Sunday, February 16, 2014

What to do with Akker Dakker?

Yes, but do the Daily and Sunday Terror have any regrets over Akker Dakker? 

Isn't the pompous pose wondrous? Here it is again:

Actually for a brief moment of joy, the pond copped this from the Terror website:

Duplicate? Surely that should have been duplicitous?

Which brings us back to Akker Dakker. What to do with him?

That's the question for the day.

As the pond has been doing movies lately, do we feed him into the woodchipper, Fargo style, or do we herd him up to the top of an oil storage tank, so he can say "top of the world ma" before blowing himself up, James Cagney style in White Heat?

You see, today Akker Dakker was in full denialist mode.

But wait, you say, Akker Dakker is always in denialist mode. Climate science, rational thought, measured tones, calm methodical arguments, he routinely denies them all ...

But, it has to be said, this effort was a particularly offensive example of Akker Dakker in racist denialist mode.

In it, Akker Dakker denies that Aboriginal children were removed from their parents. That's to deny the whole apparatus that was erected on top of Aboriginal people by bureaucrats, politicians, with the consent and sometimes the enthusiastic support of the white Australian population, anxious to deal with the vexing problem of the Aboriginal people.

Akker Dakker starts out with a bit of Rudd bashing.

No harm there, the pond has no time for the narcissist Rudd, and he can defend himself.

But then Akker Dakker tells porkies. He lies, and as usual, the Terror, the Sunday edition of the least trusted newspaper in Australia, has no shame running his lies:

...apart from delivering a warm inner glow to those who think they are the most deserving, Rudd’s apology also served to give some credibility to the whole notion of “stolen children” though no court has yet found any plausible evidence that any child was ever actually “stolen”. 
The repercussions from this well-intentioned but so far baseless campaign are far-reaching. 
Academia, not unnaturally, seized upon the flawed history and used it to push its usual anti-European theme. 
Schoolchildren are now taught that the fiction is fact. 
The ABC and Fairfax unquestioningly publish any material which they think will further cement the fable into the national consciousness. Worse, vulnerable Aboriginals have embraced the myth to embellish their status as victims of an unjust system.

It's the usual rhetorical trickery, which a more direct soul would call bullshit of the most demeaning kind.

No plausible evidence? No child - not one - was actually "stolen"? No court has yet found? As if courts are going to go around taking a fresh look at events in the first half of the twentieth century ...

Say what you will about Rabbit-Proof Fence as a film, what Akker Dakker is doing is calling Doris Pilkington Garimara a liar.

Between Akker Dakker and Pilkington, the pond knows who's lying, who's shamelessly distorting the past.

Follow the Garimara path and you end up at the Moore River Native Settlement, and the work and deeds of the likes of A. O. Neville.

Forced removals?

"they have to be protected against themselves whether they like it or not. They cannot remain as they are. The sore spot requires the application of the surgeon's knife for the good of the patient, and probably against the patient's will."

The unilateral imposition of one man's will?

"the children who have been removed as wards of the Chief Protector have been removed because I desired to be satisfied that the conditions surrounding their upbringing were satisfactory, which they certainly were not." (here for the footnotes)

This is the most vicious aspect of the history wars, and what Akker Dakker is doing, in the most vicious and reprehensible way, is conflating what went on in the past so he can pay off enemies in his current political wars.

You see, Akker Dakker wants to maintain the rage at greenies and the ABC and uppity difficult blacks from Gunnedah, who apparently are deeply in the grip of a form of greenie ABC hysteria, and don't actually know what happened to their families in the past.

That's all in aid of saying that things are going along swimmingly now:

... the conservative NSW state government is actually performing better in the area of social policy than Green/Labor can manage. 

 While more can be done, there’s no need to apologise for that performance.

You see, there's no need to apologise now, and there wasn't any need to apologise for anything that ever might have happened in the past, because no court has found any evidence of a single forced removal.

Which is a lie. Unless you happen to believe many who experienced it, who endured it, were lying.

It's exactly the same sort of institutional excuse peddled by the Christian churches and their spokespeople in relation to the mistreatment of the children in their care.

Who'd listen to children, who'd care what they had to say, with their mischievous ways, up against honourable priests and responsible adults?

Well that mob has been found out, and what a painful, tortured process it has been, but no one ever calls Akker Dakker to account, while being published in the least trusted newspaper in Australia.

The few that pay attention just dismiss him - "oh that's just Akker Dakker, everyone knows he's barking mad."

But history shouldn't be merely a matter of ideological whim or convenience. Things happened, and some people even spoke up against it:

During the passage of the New South Wales Aborigines Protection Amending Bill in 1915, for example, one Parliamentarian said of the forced removal of Aboriginal children that ...
These people are unfortunate because, in the interests of so-called civilisation, we have over-run their country and taken away their domain. We now propose to perpetrate further acts of cruelty upon them by separating the children from the parents. The mothers and fathers of these children love them just as much as the birds and the animals of the bush care for their offspring, and hon. members would not perpetrate a cruelty of this kind even upon an animal.....To my mind some better method should be adopted. There should be some method of direct control over these children, but the child should not be separated from the mother. (NSW Parliamentary Debates 57 1914-15: 1953) (here, with lots more)

The birds and the animals .... flora and fauna ...

And so still shit happened, and to talk of a baseless campaign, or courts not finding credible evidence, or dismissing it as flawed history, or a fiction and not fact, and a fable and a myth, is as shameless and as vicious a form of history as ideology you can find doing the rounds.

And, if the pond can breach Godwin's Law one more time, not that far removed from David Irvine's attempts to present the good side of the Nazi party and Adolf Hitler, or bizarre Stalinists and Maoists who still try on occasion to redeem their heroes.

Well let's just go back to the bleeding obvious, which you can find here, along with a lot more. It isn't that hard to understand, and there's no dissembling about courts and myths and fables:

Aboriginal children have been forcibly separated from their families and communities since the very first days of the European occupation of Australia.

Live with it, adjust to it how you will, take whatever stance you like to current government policies, but don't re-write history.

Sheesh, even Tony Abbott could do that bit of peace pipe-smoking and humble pie swallowing:

Opposition spokesman for Indigenous affairs, Tony Abbott, has admitted publicly for the first time that the Coalition made a mistake by refusing to apologise to Australia's Indigenous population. 
The former prime minister, John Howard, repeatedly defended his decision not to say sorry to Aboriginal people during his 11 years in power and criticised the Federal Government's historic apology to the Stolen Generations last year. 
Addressing a social services forum in Sydney, Mr Abbott was applauded when he publicly admitted the Coalition should have said sorry while in government. 
"It was a mistake for us not to apologise to Aboriginal people," he said as the crowd applauded. 
"And I'm pleased when Kevin Rudd did decide to apologise that he was strongly supported by the Coalition." (here)

Oh wait. Was he just dog whistling?

On another emotional issue, the stolen generations, Abbott remains uncomfortable about the whole Sorry thing. Abbott joined the reconciliation march across Sydney Harbour Bridge in 2000 but was never really happy about the apology. I am carrying a copy of Quadrant, the magazine for the lonely conservative male. It has an article by the editor, Keith Windschuttle, titled "Why there were no stolen generations". I am also carrying a copy of the Leftier-leaning The Monthly, where Abbott stars on the cover. The Monthly has yet another article by that magazine's editorial chairman, Robert Manne, refuting Windschuttle's claims. Abbott has high praise for Windschuttle, saying he's "a breath of fresh air". No. This air is stale. People were stolen, weren't they? His response is hardcore Abbott. "I've met people," he says. "I've met lots of people who left their families for all sorts of reasons. And that phrase, the stolen generations is a morally loaded phrase." You don't accept people were taken? "Well, I suspect in some cases, yes, but the story is not quite as one-sided as some people would make out." (here)

I suspect?

Indeed. The pond suspects some Jews, some gays, some socialists and some gypsies might have suffered under Hitler, but to this very day these notions are disputed by some people, and some of these deeply perverse people even manage to reverse the idea, such that the Nazis were socialists, and they were all gays out to rule the world ...

So much wilful stupidity and bigotry in the world, and so little time.

Meanwhile, if you want to get a sense of the times and the attitudes, why not just take a look at some of the newspapers now available via Trove.

Here, for example, is The Australian Women's Weekly reporting:

"That the women's organisations of Australia be urged that for the race heritage that we hold in trust for the generations to come, for the sanctity of our age-old traditions, and for the protection of our growing boys, to combat with all their power, this insidious attempt to mingle with the community, women of illegitimate birth, tainted with aboriginal blood, the offspring of men of the lowest human type, many of whom are Asiatics and other foreign nationalities.

Sanctity, insidious, foreign, tainted.

Yep, Akker Dakker would be right at home in the 1930s ...

And if you feel like poring over the archives, why not just ask Trove about A. O. Neville, here. You could be lost for weeks, but chances are you might arrive at a report on an "interesting" Neville lecture in September 1920:

In conclusion, Mr. Neville, after pointing out6 that, in proportion to its population, no State in the Empire had spent more money upon the amelioration of its aboriginal inhabitants than had Western Australia, urged that, even though the people were dwindling away in response to some mysterious law of nature which decreed that white man should supplant them, the good work must still go on in the hope that at least we could make the last days of a dying race the easier and happier for it. here.

Some mysterious law of nature?

Yep Akker Dakker would be right at home in WA in the 1920s ...

And so let it be entered into the record again:


  1. Bolt's on the same bandwagon today too. "No stolen generation...Name just 10!" And then blames the ABC and Fairfax for "perpetuating the myth" and thereby placing Aboriginal children at risk.

    What a despicable fuckwit he is.

    1. I sometimes wonder if Chris Berg and the IPA decided to defend Bolt because he was exercising the vilest examples of "Free Speech" they could find, a la Voltaire's famous quote

  2. Well done Dorothy for calling out Akerman for his shameless attempt at whitewashing history at this rate he'll start claiming Japan didn't commit a massacre at Nanking (do I avoid the Godwin swear jar by using the Japs?)

    Also another great example of Abbot's cognitive dissonance. He's starting to remind me of Zelig morphing his opinion to whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear even if it's the opposite of what he said earlier. I predict all sorts of clangers as he and the village idiot Joyce tour the drought affected areas today.

    Rugged farmers asking for assistance vs the end to the age of entitlement, Abbott's brain might just explode trying to square these two opposing positions.

    All the best


  3. "Mysterious law of nature"? Hmm ....sounds like the Libertarian Free Market "Invisible Hand", don't it

  4. With tales of flood and famine,
    On distant northern tracks,
    And shady yarns — 'baal gammon!'
    Of dealings with the blacks,
    From where the skies hang lazy
    On many a northern plain,
    From regions dim and hazy
    Our Akker's home again!

  5. What a bunch of hooey this article is. There was no "stolen generation", no genocide, and no government policy of breeding out the colour. The "Bringing them Home" report took no sworn evidence, cross-examined no-one, and failed to interview a single Federal or State Minister, many of whom were still alive from the time this "stealing" supposedly happened, nor anyone who was defamed in the report.

    It's all a great big bunch of steaming bullshit that has done irreparable damage to Aborigines ever since it became fashionable in the 80s. Lois Donoghue even admitted that she hadn't been stolen at all and had been abandoned by her mother.

    If there was the slightest bit of truth in the whole treacherous concoction, why has there not been a single successful law suit against the Commonwealth or the state and territory governments? The only cases that did go to court were the Cubillo and Gunner cases in the NT - where it was found that no such thing happened. The plaintiff, Gunner, admitted that his full-blood mother had actually stuffed him down a burrow at birth to be eaten by ants because the full-bloods didn't want half-caste children – and he was rescued by an aunt who handed him over to a white mission! The Trevorrow case in SA, found in favour of the plaintiff on the basis that he had been taken into care as a "neglected child" and had grown up to be a violent alcoholic suffering from a swathe of mental illnesses - just like his brothers and sisters who WERE NOT taken into care.

  6. Even the inventor of the whole disgraceful lie, Peter Read, admitted in his monogram "Clio or Janus" (pages 58-59) that he had supressed evidence that contradicted the "stolen generation" fiction and related that other Marxist academics had said, after hearing some of his recorded "oral histories" that he should not publish because it would confirm that the whole thing was a lie and that the Government should have taken those children into care - given that they were the victims of brutal physical and sexual abuse, neglect, malnutrition, and other dysfunctions.

    The only true report has been the "Little Children are Sacred" report into the atrocious goings on in NT indigenous communities where babies had been raped, young boys regularly sodomised, pre-pubescent girls packed raped, regular and vicious wife-bashing, uncontrolled alcoholism and drug abuse - indeed something straight out of Dante's inferno describing the inner suburbs of hell.

    Nothing was done, until Howard had the guts to send in the Army, because every "caring and sharing" worker was frightened of doing anything and then being subjected to accusations of creating a new "stolen generation”, of participating in a new ”genocide" and being a "racist". That's been the effect of this whole monumental pack of bullshit about the "stolen generation". What clearly happened in the NT in the 1990s and early 2000s is EXACTLY what happened between 1900 and 1980 and was the reason SOME, and a very small number at that, were taken into protective care.

  7. But don't let the truth get in the way of a bit of leftist superior, smug, sneering.

    I grew up in a central west town in NSW with a big Aboriginal population in the 1950s and 60s. I remember some of the half-castes who disappeared for months at a time who now claim they were "stolen" - and what a load of bullshit that is!

    There was one half-caste girl at school who, like most of them, stunk to high heaven, was crawling with head lice, body lice and scabies, had constant rivers of snot running down her top lip, lived under a sheet of corrugated iron on the banks of the Lachlan, and was "stolen" at age 11. She was taken to the Far West Children's Hospital in Manly to be deloused and treated for the most disgusting thing I ever saw - fly blown ears! That's right, she had such bad untreated ear infections that she actually had visible maggots in the ulcers in her ear canals. A half-caste boy was taken around the same time, 1962, his name was "Arnold" and he'd been given such a beating by his loving drunken parents that he could barely walk and his lower jaw was dislocated and left that way for weeks! He too stank to high heaven and had constant ear, nose and throat infections and the common rivers of snot. He also went to a hospital and in to foster care for many months. But they both came back in early 1963 for the whole thing to be repeated!

  8. Guess what? They both now claim to have been part of the "Stolen Generation"!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yep, their drunkenness, dysfunctional lives on endless welfare, their neglect of their own children is all down to those "white cunts" that stole them and treated them for the most debilitating and loathsome of parasitic infestation and diseases!

    Can any of you oh-so high and mighty, pious and sanctimonious snobs who believe this shit find any mention in the "Bringing them Home" report of Venereal Diseases amongst the "stolen generation" children - you know: gonorrhoea, syphilis, genital herpes and chlamydia - those very same diseases that afflicted fully a third of the girls, all well below the age of consent, taken into places like the Cootamundra Home for Aboriginal Girls?

    I guess you WANT TO BELIEVE that were all dragged from the arms of loving mothers as portrayed in that utter concoction of bullshit "Rabbit Proof Fence". I notice the movie "based on a true story" did not mention that 14 year-old Molly Craig and 11 year-old Gracie were prostituting themselves to white fence maintenance workers - just like Molly's mother had done and got pregnant at 14 and gave birth to the half-caste Molly - whom her own daughter, Pilkington who wrote the book, admits was rejected by the full-bloods and spent a lonely, neglected childhood full of abuse. They weren't taken to "breed out the black" and be married off to the scum of white society - they were taken to PROTECT them from the sexual exploitation by the scum of white society and incessant sexual molestation by the full-bloods living around the Jigalong camp.

  9. If this “genocide” did happen, how come the Aboriginal population of Australian increased at a much faster rate between 1900 and 1980 than the white population? Why have no Ministers responsible, like Gerry Hand and Rober Tickner et al been dragged off to The Hague to stand beside the likes of Slobodan Milosevic and Mladich?

    Why is it that Robert Manne has been unable to come up with just 10 of the 100,000 “stolen” who were stolen for no other reason than “being Aboriginal”? Why is it that Peter Read claimed that “being Aboriginal” was a “common” reason given for being taken by the NSW Aboriginal Protection Board; but other researchers checking the same archives of about 800 case files can only find TWO files that contain such words?

    If Australia’s various governments, ministries and Aboriginal agency are guilty of anything, they are guilty of NOT TAKING enough half-caste kids into care and NOT interfering enough to save them from lives of serial physical, sexual, emotional and psychological abuse meted out by their dysfunctional, lazy, ignorant and brutal parents. Those who claim to have been “stolen” should be giving their rescuers awards rather than condemnation based on a mountain of lies.

  10. I might also ask the "believers" if they have ever wondered why Charlie Perkins, Foley, Mansell and other "activists" with all their "freedom rides" of the 1960s, the "Aboriginal embassy" of 1972, the "lands rights" movement of the 60s and 70s, the people of the Wave Hill strike, and the risible imitators of the "Black Panthers" of the 70s NEVER mentioned the "stolen generation"? Not once, in all their well published demands was there any mention of that or of "the genocide". Doesn't that seem curious to you?

    No mention, AT ALL, until white Marxist academics like Peter Read, Robert Manne, David Marne and a whole raft of others invented the term and the fiction starting in 1981.

    Do you recall the "terrible" atrocities of all those "Aboriginal Deaths in Custody" that were investigated by a Royal Commission sitting from 1987 to 1991 that found that:

    * Aboriginal deaths in custody were lower than for any other race. Croats were far more likely to commit suicide in prison;
    * The death rate for Aboriginal prisoners was actually lower than for the same cohort at large in the community.

    So that was another huge fiction.

    Then ether was the "secret women's business" over the Hindmarsh Island Bridge. That was proved to be the invention of some Aboriginal activists and white Marxist-inspired urgers.

    So that was another huge fiction.

    Then there are the accusations about wholesale massacres - like the one at "Mistake Creek" which proved to be, rather than a white posse of vigilantes murdering men, women and children just out of pure, racist spite, a case of an Aboriginal man murdering murdering his Aboriginal girlfriend and some of her relatives because she had left him for another Aboriginal man. A simple case of a jilted lover getting revenge - and nothing at all to do with White Australia.

    If all these massacres were true and all these poor unfortunates were mercilessly gunned down, then the evidence should still be at the sites - as indeed it is in the USA where history buffs are still finding musket balls, rifle bullets, skeletal remains and so forth from both the Civil War and the Revolutionary War that took place before Australia saw the First Fleet.

    But no such evidence has been produced. Not a bullet, a musket ball, a rusted bayonet, no skeletons, no bones, no teeth - nothing at all; not a single mention in Police reports, parliamentary speeches, the press, or anything else. The only "evidence" comes from the "oral history" of mostly drunken blacks who claim they were told these things by "survivors". In other words, just more bullshit.

    You leftists who promote these fictions don't realise the damage you are doing. You are giving these people the perfect excuse never to take control of their own lives, their own destinies, or to address their own enormous failings as a people in every sense of the word; but instead the unquestioned right to attribute their own sins to the scapegoat of all those "racist white cunts". And that last epithet really does describe Peter Read, Robert Manne, Colin Tatz and anyone else who continues to promote these lies, fictions and arrant falsehoods as "truth".

    And the best document the Loonpond can come up with to support its crap is a cutting from that very authoritative and utterly believable source "The Australian Women's Weekly"!! God almighty, give me a fucking break!


Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.