are you saying that legislation that will come out of those inquiries will be based, specifically, on the answers given by neri?

what if he answered ‘no’? does that mean no legislation should be passed? c’mon..

djb, any act of congress, including the whistle blower protection law, can be challenged in a proper case, and may be declared void on constitutional ground. if such a law impinges on executive privilege and directly affect a party entitled to it, the s.c. can pass upon its constitutionality.

btw, congress can REVERSE a court decision through legislation so long as it doesn’t violate the constitution, regardless of whether or not it could change the “simple-minded”.

Maybe that is how they do things in Australia; but back here, forest rangers are employees of the government and are not to be privately paid for doing their job (which I believe includes guiding poor sop city slickers back to civilization whether such sops were lured into the forest or not).

Back when the proposed revision for the Charter was being discussed; I was able to attend some fora, discussions, etc…

I read their print and I heard their talk. For a large part it consisted of generalities, principles, motherhood statements, etc…

But when it finally went down to the details; I realized (and did what I could to disseminate those issues) that not only that those generalities, principles, motherhood statements, etc… were NOT going to be realized; some of the details would actually prevent the realization of those generalities, principles, motherhood statements, etc…

———–

“In the view of all Australian governments, all aborigines and part-aborigines are expected eventually to attain the same manner of living as other Australians and to live as members of a single Australian community enjoying the same rights and privileges, accepting the same responsibilities, observing the same customs and influenced by the same beliefs, hopes and loyalties as other Australians.”

That is how Federal and State Ministers responsible for native welfare defined the Australian assimilation policy for the aborigines.

“… to live as members of a single Australian community enjoying the same rights and priviliges …”- sounds like lofty ideals.

But the details to attain such a lofty goal included “confinement”, indoctrination, kidnapping, etc…

Not really that simple, is it?