Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:41 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:46 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:49 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:54 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:57 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:00 am
Sean Ryan wrote:In Northern Australia they have their own land dont they??
Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:30 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:32 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 3:57 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 4:54 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:34 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:45 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:51 am
Mon Jan 09, 2006 8:24 pm
Pete Dube wrote:Sean -
The treatment of native Americans has been shameful. However, Indians have a say in how our country is run just like any other citizen. There is also a branch of the federal government dedicated exclusively to native American issues, the bureau of indian affairs.
This model can be applied to virtually any country. The Spanish, the Dutch, the English, the French, the Japanese, the Chinese, the Scandinavians - all have periods of empiricism/colonialism and barbarism in their respective histories.
Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:18 am
Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:50 am
Tue Jan 10, 2006 7:59 am
Tue Jan 10, 2006 8:00 pm
likethebike wrote:Pete- The big disappointment for me when I consider the plight of American Indians, the slave trade and later the denial of rights to African-Americans, the Japanese internment camps etc- is that we're supposed to be different and we were supposed to be different from day one. And since this is my country whenever we betray those ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution it hurts me.
Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:22 am
Elvis' Babe wrote:the spanish were guilty of more of the african slave trade down into the caribbean than the united states was.
oh and btw, the indians' land? give me a frickin' break. they came here over the land bridge from asia, just like we took a trip over the pond.
speaking of indians...here's a nice little bit of quoteage (and it sums up my stance to a tee):
"You won. All right? You came in, and you killed them and you took their land. That's what conquering nations do. It's what Caesar did, and he's not going around saying, 'I came, I conquered, I felt really bad about it.' ...It's kill or be killed here, take your bloody pick."
and do i even need to go into the aztecs??? poor little indians, my rear. i have zilch compassion for their pain and suffering because they were one of the most bullying cultures in history. hail to cortez. need i mention hearts getting ripped out? and of course the poor little incas liked to sacrifice children.
and btw, the mamby pambying about the poor little indians is absolute deleted - see guidelines #2 they fought each other, took each other's lands, wiped other tribes out, etc...and were doing it long before we came in--though actually they found a white guy (probably viking) on the north american continent that predates when the indians came over the land bridge. that kind of screws up their claim to north america.
political correctness has managed to screw up so many young peoples minds into believing these lies.
do you really want the real version of history? i'll tell you this...there isn't a damn culture that hasn't tried to wipe out somebody--from the east, from the west, from the north or the south.
the african tribes weren't peaceful either...in fact, they have this little habit of using machedis on each other.
european colonialism isn't the bad guy--in fact european colonialism managed to shut down a lot of the worst things that people were doing to each other. india indian settee for example--killing the women...that got taken out by the nosy europeans. no great loss, to be sure.
Wed Jan 11, 2006 5:38 am
Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:06 am
likethebike wrote:Pete- It doesn't matter if the Indians were peaceful or not they were living here first and were basically exterminated for that reason.
likethebike wrote:The fact that Jefferson and Washington (although he freed his slaves upon his death) and Patrick "Give me liberty or Give Me Death" were slave holders does taint some of their actions. However, I feel their ideals were better than they were men (although I don't condemn as they were men of their times) especially since those ideals set up a framework where eventually all men could be free eventually. Also, you have to cut the Founding Fathers some extra slack because they had to make it work and some territories would have opted out had slavery been made illegal. Benjamin Franklin and the Quakers pushed for this at the very begining decades before the Civil War. But it wasn't going to work, keeping a Union together was essential to the survival of the country, a survival that was made that much more difficult because what the Founders were trying was truly unprecedented.
There was a lot realpolitik there. For instance, Washington was against slavery but had to hold on to his slaves through his lifetime for risk of offending other stakeholders in the new country.
Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:46 am
Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:49 am
Thu Jan 12, 2006 8:10 am
Hosted by ElviCities