Well bloody said sire - love the bit where you did a bit of substitution to illuminate the truth of the matter. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kerry Spencer-Salt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <Recipient list suppressed> Sent: Saturday, 19 February 2000 8:57 PM Subject: UNITED NATION RIGHTS FARCE - BLACK OUT UNITED NATION RIGHTS FARCE - BLACK OUT The front page of The Sydney Morning Herald (19 /02/2000) headlined 'PM warns UN Chief : no lectures". It states that, "The UN committee on the Rights of the Child in 1997 condemned the 'unjustified, disproportionately high percentage of Aboriginal children in the juvenile justice system ' and was 'particularly concerned' at the enactment of the mandatory sentencing laws'." In Spectrum the article 'White Out' details that, "Australia's' race relations will fall under the microscope of the UN Committee for the elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) which will decide next month whether to reprimand Canberra over its Wik native title laws". It such a shame that the United Nations cannot get around to discussing the deplorable history of many other countries; Australia pails in comparison. One, for instance, is China which I select because the same issue of the paper reviewed the book 'Mao : A Life'. This century, beside tanks running over human bodies, has seen 30 million dead in government repression. The review stated, "the citizens of the People's Republic of China went to their deaths in their millions, by execution, starvation or despairingly by their own hands in repeated waves of suicide. Neither Stalin nor Hitler can match the death toll that followed China's liberation...The 20 million who staved to death in 1959 and 1960 [this in only a two year period], victims of Mao's fantasy of communal living and ever more bounteous harvests...was the worst human disaster to ever befall China..the Korean War...saw 710,00 executed or driven to suicide, and 1.5 million disappear into new 'reform through labour camps'. Land reform , completed in 1952 cost the lives of up to 3 million...Several hundred thousand died in campaigns at the end of 1951 to root out 'all the filth and poison left over from the old regime'. The 100 Flowers campaign sent more than half a million intellectuals to labour camps and destroyed their families". But you see Kofi Annan can't say anything about this as he only condemns the nations susceptible to it. This is the Anglo Saxons as they seem to generally try to do the right things while the Asian and other nations tell them to 'shove off' as they go back to the civilian bloodletting. Just ask the two million Cambodians that are dead or the one third of the Timor population that the United Nations were content to allow to die. But back to the problem of the Aboriginals. The lame excuse that the UN committee used to justify the high crime rates was that aborigines "were in places 'where a high percentage of Aboriginal people live' resulting in a high percentage of Aboriginal juveniles in detention". No, you cannot say that Aboriginals culture is prone to violence and crime even though an SBS documentary showed that aboriginal homes will have 30 times the national level of domestic violence!. Once again this is because they are victims of the bad white society. The reality, if we are to have a solution, is this, "BLACK PEOPLE MUST BE TRAITORS TO THEIR RACE IF THE WORLD IS TO SOLVE ITS SOCIAL PROBLEMS. SOUND EXTREME. NOT TO THE NEW ABOLITIONISTS. THEY WANT TO GET RID OF THE PRIVILEGE THAT COME WITH BLACKNESS" Is above paragraph racist? NO, it cannot be. You see this is taken from the same issue of the Sydney Morning Herald in a article (introductory paragraph) entitled, WHITE OUT. The only difference is that I put the word 'black' in every instance where the Sydney Morning Herald used 'white'. You see it is only racist to denigrate the blacks but never is racist to denigrate the whites. This article continues the lie, let us not be so strong - the 'myth' then, of trying to prove that the aborigines are just the victims of the white society rather then being the victims of their black culture. Thus whites have a "better change than non-white of getting academic letters after your name ( or even being able to read in the first place), of being more likely to live to a grand old age and to have their babies survive, to escape poverty and entanglement in the criminal justice system and to acquire political power". The writers of these articles cannot come to grips with the fact that the way you escape the criminal justice system is not to commit crime. The statistics prove this is one thing that aboriginal culture has not been able to do very well. Nor are they willing to understand that the aboriginal life expectancy in 1788 was only thirty five years. Another way of looking at the life expectancy issue then is that the black encounter with Western civilisation, white medicine and hospitals has left them with double the life expectancy of their 'walkabout' heritage. There is no doubt white Australians have a lot to be proud about! And in spite of giving some $ 20 billion in aid the Aboriginals they have still not managed to "escape poverty". We should add here that Australians have paid to buy back land and give it to the Aboriginals; some 50 % of the land mass of the Northern Territory is owned by Aboriginals. But this has not ended the need for reconciliation which always is commensurate with more donations from the public purse. Somehow you get the feeling that if you gave the Aboriginals the whole of the Northern Territory they would still not escape "escape poverty". But is does pose a question, "AT WHAT POINT SHOULD MONETARY RECONCILIATION STOP? " As to political power well this takes time. But the same paper in 'Crash Economy' detailed the rather dubious tale of what has happened to black Zimbabwe after the end of white rule. The first few paragraphs of this article ran as follows, "Harare, five o'clock in the evening ; time to knock off work and go home. Unfortunately, the government oil monopoly hasn't paid it foreign suppliers so there is no diesel fuel. Most buses are no longer running. Your salaries doesn't stretch to a taxi - not with inflation running at 60 percent - so you end up walking several kilometers instead. When you get home there is no electricity, but that is because after 20 year of independence you still live in a shack, so you never had electricity in the first place...In the cities, once proud public hospitals built following the end of white rule in 1989 are now struggling to find basic medicines. State Schools that were free to all five year ago now throw out pupils whose parent cannot keep up with spiraling fees." And why is this? Well I don't want to be racist but the paper implicitly stated that it was the black administration that took over from the whites. "Gross corruption, a bloated public service, disastrous price fixing policies and unpopular military adventure in the distance Congo have brought Zimbabwe's economy to the brink of ruin." I would have said that it was already ruined but in any event another 10 years should see it in. South Africa is presently following the same path but the media does not make much do about the tragedy that is unfolding under black administration. New Guinea is well on the path of the road to indigenous chaos. You have to admit the black track record in politics is not all that good. Finally we should note that Zimbabwe's president wanted to push through an amendment to take all the land of the whites without compensation. This, of course, is not racist. But to understand this would take a whole new email. But I leave you with this tempting piece of legal justification from Sarah Pritchard ( Lecturer in Law, University of New South Wales) "In a famous dictum in the 1965 decision of the International Court of Justice in the South West Africa Case Judge Nanaka stated: The principle of equality before the law does not mean the absolute equality, namely the equal treatment of men without regard to individual, concrete circumstances, but it means the relative equality, namely the principle to treat equally what are equal and unequally what are unequal...to treat unequal matters differently according to their inequality is not only permitted but required ...In the case of the minorities treaties of non discrimination as a reverse side of the notion of equality before the law prohibits a State to exclude members of a minority group from participating in rights, interests and opportunities which a majority group can enjoy". This of course only leaves a single question. What race was Judge Nanaka? Kerry Spencer-Salt B.E., LL.B (Hons) The National Watchman Australian Community Organisation P.O. Box 136, Surry Hills NSW 2010 Phone : (02) 9360 0610 E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website : www.rockroll.com.au/watchman ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion. To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm For archives http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
