stamp said...cisco said...
In my opinion the majority of immigrants that come to Australia do so primarily for economic reasons, not because they intend becoming part of the great Australian tradition of comradeship and tolerance.
and why did your ancestors come here? the way many australians fiercely defend the country and the way of life is both hypocritical and ironic when you consider we are a nation of immgrants and criminals who only came here (uninvited and illegally) a few generations ago, at the cost of the long time locals. and for purely economic reasons.
yet when people try the same thing these days its; "oh no, no room for you. you might not adopt our great way of life."
comradeship and tolerance. thats a laugh
we're a country full of spoilt kids who won't share
My paternal ancestor came to Australia with the "Third Fleet" as a "Trap" or "Copper". He was a veteran Sergeant of the English Army that fought the "Battle of Waterloo" and was a native of Belfast.
The colonialist English Aristocracy wanted to populate their newly acquired colony of "New South Wales". They used the convicts they had on the rotting prison hulks that were filled to overflowing with mostly Irish Political prisoners.
The English had conquered Ireland and were severely oppressing the Irish. They were convicts but not necessarily criminals. Stealing a loaf of bread to feed your starving family can hardly be called a criminal act.
Those that survived the cruel oppression of the English were strong of heart and character. One might then say that the genetic pool of the caucasians that forged the nation of Australia was of very high quality.
Whether they came here "uninvited and illegally" or not is hardly relevant as they had no choice. If you want to level that "uninvited and illegal" arguement against anybody, do it to the English and Dutch Royal Families not the people and their decendants who built this nation. It was at the behest of those or that family (they are inbred) that Australia was earmarked for the classic "colonial exploitation scheme" that continues to this day.
Roughly 75% of Australia had been accurately mapped by the Dutch from the west and it had been named "New Holland" quite some time before Cook mapped the east coast.
Consider the western borders of Qld, NSW and Vic and why there is an east/west latitudinal shift in the longitudinal line roughly halfway along.
Could it be that the Dutch said to the English that these are the longitudes we have mapped to the north and south and we will split the difference half way and whatever is west of it is ours and whatever you find east of it you guys can have.
Remember that the Dutch and English "East India Trading Companies" had been operating out of Batavia for quite some time before 1770.
As we should all know the Dutch attempts at establishing a beach head on the west coast mostly resulted in calamity, catastrophy and disaster. Lucky for the indigenous population that happened as I believe if the Dutch had been successful, they would have hunted them down and wiped them out.
Returning to the "(uninvited and illegally) a few generations ago, at the cost of the long time locals. and for purely economic reasons." arguement.
The myth of aboriginal occupation of Australia for 40 thousand years just does not stack up. The fact that the oldest skeletal remains of the Asian Dog (dingo) have been dated at 10 thousand years and as Australia has geologically been proven not to have been part of the Asian land mass (Sunda Straits etc), indicates that the people living in Australia in 1770 were the declining remains of a once sophisticated maritime culture.
This is further bourne out by the undeniable record of the "Bradshaw Paintings" in the remotest parts of the Kimberly District of Western Australia. This beautiful art work has been reliably dated to at least two, long time span differentiated, and sophisticated cultures some 25 thousand years ago. The art, though beautiful, is also practical communication, ie scources of water and game and shows that the Kimberleys had a vastly different climate to what exists there today.
Of course the climate change "scientists" would rather ignore this real evidence.
Here endeth today's history lesson which the education departments of all states have been ordered not to teach.
Sister Mary Elephant says "Now class, who discovered Australia?"
Little Johnny pipes up. "Captain Cook, Sister Mary!!"
Sister Mary says, "Now was it me or Captain Cook?"
Little Johnny says, "Captain Cook, Sister Mary!!"
Sister Mary says, "Not the answer I wanted Little Johnny.[}:)] This is an alternative choice question Little Johnny. You can only tick one box. Was it me or he?
"
Little Johnny says, "Oh, he, Sister Mary, he!!"
Sister Mary says, "You don't have to answer twice or thrice Little Johnny, but as you got the answer I wanted twice, Congratulations!!! You are the smartest "Dumbed Down Kid" in the whole class. How does that make you feel??"
Little Johnny says, "Oh, Sister Mary, the self esteem is really pumping. Can I go to the toilet now?"
Hope you can all handle this and don't go into denial. Cheers Cisco
) but some people chose the not always easy road of accepting who they are and where they are from and adding to their lives by becoming Australian as well. Simply moving countries and gaining citizenship doesn't have to mean forgetting who you are, where you come from or your ancestry. 
