31pm:

Some Australians work under the mistaken belief that they have a right to Freedom of Speech.  *SIGH* I'd love them to point out where that is annunciated in law.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Freedom of speech is implied in Australia not legislated. We may say what we wish subject to certain limitations like laws of libel and the disclosure of certain information.
Unfortunately governments have been encroaching on this implied freedom with more intrusive legislation like 18C, which is attempting to stifle free discussion under the guise of racial vilification. The 'hate  speech' catchall is the usual suspects wet dream and must be resisted by anyone who truly values the freedom to express any idea or opinion no matter if someone is offended. 

Rights defined are rights limited.

As for no censorship imposed on political commentary, ask  Andrew Bolt about that... ::)

Just a quick survey.

How many people living today, participated in aboriginal genocide?

And how many abbos parents or grandparents were murdered by genocidal methods?

And yet, ALL WHITES are considered responsible for crimes committed
Not by us
Not by our parents
Not by our parents parents
Not by any of our kin.

Simply because we are white, we are guilty.

If that's not racism......what is??????

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 5:35pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 5:20pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 4:31pm: Some Australians work under the mistaken belief that they have a right to Freedom of Speech.  *SIGH* I'd love them to point out where that is annunciated in law.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) As a lawyer once told me, there is free speech in Australia. However, free speech has consequences. Those consequences can have legal implications. Is that a reasonable summation? Yes and no.  There is no right to Freedom of Speech in Australia.  The Government can legislate to limit speech, as it has done in the past and impose censorship when ever it wants. There are also legal implications to the exercise of Freedom of Speech.   The Government has no imposed censorship on Political commentary.  These are things that most Australians do not understand.

You are an idiot. A fantasist idiot. But what's  new.  The RESPONSIBLE government can introduce legislation, as can the Opposition, or independets/unaligned. That does not mean the government can 'impose censorship whenever it wants".  Laws are made by Parliament, you stupid, lying, deceiving - or just ignorant idiotic - fool, not by governments.  There are limits to speech everywhere. What the limits are is the issue and what the considerations are for those limits.   Cheeses, every time to venture off your safe yawn and tut tut responses you prove yourself to be a bigger and more ignorant idiot than I have ever thought you to be - and that's  saying something.



"These are things that most Australians do not understand." - BINGO !!   that's  a 5 out of 5 on the 'pompous fccn know-nothing bignoting himself' scale. You understand nothing. Stick to yawning, eyerolling and tut-tutting.  Anything else - you are out of your depth.

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 5:35pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 5:20pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 4:31pm: Some Australians work under the mistaken belief that they have a right to Freedom of Speech.  *SIGH* I'd love them to point out where that is annunciated in law.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::) As a lawyer once told me, there is free speech in Australia. However, free speech has consequences. Those consequences can have legal implications. Is that a reasonable summation? Yes and no.  There is no right to Freedom of Speech in Australia.  The Government can legislate to limit speech, as it has done in the past and impose censorship when ever it wants. There are also legal implications to the exercise of Freedom of Speech.   The Government has no imposed censorship on Political commentary.  These are things that most Australians do not understand.

You are an idiot. A fantasist idiot. But what's  new.  The RESPONSIBLE government can introduce legislation, as can the Opposition, or independets/unaligned. That does not mean the government can 'impose censorship whenever it wants".  Laws are made by Parliament, you stupid, lying, deceiving - or just ignorant idiotic - fool, not by governments.  There are limits to speech everywhere. What the limits are is the issue and what the considerations are for those limits.   Cheeses, every time to venture off your safe yawn and tut tut responses you prove yourself to be a bigger and more ignorant idiot than I have ever thought you to be - and that's  saying something.



"These are things that most Australians do not understand." - BINGO !!   that's  a 5 out of 5 on the 'pompous fccn know-nothing bignoting himself' scale. You understand nothing. Stick to yawning, eyerolling and tut-tutting.  Anything else - you are out of your depth.

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 4:31pm:

Some Australians work under the mistaken belief that they have a right to Freedom of Speech.  *SIGH* I'd love them to point out where that is annunciated in law.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Sure, here ya go

Quote:

The Australian Constitution does not explicitly protect freedom of expression. However, the High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensible part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution. It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals.

In brief, the constitution  protects the right to free speech.

I was listening to a story by an American journalist for the New York Times who was living in Australia (as the Times' Australian connection) for a few years and he made some very interesting comments on the issue of 'official' secrecy in Australia compared to the US.

His assessment was that Australian parliaments and politicians have almost a fetish with secrecy... In the US, reps of government are much more free to express an opinion than their Australian counterparts... Also FOI in Australia is a labyrinthine process compared to the US.

Well we certainly dont have the degree of freedom of speech they have
in the US, but freedom of speech is never absolute, even in the US. They do seem to tolerate hate speech over there, more than we would, thats more than likely why these right wing hate groups dont gain much of a footage in this country.

rhino wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 7:06pm:

Well we certainly dont have the degree of freedom of speech they have in the US, but freedom of speech is never absolute, even in the US. They do seem to tolerate hate speech over there, more than we would, thats more than likely why these right wing hate groups dont gain much of a footage in this country.

Yes... The US journalist's comments included those on Australia's secrecy laws which could be applied to even the most mundane of issues within government.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 7:02pm:

I was listening to a story by an American journalist for the New York Times who was living in Australia (as the Times' Australian connection) for a few years and he made some very interesting comments on the issue of 'official' secrecy in Australia compared to the US. His assessment was that Australian parliaments and politicians have almost a fetish with secrecy... In the US, reps of government are much more free to express an opinion than their Australian counterparts... Also FOI in Australia is a labyrinthine process compared to the US.

you should see the freedoms in China.

Anyway -  the US is still the leading light because it was created for just that purpose. Australia has a lot of hang-overs from the UK, as does Canada, but our constitution being a hybrid, Australia can and does take a lot of clues from the US eve as we retain, very sensibly, the British way of thinking about and applying them.

The US has a pseudo-monarchical system, with the prez acting like George the Third - ie what as the way in 1776. Australia has nothing of that pseudo monarchical presidential system. Any move to a republic, however, would shift Australia towards that way of governance. It is a really bad idea - so all the idiots are agitating for it.

The absolute beauty of the Australian system is that it elects a bi-cameral legislature  like the US, balancing States, as well as representative (lower house) based on electorates. It avoids the electoral college system but also avoids the pseudo-monarchical presidential system. No House of Lords either.


It's an absolute beauty. The Monarch has supreme authority but no executive power. Fccn GENIOUS. It has taken about 800 years to get to hiss genius level. No prick coming out of Sydney Uni can possibly improve it (No, Malcolm, you could not. Sit).

The 'republican' model is for the Chinese and the Irish and their hangers-on.  Baaaad.

I agree Frank, no need to change our system.

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:46pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :)

The silk road was built from the west to the east. The mummies from the Taklimakan(Xinjiang) show Eurasian not East Asian(Han) origins. The wheel, bronze, iron, war horse were all gifts from the west through the Indo-European people that settled there first.

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:46pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :)

LoL
https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-the-khans-series/

Gordon wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 8:53pm:

athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:46pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :) LoL https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-the-khans-series/

No need to look at history, just look at Xinjiang.



Quote:

The first inhabitants came from the west.[1] The oldest Tarim mummies, found in the Tarim Basin, are dated to the 2nd millennium BCE, when the Indo-European Tocharians inhabited the Tarim Basin. In the first millennium BCE the Tarim Basin was inhabited by the Indo-European Yuezhi nomads. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Xinjiang

So is it Islam or their ethnicity the Han have a problem with? Perhaps both.

Setanta wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 8:43pm:

athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:46pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :) The silk road was built from the west to the east. The mummies from the Taklimakan(Xinjiang) show Eurasian not East Asian(Han) origins. The wheel, bronze, iron, war horse were all gifts from the west through the Indo-European people that settled there first.

What a load of crap. Mesopotamia which is now Iraq is credited with inventing the wheel and China is also credited with independently inventing the wheel sometime later.

The Silk road didn't "go to the West", it stopped at Rome. At that time much of Europe was uncivilized and the UK didn't get civilized until the Romans forced them to take baths.

Setanta is a spreader of disinformation.

Setanta's next pile of crap will be that "the West" invented and created the Chinese.


Quote:

True potter's wheels, which are freely-spinning and have a wheel and axle mechanism, were developed in Mesopotamia (Iraq) by 4200–4000 BC. The oldest surviving example, which was found in Ur (modern day Iraq), dates to approximately 3100 BC. Wheel - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Wheel

Setanta wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 8:55pm:

Gordon wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 8:53pm: athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:46pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :) LoL https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-the-khans-series/ No need to look at history, just look at Xinjiang. Quote: The first inhabitants came from the west.[1] The oldest Tarim mummies, found in the Tarim Basin, are dated to the 2nd millennium BCE, when the Indo-European Tocharians inhabited the Tarim Basin. In the first millennium BCE the Tarim Basin was inhabited by the Indo-European Yuezhi nomads. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Xinjiang So is it Islam or their ethnicity the Han have a problem with? Perhaps both.

English gene :)

When the Mongol hordes invaded Asia, the Middle East, and Europe they left behind a massive body count, depopulating many regions. With less people, large swathes of cultivated fields eventually returned to forests, absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
https://news.mongabay.com/2011/01/how-genghis-khan-cooled-the-planet/

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 9:05pm:

Setanta wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 8:43pm: athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:46pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :) The silk road was built from the west to the east. The mummies from the Taklimakan(Xinjiang) show Eurasian not East Asian(Han) origins. The wheel, bronze, iron, war horse were all gifts from the west through the Indo-European people that settled there first. What a load of crap. Mesopotamia which is now Iraq is credited with inventing the wheel and China is also credited with independently inventing the wheel sometime later. The Silk road didn't "go to the West", it stopped at Rome. At that time much of Europe was uncivilized and the UK didn't get civilized until the Romans forced them to take baths. Setanta is a spreader of disinformation. Setanta's next pile of crap will be that "the West" invented and created the Chinese. Quote: True potter's wheels, which are freely-spinning and have a wheel and axle mechanism, were developed in Mesopotamia (Iraq) by 4200–4000 BC. The oldest surviving example, which was found in Ur (modern day Iraq), dates to approximately 3100 BC. Wheel - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Wheel

You're hopeless. The west, and all those places you proffer are west, came to the doors of China 2-3000bc. The evidence is in the mummies.

edit: Their ethnicity is also in their faces, google some pics. Kinda strange the Chinese "invented" the wheel, bronze and iron at the same time they interacted with others that had that knowledge. Same with horses, chariots. All work/war horses are of Eurasian descent, they were brought east.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 7:22pm:

rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 7:06pm: Well we certainly dont have the degree of freedom of speech they have in the US, but freedom of speech is never absolute, even in the US. They do seem to tolerate hate speech over there, more than we would, thats more than likely why these right wing hate groups dont gain much of a footage in this country. Yes... The US journalist's comments included those on Australia's secrecy laws which could be applied to even the most mundane of issues within government.

Thats probably true, Ive worked with the government, If a member of the bureaucracy here doesnt want you to know something, you wont get the information. Even under FOI laws.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2021 at 1:19pm:

The names of the murderers should be expunged from public places and public apologies should be installed  in the places where these names were adopted. Batman is one, which is the name of a Federal electorate. https://www.quora.com/How-long-ago-was-it-legal-for-white-Australians-to-kill-Aboriginal-people Quote: ... This may go some way to explaining why, within a few years of the initial settlement, an all-out war was raging between the colony and the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples. Despite numerous instructions from Britain to cease these actions, the colonial government declared martial law and placed a bounty of ₤5 for every Aboriginal adult and ₤2 for every child captured. Lip service was paid to treating the Aboriginals “humanely” - often in the same paragraph as a “shoot on sight” order. For example, should someone seeking to capture Aboriginals for the bounty be “forced” to kill some of them, this was acceptable. Proclamations were made giving assurances to the Aboriginals that they were equal under the law, but the reality was pretty obvious. For example, John Batman, a resident of the colony at the time, led a raid against a group of 60–70 men, women and children. This raid was made on behalf of the colonial government. They killed 15 and captured 2 wounded men, a woman and her 2 year old son. Batman then wrote that he: "...found it impossible that the two former [the men] could walk, and after trying them by every means in my power, for some time, found I could not get them on I was obliged to shoot them." He returned with the other two. He handed the woman over to the authorities but kept the boy and another from a different incident because they were “as much his property as his farm”. ...

Natural selection, evolution.

No good?

rhino wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 9:47pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 7:22pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 7:06pm: Well we certainly dont have the degree of freedom of speech they have in the US, but freedom of speech is never absolute, even in the US. They do seem to tolerate hate speech over there, more than we would, thats more than likely why these right wing hate groups dont gain much of a footage in this country. Yes... The US journalist's comments included those on Australia's secrecy laws which could be applied to even the most mundane of issues within government. Thats probably true, Ive worked with the government, If a member of the bureaucracy here doesnt want you to know something, you wont get the information. Even under FOI laws.

Yes, that was exactly what the journalist referred to, as many of his (relatively innocuous) FOI requests were denied.

Frank wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 8:20pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 7:02pm: I was listening to a story by an American journalist for the New York Times who was living in Australia (as the Times' Australian connection) for a few years and he made some very interesting comments on the issue of 'official' secrecy in Australia compared to the US. His assessment was that Australian parliaments and politicians have almost a fetish with secrecy... In the US, reps of government are much more free to express an opinion than their Australian counterparts... Also FOI in Australia is a labyrinthine process compared to the US. you should see the freedoms in China. Anyway -  the US is still the leading light because it was created for just that purpose. Australia has a lot of hang-overs from the UK, as does Canada, but our constitution being a hybrid, Australia can and does take a lot of clues from the US eve as we retain, very sensibly, the British way of thinking about and applying them. The US has a pseudo-monarchical system, with the prez acting like George the Third - ie what as the way in 1776. Australia has nothing of that pseudo monarchical presidential system. Any move to a republic, however, would shift Australia towards that way of governance. It is a really bad idea - so all the idiots are agitating for it. The absolute beauty of the Australian system is that it elects a bi-cameral legislature  like the US, balancing States, as well as representative (lower house) based on electorates. It avoids the electoral college system but also avoids the pseudo-monarchical presidential system. No House of Lords either. It's an absolute beauty. The Monarch has supreme authority but no executive power. Fccn GENIOUS. It has taken about 800 years to get to hiss genius level. No prick coming out of Sydney Uni can possibly improve it (No, Malcolm, you could not. Sit). The 'republican' model is for the Chinese and the Irish and their hangers-on.  Baaaad.

Yes, Australia's secrecy fetish is a hangover from the British and their official secrets act.

The American 'founding fathers' did model their new system on the British system but combined the roles of 'Head of State' and 'Head of Government' into a singular role. In so doing they bypassed the problem of two sources of potential (and potentially competing) executive power. The British eventually had to deal with the problem as well, hence the concept of constitutional monarchy (i.e. pomp without power).

Setanta wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 9:13pm:

You're hopeless. The west, and all those places you proffer are west, came to the doors of China 2-3000bc. The evidence is in the mummies. edit: Their ethnicity is also in their faces, google some pics. Kinda strange the Chinese "invented" the wheel, bronze and iron at the same time they interacted with others that had that knowledge. Same with horses, chariots. All work/war horses are of Eurasian descent, they were brought east.

Setanta is full of sh!t.


Quote:

Medieval Europe was unknown to most of China and the far east. Those who ventured in person to Europe realized quickly that China was far advanced technologically. They believed that Europe didn't have anything to teach them. Medieval Europe was unknown to most of China and the far east. How much did medieval Europe know about China? - Quorahttps://www.quora.com › How-much-did-medieval-Europ.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 11:23pm:

Frank wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 8:20pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 7:02pm: I was listening to a story by an American journalist for the New York Times who was living in Australia (as the Times' Australian connection) for a few years and he made some very interesting comments on the issue of 'official' secrecy in Australia compared to the US. His assessment was that Australian parliaments and politicians have almost a fetish with secrecy... In the US, reps of government are much more free to express an opinion than their Australian counterparts... Also FOI in Australia is a labyrinthine process compared to the US. you should see the freedoms in China. Anyway -  the US is still the leading light because it was created for just that purpose. Australia has a lot of hang-overs from the UK, as does Canada, but our constitution being a hybrid, Australia can and does take a lot of clues from the US eve as we retain, very sensibly, the British way of thinking about and applying them. The US has a pseudo-monarchical system, with the prez acting like George the Third - ie what as the way in 1776. Australia has nothing of that pseudo monarchical presidential system. Any move to a republic, however, would shift Australia towards that way of governance. It is a really bad idea - so all the idiots are agitating for it. The absolute beauty of the Australian system is that it elects a bi-cameral legislature  like the US, balancing States, as well as representative (lower house) based on electorates. It avoids the electoral college system but also avoids the pseudo-monarchical presidential system. No House of Lords either. It's an absolute beauty. The Monarch has supreme authority but no executive power. Fccn GENIOUS. It has taken about 800 years to get to hiss genius level. No prick coming out of Sydney Uni can possibly improve it (No, Malcolm, you could not. Sit). The 'republican' model is for the Chinese and the Irish and their hangers-on.  Baaaad. Yes, Australia's secrecy fetish is a hangover from the British and their official secrets act. The American 'founding fathers' did model their new system on the British system but combined the roles of 'Head of State' and 'Head of Government' into a singular role. In so doing they bypassed the problem of two sources of potential (and potentially competing) executive power. The British eventually had to deal with the problem as well, hence the concept of constitutional monarchy (i.e. pomp without power).

The core problem with constitutional monarchy is that, as you'd expect, the monarch can command enormous covert and unaccountable influence.

Even the current monarch, as mindful of her constitutional limits as she is famously reputed to be, has influenced the outcomes of parliamentary acts when components of bills to be introduced to British parliament embarrass the monarch or the institution or expose the monarch to potential culpability for which, as the monarch, she cannot be indicted for anyway.

athos wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 3:46pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :)

Any comments coming from you in this thread are completely laughable ..... you racist hypocrite.

Look to your own back yard.

Your lot massacred or starved your own in the millions.

During Maos Great Leap Forward which incorporated the worst famine in human history the Chinese Great Famine it is estimated up to 50 million died.

Not all starved - millions were also killed outright


Quote:

Deaths by violence Not all deaths during the Great Leap were from starvation. Frank Dikötter estimates that at least 2.5 million people were beaten or tortured to death and one million to three million committed suicide.[112][63] He provides some illustrative examples. In Xinyang, where over a million died in 1960, 6–7% (around 67,000) of these were beaten to death by the militias. In Daoxian county, 10% of those who died had been "buried alive, clubbed to death or otherwise killed by party members and their militia." In Shimen county, around 13,500 died in 1960, of these 12% were "beaten or driven to their deaths."[113] In accounts documented by Yang Jisheng,[41][60] people were beaten or killed for rebelling against the government, reporting the real harvest numbers, for sounding alarm, for refusing to hand over what little food they had left, for trying to flee the famine area, for begging food or as little as stealing scraps or angering officials.

So I'd suggest you runaway with your BS input you CCP stooge.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 9:05pm:

Setanta wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 8:43pm: athos wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 3:46pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:37pm: rhino wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 2:28pm: Does the same argument apply to the genocides and massacres committed by the Chinese? Any aboriginal deaths pale in comparison to the tens of millions of  murders committed by the Chinese. How many Urgurs massacred so far? A million? The British, Rhino's people, are the experts at massacres, probably hundreds of millions. In fact the British invented scalping. https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/scalping-in-america#:~:text=The%20English%20and%20the%20French,as%20many%20Indians%20as%20possible. Absolutely, such an urge to destroy and enslave other human beings cannot be explained by anything other than the possession of the so-called "British Evil gene", which means that the Anglo-Saxons are programmed to destroy others in terms of their nature and upbringing. :) The silk road was built from the west to the east. The mummies from the Taklimakan(Xinjiang) show Eurasian not East Asian(Han) origins. The wheel, bronze, iron, war horse were all gifts from the west through the Indo-European people that settled there first. What a load of crap. Mesopotamia which is now Iraq is credited with inventing the wheel and China is also credited with independently inventing the wheel sometime later. The Silk road didn't "go to the West", it stopped at Rome. At that time much of Europe was uncivilized and the UK didn't get civilized until the Romans forced them to take baths. Setanta is a spreader of disinformation. Setanta's next pile of crap will be that "the West" invented and created the Chinese. Quote: True potter's wheels, which are freely-spinning and have a wheel and axle mechanism, were developed in Mesopotamia (Iraq) by 4200–4000 BC. The oldest surviving example, which was found in Ur (modern day Iraq), dates to approximately 3100 BC. Wheel - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Wheel

In case your geography needle is stuck - Rome is considerably "west" of China. (Europe).

As is the Middle East(Iraq/Iran aka Mesopotamia).

In all their other depredations, going back millennia, how many others did the Chinese genocide??

More than you could count.....

The Grappler wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 1:00pm:

In all their other depredations, going back millennia, how many others did the Chinese genocide?? More than you could count.....

Idiots like Grappler have fertile imaginations because their craniums are full of sh!t.

Try publishing some facts instead of drunken, idiotic, fantasies Grappler.

Who invented the first steam engine then?  Sum Dum Kun in BC 3102??

Truly your mental sickness knows no bounds...

Anyway - most Wharteys never murdered or ill-treated any Niqqer here... plenty of 'em shagged some etc, as proven by the 90% White blood in most... root the black out of 'em!!!

The Grappler wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 1:08pm:

Who invented the first steam engine then?  Sum Dum Kun in BC 3102??

;D ;D

Cretinous dolts and shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball invented bullsh!t.

These two fools are probably twins separated at birth by being left in the wild.

Please, somebody, teach the fool twins, Shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball how to Google and then how to assimilate the information in their tiny brains.

A Greek was the first to demonstrate motive power from steam.

"Early in the first century A.D., a Greek inventor named Hero of Alexandria designed the world's first aeolipile, or primitive steam turbine. Heron's aeolipile consisted of a hollow sphere, mounted on a pair of tubes. Heated from below by fire, the tubes transported steam to the sphere, where it was released through another series of tubes projecting from the sphere's equator. This movement of steam through the device caused the sphere to revolve, demonstrating the potential for using steam as a means of propulsion.

While Hero's aeolipile was created as a novelty, not a means of speeding up production, it is nevertheless the first known device to transform steam into rotary motion. But it wasn't until the 17th century that attempts were made to harness the power exhibited by Heron's aeolipile for practical purposes."

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4^th, 2021 at 5:35pm:

Yes and no.  There is no right to Freedom of Speech in Australia.  The Government can legislate to limit speech, as it has done in the past and impose censorship when ever it wants. There are also legal implications to the exercise of Freedom of Speech.   The Government has no imposed censorship on Political commentary.  These are things that most Australians do not understand.

You have a right to say whatever you want to say -- provided that you hold yourself accountable for the consequences of what you say. In Australia, if you are over the age of 16 years, you are legally responsible for the consequences of what you say. In a school yard, if you yell "fight, fight, fight" as you watch a fight take place, you can get suspended for inciting violence. If you shout a bunch of swear words in the presence of the general public (provided that other people are within hearing range), you can be charged with using offensive language. Television stations have had adult content and coarse language warnings at the start of movies for years. And television shows are getting prior warning notifications if their shows have coarse language used throughout the broadcast.

If you go about defaming someone or some business through some medium, it is quite reasonable that the offended party can take you to court for defamation. It is also the reason why moderators in forums and social media have a legal duty to delete or prevent further publishing of content that violates the rights of other people.

You can say whatever you want to say. You just have to accept the legal consequences of what you say.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 2:21pm:

If you shout a bunch of swear words in the presence of the general public (provided that other people are within hearing range), you can be charged with using offensive language. You can say whatever you want to say. You just have to accept the legal consequences of what you say .

Then we do not have the right to free speech.

If it is illegal to offend, then speech cannot be free.

I am not saying that people have the right to say what they want without question. I am saying that people have to be mindful of what they because they might have made defamatory comments or have given illegal directives. Otherwise, you can say what you want without any concern for legal consequences.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 2:31pm:

I am not saying that people have the right to say what they want without question. I am saying that people have to be mindful of what they because they might have made defamatory comments or have given illegal directives. Otherwise, you can say what you want without any concern for legal consequences.

Swearing is not defamatory

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 2:08pm:

Cretinous dolts and shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball invented bullsh!t. These two fools are probably twins separated at birth by being left in the wild. Please, somebody, teach the fool twins, Shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball how to Google and then how to assimilate the information in their tiny brains. A Greek was the first to demonstrate motive power from steam. "Early in the first century A.D., a Greek inventor named Hero of Alexandria designed the world's first aeolipile, or primitive steam turbine. Heron's aeolipile consisted of a hollow sphere, mounted on a pair of tubes. Heated from below by fire, the tubes transported steam to the sphere, where it was released through another series of tubes projecting from the sphere's equator. This movement of steam through the device caused the sphere to revolve, demonstrating the potential for using steam as a means of propulsion. While Hero's aeolipile was created as a novelty, not a means of speeding up production, it is nevertheless the first known device to transform steam into rotary motion. But it wasn't until the 17th century that attempts were made to harness the power exhibited by Heron's aeolipile for practical purposes."

No engine until the 17th Century then? 

Who'd 've thunk it?   ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D

Easy meat....

The Grappler wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 2:46pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 5th, 2021 at 2:08pm: Cretinous dolts and shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball invented bullsh!t. These two fools are probably twins separated at birth by being left in the wild. Please, somebody, teach the fool twins, Shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball how to Google and then how to assimilate the information in their tiny brains. A Greek was the first to demonstrate motive power from steam. "Early in the first century A.D., a Greek inventor named Hero of Alexandria designed the world's first aeolipile, or primitive steam turbine. Heron's aeolipile consisted of a hollow sphere, mounted on a pair of tubes. Heated from below by fire, the tubes transported steam to the sphere, where it was released through another series of tubes projecting from the sphere's equator. This movement of steam through the device caused the sphere to revolve, demonstrating the potential for using steam as a means of propulsion. While Hero's aeolipile was created as a novelty, not a means of speeding up production, it is nevertheless the first known device to transform steam into rotary motion. But it wasn't until the 17th century that attempts were made to harness the power exhibited by Heron's aeolipile for practical purposes." No engine until the 17th Century then?  Who'd 've thunk it?   ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D Easy meat....

... on the 7th day god invented cretinism and Grappler was born.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 2:33pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 5th, 2021 at 2:31pm: I am not saying that people have the right to say what they want without question. I am saying that people have to be mindful of what they because they might have made defamatory comments or have given illegal directives. Otherwise, you can say what you want without any concern for legal consequences. Swearing is not defamatory

It is still against the law to do coarse language in public among people who were not expecting or accepting that kind of abusive language.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 2:21pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 4th, 2021 at 5:35pm: Yes and no.  There is no right to Freedom of Speech in Australia.  The Government can legislate to limit speech, as it has done in the past and impose censorship when ever it wants. There are also legal implications to the exercise of Freedom of Speech.   The Government has no imposed censorship on Political commentary.  These are things that most Australians do not understand. You have a right to say whatever you want to say -- provided that you hold yourself accountable for the consequences of what you say. In Australia, if you are over the age of 16 years, you are legally responsible for the consequences of what you say. In a school yard, if you yell "fight, fight, fight" as you watch a fight take place, you can get suspended for inciting violence. If you shout a bunch of swear words in the presence of the general public (provided that other people are within hearing range), you can be charged with using offensive language. Television stations have had adult content and coarse language warnings at the start of movies for years. And television shows are getting prior warning notifications if their shows have coarse language used throughout the broadcast. If you go about defaming someone or some business through some medium, it is quite reasonable that the offended party can take you to court for defamation. It is also the reason why moderators in forums and social media have a legal duty to delete or prevent further publishing of content that violates the rights of other people. You can say whatever you want to say. You just have to accept the legal consequences of what you say.

Basically, yes. 

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 5^th, 2021 at 2:08pm:

Cretinous dolts and shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball invented bullsh!t. These two fools are probably twins separated at birth by being left in the wild. Please, somebody, teach the fool twins, Shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball how to Google and then how to assimilate the information in their tiny brains. A Greek was the first to demonstrate motive power from steam. "Early in the first century A.D., a Greek inventor named Hero of Alexandria designed the world's first aeolipile, or primitive steam turbine. Heron's aeolipile consisted of a hollow sphere, mounted on a pair of tubes. Heated from below by fire, the tubes transported steam to the sphere, where it was released through another series of tubes projecting from the sphere's equator. This movement of steam through the device caused the sphere to revolve, demonstrating the potential for using steam as a means of propulsion. While Hero's aeolipile was created as a novelty, not a means of speeding up production, it is nevertheless the first known device to transform steam into rotary motion. But it wasn't until the 17th century that attempts were made to harness the power exhibited by Heron's aeolipile for practical purposes."

Take your own advice DH.

Lots of murderers are honoured in Aus - colour ain't got nothin' to do with it... all the Aborigines who killed Whites are lauded as great leaders and heroes..... given half a chance there'd be statues - though I think that's against their 'religion'.


"Right, boys!  Bring that crane in slow and easy - we're gonna take down this statue of Ngunawallya The Great.... murdered and enslaved Whites, he did..."

Gnads wrote on Jun 6^th, 2021 at 2:33pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jun 5th, 2021 at 2:08pm: Cretinous dolts and shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball invented bullsh!t. These two fools are probably twins separated at birth by being left in the wild. Please, somebody, teach the fool twins, Shmucks Grappler and Fuzzball how to Google and then how to assimilate the information in their tiny brains. A Greek was the first to demonstrate motive power from steam. "Early in the first century A.D., a Greek inventor named Hero of Alexandria designed the world's first aeolipile, or primitive steam turbine. Heron's aeolipile consisted of a hollow sphere, mounted on a pair of tubes. Heated from below by fire, the tubes transported steam to the sphere, where it was released through another series of tubes projecting from the sphere's equator. This movement of steam through the device caused the sphere to revolve, demonstrating the potential for using steam as a means of propulsion. While Hero's aeolipile was created as a novelty, not a means of speeding up production, it is nevertheless the first known device to transform steam into rotary motion. But it wasn't until the 17th century that attempts were made to harness the power exhibited by Heron's aeolipile for practical purposes." Take your own advice DH.

No engines until the 17th Century, though? 

Downe at Ye Olde Greekatorium:-

"Watcha got spinning there, Aristides?"

"I.... I'm not sure.... but it makes that thing spin by pushing steam over it..."

"Hmm.. not much use for that... you'd need it a lot bigger to do anything, and you'd take away all the firewood for milles around.... nice idea, though."

"I think I'll call it a turbine..."

"Well - don't get yourself into a bind over it... might keep the kids occupied for a while, though."

The Grappler wrote on Jun 7^th, 2021 at 12:46am:

Lots of murderers are honoured in Aus - colour ain't got nothin' to do with it... all the Aborigines who killed Whites are lauded as great leaders and heroes..... given half a chance there'd be statues - though I think that's against their 'religion'. "Right, boys!  Bring that crane in slow and easy - we're gonna take down this statue of Ngunawallya The Great.... murdered and enslaved Whites, he did..."

Nar, its not a religious prohibition, its an ability one.

They never learned to melt metal or make weapons from the abundance of metal in Australia.

After all, they couldnt even lash a stick to a stone.

---