4 ms·

Your characterising this as a 'historical curio' is ridiculous. By the same reasoning we should just leave the bombs dropped in German cities where they are -

Your characterising this as a 'historical curio' is ridiculous. By the same reasoning we should just leave the bombs dropped in German cities where they are - 'someone could die, disarming them' ...

roenxi 6y ago
Someone could also die leaving them where they are. There are circumstances where it makes sense to risk defusing a shot, but protecting a historical site in the middle of the Australian Outback is not one of them. I'd rather tell someone I blew up a 4,000 year old heritage site and get yelled at than tell them I got their son killed protecting 4,000 year old refuse. The debate should centre entirely around what happened before the shot was loaded.
- fit2rule 6y ago
  The original owners of the Australian continent were a 60,000 year old human culture. The current owners are occupied by these industries. It is factually a human rights violation to destroy the cultural artefacts of other cultures. Remember when ISIS bombed the Buddhas of Bamyan? If China were to, say, demolish the opera house to get at the fish underneath, would you be so happy about it?
  - roenxi 6y ago
    If someone is choosing between bombing people and blowing up the Buddhas of Bamyan you'd have to be a monster to say the Buddahs are more important. My advice to you if you argue this with anyone else is pick a different hill to make your stand. I'm not sure how this ended up being a discussion of the cultural heritage vs life or death matters as that was never a real issue here. Mines don't move very quickly, there would have been plenty of time for Rio to do the wrong thing and be critiqued between archaeologists being on the site and the shot being loaded. The difference between "shot is loaded therefore the caves are condemned" vs "shot is fired therefore caves are condemned" isn't important.
    - fit2rule 6y ago
      I don't need your advice - you have demonstrated callous disregard for the cultural heritage of a group of people who have experienced nothing but callous disregard for centuries. Such authoritarian attitudes as you espouse here are counter-productive to a healthy society. Your much loved mining company KNEW that the cultural heritage site was there - they dug the holes and placed the explosives regardless. Then when they were confronted, they made up the bullshit excuse that the 'explosives are too dangerous to remove' - which is of course, utter bollocks. My advice to you: confront your covert racist attitude and start to understand the violence that is being enacted on a people who do not deserve it, plain and simple. Real Australians should be furious about this destruction of the country's very, very valuable heritage. More valuable than a few sticks of gelignite, anyway... >The difference between "shot is loaded therefore the caves are condemned" vs "shot is fired therefore caves are condemned" isn't important. Maybe its not important to those who wilfully display a callous disregard for more ancient cultures than their own, but for those of us who are paying attention to the cost to humanity of this kind of behaviour, it is very, very important that this never happens again.

Your characterising this as a 'historical curio' is ridiculous. By the same reasoning we should just leave the bombs dropped in German cities where they are - 'someone could die, disarming them' ...

roenxi 6y ago

Someone could also die leaving them where they are. There are circumstances where it makes sense to risk defusing a shot, but protecting a historical site in the middle of the Australian Outback is not one of them. I'd rather tell someone I blew up a 4,000 year old heritage site and get yelled at than tell them I got their son killed protecting 4,000 year old refuse. The debate should centre entirely around what happened before the shot was loaded.

fit2rule 6y ago
The original owners of the Australian continent were a 60,000 year old human culture. The current owners are occupied by these industries. It is factually a human rights violation to destroy the cultural artefacts of other cultures. Remember when ISIS bombed the Buddhas of Bamyan? If China were to, say, demolish the opera house to get at the fish underneath, would you be so happy about it?
- roenxi 6y ago
  If someone is choosing between bombing people and blowing up the Buddhas of Bamyan you'd have to be a monster to say the Buddahs are more important. My advice to you if you argue this with anyone else is pick a different hill to make your stand. I'm not sure how this ended up being a discussion of the cultural heritage vs life or death matters as that was never a real issue here. Mines don't move very quickly, there would have been plenty of time for Rio to do the wrong thing and be critiqued between archaeologists being on the site and the shot being loaded. The difference between "shot is loaded therefore the caves are condemned" vs "shot is fired therefore caves are condemned" isn't important.
  - fit2rule 6y ago
    I don't need your advice - you have demonstrated callous disregard for the cultural heritage of a group of people who have experienced nothing but callous disregard for centuries. Such authoritarian attitudes as you espouse here are counter-productive to a healthy society. Your much loved mining company KNEW that the cultural heritage site was there - they dug the holes and placed the explosives regardless. Then when they were confronted, they made up the bullshit excuse that the 'explosives are too dangerous to remove' - which is of course, utter bollocks. My advice to you: confront your covert racist attitude and start to understand the violence that is being enacted on a people who do not deserve it, plain and simple. Real Australians should be furious about this destruction of the country's very, very valuable heritage. More valuable than a few sticks of gelignite, anyway... >The difference between "shot is loaded therefore the caves are condemned" vs "shot is fired therefore caves are condemned" isn't important. Maybe its not important to those who wilfully display a callous disregard for more ancient cultures than their own, but for those of us who are paying attention to the cost to humanity of this kind of behaviour, it is very, very important that this never happens again.