"Deep into the eyes of racism" - Nyoongar Tent Embassy, Thursday March 22

Gerry Georgatos
Two of Nyoongar Tent Embassy's stalwarts had not been to the Embassy for more than a week. Dumbartung Aboriginal Corporation's Robert Eggington and John Pell were in Perth city on planning duties for the March 28 Stolen Wages march and rally when Mr Eggington was urged on by a spiritual sense and looked at Mr Pell, "Johnny, lets go to the Embassy."

Michael Anderson: "If this continues we'll ask for UN peacekeepers to protect us" | WA Aboriginal protesters demand new deal

They drove into the Heirisson Island carpark to find it full of police vehicles with only one carpark bay vacant, as if it waited patiently for them, said Mr Eggington. "We looked around and the Embassy was swarming with police but none of our people were there. It was an eerie feeling."

They had arrived after 3pm and most of the Nyoongar folk had walked to Yagan's statue on the other side of the island to regroup in sanctuary and in peace.

"I saw police and rangers tearing down the tents, dumping the crockery, food, blankets, everything into large dumpster type bins," said Mr Eggington.

"I looked around at our flags which were still flying and some of our other symbols and I said to Johnny this isn't right that they should be dumped and destroyed. We walked past police and rangers and decided to collect them before they did."

"One officer asked us what we were doing and we said we would collect them. He looked at us like we did not matter."

"I never forget the look in the eyes of many of the police officers, young tactical response types, it was a look deep with hatred for us, smirks on their faces itching for something. I'll never forget it," said Mr Eggington.

Mr Pell said this is what shook him most about the police presence, the look in their eyes - one filled with racism. "The look in their eyes is what our people on the banks of the Murray River during the Pinjarra massacre must have seen in the eyes of those just before they slaughtered them - men, women and children."

They managed to retrieve the flags, and felt that the spirits of the Nyoongars had guided them. Nyoongar Vanessa Culbong was thankful Mr Eggington and Mr Pell had retrieved her flag, "This was my father's flag, we have always kept it." Similarly were the stories of many others.

"I have never ever seen the likes of what we saw at Mattagarup, of the police acting in these ways, not in all my life, and I have lived racism, known it, experienced. I could not believe it, it will stay with me till I die," said Mr Pell.

"I cannot excuse the government, however worst is SWALSC's Glen Kelly - he needs to resign, and I call for his resignation. Most Nyoongars will be turned against the government and Glen Kelly when they see how they treat our people. How can any Nyoongar trust anything Glen Kelly and this government ever has to say or promise when they did this to our people? Nyoongars will say they can shove their offers and deals when they treat our people like this," said Mr Pell.

"That was racism out there, an army of police, who looked like more than a hundred of them, police on horses carrying on like cavalry, and the dogs in cages seething to break out and tear at people, the air smelled of the worst of man, of the awful things done to our people for 150 years in this state," said Mr Eggington.

WA's backwater racism smashes Nyoongar Tent Embassy - for a day

Heirisson Island (Mattagarup) had become the voice of disenfranchised Nyoongars, removed from the consultation process on Native Title talks between the state government and the South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC).

The National Indigenous Times visited Nyoongar Tent Embassy on eight occasions during its nearly seven weeks at Mattagarup - on every occasion, except when West Australia's police force, in heavy duty numbers, arrived, it was peaceful, civil, and a place of yarning and a bloom of camaraderie.

Unlike many broadcast and print media reports which portrayed chaos the Embassy was orderly, at all times clean and tidy in the midst of the beautiful landscape and alongside the sweep of the Swan river, and people looked out for each other - children who were there after school hours played freely and happily. News media and radio shock jocks had been portraying images of truancy and neglect.

The ceremonial fires were carefully stoked and looked after.

In the minutes before the police arrived there was happiness, laughter, and myriad bright exchanges of civil banter.

At 2:30pm on Thursday 22, a police helicopter hovered over Heirisson and appeared to descend. The Western Australian police arrived in what appeared military phalanxes, in-a-never-before-seen public spectacle for the City of Perth upon a peaceful gathering of peoples. The public spectacle, a throw-back to an era presumed long gone, led to the unfettered debacle of confrontations, pumped-up officers on horseback galloping after activists walking to Yagan's statue on the other side of the island, and to the arrests of four of the campers - Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal.

Yagan was a Nyoongar resistance fighter who was murdered in 1833 by the first colonialists, and whose murderers then severed his head as 'bounty'. In 1984 his statue was erected at Heirisson Island. In 1997 the head from the Yagan statue was sawn off by vandals obviously in reference to the then current attempts to return Yagan's head from England.

One shocked Embassy supporter said, "The police numbers and their intimidating conduct should come before a royal commission however the government ordered this! Where do you go?"

"There were no reasons for the arrests? Why?" she said.

The Western Australian police looked near one hundred officers however many news reports have them numbered at 70 - they arrived in a platoon of blue shirts, dark shades, and gloves, and some acted in ways as if their blue thread provides them with various immunity - however the police violence, one on one, was not anywhere near as ugly as some of the officer to protestor confrontations at the Lobby restaurant incident on January 26, however it was ugly in terms of the size and force of the en masse police operation.

The violence at Heirisson was in the magnitude of the deployment of force by WA's police - the deployment of a dog squad, of horseback police, of the tactical special response group and of a huge number of officers in militia like formations and sweeping movements that caused people to fall, tumble, and a young pregnant mother, Shilo Harrison, cradling Marianne Mackay's newborn, was smacked in the face by a police officer's horse - she was 'shell shocked' and was left with a cut to her forehead.

Ms Harrison said she filed a complaint with police. However one Nyoongar said, "Police investigating police, we know where that goes." Police have confirmed they have received an 'excessive force' complaint.

Nyoongar Marianne Mackay said, "The calmness and tranquility of our culture and our respect at Mattagarup was vilified by the police and the government however we are not going anywhere, it is our right to be here."

"After all the vilification of us by the Premier and the (Police) Commissioner on radio, and Howard Sattler and Paul Murray (6PR radio program hosts) we knew the police would come today like an army. However we peacefully walked over to Yagan's statue and did not confront them, and this stunned them. Having come for trouble and not getting it, they looked foolish."

Nyoongar Greg Martin said, "They came after us, we did not do anything, they came here looking to make arrests."

Elder Herbert Bropho who was arrested two hours after the police stormed the Embassy said, "We have caused no one any harm, we have done no wrong, we will not be shut down, the Embassy will be back and up and running real quick."

"We will keep on coming back... They cannot stop us," said Mr Bropho.

The number of police and rangers were many more than those present however supporters, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, had arrived in the hour before the police and council rangers arrived to evict the Embassy campers, and many conscientiously tried to hold their ground in the face of the unrelenting sweeping movement by police across the camp, and they begged police officers to respect the rights of the Nyoongar folk at the Embassy, and said that this was not Nazi Germany, that they should not act like Nazi Germany's notorious Brown Shirts, and that they should refuse to be misused as 'weapons of government'.

Nyoongar activists spoke of a swathe of solidarity messages from right across Australia - of others nationwide who were appalled by what was described to them as the 'backwater racism of Western Australia'.

The police and 20 council rangers seized 21 tents, two vehicles, a dinghy, camping equipment, and other goods during the forcible eviction.

In the days and nights since many of the activists have remained at the Island, having regrouped, without tents and resources, with one saying, "Our spirit must remain strong."

Mr Martin said, "We send out an appeal to every good hearted person, if they can come with a tent for us, we will gladly accept it."

Mr Bropho said, "They can come back tomorrow with the army, we are not moving."

Former Fremantle Dockers and Melbourne AFL player Scott Chisholm has been at the Embassy "since day one".

"The people have been waiting for Premier (Barnett) for ages, since this started, to talk with them," said Mr Chisholm. "We have to get thee guys out of their office, sit down and talk with us."

"I am saddened, upset, at how our people are being portrayed."

"I do not want to see my people being treated the way they have, it brings a tear to my eye," said Mr Chisholm. "They haven't even been protesting, they are only people making a stand for their rights."

In the days since, there are still a dozen to a score Nyoongars at Mattagarup holding up the spirit of the Embassy and who said the bloom of the Embassy shall be raised again - they have relit the ceremonial campfires. In the meantime the police are maintaining a presence at Mattagarup, which they instead only refer to as Heirisson.

What WA Premier Colin Barnett had to say

Several hours before at least 70 Western Australian police marched into Nyoongar Tent Embassy Premier Colin Barnett had much to say. He said that the Embassy would be dismantled and where necessary 'force' would be applied.

He said it did not matter how embarrassing it may look for Western Australia and his government to the rest of Australia and to the world.

He told news media, "It has gone on long enough and it will be stopped."

"The protest is undermining the good negotiations, in good faith, about a final agreement over Native Title for Perth and the south west."

Premier Barnett accused the protestors of wanting a violent confrontation so that it would make international headlines. He did not believe his government had been at fault. He said he is relying on news footage for people to make up their minds about who is at fault however he said he did not care if the news footage was misconstrued as bad publicity, it was time to end the Embassy.

"There will be performances for the cameras and it will get reported around Australia and probably elsewhere but we will not tolerate the continuation of this camp and protest on Heirisson Island," said the Premier.

Mr Barnett said that if the Embassy continued it would make his government look "weak and impotent."

"We deliberately took a view that let them make their point for a while but that time has run out now."

"It is getting out of hand and therefore action will be taken and maybe it is a bit overdue," he said.

Several hours later, after four arrests, and news footage going around the world West Australia's police - tactical response pfficers, horseback police galloping like cavalry after activists who were only walking, a police helicopter, a dog squad, and the debacle of police marching all over ordinary folk - the Nyoongar folk said they would continue the Embassy as occurred with Canberra, 1972.

Tent Embassies have gone up in Brisbane (Musgrave), and in regional WA's Bunbury.

Inciting hatred - 'You are a weak and impotent government'

Radio programs throughout Perth and the south west of WA gave Nyoongar Tent Embassy a torrid time, none worse the radio station 6PR with three of its radio talkback hosts slamming the Heirisson Island Embassy day in day out.

A blogger to the 6PR website posted, "At least Howard tells it as it is without fear or favour. These people have had it too good too long and need to follow the laws of the land."

Radio talkshow host Howard Sattler said that the police should move in and clean them up. Fellow radio program hosts Paul Murray and Geoff Hutchison were just as tough. Mr Murray in interviewing Premier Colin Barnett said to him "your government appears weak and impotent". Premier Barnett responded, "Well we've given them the time to get their message out and now we will taken action to move them out."

WA Police Commissioner Karl O'Callaghan also added his weight on 6PR by saying it was time they had to go and he urged for instructions for his police to go in and end the Embassy.

There were many who called in support of the Embassy however most callers were vehemently against the Embassy. 'Doug' said, "Past injustices are no excuse for law breaking today."

'Max' said, "(Tell them to) get real jobs and pay taxes then you deserve the right to be heard same as the rest of Australia."

Posted by 'Dianna' on the 6PR website's blog, "I'm with you!! I'm sick and tired of these bloody do-gooders saying that we have to be more tolerant of the aboriginals - Rubbish! I'm over it, I'm tired of them making us feel intimidated with their foul mouths and violence - these 'people' on Heirisson, deserve nothing!!! I agree put them all on a remote piece of land in the middle of no-where and give them nothing, they're quite happy to take money from our government but slander them in the process!"

'Steve' posted, "Ding dong, the protestors are gone. The police and rangers need to keep on doing what they have done here today. Don't let them set up again... As soon as they set up another tent it needs to be removed. They will soon run out of tents and camping gear."

'Nikki' posted, "Paul, I like your fence idea... Keep them on the island in a secure enclosure and use their Centrelink money to provide the traditional lifestyle and habitat they claim to desire, a bark lean-to and a campfire. Of course they will be given firewood, a few kangaroos and possums thrown over the fence for them to kill and eat every week, and whatever fish they can catch... with nets they make themselves from grass. I imagine such an exhibit such as this would be quite popular with international tourists, perhaps (from a raised) treetop walk to view them safely..."

Sadly these are the views and posts of several of the far too many to document.

"They came after us"

Nyoongar Tent Embassy spokesman Greg Martin had been at the Embassy for the whole of the six weeks. He said the police always intended to make arrests.

"We tried to avoid a confrontation, they came after us. We went to the other side of the island but they kept on coming after us and they made the trouble. The police came here intending to arrest people," said Mr Martin.

SWALSC CEO Glen Kelly distressed

South West Aboriginal Land and Sea Council (SWALSC) chief executive officer, Nyoongar Glen Kelly said he was distressed his fellow Nyoongars were confronted by police in the manner that occurred, with a tactical response group, horseback officers and dog squads. He was distressed by the arrests.

Mr Kelly said, "We never wanted people to be arrested and for this event to happen."

Mr Kelly said SWALSC has the best interests of Nyoongars at heart and the Native Title proposal hopes to create last legacies, such as income and rights for Nyoongars. "I am a Nyoongar and I am in this for my people."

He said SWALSC's board of directors were elected by the organisation's 4,000 members. There are however at least 37,000 Nyoongars said Nyoongar academic Professor Len Collard.

Greens speak out in support of Nyoongar Tent Embassy

The Greens have spoken up in support of Nyoongar Tent Embassy and say that the police intervention was wrong. Greens WA member of the Legislative Council, Robin Chapple said the "activists have a right to stay on Heirisson Island."

Mr Chapple has called for calm in the face of the demands to have the Nyoongar activists "cleared from their Tent Embassy at Heirisson Island."

"I call on the Premier and City of Perth to respect the right of peaceful protest, and allow the Tent Embassy activists to continue to gather and practice culture on Heirisson Island."

"Heirisson Island is a public park of significant cultural importance, and particularly at this time while the state government is in negotiation about settlement of Nyoongar native title, it is important that the government does not silence these voices," said Mr Chapple.

"The Tent Embassy has been a peaceful gathering, drug and alcohol free by the activists' insistence. There is no pressing reason why the Tent Embassy should be cleared," he said.

War of attrition to destroy Tent Embassy wasn't enough

Sources close to the Office of the Western Australian Premier, Colin Barnett have told The National Indigenous Times that the angst by the Premier and his colleagues towards Nyoongar Tent Embassy at Heirisson built to fever pitch.

Indigenous Affairs minister Peter Collier and Premier Barnett had said that the Embassy had to go at all costs, although publicly Premier Barnett had limited himself to comments that the tents had to go and that no-one could sleep on the Island overnight.

In the last couple of weeks after an ugly tug war between City of Perth Council instructed police muscle misused as weapons against the Tent Embassy campers, the Embassy instead grew five fold in size in comparison to the first few weeks of its life.

However, police and council rangers set up concrete bollards to close off all parking area entrances into order to starve the Embassy of parking facilities and of supporters from coming in to join.

A source said, "The talkback (news media) had got too much for the Premier and some of the ministers, and with Labor and especially Ben Wyatt not supporting the Nyoongar Tent Embassy, the Premier decided to move things along. He'd had enough."

"What really sparked it for Colin and Peter (Collier) was the talkback - Howard Sattler and Paul Murray getting stuck into the Aboriginal protestors and the camp and the government letting it just carry on. With an election next year they are worried about looking weak."

"Then there's Rob Johnson (police minister) and Troy (Buswell) and Colin listens to them, and they dropped in their vitriol in against the protestors that they need to be moved on and well that was it for Colin. So, as far as he was concerned the police had to come in and end this, once and for all - lock up some of them, so be it. A couple of staffers said it's not wise to be heavy with people that don't have much, that they're not Andrew Forrest with all the voice in the world, but with Howard Sattler riling up half of Perth and the (news) media showing the worst of the protestors that was it."

Dennis Eggington says a Treaty is the answer

Dennis Eggington, chief executive officer of the Aboriginal Legal Services of Western Australia, and who unlike many prominent Nyoongar folk in high offices tied to state and federal governments visited Nyoongar Tent Embassy and demonstrated his support and comprehension of the Embassy said that it is time Australia put together a legitimate Treaty with its Aboriginal peoples. He said Australia is the only country not to have such a Treaty.

“A Treaty between the Commonwealth and Indigenous peoples can help resolve much of the problems between our peoples and the Commonwealth.” He said this would be an apt resolution for all Aboriginal peoples as is being clearly evidenced by the predicament between for instance the West Australian government and Nyoongar Tent Embassy. He said the issues are more than just the content of the Native Title offer, they are of sovereignty - and the call for Aboriginal Tent Embassies has been Australia-wide. He said sovereignty calls will not go away and are being highlighted by all Aboriginal peoples and major organisations, and that hence a Treaty is long overdue. This generation of Aboriginal voices will cut its teeth on sovereignty and for governments to try and oppress this call will need great reserves of various biases, prejudices and racism shoved down peoples’ throats to delay it as clearly demonstrated by the WA state government in what they have tried to do to the Nyoongar peoples at Heirisson Island (Mattagarup).

Mr Eggington believes a Treaty is the majorly way forward.

“This is the way other countries have done it – Treaty – and I do not know why Australia procrastinates any longer,” said Mr Eggington.

“It just causes these kinds of issues we are dealing with today and it is something that should have been done a long time ago, a long, long time ago.”

“It is a matter of governments sitting down in a fair dinkum way and drawing up a bona fide Treaty or partnership, sitting down with or peoples and putting it together,” he said.

“What is happening at Nyoongar Tent Embassy is exactly the same as Aboriginal Tent Embassy in Canberra and the people at both just want to be heard.”

“The reality once again is we’re not doing it for people’s sympathy, we are doing it because it is our right to,” said Mr Eggington.

“Whatever needs to (be done) get people to the table to talk and to put together a fair dinkum Treaty or to talk about a legitimate partnership, because the sovereignty issues will not go away, then so be it.”

In the first days of Nyoongar Tent Embassy Dennis Eggington said to me that far too many people are making the mistake of not realising that the issues with the Native Title offer are huge, and that Nyoongar Tent Embassy represents more dissatisfaction than is portrayed by the news media or is being accepted by those in positions of responsibility. The Native Title offer would not address the myriad issues and problems that afflict Nyoongar peoples, however that at the heart of the offer is a dig at the identity of Nyoongars – the extinguishment of many of their rights, and of their call for sovereignty, be it Treaty, and hence the stripping away of their identity, historical and contemporary, as assimilation plunders obvious demands.

I am reminded of the words of Les Malezer, co-chair of the First Peoples National Congress, to the news media Australia-wide the day after the Lobby restaurant incident – Australia can expect Aboriginal voices to rise, and much more to come, be they protests, heightened calls for various justice and including sovereignty, in a year that could be one pursuant ‘of historical change’. Eulayhi leader, Michael Anderson has described 2012 as the stand for justice – it is happening, this is undeniable, and the narrative is still unfolding, though state, territory and commonwealth government jurisdictions to their shame may wish not to hear it at this time.

Well known Nyoongar and university academic Associate Professor Len Collard once told me the meaning of “Nyoongar” – “human being.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg1rk-J3g8E&list=UUpE0iGRzB3GG8PianG3d5OQ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg1rk-J3g8E&list=UUpE0iGRzB3GG8PianG3d5OQ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg1rk-J3g8E&list=UUpE0iGRzB3GG8PianG3d5OQ...

photos taken by Zebedee Parkes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zebparkes/sets/72157629277230324/

photo essay by Alex Bainbridge
http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/50447

Promotion: 

Comments

"I never forget the look in the eyes of many of the police officers, young tactical response types, it was a look deep with hatred for us, smirks on their faces itching for something. I'll never forget it," said Mr Eggington.
Thats funny the police I saw most were wearing dark sun glasses can't see how you could have looked in their eyes!Some one is speaking crap Gerry.
Here is a video a few days before the eviction
http://video.news.com.au/2198741715/Police-swoop-on-island-tent-embassy
And this video on the day of the eviction
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/activists-embark-on-secret-cbd-protest/s...

The Tent Embassy has been a peaceful gathering, drug and alcohol free by the activists' insistence. There is no pressing reason why the Tent Embassy should be cleared," he said.
It's reported that a recent incident in which rocks were thrown from a nearby bridge at a boat smashing windows and injuring people on board was linked to the protest camp.that does not sound like a peaceful gathering to me what about you Gerry but I sure you will deny this happened right?
http://www.6pr.com.au/blogs/6pr-perth-blog/news-crew-attacked/20120319-1...
http://www.optuszoo.com.au/news/breaking/perth-now/wa-premier-says-tent-...

"I am saddened, upset, at how our people are being portrayed."
"I do not want to see my people being treated the way they have, it brings a tear to my eye," said Mr Chisholm. "They haven't even been protesting, they are only people making a stand for their rights."
So They haven't even been protesting hey, here is some photos of them protesting in the streets
http://www.perthnow.com.au/gallery-e6frg1vc-1226277237576?page=1

We tried to avoid a confrontation, they came after us. We went to the other side of the island but they kept on coming after us and they made the trouble. The police came here intending to arrest people," said Mr Martin.
This is just a lie look at the video and you will see it was the police trying to avoid confrontation the protesters were yelling screaming and finger pointing you could see the police did not want to be there they were just doing their job.You will also see the young tactical response types with dark glasses on a bit hard to see a look deep with hatred in their eyes and can any one see smirks on their faces because I can't.Here is the video you decide!
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/activists-embark-on-secret-cbd-protest/s...

Mr Eggington was urged on by a spiritual sense and looked at Mr Pell, "Johnny, lets go to the Embassy."
How old do you think we are Gerry?A "spiritual sense" come on mate you think we are going to buy that crap?I would believe Jake and Elwood were on a mission from God in the Blues Brother's movie before that tripe. Did they drive there in a Dodge with a 440 ci engine with cop tyres and cop suspension LOL

The City of Perth Council gave them time to get their point across but in the end they had to be evicted because there is a law that says NO CAMPING the same thing would of happened to any white group that camped there so to say racism was involved is just crap. Look at the occupy movement in Melbourne they were also evicted because of a no camping rule in parks, they too were given time to get their point across then removed.I'm sorry Gerry you racism crap does not wash with any one who can think for themselves.

White Man you caught them out big time I watched the video's and you are right on all points well done.

The other interesting thing is glasses are part of the tactical response groups compulsory personal safety equipment and must be worn.You caught them out big time on that one.

White man you are right about the comparison with the occupy movement in Melbourne they got a harsher treatment than the Aboriginal protesters did,I would say that the WA police were told to be on their best behaviour as footage would go around the world, 10 out of 10 to the Police they did a impeccable job.Trust them to try to play the racist card, just shows the crap the Police are up against.

No Sean, Gerry is on the mark and instead prejudice has caught you out Sean

No Kevin, Sean is on the mark and instead truth has caught you out

"I am saddened, upset, at how our people are being portrayed."
"I do not want to see my people being treated the way they have, it brings a tear to my eye," said Mr Chisholm. "They haven't even been protesting, they are only people making a stand for their rights."

24 Mar 12: "The Aboriginal Legal Service in Western Australia says a treaty between the Commonwealth and Indigenous people could help resolve situations like the protest on Heirisson Island in Perth. Four activists were arrested this week after police descended on the island to close the camp. The campers were protesting against a South West native title deal struck between the Noongar people and the State Government. The Chief Executive of the ALS, Dennis Eggington, says it is time for a new approach."

"If the police forces continue to use riot squads, mounted police and police dogs against peaceful protesters, then we will have no choice but to take a delegation to the UN and talk with foreign governments"
Part of "Michael Anderson's Statement
http://nationalunitygovernment.org/content/force-used-suppress-aborigina...

"They have made a determinated stance to hold a small parcel of land in protest for their rights as First Australians".
http://treatyrepublic.net/content/nyoongars-stand-against-land-rights-br...

You are right white man there was a protest and Mr Chisholm was wrong.Why would Gerry write this if it's not true?

I have been watching this site and have noticed there were 33 comments and half of them have been deleted because you White Man have made them all look like they are not telling the truth.
Good on you White man make the accountable

I just feel sorry for you (and others) however more so for the marginalised - your rationales and apothegms thrive on the prejudices, biases, stereotypes and misinformation shoved down your throat on a daily basis by well the vicious circle itself, the nescience, and which can and does subsume news media.

Gerry

Don't feel sorry for me Gerry I am not the one who has to tell lies you are.I notice you do not comment on the points I have pointed out,We can all see how you have exaggerated what happened.Why do you feel a need to do this?
Gerry it is your rationales and apothegms thrive on the prejudices, biases, stereotypes and misinformation it is you that ram it down peoples throat, look at what you have written and can not defend the garbage you wrote.

"this was not Nazi Germany, that they should not act like Nazi Germany's notorious Brown Shirts, and that they should refuse to be misused as 'weapons of government"Who is stereotyping here with this comment Gerry?If it is not the police job to move people on who are illegally camped who's job is it Gerry?How many Aboriginal people were put on trains and sent to Gas chambers?The rubbish you write is unbelievable.The Police were watching what they said and did they should be congratulated on the professional manner in which they conducted themselves,it was the protesters that were trying to bate the police but the police were too smart for them, they kept their mouths shut and did their jobs watch the footage on what happened Gerry.

I think the best thing for you to do Gerry is stop causing trouble with the lies you write and if you do write about something make it truthful is that too much to ask?Gerry for you to write these lies that only means you are wrong and you know it why else would you feel a need to lie.It is you who are the racist Gerry against the white Man and are using the Aboriginal people as a tool to be used for your own sick agenda.

Gerry put simply you suffer from verbal Diarrhea

The above is your best effort at being reasonable, you do make good points in the counter argument to stereotypes for instance against police.

Gerry

Gerry I still see you dont want to correct the lies you told, defend them or answer any of my questions,I will just take that as a admission of guilt.
But please next time just tell things how they happen and don't treat your readers as morons Gerry.

Primum Non Nocere...

Mate, I say it as I see it, as I understand it, and I report as it's put to me, and the rest you are entitled to...

First do no Harm you think Gerry.Thats all you have done is harm with the lies you print.You want to watch what you write now the White man is after you Gerry

Listen Sean, Gerry has written every word true

were you there mate? unless you were one of the coppers I don't think then that you were there

You and White man are full of holes, in your racist hearts

not all the police had glasses and if you look on the videos you'll see this

you'll see we were peaceful and that it was brought on, like uninvited guests to a party

you are a gutless work Sean, you and White man tearing into us

Thank you Gerry, thank you that there is someone who writes it like it is, was and brother these dem the facts

Sean don't lie and discredit the work of others who mean well, you do the harm and your friend or alter ego White man

Kevin, so Sean is gutless and racist because he see's the lies I also see.
I am not racist all people are created the same, it is culture, attitudes and conduct that make us all different.

Not all the police had glasses, true! but all the tactical response police did and that is who the statement was pointed at, why do you want to change what was said Kevin?

"you'll see we were peaceful and that it was brought on, like uninvited guests to a party"Kevin you were on Crown land the rules there are "No Camping" It was you who acted like uninvited guests to a party.Why do you feel a need to twist the truth

you are a gutless work Sean, you and White man tearing into us.There you go again getting the story mixed up it is you lot that is gutless remember you ran away from the Police LOL

P.S Is that gutless line a challange ?

Goodooga, northwest NSW, 25 March 2012 – An Aboriginal leader says if police forces continue to use riot squads, mounted police and police dogs against peaceful protesters, the United Nations will be asked to send in peacekeepers.

Michael Anderson, Interim Chair of the National Unity Government, was commenting on the police attack on the Nyoongar Embassy in Perth.

“Our predictions that the governments in Australia will use superior force to suppress the Aboriginal sovereignty movement have come true,” Andersaon writes in a media release.

“This is evident in the recent assault on the Nyoongar Tent Embassy in Perth where people are asserting their sovereign identity and independence through re-occupation of their own land of Heirrisson Island in the Swan River.”

Anderson writes that in anticipation of superior force and aggression “by the colonial occupying governments” he wrote a letter to the UN Secretary-General, Mr Ban Ki-moon on 27 February 2012 “putting him on notice of our sovereignty movement and the anticipated repercussions”.

“If the police forces continue to use riot squads, mounted police and police dogs against peaceful protesters, then we will have no choice but to take a delegation to the UN and talk with foreign governments, in an effort to get foreign security forces as peace keepers to protect us against this ongoing violent aggression and oppression.

“There is no excuse for the type of aggression shown in Perth last week. The photograph taken by Alex Bainbridge on 22 March 2012 is an iconic image of our struggle.

“We are calling on our people and supporters to put the cameras in their mobile phones to good use and to capture as many images as possible of the oppression our people are under and the abuse of police powers. Then send the evidence to tab called “EVIDENCE” in our Sovereign Union website www.nationalunitygovernment.org and fill out the contact form with as much detail as possible.”

The entire statement:

Iconic image: Gather the evidence of the abuse by superior force

“Our predictions that the governments in Australia will use superior force to suppress the Aboriginal sovereignty movement have come true. This is evident in the recent assault on the Nyoongar Tent Embassy in Perth where people are asserting their sovereign identity and independence through re-occupation of their own land of Heirrisson Island in the Swan River. WA Nyoongars have maintained sovereign independence despite 225 years of the invader society’s occupation. This, of course, is an issue that will not go away. The erection of the Nyoongar tent Embassy was triggered by the WA offer of $1billion to settle all land claims in the SW of WA – a pittance considering the innate wealth of the lands and waters.

In anticipation of superior force and aggression by the colonial occupying governments, I wrote a letter to the UN Secretary-General, Mr Ban Ki-moon on 27 February 2012 putting him on notice of our sovereignty movement and the anticipated repercussions.

If the police forces continue to use riot squads, mounted police and police dogs against peaceful protesters, then we will have no choice but to take a delegation to the UN and talk with foreign governments, in an effort to get foreign security forces as peace keepers to protect us against this ongoing violent aggression and oppression.

There is no excuse for the type of aggression shown in Perth last week. The photograph taken by Alex Bainbridge on 22 March 2012 is an iconic image of our struggle:

We are calling on our people and supporters to put the cameras in their mobile phones to good use and to capture as many images as possible of the oppression our people are under and the abuse of police powers. Then send the evidence to tab called “EVIDENCE” in our Sovereign Union website www.nationalunitygovernment.org and fill out the contact form with as much detail as possible.

The following letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the UN resolutions clearly demonstrate our need for protection from the superior force of the colonial powers in our land:

Mr Ban Ki-moon

UN Secretary-General

United Nations

New York

27 February 2012

Your Excellency,

I am corresponding with you on behalf of the National Unity Government, known as the Sovereign Union of the Aboriginal Nations and Peoples in Australia (SUANPA).

For two hundred and twenty five years our country has been occupied by the British and ruled by all their successors in title.

From the original instructions to the invading Captain Arthur Phillip, the British advised in 1788 that upon their landing an invasion of the land mass, then referred to as New Holland and Terra Australis he was to apply the ‘rules and disciplines of war’ from the outset. The historical records clearly show that former Dutch and British explorers were well aware that this new-found land was indeed peopled.

Australian historical records and despatches from various governors to the British Admiralty, during the early years of occupation, tell of constant undeclared warfare. Clearly the 19th century documents and those of well into the 20th century, show that the various Australian colonies ignored the British Admiralty’s instructions for Aboriginal Peoples’ rights to occupy, possess and use their lands and resources as their customary usages had done so previously. Instead, the colonies developed policies and strategies to exterminate our race. If you require evidence of these facts we can produce them at your request.

It is said in law, that in order to prove genocide, it is obligatory for those making the allegations to prove that the State had planned or condoned any practices that lead to the genocide of a particular race or ethnic group in whole or in part, or by condoning private armies or vigilante groups. Should your office require this information, it can also be produced.

Within the last twelve months I have come upon legislation from the British parliament dated 1875 called the Pacific Islanders Protection Act 1875. This UK Parliamentary Act was an amendment to the 1872 Pacific Islanders Protection Act that was popularly referred to as the anti-blackbirding Act, or words to that effect.

The 1875 amendment refers to the 1872 Act as being the principle Act, and in the principle Act the terms and definitions described unambiguously and unequivocally the specific locations and landmasses that these Acts related to. Under the terms and definitions of the principle 1872 Act it included and applied to the colonial states at the time of Queensland, New Zealand, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and Western Australia. It must be noted that the current Northern Territory was part of the South Australian colony at this time.

In December 2011, I had the occasion to travel to London to look at the Votes and Proceedings and Bills in respect of the 1875 Pacific Islanders Protection Act in the Office of Parliamentary Counsel in Whitehall. I must admit that I was surprised that the rights of Aboriginal Peoples in Australia were not part of those debates. However, in August 1875 when the Pacific Islanders Protection Amendment Act 1875 was concluded in the Parliament, the Act included Sections 7 and 10, which read:

7. Saving of rights of tribes. – Nothing herein or in any such Order in Council contained shall extend or be construed to extend to invest Her Majesty with any claim or title whatsoever to dominion or sovereignty over any such islands or places as aforesaid, or to derogate from the rights of the tribes or people inhabiting such islands or places, or of chiefs or rulers thereof, to such sovereignty or dominion, and a copy of every such Order in Council shall be laid before each House of Parliament within thirty days after the issue thereof, unless Parliament shall not then be in session, in which case a copy shall be laid before each House of Parliament within thirty days after the commencement of the next ensuing session. [2243]

10. Proclamation of Act. – This Act shall be proclaimed in each Australasian colony by the governor thereof within six weeks after a copy of it has been received by such governor, and shall take effect in the said colony from the day of the proclamation. [2246]

Having located these sections, I then had discussions with a Member of the House of Commons, Mr Jeremy Corbyn, MP at his Parliamentary office. I asked Mr. Corbyn, how was it that these two sections had been included. He responded to wit: Her Majesty Queen Victoria, through the exercise of her prerogative rights made two Orders in Council: the first being section 7 and the second being section 10. Mr Corbyn then added that, when such an Order in Council is given by the English Monarch, it becomes absolute law within the British legal jurisdiction, which included all the colonies of England at the time and thereafter.

It is important now to refer you to a court case dated 1842 before the full bench of the Supreme Court in New South Wales, R v Murrell and Bummaree (1836) 1 Legge 72; [1836] NSW Sup C 35.

Briefly, an Aboriginal man was brought before the court for killing another member f his own tribe under his Law. He challenged the jurisdiction and said he was not a subject of the British king and therefore not subject to the jurisdiction of the court. The court concluded that given that the British instructions were to offer protection of British law to Aboriginal people, then he must be subject to British law. The defence counsel then put it to the court on Jack Congo Murrell’s behalf that if he was indeed a British subject then the colonial state had a legal obligation to compensate him financially for the land they had confiscated from him as a result of the invasion. Interestingly the court held that;

Although it was granted, that on first taking possession of the Colony, the Natives were recognized as free and independent, yet the various tribes were found not to occupy that position in the scale of nations as to strength or government which would entitle to sovereignty. [Sydney Herald 5 May 1836]

It is from this conclusion that until 1993 Australia was considered a country settled by ‘peaceful’ means because it was classified as terra nullius, a legal concept that has now been overturned by Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] HCA 23; (1992) 175 CLR 1 (3 June 1992)

In respect to the High Court Mabo (No.2) case, it should be noted that the High Court perused the Pacific Islanders Protection Acts and concluded that, on the question of the continuing sovereignty of Aboriginal people it was not within the High Court’s jurisdiction to form any view and make conclusions. As Aboriginal Peoples we do understand this reasoning because the High Court is established by the settler state to deal with their laws governing their people. The conundrum that we now find ourselves in is the fact that the British from 1875 onwards did not claim sovereignty or dominion over the peoples, our place the rulers and chiefs. This was then and continues now to remain the British law in respect to Aboriginal people.

From the 26 January 2012 it has now been re-asserted that Aboriginal people are sovereign and independent people of this country and we are now finalising the development of a National Unity Government to exercise our sovereign and independent rights as Nations and Peoples.

During this development phase we do understand and acknowledge that it will be viewed and taken as a serious affront to the existing invader nation state of Australia, in respect to territorial integrity. Having said this however, the Australian state has been deceitful and dishonest in its treatment of our Peoples and as a consequence of our Old Peoples’ lack of understanding of the English language and their methods of government, we have been denied all those rights which we have always held and that had been confirmed since 1875. No doubt the Australian state will now use, by sheer weight of numbers and superior force, through their local police organisations and military, to suppress any Aboriginal efforts to gain our legal rights. In respect to this we will be travelling to England in the coming months to hold talks with the English government in an effort to have them honour their own law pre and post Federation of the Australian state.

We are appealing to the United Nations, through you as the Secretary-General to provide us with protection and support to establish our National Unity Government (SUANPA) and to achieve its desired goals. We are freely exercise our right to organise ourselves so that we can reach a point that will enable us to govern ourselves in our own right, once again.

We also understand the need to have urgent meetings with the Australian state as they occupy the same landmass and rely on the same natural resources for their own economic stability, but we cannot hold these meetings until we first organise at a national level. We do know that each of the Australian states at present are rejecting our efforts by banning our gatherings in and on public places, and referring these gatherings as protests, thereby causing civil unrest. But it is our submission that it is they, with the dominant and governing numbers, who are exercising superior force to prevent us from holding gatherings and using their police to break up our groups and move us on.

We would like to draw your attention to the fact that we gather on public lands and similar locations in an effort to avoid conflict, but it is the nation state, which is taking offense. It comes as an absolute surprise for us that the Australian states, both Federal State and Territory, are unable to understand and accept that it is from their own political and legal genesis that is, the British and their parliaments and the laws which underpin their society, that gives us our legal right. I reiterate, the source of our authority to assert our sovereign rights and dominion over our lands and natural resources as free and independent Peoples is recognised by the same source of power.

I now wish to reiterate my call that the United Nations, under international law, must invoke upon the Australian state their obligations to refrain from the use of force and to engage fully with us as the National Unity Government to have fully realised those guarantees that are entrenched with the attached UN General Assembly resolutions

Should the United Nations find this too difficult and confronting, then we ask that the United Nations refer this matter to the international Court of Justice for their Advisory Opinion.

In the document we attach we outline the basis of our sovereignty movement and the UN’s international moral and legal obligations to ensure a peaceful transition.

Sincerely,

Michael Anderson

Interim Chair

National Unity Government

Sovereign Union of Aboriginal Nations and Peoples in Australia

PO Box 55

GOODOOGA

NSW 2838

THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION

The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples of 14 Dec 1960 states:

The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of co-operation and world peace…all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their Sovereignty, and the integrity of their national territory. [1]

The prohibition on the use of force to deny self-determination was first declared in the UN General Assembly resolution 2160 (XXI), 30 November 1966, 98-2-8:

…forcible action…which deprives peoples under foreign domination of their right to self-determination [external or internal] …constitutes a violation of the Charter.

After the second world war, the United Nation’s urgent quest for world peace are in the name of:

We the peoples of the United Nations…[2]

and

All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence…

is the first article of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR)[3] and of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(ICESCR).[4]

It is understood that force may be used to defend against denial of self-determination, but this was not stated clearly until 1970 in the Declaration on Friendly Relations that established the principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples:

Every State has the duty to refrain from forcible action which deprives peoples…of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence. In their actions against, and resistance to, such forcible action in pursuit of the exercise of their right to self-determination, such peoples are entitled to seek and receive support in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter.

But the 1970 Declaration on Friendly Relations advocates forms of government beyond those detailed in Principles VII-IX of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1541.[5]

In UN General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV) 24 October1970 called:

The Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among States in accordance with the charter of the United Nations (A 8082)

is the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples:

Every State has the duty to promote, through joint and separate action, realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter, and to render assistance to the United Nations in carrying the responsibilities and entrusted to it by the Charter regarding the implementation of the principle announced in order;

(b) to bring about a speedy end to colonialism, having due regard to the free and expressed will of the peoples concerned;

and bearing in mind that subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a violation of the principle, as well as a denial of fundamental human rights, and is contrary to the Charter.

The establishment of a sovereign and independent State, the free association or integration with an independent state or the emergence into any other political status freely determined by a people constitute modes of implementing the right of self-determination by that people.

The territory of a colony or other Non-Self Governing Territory has, under the Charter, a status separate and distinct from the territory of the State administering it; and such separate and distinct status under the Charter shall exist until the people of the colony or Non-Self Governing Territory have exercised their right to self-determination in accordance with the Charter, and particularly its purposes and principles.

Nothing in the foregoing paragraphs shall be construed as authorizing or encouraging any actions which dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign independent States conducting themselves in compliance with the principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples as described above, and thus possessed of a government representing the whole people belonging to the territory without distinction as to race, creed or colour.

On 30 November 1995, the United Nations Economic and Social Council appears satisfied that First Nations Peoples’ concerns are adequately dealt with by Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations. That is;

…The development of friendly relations among nations based on respect of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples.

To permit the Australian Government’s submission to have any legitimacy at all, when they say:

...Australia considers that self-determination encompasses the continuing right of peoples to decide how they should be governed.’ [6]

is of great concern and this position of the Australian government cannot be left to stand for them to deny our rights as Peoples, based on the existing resolutions of the United Nations, as cited.

There was enormous difficulty in the Working Group of the Commission of Human Rights to Elaborate a Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples for Article Three, the right to self-determination, to be endorsed by the UN nation states. In fact Australia was a key country opposing the inclusion of Article Three, supported by the other members of the CANZUS alliance, Canada, New Zealand and the United States of America.

During the laborious drafting process, we protested:

Are we not the Free Peoples of the world, or does the United Nations view First Nations Peoples as a different and lesser class of Peoples?

Is it not the Charter of the United Nations to insure that Human Rights and Freedoms are extended to all Peoples to be observed and adhered to and consistent with the enunciated Article 1 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;

...All peoples have the right of self-determination by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development…

Because of the continuing Australian deceit and denial as to our inherent rigts, it is no wonder that the Australian Governments during the drafting process remained by seeking to prevent being extended to the Aboriginal Peoples.

But the United Nations is an association of member nation states, which each recognise each other’s sovereignty. Their common denominator is that he majority acquired their power and status through military might and the genocide of First Nations Peoples, with whom they came into contact with during the colonial imperil epansion. Unfortunately, we, the tribal Peoples of the Earth, residing within the UN nation states’ boundaries, are having to appeal to the nation state that over ran over Peoples and lands.

There can be no doubt that our appeals to the United Nations will be frought with constant opposition, because as First Nations Peoples our appeals do, in fact, impact upon the territorial integrity and political unity of those nation states. There can be no doubt that he United Nation swill have to formulate new policies and procedures in respect to the UN Nation states to commence a process of true and meaningful internal colonization by following the principles cited in the resolutions herein.

The UN Special Rapporteur, the late Professor Alfonso Martinez, also harboured no doubts concerning the much-debated issue of the right to self-determination: First Nations Peoples, like all Peoples of the Earth, are entitled to this inalienable right.[7]

Self-determination is not restricted to full independence. There is a continuum of freedoms available and a range of choices. It is the right of the People concerned to choose which form of self-government, autonomy or independence they aspire to. It can also be an evolving process so that freedoms are gained in incremental stages.

As Professor Rudolfo Stavenhagen concludes:

…the denial of self-determination is essentially incompatible with true democracy. Only if peoples’ right to self-determination is respected can a democratic society flourish…[8]

As recently * as April 2000 the UN Commission on Human Rights re-stated the underlying principle for world peace and good order in Resolution 2000/62:

…a democratic and equitable international order requires, inter alia the realization of the following rights:

(a) The right of all peoples to self-determination, by virtue of which they can freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development…[9]

In the preceding Resolution 2000/40 the UN Commission on Human Rights emphasised that:

…political platforms …based on racism…or doctrines of racial superiority and related discrimination must be condemned as incompatible with democracy…and that racial discrimination condoned by government policies violates human rights…

Thus international law acknowledges that there is also a creative process at work and in this way it is the right of First Nations Peoples to determine their own political status, even if this form of government has not been previously recognised by the United Nations. In fact, this is getting close to the crux of the issue because First Nations Peoples already have ancient systems of government, Law/Lore and economy handed down through time, but it was the colonising powers who denied the existence of this sacred process and, instead, subjugated and denigrated the First Nations Peoples.

But now the Earth, our Mother, is stirring and First Nations Peoples across the globe are feeling a new sense of empowerment and the diverse cultures and peoples are re-energising, rising up in defense of our Mother Earth; knowing that unless this happens our Earth is finished. It is the combined energies of First Nations Peoples with non-Aboriginal supporters who can break the shackles of trans-national corporate globalisation, militarism, nuclear cycle and state sovereignty. First Nations Peoples are having to find ways of re-expressing the ‘Voice of the People’, which for too long has been silenced by the dominant powers and an obstructionist media outlets. Destruction of the Earth and genocide against First Nations Peoples have become accepted norms by dominant populations living in denial of the reality which surrounds them.

With establishment of the World Trade Organization through Free Trade Agreements and the corporatizing of governments, the territorial integrity, which nation states so desperately cherish and protect is now compromised. It is important to understand that Aboriginal Peoples, like the remainder of the nation state’s population have never been consulted by the governments, to gain the peoples’ free, prior and informed consent to have their country’s territorial integrity compromised in the name of commerce and trade. This act by governments and those who participate in it is treasonous and a fraud against its population.

For each of the nation states to argue that the First Nations Peoples’ claim of right through self-determination is a threat to their territorial integrity is an hypocrisy of monumental proportions.

White Man, you were not there. You rely on mainstream news media for some of your "evidence". Particularly on outlets and shows that are known hot-spots for racism.

Your analysis about the sunglasses and "looking into eyes" is crap, I can see plenty of police without sunglasses on, particularly those that were doing most of the talking. Mr Eggington talking about "looking into eyes" is in no way inconsistent with the videos that you quote.

You don't have even half the story on the rock throwing. The media has presented no evidence that there were any rocks thrown by any person associated with the embassy. Eyewitnesses at the embassy report having rocks thrown at them and constant racial abuse by boaters passing by. If there was any rock throwing at the boat in question by anyone associated with the embassy, that would have been in retaliation to earlier attacks by that boat. Embassy people allege that this included driving the boat through a group of Nyoongar children who were swimming. One was hit in the face with a thrown bottle. You can search online for a video explaining that, if you dare to look for an account from people from the tent embassy. Or do you assume that white people tell the truth and black people lie?

Most of your criticism about Gerry lying relates to quotes he makes. That's not Gerry talking, that's him quoting someone else. Or can't you tell the difference? Are you saying that the quotes are not accurate or are made up by Gerry? Or are you saying that the people being quoted are lying? How could you tell the difference?

I'm afraid your writing is as full of holes as you allege Gerry's to be and full of bias. You were not there and you have not talked, I presume, to people who were. How can you think that you have a better perspective on events there than Gerry?

You also are very selective and willfully deceitful in trying to find contradictions. Your identified "contradiction" regarding Mr Chisholm's comment about embassy people not protesting is false. He was clearly referring to people at the embassy at or in the days around the time the police moved in. He was not referring to a protest some weeks ago in the city.

Your analysis about the sunglasses and "looking into eyes" is crap, I can see plenty of police without sunglasses on, particularly those that were doing most of the talking. Mr Eggington talking about "looking into eyes" is in no way inconsistent with the videos that you quote.
yes it is the quote was ""I never forget the look in the eyes of many of the police officers, young tactical response types, it was a look deep with hatred for us, smirks on their faces itching for something. I'll never forget it," said Mr Eggington.
look at the , young tactical response types they all had glasses on tell me how many did not or do you need glasses too?

Do you assume that white people tell the truth and black people lie?Right back at you, do you assume black people tell the truth and white people lie?

Most of your criticism about Gerry lying relates to quotes he makes. That's not Gerry talking, that's him quoting someone else. Or can't you tell the difference? Are you saying that the quotes are not accurate or are made up by Gerry? Or are you saying that the people being quoted are lying? How could you tell the difference?
Gerry is a jounalist and as a professional he should check his story before it is put to print.In answer to your question all of the above

You also are very selective and willfully deceitful in trying to find contradictions. Your identified "contradiction" regarding Mr Chisholm's comment about embassy people not protesting is false. He was clearly referring to people at the embassy at or in the days around the time the police moved in. He was not referring to a protest some weeks ago in the city.
They are the same people have a look you really do need Glasses.
The funny thing about you saying I was not there, I am in one of the Photo's LOL

That's an interesting claim you make about being there. I wonder in what capacity, one of the cops perhaps? That would explain a few things. I wonder why you rely on quoting the videos if you were an eyewitness to the events. I wonder why you failed to claim the credibility of being an eye witness earlier?

Also I am afraid you thinking lacks logic and consistency. Nobody said that nobody at the embassy has not participated in protests elsewhere at other times. So you contradiction still does not stand.

You are truly disingenuous if you think that a video of police officers wearing sunglasses proves that Mr Chisolm did not look in to eyes and see smirks on faces. It's absurd to suggest such a thing. You have video of, or were watching Mr Chisolm every minute were you?

I don't assume that white people lie, I am one myself, and a migrant to boot. But I sure can smell the putrid stench of racism. I can recognise the faulty and disingenuous arguments that are so often used to try and deny to the racism that underpins them.

In any case, if you are claiming to be an advocate and watchdog for journalistic integrity, a sort of one-person Media Watch, I think there are better people to be looking at than Gerry. If you are aspiring to be an unmasker of lies and untruths, there are better targets to turn your attention to, like politicians and police for starters. Lets see how they lie about the incident where a pregnant woman, with very young baby in arms, was deliberately bumped over and injured by a mounted police officer. My good friend was right there and it was clearly deliberate because he changed directed and walked the horse straight at her. I also know the woman in question.

This was after the activists abandoned the embassy and had retreated to the other end of the island, doing their best to avoid a confrontation. Almost no mention of that in the media.

"You are truly disingenuous if you think that a video of police officers wearing sunglasses proves that Mr Chisolm did not look in to eyes and see smirks on faces. It's absurd to suggest such a thing. You have video of, or were watching Mr Chisolm every minute were you?"
Why would I be watching Scott Chisolm?When it was Dennis Eggington (Jake), chief executive officer of the Aboriginal Legal Services of Western Australia that said it!Here it is again for you.

"I never forget the look in the eyes of many of the police officers, young tactical response types, it was a look deep with hatred for us, smirks on their faces itching for something. I'll never forget it," said Mr Eggington.

Not only do you get your Mucking words Fuddled you get the whole story arse about.You don't have a clue who said what to who, and who did what to who,What, or was that what said who to what and what did who to what LOL

Fizick did you know if a Aboriginal agrees with the White man on these issues he is labled as some one who has sold out to the white man.with you comment
"I don't assume that white people lie, I am one myself, and a migrant to boot. But I sure can smell the putrid stench of racism. I can recognise the faulty and disingenuous arguments that are so often used to try and deny to the racism that underpins them"
This is your opinion I would not say you sold out to the black man, I am not racist and think you are entitled to you opinion.Do you see who the real racists are yet?

"You also are very selective and willfully deceitful in trying to find contradictions. Your identified "contradiction" regarding Mr Chisholm's comment about embassy people not protesting is false. He was clearly referring to people at the embassy at or in the days around the time the police moved in. He was not referring to a protest some weeks ago in the city"

This is what Michael Anderson had to say "If the police forces continue to use riot squads, mounted police and police dogs against peaceful PROTESTERS, then we will have no choice but to take a delegation to the UN and talk with foreign governments, in an effort to get foreign security forces as peace keepers to protect us against this ongoing violent aggression and oppression.

There is no excuse for the type of aggression shown in Perth last week. The photograph taken by Alex Bainbridge on 22 March 2012 is an iconic image of our struggle:

You, Michael Anderson,Scott,Dennis and Johnny(Jake and Elwood) need to get together and get your stories straight, because Michael Anderson clearly calls your mob protesters.

Every day aboriginal Australians get up and teach the world about survival. I have been welcomed by the Indig mob down at Matagarup and have had the great privilege of being there during some important ceremonies and cultural teachings. I have also witnessed the rock throwing & racist taunts by passers by. Rocks that on one occasion hit a child in the face. Police were called and refused to investigate or take a statement (they took his name and badge number & made a complaint). While I do not condone violence of any kind it is interesting to note the media fails to report on the violence these people endured for weeks while exercising their right to be on land they never surrendered and are in the process of staking a claim to. Their lawyers have considerable documentation, as does Mr Anderson. People at Matagarup are NOT protesting, they are exercising sovereignty, as is done by Indigenous peoples around the world who have not ceded or treatied away their land rights. I understand the you might feel that is a form of protest, however, I think it would be stretching truth to breaking point to say people were protesting when the cops moved on them up at Yagan's statue. I was there. People were there for over half an hour...sitting talking, having walked over there to avoid confrontation at the embassy site where they left the council & cops to dismantle and remove their possessions. I ask you: what more could they do beyond walk away. Police moved in and began grabbing people rather suddenly. The cop on the horse deliberately steered it towards the woman holding her friend's baby. Deliberately & with intent to cause harm. I was mere meters away and there was no provocation for this clearly criminal act by that officer. If the police had not moved in and began to grab people who were neither camping nor protesting, merely being, there would have been no verballing! If, as you say, you were there you would have to agree if left alone their would have been no confrontation! The cops came to them. BOTH TIMES! So you have been caught out in a lie! I did not just witness racism that day, in the actions of that police officer deliberately trying to ram a woman holding a baby I saw evil.

Oh and the cops on the horses were not wearing sunglasses: I have a clear memory of looking into the eyes of the one who charged Shilo. Had to turn his horse hard to the left to run into her. And mate I can assure you the dude smirked.

In fairness the cop in front of her moved forward to keep her from falling over when the force of the blow made her stumble.

So that is another claim you make that is wrong.

I'd keep going but their is no point. You see I not only believe they have a right to be there, I think its about bloody time. They will never achieve justice without militancy. In the history of social change only resistance & militancy (non violent militancy is what I advocate) has achieved a measure of social justice for the dispossessed and marginalized. Having listened intently to the great Michael Anderson (an historic figure and sharp legal mind) a few weeks ago down at matagarup it would appear that the Indig mob certainly have a legal claim under international & possibly Australian law to have their sovereignty recognized. Many other indig peoples have achieved this (US, Canada, states in central & South America)etc) in some measure & this has aided social and economic status and the invaders worlds have not caved in. There is no way for Govt of Oz to stop this inevitable transformation in Indig affairs So rather then the exercise of state violence here's a thought....do the very thing that both SWALC & the Govt have stubornly refused to do: sit down and actually talk to the aboriginal leaders of the Embassy. I note that you fail to mention this salient fact: the indig mob have repeatedly asked for consultation & meetings. They have been ignored. They were not even invited to or allowed in to a conference on indig land rights! How absurd is that. What a joke.

People should be aware of what the deal between the WA State Government and the SWALSC Nyoongar community is and is not .

What it is not:

It is not a one document reconciliation between settler Australia and the traditional Nyoongar owners.

It is not a treaty.

It doesn't deny some form of future sovereignty for the Nyoongar people.

It is not the last step in reconciliation.

It does not make up for 150+ years of attempted genocide, assimilation policies and discrimination.

What it is:

It does resolve a number of native title claim in relation to the native title act of 1993 and does prevent or significantly limit any future claims that can be made in relation to this act..

It will provide the Nyoongar community with significant resources and some land which they don't currently have.

It is a significant step in the reconciliation process.

Sure, it will restrict some future claims but I'm don't believe that these restrictions will be as great as some people, on either side of the debate are making out. People should find out more about what the future legal effect will be before making their decision whether to support it or not.

The deal with swalsc isn't a good deal, it is important people are aware but it's a little money and some jobs in parks and not much more that doesn't happen outside a deal like this, the deal is actually pretty much about signing off rights and that's wrong

I think this was good by Gerry and pretty open minded

How do we ever change things, it just seems like there is obstinacy with one side, the govenrment, and righteous hopelessness with the other side, the victims?

What do we do to get change? So many songs and hopes over the years and really so little achieved.

Yeah how do we change things, i have become sad reading some of the mindlessness of people who dump on people who speak so well

I don't think in the years which I have left that we will see justice, may my children's children see it for all of us, The Lord is watching that is our comfort

Many indig people have been able to exercise sovereignty. Have a look at the Canadian or New Zealand model. I'm not suggesting that this resolves ALL conflict and disparity...but it is an alternative to assimilation models and genocide. Australia has gone down the route of attempts at assimilation & genocide (as did the US initially...just run people off their lands and kill them...then use the churches to destroy what remains of culture). The US has moved in the direction of sovereignty as have almost all other nations when attempting to find models of relationships with indigenous people who have legitimate claim to land. Australia is now almost the only country that refuses to recognize in any way aboriginal sovereignty. The Aboriginal peoples of Oz are now attempting to assert that which under international law they already have. SOVEREIGNTY
I don't think the author of the post dismissing this notion understands either what it means or how it has been realized in other jurisdictions. Perhaps an examination of the relationship between Canada's "First nations" peoples and the Crown would be a starting point. While the First Nations peoples of Canada do NOT have a separate STATE they are recognized as a separate nation with a significant measure of self determination and control and ownership of resources. Some of the larger bands operate as self funded and self governed constituencies with more authority then a municipality and with absolute ownership of the mineral resources found on & under their land (depending on the terms of the original treaties. Certainly not all claims are yet settled and social problems still exist...but nothing like what is apparent here! Then of course there is Nunavit.....an Inuit homeland that has self government and extensive authority: the powers of a province or state (actually even more). So it is neither inconceivable nor a pipe dram for aboriginal people HERE to be able to exercise sovereignty. They are working to begin practicing and living this (part of what the tent embassy is about is establishing and practicing sovereignty) while they prepare the legal challenges to have this sovereignty RECOGNIZED. They fully appreciate the only other option is cultural genocide embodied in assimilation policies. These policies can only result in a continuation of the poverty, social problems and high incarceration & death rates that continue to plague these people and will ultimately destroy them. Looking around the world the ONLY alternative way forward IS recognition of sovereignty (as many other countries have done) and a move towards resource and power sharing that will allow continuation of culture and control over lands & minerals etc that flow from this. I'm afraid the dude above just does not comprehend what the models look like elsewhere. I can certainly imagine a whole other set of relations with aboriginal peoples. As someone who grew up in Canada I have witnessed this first hand. Another way is possible...and probably inevitable.

excellent, a pay the rent proposal and sovereignty like Rob Eggington and Michael Anderson in one as they call for these

Hey dude, you are amazing! 1788 eh? You really don't like certain people eh? You really are racist rather than somebody who is grated by something? You're the dude who claims Irish ancestry and is upset what the British did to the Irish. So you don't see any irony in what you say all the time about what the invader did to Ireland and the invader to Aboriginal people of this continent (unless you're into Terra Nullius)?

So what is it? Hypocrisy or racism?

Add up the listed violent war-like deaths on each side.

The incomplete list provided by #White Man.

If Seven whites = 100 Blacks ?

Does this equal equality under the law and in the protection of human rights ?

why are the racist comments being pulled down or hidden? the world should read the obvious racism many of us have faced for generations and see what were up against

don't hide the racism

Hi Col - the site has a policy against discrimanation

http://www.indymedia.org.au/editorialpolicy

I reckon the racists get enough airplay elsewhere personally

racism is easy to expose, difficult to do something about

if you want to read about racism in wa read sat's the west newspaper and today's editorial in it, it's shocking, and read Gerry's piece here at indie

http://indymedia.org.au/2012/04/02/wedge-tactics-by-wa-government-to-wat...

more from gerry that makes sense

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/10/487665.html

i was touched by this,

http://indymedia.org.au/2011/12/21/my-christmas-letter-the-little-drumme...

thanks for this gerry, sort of made my day and pulled me out of a little trough of the dog

you do great good

much appreciated, fiona

Thanks Gerry ....this country needs to wake up and look at their laws/lores

often only side of the story is the truth, and Gerry seems to do well in getting to the truth

Gerry's story has been picked to bits and not much he say's is true open your eyes Lou.Gerry makes money out of this be careful about people who push a agenda to line their pockets!

What the hell Jimbo? Do you know Gerry, because some of us know heaps about him, he isn't one of these big shot high profile types but he does big shot things behind the scenes and has done for a lifetime for so many. He makes f-all money for what he does now, we all know that, he makes no money from most of his writings, if anything he ensures by his outspokenness he'll never make the big money. The guy has helped so many people it's ridiculous to tally up, but we other small contributors behind the scenes and especially social workers and many in the legal system know of the enormous good and sacrifices this man has made - other than some community awards and humanitarian acknowledgments has this man campaigned for any major awards, NO, has this man made a living of what he does and the huge amount of time he has put into the most vulnerable people over the many years, NO. So pull your head in Jimbo and don't throw mud at people that whose examples we could do more with. To many the man is a saint, and to many others he is in your face and a pest, and to others well they get happy to hear when he's left somewhere he is been for a while.

This guy built the largest computer recycling project in Australia, and first ran it from his home before he took onto a university space where he and students gave their time to donate something like near 60,000 computer to West Australians and people all over the world.

This guy built students without borders and one program after another - look him on google.

He has tried to assist the Indigenous voice by trying to politicise it, by trying to form a political party for those who asked assistance from him.

He has worked years with the homeless.

He has visited the most vulnerable in prisons year in and year out.

His damn PhD is in Australian Deaths in Custody and not in How do I make more Money, where's his PhD going to take him other than in helping others? Get real Jimbo.

If you don't know any of the above about him then you don't have any chance of knowing the other tough stuff he has done. I know enough from those that matter, who do know.

He has his enemies, in every political party, including the Greens for whom once he was a candidate, and he is their loss, our loss, but he has his supporters in all these two-bit political parties.

This guy couldn't give a shit about money except what he needs probably to get by.

Don't judge him by your standards and don't cut him down because you feel you have to justify yourself, you and that ridiculous 'White Man'.

Even those who have felt the demands of his advocacy and want him to disappear well they too deep down respect him, his integrity and his guts. He made enemies at Murdoch University because he stood up for every right when others wouldn't and I have read where he became the only university senator to be censured by the university in its entire history and apparently this happened to him twice, well I say power to the man and I praise types like him. Gerry was the general manager of the university guild there and by all accounts did great things and finished up the most popular person at the university even if he did have the most powerful vile enemies.

If you needed someone in your hour of need Jimbo, and you too White Man, you would want that man to be Gerry Georgatos, the same man who fought that awesome persistent battle for the Indonesian children our country shamefully imprisoned in adult jails. There are few as persistent and dogged as Gerry, ask those that know him and if any reader on this site who knows I am writing the truth about this man wants to confirm what I am saying please do so.

If you're ever in trouble Jimbo just call Gerry! At least you can count on him not saying your problems are in the too hard basket!

Fiona

If White Man is the good work then lo and behold our misery, you'd think pal you'd be applauding Gerry and people like him instead of someone who nominates himself as 'White Man'. Go figure!

there is still say a century's worth of racism left and it's bad what we still have however in about a century racism should be gone forever

Gerry, your writings are very worthy input into us seeing things for what they are, Julie