I know replying to you is a waste of time as far as you are concerned. However, others do read things here.
It is most unlikely that the first immigrants were the only immigrants until 1788.
It is highly likely that the very first immigrants were end off by subseaquent waves.
There are many "aboriginal" tribes. Do you believe they all evolved from a single boatload of people - the very first "boat people" to "invade" Australia?
Or do you believe that the pre-1788 people were truly indigenous, springing spontaneously from spinifex?
Where do you see the Torrest Strait Islanders in the great scheme of things. If you know any you will be aware that they have no sense of idenbreasty with "aborigines", and indeed look down on them.
To argue that "aborigines" "owned" Australia is totally fallacious. The concept of ownership of land is Western. There were no "owners" of anything prior to the First Fleet.
This is not an excuse for trampling on the Priors. Unfortunately, since I first visited Australia in 1964 everything the Government has done has made matters worse rather than better. It is good to see some recognition of this.
Whatever we do, we must remember PS Kelly's observation:
"It is not possible to right ancient wrongs without creating modern wrongs."
Kelly was not arguing that nothing should be done to redress old injuries, but rather to recognise that it is a vexed process, and in the absence of extreme care and caution very likely to produce undesired consequences.
We haven't seen much of those.
Regards,
Izzy
