Do the people of the USA support the 40 year Occupation of Paletinian territories? - Page 3

Foolosophy · #21 (**permalink**) 06-18-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Fox

There were about 8 million in lands inside the modern day US.

90% of them were wiped out by disease, unintentionally brought by the new comers.

So only a mere 800,000 native American indians were killed as a direct result of the fascist invasion?

7.2 million died from introduced diseases?

Is that what you are saying to everybody here?

You're figures may help you sleep at night - BUT the facts dont bare any resemblence whatsoever to the reality and brutal slaughter of native American indians at the hands of the WHITE MALE CHRISTIAN INVADERS.

Start with reading Howard Zinns "A People's history of...."

Or do you prefer to get your historical accounts concerning the brutal past of your country drectly from the "Propaganda Institute" or the "Cleansing Asssociation of the USA" also known as the US Republican Party headquarters.

Your opinion in this instance is very similar to your other stances such as Anthropogenic Global Warming and the Israeli Occupation of Palestinian Territories.

The white fox populations in the wild are distancing temselves from your remarks becasue they feel betrayed and ashamed. I believe they are considering a collective legal class action against you in the highest court of the land.

Although I wouldnt hold my breath on justice being carried out - this very same US court alllowed Bush to steal an election in the USA didnt it?

ENOUGH said - NOW BE GONE WITH YOU WHITE FOX - FOREVER

White Fox · #22 (**permalink**) 06-18-2008, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foolosophy

So only a mere 800,000 native American indians were killed as a direct result of the fascist invasion?

7.2 million died from introduced diseases?

Is that what you are saying to everybody here?

You're figures may help you sleep at night - BUT the facts dont bare any resemblence whatsoever to the reality and brutal slaughter of native American indians at the hands of the WHITE MALE CHRISTIAN INVADERS.

Who said that the other 10% was even killed? Why would I not be able to sleep because some people a long time ago killed some other people? It's not like I had anything to do with it. This won't be affecting my sleep.

Quote:

Start with reading Howard Zinns "A People's history of...."

Or do you prefer to get your historical accounts concerning the brutal past of your country drectly from the "Propaganda Institute" or the "Cleansing Asssociation of the USA" also known as the US Republican Party headquarters.

Hmmm.... let me think for a minute. Which president was harshest on Indians? God forbid that it would be the ideological FOUNDER of the Democratic party.

Quote:

Perhaps the most controversial aspect of Jackson's presidency was his policy regarding American Indians.[29] Jackson was a leading advocate of a policy known as Indian removal. In his December 8, 1829 First Annual Message to Congress, Jackson stated:

This emigration should be voluntary, for it would be as cruel as unjust to compel the aborigines to abandon the graves of their fathers and seek a home in a distant land. But they should be distinctly informed that if they remain within the limits of the States they must be subject to their laws. In return for their obedience as individuals they will without doubt be protected in the enjoyment of those possessions which they have improved by their industry.[30]

Swedish scholar in the field of comparative religion Mattias Gardell who specializes in the study of religious racism in USA, studying groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Nation of Islam, says Jackson called Indian removal[dubious – discuss] the "Final Solution" to the Indian issue during his election campaign.[31] After his election he signed the Indian Removal Act into law in 1830. The Act authorized the President to negotiate treaties to purchase tribal lands in the east in exchange for lands further west, outside of existing U.S. state borders.

While frequently frowned upon in the North, the Removal Act was popular in the South, where population growth and the discovery of gold on Cherokee land had increased pressure on tribal lands. The state of Georgia became involved in a contentious jurisdictional dispute with the Cherokees, culminating in the 1832 U.S. Supreme Court decision (Worcester v. Georgia) which ruled that Georgia could not impose its laws upon Cherokee tribal lands. Jackson is often quoted (regarding the decision) as having said, "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" Whether or not he actually said it is disputed.[32]

In any case, Jackson used the Georgia crisis to pressure Cherokee leaders to sign a removal treaty. A small faction of Cherokees led by John Ridge negotiated the Treaty of New Echota with Jackson's representatives. Ridge was not a recognized leader of the Cherokee Nation, and this document was rejected by most Cherokees as illegitimate.[33] Over 15,000 Cherokees signed a petition in protest; it was ignored by the Supreme Court.[34] The treaty was enforced by Jackson's successor, Van Buren, who ordered 7,000 armed troops to remove the Cherokees.[35] This resulted in the deaths of over 4,000 Cherokees on the "Trail of Tears."

By the 1830s, under constant pressure from settlers, each of the five southern tribes had ceded most of its lands, but sizable self-government groups lived in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida. All of these (except the Seminoles) had moved far in the coexistence with whites, and they resisted suggestions that they should voluntarily remove themselves. Their non-violent methods earned them the title the Five Civilized Tribes.[36]

In all, more than 45,000 American Indians were relocated to the West during Jackson's administration. During this time, the administration purchased about 100 million acres (400,000 km²) of Indian land for about $68 million and 32 million acres (130,000 km²) of western land. Jackson was criticized at the time for his role in these events, and the criticism has grown over the years. Remini characterizes the Indian Removal era as "one of the unhappiest chapters in American history."[37]

Quote:

The white fox populations in the wild are distancing temselves from your remarks becasue they feel betrayed and ashamed. I believe they are considering a collective legal class action against you in the highest court of the land.

White Foxes have never been guilty of collective action

We're too individualistic.

Quote:

Although I wouldnt hold my breath on justice being carried out - this very same US court alllowed Bush to steal an election in the USA didnt it?

ENOUGH said - NOW BE GONE WITH YOU WHITE FOX - FOREVER

I feel so welcome here.

Foolosophy · #23 (**permalink**) 06-19-2008, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Fox

I feel so welcome here.

Well maybe thats because you are obviously an advocate of the Oligarchical corporate socialist US state that props up its inefficient and corrupt private sector and stock market with favourable lobby group induced Congressional legislature as well the ON GOING corporate welfare programs that in effect enrich the already filthy rich and push down the bulk of the AMerican population into the swamps of poverty and desolation.

(not a bad sentence hey White FOX? - Gee I am good on Fridays

)

White Fox · #24 (**permalink**) 06-19-2008, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foolosophy

Well maybe thats because you are obviously an advocate of the Oligarchical corporate socialist US state that props up its inefficient and corrupt private sector and stock market with favourable lobby group induced Congressional legislature as well the ON GOING corporate welfare programs that in effect enrich the already filthy rich and push down the bulk of the AMerican population into the swamps of poverty and desolation.

(not a bad sentence hey White FOX? - Gee I am good on Fridays

)

An advocate of a socialist state? Moi?

Never have I been so offended in my life!

cabotcat · #25 (**permalink**) 06-20-2008, 08:43 PM

Palestine should have its own state. Israel should also maintain its sovereign status. If I was Israel I would be a little weary of decades of talks and attacks have that yielded no progress.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why people who support Clinton should not support McCain	hendrixpujols11	Elections & Campaigns	4	06-15-2008 09:04 AM
Revolation! Black People are Different than White People.	Raharu Haruha	Political Opinions & Beliefs	333	06-03-2008 09:31 PM
Clinton Blames Large Numbers of People Who Support Peace for Her Defeat	DemocratsBlog	Political Blogs	1	04-19-2008 08:52 AM
The People Support Marriage & Family	OpineBlog	Political Blogs	0	01-17-2008 10:26 PM
Famous People Born on the Same Day and Year as Us	ForceoftheTruth	Off-Topic Chat	11	09-03-2006 07:25 PM