Bob your a long term supporter of the intervention and Chris Graham is a long-term detractor. I guess that sets up a nice polemic but your attack accuses him unfairly. I was in the NT when the intervention was announced and when Yunupingu first opposed then backed it. Disorienting? you bet. I can only assume that deals were done to get Yunupingu’s endorsement and I seem to remember promises of a) lots of cash and b) that Yolongu land would be relatively untouched which gave some kind of logical framework to what transpired. I figured Yunupingu knew what he was doing in the circumstances but it still made a lot of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people deeply concerned.

It didn’t alter my view that the intervention had the interests of Aborigines well down the list of priorities and that there were lots of very bad things about it but the merits of the intervention aren’t really the issue here.

Once again we have a story from Chris Graham that goes to an important indigenous issue in a level of complexity and depth unseen in mainstream media. Yunupingu’s changes of direction on the intervention do beg some questions and it seems a reasonable subject for a story.

If you want to keep discussing this through ‘comments’ ok but see if you can do it without descending into the name calling ad hominem stuff.

There’s no interest in your article today.

I think you have forgotten the basic rule of indiggy reporting - Black fella GOOD, White Fella BAD.

I think you have dissoriented you supporters today with this slanderous ( deserved ?) attack an an important black leader.

Try to get back to form tomorrow with one of those riveting stories of how it’s the Governments fault that some hero with centuries of proud traditional heritage has lost his blanket or can’t find the toilet.

They are always winners with your fans.