"You've denied reality or you're one of them- politically correct."

That's nonsense. All I've done is question your posts to determine your position.

I haven't looked at your links, and I doubt I will find time to. Let's be clear though, if any children were forcibly separated from their families without a court deciding that EACH child was in danger of abuse from their parents, then you and I should condemn the action.

I'm more than happy to agree (based on your most recent post) that separating SOME Aboriginal children from their parents was justified.

I am NOT arguing that Aboriginal culture is inherently good, and that we should respect cultural norms.

However, was each case considered by a court, or was a blanket decision made - for subjective political reasons - to separate Aboriginal children from their parents? I have not reserached the issue, but I find it unlikely that the head of the Australian government apologised in relation to cases of identified child abuse.

Without going into “alleged” occurrences and just dealing with this - “Aboriginal parents were abusing their children. Is this your position?” Of course that's exactly what I said. “Sure beats home on the range where the beer and the petrolheads play (with each other).“ I think before I post.

Marvelous Google serves us up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uA6mn6Sif40

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1704472.htm “Sharon Duthie watched Lateline's interview with central Australia's Crown Prosecutor Nanette Rogers when she outlined the extent of domestic violence and child sexual abuse in some Aboriginal communities.

SHARON DUTHIE: I was starting to feel am I the only normal person here or am I abnormal and everyone else is normal because there was such an apathy. You would sew people's heads up at 4 o'clock in the morning, you'd come out and go back to bed and think nothing of it and you'd see people beaten. Then when I started seeing young children come through with what looked like sexually transmitted infections, I couldn't just sit back and do nothing about it anymore.”

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200706/s1953073.htm “The Northern Territory's Family and Community Services Advisory Board says the issue of child sex abuse should be highlighted in the lead up to the Federal election.“

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/08/15/1029113981588.html

“The government has referred the recommendations to a high-level task force, due to report in October. But it has immediately implemented the mandatory reporting of sexually transmitted diseases for children under 13.”

“Endemic family violence and sexual abuse in Western Australian Aboriginal communities was a human tragedy that was nothing short of a national disaster, Premier Geoff Gallop said ..“

And to answer your earlier point “Is that actually the other side of the story, or is it irrelevant to the point of this article about whether this apology is meaningful?” Yes it is the real story, “a political stunt and is completely vacuous.“ Paul began; “In fact, I have not heard any Aboriginal people on this matter at all. I think that the pro sorry sayers are more concerned about their own feelings than the feelings of the Aboriginal people. “

You've denied reality or you're one of them- politically correct.

"I'm sure you're not suggesting leaving children open to abuse etc. That is criminal."

You're right; however I have not heard anyone argue that the alleged actions of the Australian government were justified because Aboriginal parents were abusing their children. Is this your position?

I agree that the courts should enforce the criteria for abuse. The issue of what exactly those criteria should be is no doubt extraordinarily complicated; but I doubt the alleged actions of the Australian government could be justified by these criteria.

If the alleged actions of the Australian government were not justified by evidence of abuse, I suggest that we shouldn't be mealy mouthed in our condemnation.

I'm sure you're not suggesting leaving children open to abuse etc. That is criminal.

There should be a hearing then a court order referring children to the care of a charitable organisation.

If they want them back they can prove they're worthy first.

"The state forcibly removes children all the time."

And is that a good thing or a bad thing?

For example a large proportion of the New Zealand electorate might think that anyone who writes as you do is a ruddy faced half wit who shouldn't be allowed to raise children.

Should they be allowed to enforce that decision? If not, who does get to make the decision, and on what criteria?

Then the piece below appears in the Saturday newspaper. What do you know? It could well be all lies.

White liberal guilt strikes again.

This marks Rudd out to be one to watch. He's already blathering about climate change and sustainability (what? from a socialist?) and now more lies.

A very evil man.

"5:00AM Saturday February 16, 2008
By John Roughan

His suspicions of the stolen generation story had been aroused when reading the 1997 report of an inquiry by a fellow jurist, Sir Ronald Wilson."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=49&objectid=10492750

Of course the apology is a political stunt and is completely vacuous but oh, look at all these warm fuzzy feelings of those Ozzie hand-wringers.

Don't you get it?

I don't say that much but almost, yes. Not the race bit. What's your problem? The state forcibly removes children all the time.

Some people should not breed. Do you have a problem with that too?

"The other side of the story is the successful upbringings many of these dirt-worshippers may have got to enjoy."

So we can assume you endorse the forced separation of children from parents base on race, or at least sympathise with the idea, can we Gregster?

Is that actually the other side of the story, or is it irrelevant to the point of this article about whether this apology is meaningful?

The other side of the story is the successful upbringings many of these dirt-worshippers may have got to enjoy.

Sure beats home on the range where the beer and the petrolheads play (with each other).

I'm sorry to hear this Paul

Seriously, Australians will be sorry when the prospect of billions comes up surrounding that word, 'genocide'. I've already heard it twice on the mainstream media.