Red Lake Tragedy: Bush Isn't a Racist, is He?

[great bowyer]

Originally Posted by paperclip

But, I feel there are certain places in America that are clearly Native American and should go back to those people. I also noticed that someone was killing American Bald Eagles; which is sacred to the Native American people; so, I wish they'd stop.

i agree, the native americans have been treated horribly by the government and other non-natives since columbus arived. i think it is a tragedy that the native americans have to deal with being treated in such a manor.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by paperclip

I also noticed that someone was killing American Bald Eagles; which is sacred to the Native American people; so, I wish they'd stop.

For what it's worth, killing American Bald Eagles is illegal in the US and has been since 1940.

-B :)

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by paperclip

I also noticed that someone was killing American Bald Eagles; which is sacred to the Native American people; so, I wish they'd stop.

Yes...all Native Americans...in general...because blanket statements are good.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by great bowyer

i agree, the native americans have been treated horribly by the government and other non-natives since columbus arived. i think it is a tragedy that the native americans have to deal with being treated in such a manor.

Not to defend the treatment of Native Americans, but it's hardly anything new...they'd been treating each other just as horribly (albeit less efficiently) for thousands of years before anybody else ever showed up...

[latenight]

My thoughts on Bush not making a call about the shootings.......

It is for the best, more media attention is only likely to bring about copycat killings.

Sometimes its best for the media to stop worrying about ratings, and to start thinking about what the possible results of what they report


http://www.lorencoleman.com/copycate...at_effect1.htm


"I'm not at all kind to the media in the book. I basically say they are using
death to sell soap and SUVs" ---from above

[Red #40]

I disagree, first if he had called there would have been very little media attention. The president comments on things every day but most of it doesn't merrit a single headline. Not calling has caused much more Media coverage. Second, you can't blame the media for covering stuff people actually do. So what if someone copies a crime? If they had not known about the crime that does not mean they would not have commited any crime. The article quoted states that Bank Robberies are pretty much ignored by the media, but banks still get robbed every day.

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

For what it's worth, killing American Bald Eagles is illegal in the US and has been since 1940.

-B

Yes, except for Native Americans.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by Red #40

I disagree, first if he had called there would have been very little media attention. The president comments on things every day but most of it doesn't merrit a single headline. Not calling has caused much more Media coverage. Second, you can't blame the media for covering stuff people actually do. So what if someone copies a crime? If they had not known about the crime that does not mean they would not have commited any crime. The article quoted states that Bank Robberies are pretty much ignored by the media, but banks still get robbed every day.

Stuff people actually do?

Why, then, were there no cameras in Los Lunas, New Mexico over the past few weeks, as hundreds of college students gave up spring break to build houses for the poor? Why don't we ever see good news? Charity? People helping each other?

[Inquartata]

Pffft! How many of them were sentenced to community service or fulfilling volunteer requirements for college programs?

[jeff]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

Yes, except for Native Americans.

Data point (and threadjack) I've seen this, actually. Jemez Pueblo and related Pueblo tribes (New Mexico) are allowed to both kill eagles and keep them captive (not many are) and use their feathers in religious ceremonies, which would be illegal for the general population. So, the exemption from the rule does exist.

[great bowyer]

Originally Posted by Soldier

Not to defend the treatment of Native Americans, but it's hardly anything new...they'd been treating each other just as horribly (albeit less efficiently) for thousands of years before anybody else ever showed up...

to a certain extent, but their culture is different than what we are used to. i also think the europeans have been treating each other worse than the native americans were.

[Svidrigailov]

Originally Posted by Soldier

Not to defend the treatment of Native Americans, but it's hardly anything new...they'd been treating each other just as horribly (albeit less efficiently) for thousands of years before anybody else ever showed up...

Perhaps the native americans warred against each other, and some tribes opressed other tribes...but no tribe went and imposed their culture and lifestyle on another to the extent the europeans did with native americans. Plus, the tactics used by europeans in America were dishonorable even by european standards at the time...when the french invaded spain, or the spanish invaded flanders, or the english invaded europe...the invaders did not treat the invadees like the europeans treated the americans.

The racism of the europeans to the native americans is also very well documented; the europeans often believed they were dealing with animals and not humans. The treatment that ensued from this marks an important difference between the way europeans dealt with a conquered tribe and the way an indian tribe might deal with another indian tribe they just conquered.

[great bowyer]

Originally Posted by Svidrigailov

Perhaps the native americans warred against each other, and some tribes opressed other tribes...but no tribe went and imposed their culture and lifestyle on another to the extent the europeans did with native americans. Plus, the tactics used by europeans in America were dishonorable even by european standards at the time...when the french invaded spain, or the spanish invaded flanders, or the english invaded europe...the invaders did not treat the invadees like the europeans treated the americans.

The racism of the europeans to the native americans is also very well documented; the europeans often believed they were dealing with animals and not humans. The treatment that ensued from this marks an important difference between the way europeans dealt with a conquered tribe and the way an indian tribe might deal with another indian tribe they just conquered.

exactly the point i was trying to get across. thank you.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

Pffft! How many of them were sentenced to community service or fulfilling volunteer requirements for college programs?

Every one of us voluntarily gave took spring break to do this.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by great bowyer

to a certain extent, but their culture is different than what we are used to. i also think the europeans have been treating each other worse than the native americans were.

Cruelty is cruelty, no matter the culture. I don't think Europeans were any worse, only more efficient.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by Svidrigailov

Perhaps the native americans warred against each other, and some tribes opressed other tribes...but no tribe went and imposed their culture and lifestyle on another to the extent the europeans did with native americans. Plus, the tactics used by europeans in America were dishonorable even by european standards at the time...when the french invaded spain, or the spanish invaded flanders, or the english invaded europe...the invaders did not treat the invadees like the europeans treated the americans.

The racism of the europeans to the native americans is also very well documented; the europeans often believed they were dealing with animals and not humans. The treatment that ensued from this marks an important difference between the way europeans dealt with a conquered tribe and the way an indian tribe might deal with another indian tribe they just conquered.

Really?

From what I've learned of American history, the Native Americans weren't much better. Impose their culture on another? Not really. They'd just invade, enslave the native population, and set up their own culture in the land, wiping out what was there. Racism? They quite commonly enslaved each other...can't think a person much better than a dog, if you're enslaving him.

[great bowyer]

Originally Posted by Soldier

I don't think Europeans were any worse, only more efficient.

so they can tourture and kill more people faster? i don't think the natives went around and unfairly condemed thousands to burn, they did not invent machines to kill people faster, they did not invade cities that were a whole continent away, they did not have large specticles of people fighting to the death. they did not have a rich king that took every thing from his people and watch them starve.

the natives did fight alot for land that they can use for hunting to get food. they did capture and tourture people, but it was also considered an honor to not flinch during the tourture. it was not until after the europeans came that they started to get vicious. the battles were less deadly and not focused as much on trying to kill all the enemy. the natives made sure that no one went hungry in the tribe. the tribal leaders were often the poorest in the tribe. the religeon was deeply embedded into every hting they did, and as such they offered thanks for everything they had before they did any activity. this does not sound as though the natives were just as cruel but less efficient than the europeans.

[Soldier]

Originally Posted by great bowyer

so they can tourture and kill more people faster? i don't think the natives went around and unfairly condemed thousands to burn, they did not invent machines to kill people faster, they did not invade cities that were a whole continent away, they did not have large specticles of people fighting to the death. they did not have a rich king that took every thing from his people and watch them starve.

I think you read me backwards - I'm agreeing with you here. The natives tortured and killed people...just weren't (usually) advanced enough to do it by the thousands.

Originally Posted by great bowyer

the natives did fight alot for land that they can use for hunting to get food. they did capture and tourture people, but it was also considered an honor to not flinch during the tourture. it was not until after the europeans came that they started to get vicious. the battles were less deadly and not focused as much on trying to kill all the enemy. the natives made sure that no one went hungry in the tribe. the tribal leaders were often the poorest in the tribe. the religeon was deeply embedded into every hting they did, and as such they offered thanks for everything they had before they did any activity. this does not sound as though the natives were just as cruel but less efficient than the europeans.

So because enduring torture was considered honorable, the natives can be excused for it?

And what do you mean, less deadly? The Incas were frequently genocidal, wiping out entire tribes around them. The natives went to war and killed, plundered, and raped, just like everybody else in the world. Whether it was for hunting land, or farming land like in Europe, what does it matter the reason?

[Larrison]

Originally Posted by Soldier

I think you read me backwards - I'm agreeing with you here. The natives tortured and killed people...just weren't (usually) advanced enough to do it by the thousands.

So because enduring torture was considered honorable, the natives can be excused for it?

And what do you mean, less deadly? The Incas were frequently genocidal, wiping out entire tribes around them. The natives went to war and killed, plundered, and raped, just like everybody else in the world. Whether it was for hunting land, or farming land like in Europe, what does it matter the reason?

Well said. Having read some of the original accounts of both European and Native American treatments of each other (and of European/ others and Native American/ Native American) I don't think you can hold one side or the other up at paragons of virtue. The Native Americans were horribly cruel to each other in war, and war was something that happened almost constantly, unless you were in one of the very few powerful nations without substantial populations of neighbors. The Aztecs and Mayans were not nice people, to use massive understatement, by today's standards, and how the North American native tribes treated those who they attacked or defeated in battle turns my stomach. But the Europeans who came to the New World looking for riches and glory were also not nice people. I will note the actions of other Europeans (such as the Portugese in the Indian Ocean region) were also not nice to the power structures in effect there, when they arrived.

As related reading, I highly recommend Jared Diamond's book "Guns, Germs and Steel".

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Soldier

Every one of us voluntarily gave took spring break to do this.

Wait---our service academies let their inmates, er, students go on spring break? That's just wrong...

And---who took care of the chickens while you were away? Poor things.