Many radio callers outraged by "apology"

You can express regret about something you didn't do but can you apologize for it? How can the Federal governmment today apologize for something that was the responsibility of long-gone State governments?

Something that almost everybody seems to have missed is that Rudd was in fact rather clever in one way. He has short-circuited demands for an apology over the white "invasion" of Australia. He centered his remarks on kids being taken away by social workers (a very tiny minority of Aborigines) but everybody seems to have reacted as if he had apologized much more widely.

He did also make the general statement "We apologise for the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians" but that clearly did not refer to any "invasion"

Whether you call them the ignored majority or the ignorant few, it took only a mouse click and a quick flick of the radio dial to discover that many Australians did not welcome Kevin Rudd's apology yesterday. The words "We are sorry" from the Prime Minister sent talkback switchboards and internet servers into meltdown, as thousands rang or clicked in to register their disagreement and in some cases disgust at the new direction their leaders had taken. Calls and commentary on the Sydney radio stations 2GB and 2UE led the charge, with callers describing the morning's events as "political correctness gone mad" and asking why it was an apology for "them and not us".

"I'm disgusted . he [Rudd] makes out that we've done nothing but destroy this country," one caller to Alan Jones said. "Is he ashamed that we defended this nation against Japan? Will he say 'sorry' to the people who died defending this nation in the wars? What about them?" Jones himself espoused the view of history made famous by historians such as Keith Windschuttle. "Yes, there was a piece of nonsense and obnoxious policy in Western Australia in 1936. But over 99 per cent of them were untouched by this political stupidity," Jones said. ". Many of the children who were taken were welfare cases . they were malnourished and mistreated."

Mr Windschuttle accused Mr Rudd of inconsistency. "An apology without reparations is not a genuine apology for a crime of this dimension. It is a mere public relations exercise. Mr Rudd will soon find that, rather than his apology ending grievance over this issue, all he has done is reignite it." [Windy knows that compensation claims would have to be adjudicated by a court and that few if any such claims would survive legal scrutiny. And that would really put the cat among the Leftist pigeons]

Long after the well of talkback calls had begun to dry up, the tide of online dissent on the issue of compensation continued. "Why is it that white (non-indigenous) children struggle to get assistance with schooling whereas children of the same age with Aboriginal blood are now asking for compensation?" Joanne from Adelaide asked on

In one online poll 36 per cent were in favour of the apology and 64 per cent against, while another had the number at 44 in favour to 56 opposed. "It shows that the average Australian in the street is not in favour of what our leaders are doing," the leader of the Australia First Party, Dr Jim Saleam, said. "We were not responsible for these policies - we weren't even there. I think most people see that simple logic."


Posted by John Ray

No comments:

Post a Comment

All comments containing Chinese characters will not be published as I do not understand them