Source: Bringing them Home – Chapter 6 Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Report, Bringing them Home, Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families April 1997.
Source: KEITH WINDSCHUTTL Why There Were No Stolen Generations (Part Two). Quadrant (January 2010) at http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2010/1-2/why-there-were-no-stolen-generations-part-two/
Laws banning the sale of alcohol to aboriginals were first passed in 1837. Later that century the ban was extended to opium. In time, all states and territories banned the sale of alcohol to aboriginals.
Australia figures prominently in the Journal of Genocide Research. The black armband theory of Australian history alleges genocidal intent towards Australian aboriginals by the state and territory protectors of aboriginals and their accomplices. Then why the ban on alcohol and the opium?
There were strong temperance movements in Australia in the first half of the 20th century. They achieved considerable political success. Their intention was to save their fellow Australians from the demon drink.
Why then was a policy of alcohol prohibition extended to aboriginals when the state protectors aboriginals were apparently according to the black armband theory of history practising genocide?
A credible theory must make risky predictions and strictly forbid certain things if its fundamental thesis is valid. Temperance movements were well-intentioned attempts to save their fellow man and, in particular, husbands and sons. The pubs closed at 6 for white Australians and were not open at all for aboriginals.
Why was this well-intentioned policy to save people from the demon drink extended to aboriginals in an era of genocide against aboriginals? Certainly, genocidal governments of that time would have known that binge drinking would have helped kill off the aboriginal people. Did they just miss a step? Keep missing that step from 1837 until 1972?
Something does not add up here? Drinking was seen as a serious social evil. The supposedly otherwise genocidal state and territory protectors of aboriginals sought to protect aboriginals from this serious social evil.
Genocidal state and territory protectors of aboriginals, if it is true they were intent on a genocide, must be expected to do little or nothing to promote aboriginal welfare. Yet they sought bans on alcohol and opium.
You cannot criticise Trump and the Pacific solution to boat people coming to Australia at the same time? Both Trump and Amnesty International agree that certain developing countries are not very nice places to go to and the people there are rather rough and intolerant of outsiders.
Source: THIS IS BREAKING PEOPLE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AT AUSTRALIA’S ASYLUM SEEKER PROCESSING CENTRE ON MANUS ISLAND, PAPUA NEW GUINEA by Amnesty International Australia at https://www.amnesty.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Amnesty_International_Manus_Island_report-1.pdf