@ Just Sayin. I agree, there is that side to …

Comment on Trees on Melanka block no longer sacred? by Ray.

@ Just Sayin. I agree, there is that side to it as well. My point was that under an Indigenous land use agreement, native title can be extinguished, if the monetary compensation is agreed upon. Everything has its price, if the price is right.
Those who choose to be offended by this will be, not much I can do about that.
Your comments about respecting culture and sacred sites are interesting.
I was unaware that business oportunities to bring tourists into town have been scrapped because we don’t show enough respect and therefore trust does not follow. This is a shame.
Which proposals were they, because the number of bookstores and galleries in town that promote Aboriginal culture are impressive, not to mention the quality of work done by CAAMA that show a culture thriving with modern technology.
Are you referring to the respect and trust shown to local business in town that are actually running and bringing tourists into town that are smashed up, are pelted with rocks, broken into, used as a toilets, etc?
Trust and respect are a two way street, and non-indigenous attractions are also responsible for bringing tourists into town as well.
There is both black and white history in this town, and tourists come here to experience both.
Or maybe they come here for one and learn about the other, how’s that for a win win?
I believe that many developers would be keen to get involved with a project on the Melanka site, but who wants to touch it with the complications of those sacred trees?
I am sure that if one of them died due to construction activity, a huge fine would be written into the contract (dollar value).
Instead, we have an unkempt eyesore in town that could be transformed into something amazing, but it just sits there until the price is right, or they blow over in the next big storm. If it was the tree itelf that was sacred, would a solution be to propogate a cutting and plant that in a place acceptable to the Arrente?
I remember that idea working for a single pine tree that featured on the Turkish peninsula just over 100 years ago.

Ray Also Commented

Trees on Melanka block no longer sacred?
Hi Russell, glad to see that three words could stir up such a response. How dare you say I am a newcomer? I have been annoying you for years.
My three word initial comment simply stated the obvious. Aboriginal groups are able to negotiate with mining companies (for example) on the exploration / mining on their land.
By negotiate, I mean an agreement to do a certain activity for a particular consideration (money). Many mining companies have been charged and fined for damaging sacred sites.
So one group has agreed to be awarded compensation for the damage caused by the other.
The importance of the site can/has sometimes determined the monetary penalty. You can google that to find the factual links.
Hence, to some degree, sacredness = dollar value is correct.
I remember being told that an event I organized needed a welcome to country speech. I thought OK that’s a nice gesture, and when approaching the appropriate body, was told “yes would love to, the fee will be $300”.
I was gobsmacked that the opportunity to share culture with visitors from around the country was accompanied by a fee schedule.
Sometimes a simple comment is enough to start a conversation, which was my intention, and that worked quite well. Just because I choose not to have my full name published does not invalidate my right to an opinion, it could be that public comment on a public forum and having different opinion to the populist thinking, could be against a policy I work under.


Trees on Melanka block no longer sacred?
Sacredness = dollar value.


Recent Comments by Ray

Alice councillors join new political party
Ha ha, love the moniker Local 3, maybe I started something, but have not seen any posts from local 2 yet. Maybe over time we will grow, and can have a locals get together. Position vacant: Local 4.


Make September 8 Australia Day, anthem in Pitjantjatjara
Shannon Spaulding: It is quite ironic that you chastise Mr Egan over his choice of words.
He has done far more for the Indigenous people in the NT (both fair skinned and full blood) than you could ever dream of, yet you chastise him on the words he uses.
It is ironic that you attribute the white Australia policy to relating to Aboriginal people whereas it actually was an immigration policy.
You quote things about the so called stolen generation that really prove you have no real understanding about that subject either, apart from the populist ideas of that myth.
I might identify as a Syrian Attack Helicopter, but does that mean I am one? How is it fair that an urban couple living in a million dollar house, a white male living with a mostly white woman whose great grandmother was Aboriginal, gets the same benefit, drawing from the same funding as a child living at Mutitjulu? Of corse not.
Be proud of your cultural identity, but acknowlege all sides. Whilst I do not agree with Ted’s proposal, I would never contemplate trying to educate him on Aboriginal affairs.
That would be like arguing with Stephen Hawking about what sort of cheese the moon is made from.


The stolen child who went to university
True Peter, sadly what happened when many of these children were taken away was traumatic, however the biggest mistake was the acceptance of the misnomer, stolen.
True, the term stolen usually means taken without permission, but unfortunately this term fails to address the reason they were taken.
In almost all cases it was due to either neglect or an inability to provide a safe environment, and in context, based on what European standards at the time deemed a safe environment.
There have been many prominent Aboriginal people who have gone on record claiming they were stolen, but this often led to heartbreak when the real circumstances are discovered, that their parents were unable to provide for them, for various reasons.
It’s easier to say the government stole you rather than say your parents were unable to provide for you. There has only ever been one truly stolen person in any court case in Australia.
Bruce Trevorow, who was adopter out when his parents left him in hospital and were uncountable for over 12 months.
The term stolen generation is now morphing into the more emotive term genocide.
In the meantime the children continue to suffer.


Australia Day: Alice’s role in it
@ Evelyn. The Australia Day celebrations that we celebrate today first began in 1818, when it was called Fist Landing Day, or Foundation day. The recommendation from Matthew Flinders that the country be called Australia was only accepted a year before that.
During the Centenary in 1888, leaders from around Australia and new Zeland gathered in Sydney to celebrate what was then changed to Anniversary Day. The Federal Australia Day Council began in 1946 until replaced by the National Australia Day Council in 1984.
So while July 9, 1900 is an important milestone in our history, it does not reflect the day of our beginnings, or in effect our birthday. Whilst Aboriginal history goes back thousands of years before European settlement, Australia’s history really began when first claimed by Philip on the shores of Port Jackson, on January 26, 1788.
The many events that occurred subsequently, whilst important, do not tell the story from the beginning.


Fiscal emergency: Get rid of Ministers, says Opposition
@ Pseudo Guru. Politicians are not public servants. Public servants are defined as “employed under the Public sector Employment and Management Act”.
Politicians are not employed under this Act, as they are elected.
They have similar guiding principles, however it is important to understand that they are NOT public servants.
In many Acts, the buck stops with the CEO of the agency, a “Minister of the Crown” cannot be prosecuted or charged for a failure or breach of an agency under their portfolio.
They are not elected to “serve the people”, rather to represent the people. Small words, but big difference.


Be Sociable, Share!