Aboriginal child abuse and the NT Intervention

[S.A.M.]

In 2007, in response to the Northern Territory Report into sexual abuse – called Ampe Akelyernemane Meke Makarle (Little Children are Sacred) – the Howard Government announced a national emergency in remote Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory.

The Government’s ‘NT Intervention’ involved sending police and the army into remote communities, alcohol bans, winding back Aboriginal land rights under the NT Aboriginal Land Rights Act, health checks for Aboriginal children and the quarantining of welfare payments in 73 Aboriginal communities.

With the exception of some prominent Aboriginal commentators, Aboriginal groups strongly condemned the NT Intervention. The authors of the Little Children are Sacred Report also spoke out against the intervention, arguing that its heavy handed, top-down approach was inconsistent with the recommendations in the report.

40 Aboriginal organisations put forward an alternative proposal for urgent action based on consultation and partnerships with local Aboriginal communities, welfare organisations and women’s groups. This proposal was ignored and, with the support of the former Labor Opposition, the NT Intervention went ahead.

http://reconciliaction.org.au/nsw/recent-issues/aboriginal-child-abuse-and-the-nt-intervention/

What is the consensus in Australia about using the army to combat child abuse in aboriginal communities? Is it time to remove these children and assimilate them into Australian society rather than leave them to be abused? Should the aboriginals be put under military rule so as to save the children?

What do you think?

 

[Asguard]

The army was never used in any sort of enforcement roll, that's a misunderstanding of what happens here. The army is used a lot in emergency situations acting under direction of state authorities for the most part, for instance cleaning up after cyclones Tracy and the one in Queensland and cutting fire breaks in Vic. In the intervention defense was there to Assist with logistics, admin, building houses ect. Any enforcement will be undertaken by sworn NT police (there were Police borowed from the other states and the feds but they were all sworn in as NT police)

 

[S.A.M.]

The army was never used in any sort of enforcement roll

Why ever not? If they can liberate women in Afghanistan and whoever in Somalia, why not liberate the sexually abused children from pedophilic aboriginals?

Didn't the Howard government say, you are either for the removal of aboriginal children from their abusive environments or for pedophilia?

Using the grim spectre of paedophilia, the government has managed to vilify Aboriginal men across the nation, basically giving the public an ideological ultimatum - you are either against Aboriginal rights or for paedophilia.

Read more at Suite101: Military in Aboriginal Communities: Army Sent to Mutijulu for Child Abuse Intervention http://www.suite101.com/content/military-in-aboriginal-communities-a25454#ixzz16yBzSnAw

So what do Australians support? The forced separation of abused aboriginal children from their communities or...pedophilia?

 

[Bells]

Why ever not? If they can liberate women in Afghanistan and whoever in Somalia, why not liberate the sexually abused children from pedophilic aboriginals?

Excellent, I see that Australia is your current rant du jour.

Sooo... Do you think all Aboriginals are paedophiles?

Didn't the Howard government say, you are either for the removal of aboriginal children from their abusive environments or for pedophilia?

Umm no. You are taking a simplistic approach to it and one that really flies in the face of reality.

The Howard Government reacted to a spate of reports of fairly horrific child abuse cases that occured over a period of time. One of which was quite horrifying.. I'd go into details but yeah, it was stomach turning. The child in question had been gang raped repeatedly after being removed from her non-Indigenous foster carers and placed back into the Aboriginal community to live with her extended family, even though the social workers knew she would not be safe there. The report into the incident and into child abuse in general found that the figures were quite horrifying.

Because the areas covered in the Northern Territory were so vast, the army was called in for logistical reasons. Children were not removed in bulk from communities, but yes, the approach of the Government was reactionary and heavy handed. But the end result was more police officers being placed in Aboriginal communities, more safe houses and better medical access for Aboriginal children, which your link mentions.

Now, new laws and regulations were also put in place to force parents to actually feed their children. So what they did was to hold back a portion of their welfare payments and that money was used to pay their rent directly and also to purchase their food or to provide them with food stamps or coupons for food and clothing items only. Alcoholism is rife in many Aboriginal communities, as is petrol sniffing, and many children fall prey and victim to it (by becoming addicted themselves or from the abuse that inevitably follows when their family members are drunk and stoned out of their minds). Some communities went further and forced school attendance and provided buses to go and pick up the children and take them to school and then provided afterschool care and sports to keep these children from alcohol and petrol or spray paint sniffing. These children were also fed and given medical aid as required. That is what the army helped set up. The Howard Government didn't send in the army to take children from their homes. The army in most cases helped set up field hospitals and provided doctors and nurses in these remote communties, as well as counsellors as required.

I'd really suggest you read up on the issue before you take a couple of paragraphs and blow it out of proportion and out of context.

So what do Australians support? The forced separation of abused aboriginal children from their communities or...pedophilia?

I think if a child is in danger in a community, they should be removed immediately from that community. Race does not factor into a child's safety. Or do you disagree?

 

[S.A.M.]

Do you think all Aboriginals are paedophiles?

Is that relevant? Does military intervention require them to be all pedophilic? Don't you think they would prefer to have soldiers making the decision if they are insurgents militants pedophiles or not? They are surely all suspected pedophiles since not a single community is free from abused children.

I think if a child is in danger in a community, they should be removed immediately from that community. Race does not factor into a child's safety. Or do you disagree?

How can I possibly disagree? I support everything the government does to benefit women and children. Bring back the Stolen Generation! Why wait till they are abused? A pre-emptive strike is necessary in my opinion.

 

[Bells]

Is that relevant? Does military intervention require them to be all pedophilic? Don't you think they would prefer to have soldiers making the decision if they are insurgents militants pedophiles or not? They are surely all suspected pedophiles since not a single community is free from abused children.

What in the hell are you on about?

You know nothing about the plight of Aboriginal women and children in this country. You obviously know nothing about the reasons for intervention or why the Army was used.

You don't even have a basic grasp of it.

No community on this planet is free from abused children. Or does that escape you? Your own country is rife with it. At least we're trying to address the issue through medical help, education and offering women and children in danger the ability to escape to safety. Can you say the same for your country?

I understand you have a stick up your backside about Afghanistan, but don't confuse the issue. It has nothing to do about abused children in Aboriginal communities in Australia.

How can I possibly disagree? I support everything the government does to benefit women and children. Bring back the Stolen Generation! Why wait till they are abused? A pre-emptive strike is necessary in my opinion.

Since you have no clue about this issue in Australia, I'd say your opinion is about as worthy as the leaves you use to wipe your backside.

You don't even know or understand the Stolen Generation or what it entailed. For you to use it in this context proves that. It's actually quite insulting and racist.

You're like the Sarah Palin of Sciforums... Just talking points with no substance or understanding of actual issues.

 

[S.A.M.]

No community on this planet is free from abused children. Or does that escape you? Your own country is rife with it. At least we're trying to address the issue through medical help, education and offering women and children in danger the ability to escape to safety. Can you say the same for your country?

You're right its very bad in India, look at the status of women, the rampant prostitution of children. Do you think the Australian peacekeeping force will consider an intervention to save them from their menfolk?

 

[Bells]

You're right its very bad in India, look at the status of women, the rampant prostitution of children. Do you think the Australian peacekeeping force will consider an intervention to save them from their menfolk?

Is your Government incapable of caring for the wellbeing of women and children in India? I'd suggest you take it up with them.

 

[S.A.M.]

Is your Government incapable of caring for the wellbeing of women and children in India? I'd suggest you take it up with them.

Well clearly, they are mostly Hindu fundamentalists after all. What do they know about morals and human rights? Its a very backward kind of society with rampant misogyny. You must have heard of the dowry deaths, cops caught raping minors, politicians assisting in communal massacres, dalit women stripped and gang raped in public, human rights workers imprisoned and killed in broad daylight. Everyone knows that bringing in the army is the only solution to such problems. But you've seen the Indian Army in Kashmir. They pull out nails, rape and mutilate women. Clearly we need the guiding hand of a much more moral army. And who better than the Australians?

Is there an application we can fill out somewhere?

 

[Bells]

Well clearly, they are mostly Hindu fundamentalists after all. What do they know about morals and human rights? Its a very backward kind of society with rampant misogyny. You must have heard of the dowry deaths, cops caught raping minors, politicians assisting in communal massacres, dalit women stripped and gang raped in public, human rights workers imprisoned and killed in broad daylight. Everyone knows that bringing in the army is the only solution to such problems. But you've seen the Indian Army in Kashmir. They pull out nails, rape and mutilate women. Clearly we need the guiding hand of a much more moral army. And who better than the Australians?

Is there an application we can fill out somewhere?

Well in your opinion, we murder children as our past time. Maybe you should seek help from Iran. I understand from you that they're absolute role models these days.

 

[S.A.M.]

Well in your opinion, we murder children as our past time. Maybe you should seek help from Iran. I understand from you that they're absolute role models these days.

But Iran does not police the world. In fact, they do not even police their neighbors - clearly this is a role for which only the most moral are suited.

Tell me, with the aboriginal lifestyle being so detrimental to themselves and their children, why does the Australian government treat them like mindless children? Taking away their booze and pocket money, rolling back their land rights, banning their porn. Why don't they bring their own vastly superior western social morals to them? If Australians can travel halfway around the world to teach the Afghans democracy and secularism and train them to be good soldiers and providers, why can't they do it with the aboriginals at home?

 

[Bells]

But Iran does not police the world. In fact, they do not even police their neighbors - clearly this is a role for which only the most moral are suited.

So the sabre rattling towards Israel is what? An invitation to a Sunday picnic?

Tell me, with the aboriginal lifestyle being so detrimental to themselves and their children, why does the Australian government treat them like mindless children?

What makes you assume the Australian Government only does this to Aboriginals? They do it to anyone who suffers from severe substance abuse to ensure they have a house over their heads and food on the table. Many families have a portion of their welfare payments withheld to pay food and rent, etc. It is a way to ensure their children are fed and educated and have a home. Do you disagree with the policy?

Taking away their booze and pocket money, rolling back their land rights, banning their porn.

Who said anything about porn? You are aware that most Aboriginal communities are dry zones and such moves were put in place at the request of Aboriginal elders? Yes? No?

Why don't they bring their own vastly superior western social morals to them?

You mean education and health care for their families and safe havens for those who are abused? Something the Government is trying to make available to all Australians?

If Australians can travel halfway around the world to teach the Afghans democracy and secularism and train them to be good soldiers and providers, why can't they do it with the aboriginals at home?

What makes you assume Aboriginals need to be taught such things? Do you consider them to be backwards?

 

[S.A.M.]

So the sabre rattling towards Israel is what? An invitation to a Sunday picnic?

What sabre rattling? The denoument of Zionism? Every right thinking person with a brain does that.

What makes you assume the Australian Government only does this to Aboriginals? They do it to anyone who suffers from severe substance abuse to ensure they have a house over their heads and food on the table. Many families have a portion of their welfare payments withheld to pay food and rent, etc. It is a way to ensure their children are fed and educated and have a home. Do you disagree with the policy?

I must be behind the times, but yes I do. Substance abuse is usually a sign either of chemical intoxication or mental disease. I'm not sure how treating the symptoms alone helps to resolve the issue. But what do I know?

Who said anything about porn? You are aware that most Aboriginal communities are dry zones and such moves were put in place at the request of Aboriginal elders? Yes? No?

CANBERRA, Australia – Australia's prime minister announced plans Thursday to ban pornography and alcohol for Aborigines in northern areas and tighten control over their welfare benefits to fight child sex abuse among them.

Some Aboriginal leaders rejected the plan as paternalistic and said the measures were discriminatory and would violate the civil rights of the country's original inhabitants. But others applauded the initiative and recommended extending the welfare restrictions to Aborigines in other parts of the country.

So the elders treat their community as children along with the Australian government? Isn't that patronising? Does it work?

You mean education and health care for their families and safe havens for those who are abused?

According to James, one does not use the army for work that should be done by police, social welfare organisations or schools. So whatever it is that the army does which works on the Somalians and Afghans should be attempted on the aboriginals, don't you think? Or should they be denied the vast experience that Australian troops have gained in the international arena?

What makes you assume Aboriginals need to be taught such things? Do you consider them to be backwards?

No no, its not politically correct to call them backward. Lets just call them socially challenged. After all, the high suicide rates, rampant child abuse and alcoholism not to mention poor levels of education and low socio-economic status doesn't exactly speak well for their social aptitudes does it? Or don't you want them to enjoy the freedoms and lifestyles of other Australians?

Questions:

what happens to the men who abuse the children?

what happens to the children who are forcibly taken from their community?

what happens to the white miners who utilise the sexual services of the aboriginal teens?

 

[Asguard]

So Sam, the army are this big bad bunch of dogs whobhave to be caged right?

Do you realise that when you watch LOTRs that the 1000s of extras were actually NZ army because they are a big group of organized people who can be called on?

Did you know the army was called in to assist with building fire breaks, setting up.refugees points for those fleeing the flames, helping with medical care and body retreval during the black sat bush fires. Hell if there is a car acident near the army base its quite routine for the civilian ambos to ask defense to attend and transport if they have no cars near by

 

[James R]

Sooo... Do you think all Aboriginals are paedophiles?

Is that relevant? Does military intervention require them to be all pedophilic? [snip]

Once again, we see SAM avoid a simple, direct question, and attempt to divert onto a tangential topic of discussion.

Why is SAM unable to answer simple direct questions?

Does SAM support the Taliban? Yes or no?
Does SAM believe that all aboriginal people are pedophiles? Yes or no?
Does SAM think the Iranian government is a model government? Yes or no?

I can only conclude that SAM doesn't want to tell us what she actually believes about things. Is that because she is worried that she will look bad when she tells us what she really thinks? Is she embarassed about her opinions? I think that must be it.

I think if a child is in danger in a community, they should be removed immediately from that community. Race does not factor into a child's safety. Or do you disagree?

How can I possibly disagree? I support everything the government does to benefit women and children. Bring back the Stolen Generation! Why wait till they are abused? A pre-emptive strike is necessary in my opinion.

Once again, SAM avoids answering the simple question. Instead, she gives a snide response that puts words into Bells' mouth.

The question was: Should race be a factor in concern for a child's safety? i.e. should children of different races be treated differently when it comes to protecting them from abuse? Yes or no?

Again, it's a very straightforward question.

So let me ask it directly in a different way:

SAM: Do you condone the abuse of some children, if they are of certain races?

 

[quadraphonics]

But Iran does not police the world. In fact, they do not even police their neighbors

Sure they do. They've had their hands in Iraq, Lebanon, etc. for a long time, supported the Northern Alliance against the Taliban before that, and so on. They may have given up on the whole "export the Revolution" thing, but "sphere of influence" still seems to feature heavily in their approach.

 

[Bells]

What sabre rattling? The denoument of Zionism? Every right thinking person with a brain does that.

You mean they are trying to police Israel by demanding the death of Zionism?

I must be behind the times, but yes I do. Substance abuse is usually a sign either of chemical intoxication or mental disease. I'm not sure how treating the symptoms alone helps to resolve the issue. But what do I know?

They are attempting to treat all of it.

I guess trying to make sure that their children actually have food to eat on a daily basis and ensuring the children get an education and health care is a bad thing to you and not a good way to try to overcome substance abuse. I beg to differ.

So the elders treat their community as children along with the Australian government? Isn't that patronising? Does it work?

Do you know or understand anything at all about the role of elders in Aboriginal communities? Do you know or understand how they govern their communities and the rules used to govern such communities? I would guess from this statement of yours that the answer to that is no?

According to James, one does not use the army for work that should be done by police, social welfare organisations or schools. So whatever it is that the army does which works on the Somalians and Afghans should be attempted on the aboriginals, don't you think? Or should they be denied the vast experience that Australian troops have gained in the international arena?

One more time, for Sarah Palin..

The Army was used for logistical purposes - transport (air and land) - since the areas covered were so vast and remote and in some instances, difficult to access by car or 4x4 for example..

No no, its not politically correct to call them backward. Lets just call them socially challenged. After all, the high suicide rates, rampant child abuse and alcoholism not to mention poor levels of education and low socio-economic status doesn't exactly speak well for their social aptitudes does it? Or don't you want them to enjoy the freedoms and lifestyles of other Australians?

Ah yes, I forget you come from a caste system where those less fortunate then you are considered backward.

At least we acknowledge there is a problem and are looking for solutions to fix it. Can you say the same for you country? Seeing the levels of poverty being hidden from view in the Commonwealth Games, I would probably say the answer to that question would be a no.

what happens to the men who abuse the children?

Which men? They go to jail.

what happens to the children who are forcibly taken from their community?

Which children? Those who are in danger in their communities are placed in foster homes with parents who are trained to care for abused children, or placed with extended family members in other communities.

This is common in Australia. If a child is sexually abused or physically abused in their home, they are removed from said home until said home is made safe for their return.

what happens to the white miners who utilise the sexual services of the aboriginal teens?

Huh?

 

[Bells]

So Sam, the army are this big bad bunch of dogs whobhave to be caged right?

Do you realise that when you watch LOTRs that the 1000s of extras were actually NZ army because they are a big group of organized people who can be called on?

Did you know the army was called in to assist with building fire breaks, setting up.refugees points for those fleeing the flames, helping with medical care and body retreval during the black sat bush fires. Hell if there is a car acident near the army base its quite routine for the civilian ambos to ask defense to attend and transport if they have no cars near by

Not to mention helping in other disaster areas..

When we lost everything in The Gap storms and were trying to sort through the rubble and mud that had swamped our home, they just turned up on our doorstep with clean drinking water (our water supply was not drinkable in the weeks after the storm) and fresh food for us to eat (we were trapped and unable to get out as parts of the roads were blocked in the street where I lived).. And helped us carry out the mud soaked furniture and helped us for about 2 days.. Without our having requested it. They all just turned up in our street and did it. Even took us to get hot showers and a hot meal in the evening (we had no power and our BBQ had floated off down the river) in their big trucks..

Thankfully our children were not there. Otherwise, in Sam's world, they'd have shot the children.. Because that's apparently what they do.

 

[S.A.M.]

So Sam, the army are this big bad bunch of dogs whobhave to be caged right?

Do you realise that when you watch LOTRs that the 1000s of extras were actually NZ army because they are a big group of organized people who can be called on?

Did you know the army was called in to assist with building fire breaks, setting up.refugees points for those fleeing the flames, helping with medical care and body retreval during the black sat bush fires. Hell if there is a car acident near the army base its quite routine for the civilian ambos to ask defense to attend and transport if they have no cars near by

My criteria for assessing any action is very simple: does it work?

The Australian peacekeepers have been doing their bit in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia. Coincidentally these are the top three countries from which people are fleeing for asylum in other countries. So whatever they are doing clearly has not brought peace there.

But let us suppose that the NT intervention was well meant. They are all aboriginal loving Aussies so clearly any military intervention against aboriginal communities would be done out of a sense of achieving results.

Instead:

It has now been 3 years since the Northern Territory Intervention was first implemented. Its effects on Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory have been devastating. A recent government assessment report of the NT intervention noted that: “health, child health care referrals are down… child malnutrition is up… On education, total enrolments and school attendance rates are marginally down”

“On law and order, alcohol, drug and substance abuse incidents are all up (p.32–33); domestic violence related incidents are up (p.33); and breaches of domestic violence orders are up (p.33) despite a far greater police presence… all categories are up except for sexual assault reports that are slightly down.”

The truth is that the Northern Territory Intervention was never intended to raise the living standards of Indigenous Australians. The policy first came into place in 2007 in the dying days of the Howard government. It had the full backing of the Labor Party. Emergency measures were implemented which banned alcohol and pornography in Indigenous communities, the police were armed with increased powers to arrest and detain individuals, welfare benefits were quarantined and in many places entire communities were forcefully evicted by the Government.

At one stage the military were mobilised to “police” these communities. As the policy singled out individuals according to their birth it also required the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act.

The agenda of the Intervention has been simple. Mining, agribusiness and tourist corporations have long demanded unrestricted access to mineral-rich Aboriginal land. The Intervention facilitates this. On top of this the cuts to welfare and shutting down of small isolated communities will mean a steady supply of cheap labour for Australian big business.

To implement the policy Howard, with the backing of the Australian press, pushed a myth that paedophilia and child prostitution rings were rampant in Aboriginal communities. The fact of the matter is though that no evidence has been found of these claimed prostitution rings. There is nothing proving that paedophilia rates in poverty stricken Aboriginal communities are any higher than in poor white communities.

http://socialistworld.net/doc/4582

Sounds like it didn't work for the aboriginal community either.

Which begs the question: is the Australian government really dumb or is there a reason they keep doing stuff which just makes bad situations worse?

 

[S.A.M.]

Does SAM believe that all aboriginal people are pedophiles?
SAM: Do you condone the abuse of some children, if they are of certain races?

Well I MUST support pedophilia since I am not supporting the removal of aboriginal children from their community. And the Australian government clearly considers all aboriginals to be pedophiles since they have sent the army to deal with child sexual abuse in their community. I guess, the aboriginals are the Australian Taliban.