History MC (2 Viewers)

[Pump4393]

1) east timor YES EAST TIMOR I AM SO FRIGGEN STUPID!!!!!!
2) Statement 1 True Statement 2 False
3)Moratorium Marching

also what was the answer to the aboriginal referendum one? i got 20/20 in trials but todays questions just werent my cup of tea haha

 

[pwoh]

Crap I think I ignored the dude in the background with the "fight in backyard" sign. =O

1) east timor YES EAST TIMOR I AM SO FRIGGEN STUPID!!!!!!
2) Statement 1 True Statement 2 False
3)Moratorium Marching

also what was the answer to the aboriginal referendum one? i got 20/20 in trials but todays questions just werent my cup of tea haha

Something about inclusion into the census. The 67 referendum is ingrained into my head..

 

[Laryxle]

I put 1) Korea but I spent heaps of time deciding between Korea or East Timor idk why
2) I true II false
3) moral grounds.

I bombed out in most of the other mc's though.

What was the order of the things happening chronologically?

 

[x jiim]

Korean War, Referendum [or was it ANZUS/SEATO? == ], Petrov Affair, Vietnam War. Pretty sure about that. Well, it was d anyway ><

 

[iipwinceSS]

I ) forgot what i put for the first one =S

II) the first one true and the second one false

III) refusing the call to military service on moral grounds

=\

 

[speedofsound]

Crap I think I ignored the dude in the background with the "fight in backyard" sign. =O



Something about inclusion into the census. The 67 referendum is ingrained into my head..

Yeah, definitely the census.

haha I noticed it, but I didn't think enough to figure out what it meant lol

 

[speedofsound]

Korean War, Referendum [or was it ANZUS/SEATO? == ], Petrov Affair, Vietnam War. Pretty sure about that. Well, it was d anyway ><

That was it. There was only one option that began with the Korean War and that was it.

 

[Pump4393]

my teacher never said ANYTHING about peackeeping in vietnam or korea, i got the impression that we battled them, nothing else. and i'd heard about peacekeeping in timor, so that was it..

 

[speedofsound]

my teacher never said ANYTHING about peackeeping in vietnam or korea, i got the impression that we battled them, nothing else. and i'd heard about peacekeeping in timor, so that was it..

I don't think the question actually mentioned peacekeeping, I just thought it said to combat communism...? I'm sure it did :S

 

[Deer]

put
1) Vietnam,
2) both statements true
3) moral grounds

fuck i suck

Same here

 

[studentcheese]

1) Korean
2) both true
3) moral grounds

 

[yalando]

I said Korea- text book said it so i guess its right.....
Moral grounds, teacher DRILLED this into our heads all year
and i said both statements true for the mere fact that i thought that bloke woulda been very strong minded to be protesting FOR the war amongst a group of angry old women for SOS with sharp, possibly splintery sticks. I just thought ud be an idiot to be going for the war with a group of people obviously there against it. Especially old women like the supervisors

 

[blackratpoo]

stuoid history mc. the whole un question was stupid.....im realising how bad im going now.

 

[mdash]

1) afterwards, my friends said it was korea. i put vietnam though x_x

2) i put first true, second false

3) moral grounds one for me

Same as you, and I believe all to be correct

 

[bemer]

the hardest question was "why was the native title act of 93 important to aborignal people:
it was between c and d i put d
d)it legislated that aborignal people could claim land leased by pstoralists and miners
c was - it gave some aborigines the right to owwnership of land based on thir traditons and customs
what do uze fink?

 

[victoria10]

im pretty sure i put down c.
lol.

but if i didnt no the answer i chose outta b or c whichever sounded more right. lol

never use my theories people!

 

[pandaemon]

korea and moral grounds.


korea since we didnt actually go there, we only contributed troops to the UN force. vietnam on the other hand was just us with no un troops.

and the US

 

[studentcheese]

the hardest question was "why was the native title act of 93 important to aborignal people:
it was between c and d i put d
d)it legislated that aborignal people could claim land leased by pstoralists and miners
c was - it gave some aborigines the right to owwnership of land based on thir traditons and customs
what do uze fink?

I put c). d) relates more to the Wik Decision of 1996. Also, native title is not about claiming land. It is about the right to own land based on traditions and customs. Native Title is not given or claimed. It just exists. (Source: RetroActive 2)

 

[bemer]

far no band 6 then alredy around 5 rong 4 mc

 

[Paradox1345]

I put c). d) relates more to the Wik Decision of 1996. Also, native title is not about claiming land. It is about the right to own land based on traditions and customs. Native Title is not given or claimed. It just exists. (Source: RetroActive 2)

So it was A? Aboriginals could own land?