Refugees Protect Woman From Sexual Harassment In Germany

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(01-27-2016, 11:59 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: http://m.townhall.com/columnists/michaelmedved/2007/09/19/reject_the_lie_of_white_genocide_against_native_americans/page/full

It's not allowing me to copy that article.    What do you say to the things brought up here.

Two words:  "spicy language."

It is a pathetic attempt to garner attention by using sensationalism despite the facts.  You of all people should understand.

Michael Medved cited Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel to note millions of Native Americans died of disease.  That's true.  However, Michael Medved conveniently ignores Jared Diamond's assertion the Native Americans were "exterminated by European colonists" on page 15 of the Prologue.  I guess Medved didn't read past page 14.

According to Dictionary.com genocide is defined as as the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.  The fact that millions of Native Americans died of disease (at least some of which were due to deliberate biological warfare) does nothing to change the fact the survivors were deliberately and systematically exterminated IOT promote European colonialism.

Medved further states, "A nation ashamed of its past will fear its future."  I love that quote because it illustrates how f#$&ing stupid Medved is to anyone with a lick of common sense.  Unless, of course, Medved is proud of slavery.  Let me break it down for you, Lucie.  As someone pretending to be a psuedo-Christian, I'm sure you are psuedo-ashamed of your sins, but that doesn't mean you fear your future.  Does it?  No, of course not.  That is why it is stupid.

[BmorePat87]

(01-27-2016, 02:55 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: False.

The biggest killer of the Native Americans was disease. Diseases killed an estimated 95% of the pre-Columbian Native American tribes between 1492 and 1700. It is the same thing that happened to the Incan's.

Early European explorers brought with them Small Pox, Measles, Influenza and Typhus and the Native Americans had never been exposed to any of those before so they had very little genetic immunity to them.

Early settlers/explorers also tried to use the Native Americans as slaves, but they were terrible slaves. Since they were familiar with the lands, they escaped easily. To combat that, the English/French/Dutch started shipping them to the Caribbean Islands. By 1700 Barbados was no longer accepting Native American slaves. They died too quickly from the diseases that they kept being exposed to and they found a better supply of slaves with the birth of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade in the mid to late 1600's.

Interesting argument. Obviously diseases wiped out many native Americans, but does the fact that diseases killed many then make the actions of Europeans any less genocidal? Killing, enslavement, forcible removal from lands, starvation, destruction of homes, forcing Natives to live in reservations, the attempted destruction of their culture. Even if their numbers had already dwindled, the systematic destruction of their population and culture is itself genocide.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(01-26-2016, 11:16 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: they were uncivilized and fracturef to the point they killed each other for the most part.     

No, it wasn't disease.  They killed each other off for the most part.  Even Lucie's link cites disease . . .  Oh, wait.  Nevermind.  Lucie proved Lucie wrong.  Again.

(01-26-2016, 08:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: They just squandered away what they had with poor choices.   

When they weren't busy killing each other off they should have decided not to catch the smallpox.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(01-27-2016, 03:15 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Interesting argument. Obviously diseases wiped out many native Americans, but does the fact that diseases killed many then make the actions of Europeans any less genocidal? Killing, enslavement, forcible removal from lands, starvation, destruction of homes, forcing Natives to live in reservations, the attempted destruction of their culture. Even if their numbers had already dwindled, the systematic destruction of their population and culture is itself genocide.

I will not deny that atrocities were committed by all sides, however there was never any straight up attempt to exterminate them.

The introduction of diseases was not biological warfare (if you read up on Columbus's 2nd voyage, you will note that he claims several of his men got ill after they landed), the Early Europeans had no idea that simply meeting them would cause so many deaths amongst the Natives. Their goal was simply to make GOLD, whether that was with new trading partners, selling them as slaves and find places to establish some colonies to further advance their gold earnings. If their intent was to exterminate, they certainly wouldn't have sold them as slaves, they would have outright killed them. The Natives warring with others and amongst themselves will result in displacement and impoverishment (starvation), and make them even more susceptible to diseases.

Fast Forward to the United States. The early US did not promote policies that were to physically eliminate all Indians, in fact, they actually created policies that promoted assimilation. The only time the US agreed to "exterminate" the Natives, was when a group the Natives would refuse to cede their lands to the Americans per the signed treaty.

Treaties were also another killer that undid the Indians, they didn't know what exactly they signed away. In many cases they signed their lands away for next to nothing. Once they signed, and the US started enforcing the treaties, about the only land left that they didn't sign over to us was in Oklahoma.

Intent is the key word here.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(01-27-2016, 05:49 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I will not deny that atrocities were committed by all sides, however there was never any straight up attempt to exterminate them.

The introduction of diseases was not biological warfare (if you read up on Columbus's 2nd voyage, you will note that he claims several of his men got ill after they landed), the Early Europeans had no idea that simply meeting them would cause so many deaths amongst the Natives. Their goal was simply to make GOLD, whether that was with new trading partners, selling them as slaves and find places to establish some colonies to further advance their gold earnings. If their intent was to exterminate, they certainly wouldn't have sold them as slaves, they would have outright killed them. The Natives warring with others and amongst themselves will result in displacement and impoverishment (starvation), and make them even more susceptible to diseases.

Fast Forward to the United States. The early US did not promote policies that were to physically eliminate all Indians, in fact, they actually created policies that promoted assimilation. The only time the US agreed to "exterminate" the Natives, was when a group the Natives would refuse to cede their lands to the Americans per the signed treaty.

Treaties were also another killer that undid the Indians, they didn't know what exactly they signed away. In many cases they signed their lands away for next to nothing. Once they signed, and the US started enforcing the treaties, about the only land left that they didn't sign over to us was in Oklahoma.

Intent is the key word here.

It's puff, puff, give. Not puff, puff, puff, puffity-puff puff, H.R. Pufnstuf,  puffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff, puff, give. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(01-27-2016, 06:53 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It's puff, puff, give. Not puff, puff, puff, puffity-puff puff, H.R. Pufnstuf,  puffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff, puff, give. 

Sorry, you are on a list, but it's not my share list.

[StLucieBengal]

Just stop making the native amercians out to be intentional victims . Europeans didn't come over here and say welp lets kill all these savages.

I know making our founders look like monsters is a popular opinion here on this board but it's just flat out false.

If anyone is so upset at what happened then give all your land and possessions of value to an Indian and then move back to where your ancestors are from.... Then you can come back here and lecture us all.

[Vas Deferens]

(01-27-2016, 09:43 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Just stop making the native amercians out to be intentional victims .   Europeans didn't come over here and say welp lets kill all these savages.    

I know making our founders look like monsters is a popular opinion here on this board but it's just flat out false.  

If anyone is so upset at what happened then give all your land and possessions of value to an Indian and then move back to where your ancestors are from....   Then you can come back here and lecture us all.

You'rr probably one of those that think God gave the Europeans this land.  It's not about a wholesale return bud.  You and I didn't do a god damned thing.  It's about acknowledging the reality of the situation so that the same atrocities don't occur in the future.  Unfortunately people like yourself would rather strut around and be proud of the plight of an entire population than show a little respect.  

Your 'spicy' peacocking is a pitiful attempt to make yourself feel better about your failed existence. 

[BmorePat87]

(01-27-2016, 05:49 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I will not deny that atrocities were committed by all sides, however there was never any straight up attempt to exterminate them.

The introduction of diseases was not biological warfare (if you read up on Columbus's 2nd voyage, you will note that he claims several of his men got ill after they landed), the Early Europeans had no idea that simply meeting them would cause so many deaths amongst the Natives. Their goal was simply to make GOLD, whether that was with new trading partners, selling them as slaves and find places to establish some colonies to further advance their gold earnings. If their intent was to exterminate, they certainly wouldn't have sold them as slaves, they would have outright killed them. The Natives warring with others and amongst themselves will result in displacement and impoverishment (starvation), and make them even more susceptible to diseases.

Fast Forward to the United States. The early US did not promote policies that were to physically eliminate all Indians, in fact, they actually created policies that promoted assimilation. The only time the US agreed to "exterminate" the Natives, was when a group the Natives would refuse to cede their lands to the Americans per the signed treaty.

Treaties were also another killer that undid the Indians, they didn't know what exactly they signed away. In many cases they signed their lands away for next to nothing. Once they signed, and the US started enforcing the treaties, about the only land left that they didn't sign over to us was in Oklahoma.

Intent is the key word here.

I agree that accidental exposure to diseases isn't criminal/genocidal. I take issue with suggesting that incidents like the Trail of Tears weren't intended to eliminate any portion of the Native population. If I uprooted tens of thousands of a group of people and forced them to march 1,000-2,200 miles with limited resources, I know many will die along the way. It should also be noted that a lot of these "treaties" were forced on them with threat of military action. 

[GMDino]

(01-27-2016, 09:56 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I agree that accidental exposure to diseases isn't criminal/genocidal. I take issue with suggesting that incidents like the Trail of Tears weren't intended to eliminate any portion of the Native population. If I uprooted tens of thousands of a group of people and forced them to march 1,000-2,200 miles with limited resources, I know many will die along the way. It should also be noted that a lot of these "treaties" were forced on them with threat of military action. 

Yes, but if they caught colds and died that just diseases...not like they *planned* to kill them.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(01-27-2016, 09:43 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Just stop making the native amercians out to be intentional victims .   Europeans didn't come over here and say welp lets kill all these savages.    

I know making our founders look like monsters is a popular opinion here on this board but it's just flat out false.  

If anyone is so upset at what happened then give all your land and possessions of value to an Indian and then move back to where your ancestors are from....   Then you can come back here and lecture us all.

I understand why you were a physical education major. Allegedly. 

[StLucieBengal]

oncemoreuntothejimbree Wrote:I understand why you were a physical education major. Allegedly. 

Ah just like your alleged military experience. .

[Rotobeast]

(01-27-2016, 09:43 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: If anyone is so upset at what happened then give all your land and possessions of value to an Indian and then move back to where your ancestors are from....

*holds palm out*

[StLucieBengal]

Rotobea Wrote:*holds palm out*

Go see Pat kemosabe

he has some Maryland tribal lands for you.

[Vas Deferens]

(01-27-2016, 10:45 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Ah just like your alleged military experience.  .

This has to be one of the most egregious repeated acts of disrespect on these boards.  You're going to continually slander a veteran over on his merit and service after he's given proof of said service to our country.  You and everyone of your rogue miscreant slack jawed buddies on here should be ashamed at yourself, only you're incapable of doing so.   I'm genuinely surprised the mods continue to allow an intolerant troll to hide behind a digital veil and say things like this to anyone, let alone a veteran who's given evidence of his service. 

Man up and prove some of your bodacious claims.  

[Vas Deferens]

(01-28-2016, 12:21 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Go see Pat kemosabe

he has some Maryland tribal lands for you.  

Racist

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(01-27-2016, 10:45 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Ah just like your alleged military experience.  .

You have an open invitation to come visit me. Just let me know. You can verify my identity with my drivers license then cross reference my drivers license with my DD 214. 

[GMDino]

(01-28-2016, 01:08 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: This has to be one of the most egregious repeated acts of disrespect on these boards.  You're going to continually slander a veteran over on his merit and service after he's given proof of said service to our country.  You and everyone of your rogue miscreant slack jawed buddies on here should be ashamed at yourself, only you're incapable of doing so.   I'm genuinely surprised the mods continue to allow an intolerant troll to hide behind a digital veil and say things like this to anyone, let alone a veteran who's given evidence of his service. 

Man up and prove some of your bodacious claims.  

It took forever for his previous account/other name on the old boards to be banned...he'll go too far soon enough.

[Vlad]

(01-27-2016, 03:08 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Two words:  "spicy language."

It is a pathetic attempt to garner attention by using sensationalism despite the facts.  You of all people should understand.

Michael Medved cited Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel to note millions of Native Americans died of disease.  That's true.  However, Michael Medved conveniently ignores Jared Diamond's assertion the Native Americans were "exterminated by European colonists" on page 15 of the Prologue.  I guess Medved didn't read past page 14.

According to Dictionary.com genocide is defined as as the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.  The fact that millions of Native Americans died of disease (at least some of which were due to deliberate biological warfare) does nothing to change the fact the survivors were deliberately and systematically exterminated IOT promote European colonialism.

Medved further states, "A nation ashamed of its past will fear its future."  I love that quote because it illustrates how f#$&ing stupid Medved is to anyone with a lick of common sense.  Unless, of course, Medved is proud of slavery.  Let me break it down for you, Lucie.  As someone pretending to be a psuedo-Christian, I'm sure you are psuedo-ashamed of your sins, but that doesn't mean you fear your future.  Does it?  No, of course not.  That is why it is stupid.

Medved is a walking encyclopedia. On occasion I am able to listen to his program, and I've never heard anyone that is able to rattle off statistical data and historical fact from the top of his head no matter what subject is being discussed quite like him. Medved is spot on in this article.  Quite a remarkable guy, so for you to call him stupid doesn't do a whole lot for your credibility.

Medved prefaces the article by acknowledging the suffering of Native Americans, and anyone with a lick of common sense would tell you that Medveds aim was not to dismiss the mistreatment of Native Americans. Being ashamed of it to the level that the self loathing leftist "hate America first" crowd wants everyone to is what Medved is addressing. If we're not sulking over our "evil" past, then we ourselves must be evil.

Aside from the fact that the Native Americans stole this land from other Native Americans through constant tribal wars, the conquest of the Native Americans by whitey was not the first time one group of people conquered another.

As Medved points out:
On six continents, such shifting populations – with countless cruel invasions and occupations and social destructions and replacements - have been the rule rather than the exception.
Lets see, in Europe alone there were the Goths, the Visigoths, Vandals, Gauls, Franks, Saxons, and a slew of other barbarian peoples that by conquering others may have had something to do with the formation of the European countries we see today. I don't know. I'm not an expert in the history of Western Civ.

So if you're of French descent for example, perhaps you should be ashamed because some group may have been wiped out by another so that France may exist.

And those illegal Mexicans you have a soft spot for, they wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the Spanish conquests of Central America.
You people ignore the Spaniards because they don't count, although Caucasian, they don't quite fit into your anti white narrative. 

The discovery of the new world and the founding of United States should have marked the last and final episode of one mans territorial conquest over another.
Too bad guys like Hitler didn't see it that way.

[Belsnickel]

(01-28-2016, 09:15 AM)Vlad Wrote: The discovery of the new world and the founding of United States should have marked the last and final episode of one mans territorial conquest over another.
Too bad guys like Hitler didn't see it that way.

I don't know much about Medved, nor do I really care. This little bit, though, why? Why should what happened here have been the last? Why not one of the times before it, or after it? Hitler and men like him certainly haven't been the only ones since 1789 to do this. People often forget how new the borders in the old world really are. These territorial conquests happen constantly all over the world.

I have mixed feelings on these sorts of things. I've done a fair amount of reading on the interactions with natives here in Virginia and early colonists. The natives here thought Jamestown was just another trading outpost, and when they discovered otherwise they weren't too happy about it. By then, though, it was too late. Combine that with cultural misunderstandings and you have a recipe for disaster. My problem isn't so much with the conquest of the lands; that is, as has been pointed out, the standard throughout history and will be into the future. My issues lie with our treatment with the native tribes after treaties were written and they accepted a role within the U.S. Sure there were insurgents for many years after, but even those that weren't a part of that were faced with broken promises and mistreatment that have led to the near extinction of many tribes.

Because of racism in the Old Dominion, almost none of the Virginia tribes can receive federal recognition because for many years they were denied the status of "Indian" and relegated just to being "Colored". This break in the records combined with the treatment that came with it has caused a number of problems for the tribes. Cultures nearly lost to the ages as they are pushed to the brink.

No, how we conquered them may be something that some people have issues with, and I can understand that as a pacifist. But the mistreatment that occurred after they were to be considered a part of our nation is really the biggest tragedy of the story.