More Sorry fallout…

An indigenous member of the “Stolen Generation” has taken umbrage at Brendan Nelson’s quoting of her words in his response speech.

I can’t find disagreement with the bulk of the comments. Maybe it would have been a wise gesture for Nelson to contact Mrs Lynam to let her know that he would plan to quote her, but it seems that those words were on public record, and I would suggest that there was no malice behind the manner in which he used them. After reading a transcript of Nelson’s speech, I can’t see too much wrong with the substance of what he said – it was apologetic without grovelling appeasement.

The more I read stories like this, the more I fear that this will snowball into a complex myriad of litigation and prolonged tension, depending on what the outcome of these cases are. Could this apology and other related musings actually prove to be counterproductive?


3 Responses

  1. Ha, umbrage

  2. “. . . complex myriad of litigation and prolonged tension . . .”

    As they say, ‘t ain’t over yet.

    Our previous Prime Minister – like him or not – was not a fool. Despite much pressure to the contrary, he chose not to say the S word on the basis of lots of sound legal advice and some rumblings and rumours that one hears from parliamentarians in parliament and not the usual body noises heard from the public in the pub.

    That’s not to criticise our current Prime Minister. I think he’s OK.

    The vociferous press and the whining of the general public proves my personal ironic statistical theory: that the majority of people are below average. If the ignorant back-turners were as clever as they think they are, they would themselves be elected into government, or be at work in the middle of the week, or doing something more useful than an obviously staged stunt for the cameras. Look at the film footage. On Wednesday morning, some people simply woke up with an agenda and the facts were not going to stop their exhibition. “Not listening! Not listening!” Maybe they should stop tuning their backs on other issues, like social dysfunction, the disdain for education, unemployment, petrol sniffing and child abuse.

    The only “toxic speech” I heard was supposedly from Mrs Lyman, who referred to Dr Nelson as a “bloody bastard”. This isn’t helping anyone. While her history may be heartbreaking, her sole recent contribution to this has been to sell some newspapers for media companies whose owners are rich white men.

    I bet the press wound her up too. . . “Mrs Lyman, this speech is toxic, do you think he’s a bloody bastard?” The media will pick at a sore as long as they can squeeze a story out of it, and as hard as it is to say, they don’t give a rip about what this dear lady has been through. And how much am I reacting to the media, rather than dealing in facts and civilised and compassionate discussion?

    Personally I would say “sorry” to these victims of horror and abuse, but as long as various victims generally harbour hate, you may ask “what’s the point in making a general apology?”

    Will it be over now? I don’t think so, not for a long, long time. Not until after someone apologises to me for the Great Climate Change Hoax :p

  3. […] for them to become known to the wider community, just like the case of Mrs Lynam that I commented on yesterday. And undoubtedly there are many stories like this that could be told, whether it is to merely make […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: