blairy Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 ooh, goody. So what did it say about good old Gough, got a link to it?JB Whitlam Role in Ousting East Timor Catholic Leader Whitlam condemned for approval of 1975 invasion
John_Barber Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 Whitlam Role in Ousting East Timor Catholic LeaderWhitlam condemned for approval of 1975 invasion Thanks Blairy, I'll check it out. In the interests of balance, I'll also check Mr. Downer's mentions too. Cheers JB
blairy Posted February 7, 2006 Posted February 7, 2006 If you Yahoo "Truth and Reconciliation Report" +Downer you get a fair few results. When searching "Truth and Reconciliation Report" +Whitlam you get stuff all.
Trickster Posted February 8, 2006 Posted February 8, 2006 Yep there would have been, and there was!Keating and Gareth-Gareth Evans were big supporters of the murderous Suharto regime. The Labor Govt. signed a treaty with Jakarta in which Australia "recognised" the illegal occupation of Timor in return for a maritime boundary which was favourable to Australia (under certain interpretations of maritime laws regarding boundaries, continental shelves vs equidistant borders etc) in relation to the exploitation of oil reserves. Basically Keating and Evans said, "we get the oil/maritime boundary and we'll support your "ownership" of East Timor." Now when Timor L'este became independent, 25 years and hundreds of thousands of lives too late, the Howard Govt was faced with a quandary. East Timor is in greater need of the Oil revenue than is Australia, yet the previously agreed boundary would indicate Australia should be the beneficiary. If the maritime boundary is moved for East Timor, then the precedent is set for it being moved for WEST Timor too. (West Timor still being part of Indonesia despite a cultural & ethnic background which would suggest otherwise, due to West Timor, and the rest of Indonesia being previously occupied by the Dutch, unlike Portuguese-occupied East Timor) So when Australia does not want the boundary to be moved, maybe it should be considered in relation to Indonesia, rather than an attack on East Timor. The recent announcement of the oil revenue deal with East Timor (where they get the oil revenue they'd get if the seabed boundary was moved), and postponement of a border discussion for 50 years is really a postponement of what will turn out to be a re-negotiation of the seabed treaty with Indonesia as a revised boundary with East Timor will immediately trigger the Indonesians to demand a similar review in relation to West Timor (and maybe other areas). Despite what some would wish to believe, East Timor was betrayed by; Whitlam Government, Fraser Government, Hawke Government, Keating Government, with Keating in particular making odious overtures to the murderer Suharto. The Howard Govt may have been dragged into the whole independence situation, but whatever the scenario, finally, undeniably an Australian government has provided political, military and development and financial support to the people of East Timor (which has been recognised by East Timorese leaders) despite falling short in some areas where we'd prefer more support to these poor neighbours of ours, and those who supported our troops in WW2 against the invading forces from Japan. Santa, we do know how you love to hate Howard and co, but please don't raise the East Timor issue to support attacks on Johnny. The Howard government's record on East Timor, while not perfect, overwhelmingly shames each and every one of its predecessors over the last 25-30 years. I think it was Ramos Horta who said something along the same lines, that the Howard govt would always be better regarded than Keating's in relation to East Timor. JB An excellent and reasonable account but those with an obsessional and quite frankly irrational Howard hating view of life can't be told. It's a bit sad that people such as your good self spend the time attempting to bring reason and facts to people (no need to mention monikers - we all know who I'm referring to) who are so full of bile that they can't think with a clear head!
Santa1503559644 Posted February 8, 2006 Author Posted February 8, 2006 If it wasn't for not being able to read anything clearly on my monitor, ATM ... I'd think Tricky was trying to have an uninformed go at me ... however, maybe he's just looking in the mirror! ____________ NB: If he's not having a go at me (since he realises that wouldn't correlate with the facts), then ...... sorry Tricky ... feel free to aim your (bile, was it?) at whoever you were attacking...
blairy Posted February 8, 2006 Posted February 8, 2006 If it wasn't for not being able to read anything clearly on my monitor, ATM ... I'd think Tricky was trying to have an uninformed go at me ... however, maybe he's just looking in the mirror! ____________ NB: If he's not having a go at me (since he realises that wouldn't correlate with the facts), then ...... sorry Tricky ... feel free to aim your (bile, was it?) at whoever you were attacking... Why do you need your monitor to read the Auto Teller Machine...it already has a screen? Oh I get it... Sorry Santa, your monitor has been playing up for quite some time...seeing things clearly, hhhmmmm
mello yello Posted February 9, 2006 Posted February 9, 2006 Why do you need your monitor to read the Auto Teller Machine...it already has a screen?Oh I get it... Sorry Santa, your monitor has been playing up for quite some time...seeing things clearly, hhhmmmm Hes using an old Auto Teller Machine as a monitor is what he means I think
mello yello Posted February 9, 2006 Posted February 9, 2006 An excellent and reasonable account but those with an obsessional and quite frankly irrational Howard hating view of life can't be told. It's a bit sad that people such as your good self spend the time attempting to bring reason and facts to people (no need to mention monikers - we all know who I'm referring to) who are so full of bile that they can't think with a clear head! Sorry I cant leave a thread without having a go at Tricky Ricky when he says things like that Wasnt it Josef Stalin who also thought anyone criticising him or the Government MUST have been irrational and were classified mentally unfit and were duly shipped off to the Gulags? Perhaps Ricky with a bit more "education and conditioning" (State run and sponsored of course)....I may be able to react to Pavlovs bell a little more promptly and with the "appropriate" enthusiasm and responses....however until I achieve that level of toilet training I can only say one thing... "Lifes a ****....and so am I"
Aloysius Posted February 9, 2006 Posted February 9, 2006 Sorry I cant leave a thread without having a go at Tricky Ricky when he says things like that Wasnt it Josef Stalin who also thought anyone criticising him or the Government MUST have been irrational and were classified mentally unfit and were duly shipped off to the Gulags? Perhaps Ricky with a bit more "education and conditioning" (State run and sponsored of course)....I may be able to react to Pavlovs bell a little more promptly and with the "appropriate" enthusiasm and responses....however until I achieve that level of toilet training I can only say one thing... "Lifes a ****....and so am I" Be fair Mello! Trickster was praising another poster - someone who you have praised yourself - and then contrasted a masterful measured style with unnamed posters whose style is quite different. If you were to re read JB's letter referred to by Trickster and compare it with the more excitable, emotional, quickly descending to the toilet style above, you would surely understand his point!
mello yello Posted February 9, 2006 Posted February 9, 2006 Be fair Mello!Trickster was praising another poster - someone who you have praised yourself - and then contrasted a masterful measured style with unnamed posters whose style is quite different. If you were to re read JB's letter referred to by Trickster and compare it with the more excitable, emotional, quickly descending to the toilet style above, you would surely understand his point! Oh yeah you could be right ( and wrong lol ) alan...I actually thought he was talking TO that someone else there and not to JB....so by default I accepted responsibility. (As if he'd refer to "that someone else" as "your good self"...that should have made me read it twice in itself lol) Regardless of that, I read ....."....those with an obsessional and quite frankly irrational..." and "they" plural....and in view of recent generalisations it sounded like another blanket. Im merely defending those who are opposed to JWH and his Govt as being labelled irrational and obsessional. Feel free to correct me if Im wrong there alan. Apologies to Trickster for thinking it was indirectly or directly aimed at "those like me".......... Anyway it wasnt even harsh....very tounge in cheek..and given that I thought it might have been at me I thought the response was quite well natured They were right....Politics IS like pissing upwind. All Fair n Balanced this side of the fence al........hows your lawn?
Trickster Posted February 9, 2006 Posted February 9, 2006 Oh yeah you could be right ( and wrong lol ) alan...I actually thought he was talking TO that someone else there and not to JB....so by default I accepted responsibility.(As if he'd refer to "that someone else" as "your good self"...that should have made me read it twice in itself lol) Regardless of that, I read ....."....those with an obsessional and quite frankly irrational..." and "they" plural....and in view of recent generalisations it sounded like another blanket. Im merely defending those who are opposed to JWH and his Govt as being labelled irrational and obsessional. Feel free to correct me if Im wrong there alan. Apologies to Trickster for thinking it was indirectly or directly aimed at "those like me".......... Anyway it wasnt even harsh....very tounge in cheek..and given that I thought it might have been at me I thought the response was quite well natured They were right....Politics IS like pissing upwind. All Fair n Balanced this side of the fence al........hows your lawn? I actually posted a response to you and Alan this morning in this thread but it seems to have ended up in the ether!? Has anyone else had that happen? Anyway, all I was trying to say was John B obviously spent some time on what is a well though through post but posts like that are sortof wasted on people like a certain serial e-etiquette offender who can't see reason when it's staring him in the face. Mello, I don't necessarily agree with you a lot of the time but I know where you're coming from. In fact I know where that other person is coming from too - but he would be doing himself and everyone else a favour if he grew up a bit and showed a bit of respect when it's appropriate rather than taking a knee-jerk PM hating line in such an un-bending way.
Aloysius Posted February 10, 2006 Posted February 10, 2006 Oh yeah you could be right ( and wrong lol ) alan...I actually thought he was talking TO that someone else there and not to JB....so by default I accepted responsibility.(As if he'd refer to "that someone else" as "your good self"...that should have made me read it twice in itself lol) Regardless of that, I read ....."....those with an obsessional and quite frankly irrational..." and "they" plural....and in view of recent generalisations it sounded like another blanket. Im merely defending those who are opposed to JWH and his Govt as being labelled irrational and obsessional. Feel free to correct me if Im wrong there alan. Apologies to Trickster for thinking it was indirectly or directly aimed at "those like me".......... Anyway it wasnt even harsh....very tounge in cheek..and given that I thought it might have been at me I thought the response was quite well natured They were right....Politics IS like pissing upwind. All Fair n Balanced this side of the fence al........hows your lawn? True - credit where due - well natured indeed! No correction called for - "Tear down the wall!" Re the lawn - great rejoicing - it's not quite dead and my CEO has returned from overseas - so she can cut the bit that's not dead.
Recommended Posts