Jump to content

Ethnic groups attack citizenship test


Julian2

Recommended Posts

Isn't Oz history similar to American history. 'Muvver Engerlund' sent their prisoners and social outcasts to Botany Bay' date=' Plymouth, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. lol.

 

Funny thing is Oz gets the reputation for prisoners and America got a whole lot of them themselves who a few generations down were calling themselves the social elite...lol...

 

 

 

Do they voters there get to have their ballots in different languages like they do here? We have just about every conceivable dialect or language on government forms.

 

[/quote']

Just as a point of interest,the prison hulk barges used to be moored up in the River Medway estuary just a stones throw from where I live.

Also a question to the Aussies on this board.Someone asked in one of the papers how New South Wales got its name when its bordered by territories with much more illustrious` names like Queensland and Victoria.No one knew the answer.

I've been to both the old and the New South Wales's and the old one is a real boring place.

So how did NSW's get its name?Thanx

 

Boring?

What could be boring..you must have gone to the wrong places... :p

We have footy booze and women what more do you want...Btw i have no idea how it got its name...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I will add, many Asian groups seem to be uninterested in integrating/assimilating as well. At least here in the Bay area, no ideas how it is in other parts of the country that are predominently white, other ethnic group dominated.

 

Other parts of the USA...

 

Detriot, large Arabic/Muslim community, english is the second language

 

Seattle, they have many small communities, Chinese, Viet Namese (?), etc. English second language.

 

Chicago, has 'em all and in those communities, english is the second language.

 

San Diego...english is the second language in many parts.

 

Portland, OR, large Mexican population.

 

Same-same, all over the USA. If you are in a small southern city, they seem not to put up with the BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New South Wales was the name of the territry all along the east coast of Australia, eventually Queensland and then Victoria were carved out of it.

 

Note that up till 1900, all through the 1800's, each territory was a seperate country, with its own army, navy etc. Fighting in the boor war was NSW troops Et.

 

In a series of referendums held every 5 years or so from 1880 onwards, Fiji, New Zealand and the then 6 Australian states would vote on forming a "Commonwealth".

 

First Referendum all voted yes excet Queensland and Western Australia. 2nd Referendum Fiji voted dropped out of further referendum, but NZ said yas, still Qld and WA saying no. In last referendum WA and QLD said Yes, by this time NZ deciding to go it alone.

 

Imagine if in first referendum all had said yes? Australiia wold include NZ, it's protectorates, and Fiji.

 

This outlines a lot of the closeness between NZ and Australia and mutual benifits that existed for so long, as a boy I didn;t even need a passport to go there.

 

It also shows how Queensland and WA have always seen themselves as different from the rest of Australia.

 

As a Queensaldner I often refer to myself first as a Queenslander, 2ndly as a Australian.

 

DOG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see someone just gave Perth back to the Abo..er..indigenous Australians.

 

Aborigines given ownership of Perth by judge

By Kathy Marks in Sydney

Published: 21 September 2006

 

Aborigines have been declared the traditional owners of Perth and given the right to hunt and fish in the area, in the first successful claim by indigenous people to an Australian state capital.

 

The landmark ruling by the Federal Court astonished Aboriginal groups, with one community leader, Noel Pearson, welcoming the "absolutely extraordinary" decision. The judgment opens the way for similar claims over cities such as Sydney and Melbourne.

 

However, the state government of Western Australia said it would appeal, and it may be joined by the federal government. The Prime Minister, John Howard, said his initial reaction was "one of considerable concern".

 

The judge, Justice Murray Wilcox, granted the Nyoongar people "native title" over more than 6,000 sq km of land, including Perth and its surrounds. That means they can use it for traditional activities such as hunting, camping and fishing, as well as looking after sacred sites and generally caring for the land.

 

The judgment will not affect homes or businesses, as the Australian courts have ruled that native title does not apply to land owned on a freehold or long-lease basis. Mr Justice Wilcox cautioned that it was "neither the pot of gold for the indigenous claimants nor the disaster for the remainder of the community that is sometimes painted".

 

Native title claims in the past have prompted scare campaigns by mining and agricultural companies. But the judge said that his decision would have no impact on "people's backyards".

 

For native title, Aborigines must prove a continuing and unbroken link with the land that they owned until British colonists arrived. That was thought to be an almost impossible task in densely settled metropolitan areas.

 

In 2002 the High Court, which is superior to the federal courts, rejected a claim by the Yorta Yorta people over a heavily populated swath of south-eastern Australia. Mr Pearson said the latest ruling restored indigenous rights in relation to cities and southern regions.

 

Fred Chaney, the deputy chairman of the National Native Title Tribunal, said the Nyoongar people had been "subjected to pretty incredible interference and dislocation ... they've been shifted around, shunted around, their families have been broken up".

 

He added: "The extraordinary thing is that they've been able to demonstrate to the judge that there is still continuing Nyoongar law and culture, which is understood, which still binds them to the country, and which regulates their relationships. So it's an amazing example of cultural survival under extremely adverse circumstances."

 

One conservative politician in Western Australia warned of dire consequences, claiming that the public could be charged a fee to use parks and waterways. Alan Eggleston, a state Liberal senator, said: "This really could have quite profound and significant implications, and change our way of life."

 

Aboriginal Australian groups dismissed his claims as baseless "scaremongering". Glen Kelly, head of the South West Aboriginal Land Council, told ABC radio that the Nyoongar would seek a say in the management of parkland and state forests, but that "in general life will go on as it currently is".

 

Mr Justice Wilcox ruled that the Nyoongar are the traditional owners of the entire area to which they claim native title: 200,000 sq km of south-western Australia. But he has yet to decide whether to grant native title to land outside the Perth metropolitan district.

 

The state government said it would appeal as the judgment contradicted the High Court's Yorta Yorta ruling, which decided that native title had been "washed away by the tide of history".

 

Mr Howard said: "Many people will regard it as somewhat incongruous - there could still be some residual native title claim in a major settled metropolitan area."

 

Aborigines have been declared the traditional owners of Perth and given the right to hunt and fish in the area, in the first successful claim by indigenous people to an Australian state capital.

 

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/australasia/article1655632.ece

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...