19 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I agree it was the right outcome.  He should have gone long ago for everyone's sake.   Yet, I think it is poor, even cowardly that people are supporting him now that the dastardly deed is done.  Had they spoken up earlier a bit of dignity may have been injected into his final downfall.  As it is he had to suffer a humiliating end. 

For someone of his position and contribution to all walks of life I would have liked him to go out with some dignity and respect.  You raise a good point about his and his families mental health.  After all he is only human. 

Very much agree that Eddie, and his family, should be considered in all this and unless I've missed it I haven't really seen anything to vitriolic around the traps.

Disagree a little about the nature of his downfall though, that was all his own doing. He had the mic.

50 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Couldn't care less if you agree or this whole idea of "narrative" you keep pushing, that's simply what it is and is why the 'others didn't get booed' logic doesn't stack up. You've just further made my point for me by bringing up Betts & O'Loughlin.

Long and Goodes' scenarios are not really similar.

You may want to look into the response Long got at first though, including death threats mailed to him. Doesn't seem you're really THAT up on the story mate. Plus there's the fact he was combating onfield racism and was strongly supported by the AFL. Wasn't exactly the same with Goodes hey?

Winmar had a poignant moment after being racially abused for a whole day in horrendous ways. Not at all similar to Goodes who was booed more intensely after winning Australian Of The Year and having numerous public appearances totally misrepresented by the media.

Let's not forget that Eddie said Goodes would have been treated better if he had 'given some warning' before doing his goal celebration; an Indigenous dance taught to him by Indigenous kids, after he (an Indigenous man) had just kicked an Indigenous ball through for a goal while wearing an Indigenous jumper in Indigenous round...

Stop making excuses for others and clearly yourself.

 

This isn't going anywhere so we should agree to disagree. Neither of us can provide hard evidence of why Goodes was booed only theories.

Eddie should have handled things better.  He confused his role as club president with ‘personality’.  He has overseen much success in his time at Collingwood, but his media efforts (for someone trained as a journalist) were appalling.  He obviously doesn’t understand the role of professional chairperson (as opposed to media spokesperson that he seems to take up).

As chairman, his comments were so poorly articulated.  What he thought he was communicating and what he actually communicated were vastly different.  He showed that he is tone deaf to what is happening and therefore not the right person to lead the deep cultural change required.  Gotta go.

As a personality, Eddie polarises people.  He has been a bogan playing to the MMM/footy show crowd and they love him.  All of his poor comments re race have added up.  

Eddie, this was not about you, but about CFC.  Making it about you was where you stuffed this up.  That alone should cost you the presidency.

 

2 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

This isn't going anywhere so we should agree to disagree. Neither of us can provide hard evidence of why Goodes was booed only theories.

That's just arrant nonsense: Goodes was booed because he wouldn't play the passive Aboriginal game, because he raised his hand and said enough is enough, because he was brave enough to simply be himself. The bottom line is that Australia was founded by a Racist White Supremacist country called Britain, and it has always behaved accordingly. It only stopped practicing the White Australia Policy less than 50 years ago, and it's policies against so called Boats are an extension of that mind-set. 

54 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

This isn't going anywhere so we should agree to disagree. Neither of us can provide hard evidence of why Goodes was booed only theories.

The evidence is there over hundreds of years, you just refuse to see it.

1 hour ago, Cranky Franky said:

This isn't going anywhere so we should agree to disagree. Neither of us can provide hard evidence of why Goodes was booed only theories.

Give it a rest Frank

 

1 hour ago, dieter said:

That's just arrant nonsense: Goodes was booed because he wouldn't play the passive Aboriginal game, because he raised his hand and said enough is enough, because he was brave enough to simply be himself. The bottom line is that Australia was founded by a Racist White Supremacist country called Britain, and it has always behaved accordingly. It only stopped practicing the White Australia Policy less than 50 years ago, and it's policies against so called Boats are an extension of that mind-set. 

Dieter you do understand that repeating your claim about Goodes again and again is not actually evidence & u sound like Trump & the stolen election.

And BTW every country throughout its history been racist and supremacist either white, black, yellow or brown. Maybe you can enlighten us with some exceptions - Germany maybe or Ruanda, Brazil, india, maybe Japan ?

Who cares how old the person was making racist comments, everyone needs to be called out on it. To say she was a little girl and this people booed Goodes is trying to change the angle of the issue and deflect the racism and turn a blind eye and put drag him down again. What a ridiculous argument.  

40 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

And BTW every country throughout its history been racist and supremacist either white, black, yellow or brown. Maybe you can enlighten us with some exceptions - Germany maybe or Ruanda, Brazil, india, maybe Japan ?

As I wrote in one of my previous posts, racism is a universal phenomenon. We live in a country founded exclusively on white privilege, that's what we have to live with and deal with. We also have a very, very long way to go as a nation before we can look ourselves in the mirror and admit that the treatment of our indigenous people was and largely still is shameful, and a situation which needs to be urgently addressed. The fact that it's 2021 and we're still learning how not to deal with it is an indictment of how little headway we've really made. 

2 hours ago, dieter said:

That's just arrant nonsense: Goodes was booed because he wouldn't play the passive Aboriginal game, because he raised his hand and said enough is enough, because he was brave enough to simply be himself. The bottom line is that Australia was founded by a Racist White Supremacist country called Britain, and it has always behaved accordingly. It only stopped practicing the White Australia Policy less than 50 years ago, and it's policies against so called Boats are an extension of that mind-set. 

Dieter,

Lets be clear.

Australia was founded mostly by convicts who never chose to populate this place willingly.By boat.

Secondly,

White Australia Policy was a Labour initiative- same as ethnic branch stacking-  an uncomfortable reality for them when they became the heroes of minorities overnight.Despite history.

Thirdly , “Boat People “ are South Vietnamese fleeing communist torture post 1975. There is no inconsistency in letting them settle as opposed to other refugees.

Fourthly , we are not a communist country . We are still a British outpost, with a bi- cameral parliamentary system backed by a constitutional monarchy.

Sixthly,

The official British policy was to leave the native peoples unharmed and protected.

Many , including Batman , ignored the law.

The historical revisionism practices of the modern idiots of communism are tedious but worthy of polite correction.

 

 

54 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

And BTW every country throughout its history been racist and supremacist either white, black, yellow or brown. Maybe you can enlighten us with some exceptions - Germany maybe or Ruanda, Brazil, india, maybe Japan ?

What's that got to do with anything?

Is it a good enough reason to maintain the status quo?

They do it, so why not us...

Shouldn't we aspire to be better?

Biff

Let's be equally clear. Whether they were convicts or stowaways, is not the point. They were sent here by the British Government as an act of appropriation of the sub- continent called Australia so that no other country could take it over. Also, unless they were very good swimmers, their only option was to come by boat.

Secondly, White Australia was neither Labor nor Liberal not National. It erupted from the innate prejudices of Europeans who settled in the goldfields. 

Turdly, to raise semantics about the definition of 'boat people' ignores the great claim of Abbot and Scumbag Morrison that they stopped the Boats.

Fourthly, we are definitely not a communist country: for once you are not playing tricks with me. I fail to see how this is relevant though.

You skipped Fifthly because you probably got it mixed up with Filthy, so we'll go to 

Sixthly: There is this fiction that the British Government wanted the natives to be unharmed and protected. Sure. That's why they shot so many. They protected them so much that many died of disease. And there is this nebulous shadow between the 'word' and the 'deed'. Most of all, your notion of what happened, totally ignores the simple fact that the Brits felt they had a god given right to dispossess the native people of Australia.

Once again, your mention of 'communism' is out of context here: perhaps it goes back to the days when your Parish Priest brainwashed you every Sunday morning about the Red Peril. God only knows...

Oh, that perhaps I am an id''t is probably indisputable - Dostoevsky, after all, wrote a book about me - however I have never been an '[censored] of communism'. Where did you get that silly idea? Are you drinking a reliable brand of methylated spirits?

 

Edited February 11, 20214 yr by dieter

Skinny,

WAP was an ALP policy and there is no denying it.

Secondly, 

The British policy was to protect Aboriginal people from harm as much as possible at the time.

To kill a “native” was punishable by death in the 18thC and beyond.

I am an Australian history buff and I won’t have it re- written by morons.

 

10 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Skinny,

WAP was an ALP policy and there is no denying it.

Secondly, 

The British policy was to protect Aboriginal people from harm as much as possible at the time.

To kill a “native” was punishable by death in the 18thC and beyond.

I am an Australian history buff and I won’t have it re- written by morons.

 

I'll just weigh in saying that at that time in history they probably would've classified essentially enslaving them in order to modernise them was considered to be doing it in their best interests. Much in the same way the stolen generation was because they wanted to get them out of the hands of their true parents to move them towards a white way of life (and basically breed their culture/race into extinction).

I've got no doubt there would've been countless undocumented acts of cruelty in the name of "harm prevention". 

We are largely ignorant to our own bloody history because we aren't taught enough of it, and because the history books are always written (or re-written) by the "winners".

Also it may well have been punishable by death to kill a native, I'd be very interested to know how many were actually convicted of it.

Just now, Pates said:

I'll just weigh in saying that at that time in history they probably would've classified essentially enslaving them in order to modernise them was considered to be doing it in their best interests. Much in the same way the stolen generation was because they wanted to get them out of the hands of their true parents to move them towards a white way of life (and basically breed their culture/race into extinction).

I've got no doubt there would've been countless undocumented acts of cruelty in the name of "harm prevention". 

We are largely ignorant to our own bloody history because we aren't taught enough of it, and because the history books are always written (or re-written) by the "winners".

Also it may well have been punishable by death to kill a native, I'd be very interested to know how many were actually convicted of it.

There are first hand accounts of life in Sydney and Hobart in Georgian Times .

I can say with tremendous certainty that the British were far more humane and civil than the French and Dutch of the same era.

The conflicts of  the time we’re not due to a “ policy” by the British.

Quite the opposite.

Inevitable perhaps, but not deliberate.

 

1 hour ago, dieter said:

Fourthly, we are definitely not a communist country: for once you are not playing tricks with me. I fail to see how this is relevant though.

 

The relevance here is that we are lucky to be in a country that allows us to discuss matters in a free and respectful way and not be dictated to by Governments or anyone else on what we can or can't say..

As some Pom once put it "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Unleash Hell said:

The relevance here is that we are lucky to be in a country that allows us to discuss matters in a free and respectful way and not be dictated to by Governments or anyone else on what we can or can't say..

As some Pom once put it "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

 

 

 

 

That was Voltaire...

17 minutes ago, Biffen said:

There are first hand accounts of life in Sydney and Hobart in Georgian Times .

I can say with tremendous certainty that the British were far more humane and civil than the French and Dutch of the same era.

The conflicts of  the time we’re not due to a “ policy” by the British.

Quite the opposite.

Inevitable perhaps, but not deliberate.

 

You forgot the Spanish, Ottomans etc.

Correct me if Im wrong but the Spanish have the lavish claim of settling a continent and the inhabitancy disappered?

There is a little known history of British enslavement where the Brits themselves were taken as slaves, very exciting stuff.

Edited February 11, 20214 yr by Unleash Hell

40 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Skinny,

WAP was an ALP policy and there is no denying it.

Secondly, 

The British policy was to protect Aboriginal people from harm as much as possible at the time.

To kill a “native” was punishable by death in the 18thC and beyond.

I am an Australian history buff and I won’t have it re- written by morons.

 

I had serious reply, but if any 'Australian History buff' wants to talk about 're-written by morons' with a straight face, it is surely at their own peril. I thought you were better than that Biff. I was wrong...

3 minutes ago, dieter said:

That was Voltaire...

My mistake, it was a quote from her book

Edited February 11, 20214 yr by Unleash Hell

17 minutes ago, Biffen said:

There are first hand accounts of life in Sydney and Hobart in Georgian Times .

I can say with tremendous certainty that the British were far more humane and civil than the French and Dutch of the same era.

The conflicts of  the time we’re not due to a “ policy” by the British.

Quite the opposite.

Inevitable perhaps, but not deliberate.

 

Absolute racist rubbish! The track record of the Brits is one of the 'hidden secrets', mostly because we are still yolked to them by the anachronism called the Monarchy. Read Churchill's narrative about the Indians, the IRaqis, the Sudanese...

 

6 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

You forgot the Spanish, Ottomans etc.

Correct me if Im wrong but the Spanish have the lavish claim of settling a continent?

There is a little known history of British enslavement where the Brits themselves were taken as slaves.

Ask the Irish about the fine print.

47 minutes ago, Biffen said:

WAP was an ALP policy and there is no denying it.

I'm not an Australian history buff 'Biff' but wasn't this policy drafted and set up by the Protectionist Party of Barton and Deakin?

Just asking for a friend.

6 minutes ago, dieter said:

Absolute racist rubbish! The track record of the Brits is one of the 'hidden secrets', mostly because we are still yolked to them by the anachronism called the Monarchy. Read Churchill's narrative about the Indians, the IRaqis, the Sudanese...

 

Churchill was responsible for the mass slaughter of Australians in Gallipoli.Was it deliberate?

No.

1 minute ago, Biffen said:

Churchill was responsible for the mass slaughter of Australians in Gallipoli.Was it deliberate?

No.

Your question should be, Why did Churchill have the power to send thousands of Australians to be slaughtered in a British Colonial War???????