| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"MAB" |
| Date: |
27 Sep 2004 12:10:00 AM |
| Object: |
OT: Remembering a Holocaust |
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
By Maria Puente, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Over the past 500 years, the indigenous peoples of the
Americas have been invaded, conquered, converted, enslaved, diseased,
robbed, removed, confined, massacred and/or assimilated to the brink of
extinction. Now, at last, they're about to be officially celebrated here on
the National Mall, with a museum they had to fight for and a story they get
to tell. (Photo gallery: National Museum of the American Indian, inside and
out)
Museum director Richard West says the building's location on the National
Mall "comes as close to pure historical poetry as I could ever imagine."
By Robert C. Lautman
There will be some mixed feelings when the Smithsonian's National Museum of
the American Indian opens Sept. 21 with six days of festivities. As many as
20,000 Indians in traditional regalia from all over the Americas, from the
Arctic Circle to Patagonia, are expected to march in procession - the
largest multitribal, multinational gathering of Indian people ever in
history. There will be speeches and storytelling, religious ceremonies and
cultural exhibits, food, music and dance, and floods of tears.
Joyful tears to be sure, but tears of mourning, too, for all who died in the
centuries-long Indian holocaust. And tears of regret that it took so long to
get to this point: The United States is the last major country in the
hemisphere to build a national museum focused on the art, history and
culture of the peoples who were here before the European conquest.
"It's going to be pretty emotional," says Suzan Shown Harjo (Cheyenne), a
longtime Indian rights activist and one of the "mothers" of the new museum
who helped conceive it nearly 40 years ago. "We'll be there to celebrate our
survival and to commemorate our tremendous losses. ... All of us will be
surrounded by all sorts of relatives in spirit."
The museum opens 15 years after it was authorized by Congress in a long
fight over Indian rights legislation. It comes decades after other groups
already have secured a place on or near the Mall: There's already a museum
for African art and culture, two for European art, two for Asian art, one on
American history and one on the Jewish Holocaust.
Richard West (Southern Cheyenne), director of the new museum, acknowledges
that a Native presence should have been first on the Mall, not last. So why
wasn't it?
"There was a tremendous cultural invisibility about Indians," West says. On
the other hand, he says, the museum occupies a symbolically important
"keystone" spot, at the foot of the Capitol across from the "apotheosis of
Western civilization" - the East Wing of the National Gallery.
"It's a placement between equals in the political and cultural heart of
America," West says. Now that the country has moved toward respect of
Indians, he says, the museum can help "create the groundwork for
reconciliation" between Native and non-Native peoples. "It comes as close to
pure historical poetry as I could ever imagine."
10,000 years on display
It's accompanied by architectural poetry, too: The museum's $219 million
five-story building - with 7,500 objects covering 10,000 years on display
and at least 4 million visitors a year expected - is a splendid departure
from the neoclassical grandeur and modernist sensibility of other buildings
on the Mall. Thanks to the principle Canadian architect, Douglas Cardinal
(Blackfoot), there are few straight lines. It's all sinuous curves and
circles, clad in textured Kasota limestone of a striking golden hue,
mimicking the appearance of a timeworn Western cliff at sunset. "A
post-modern cliff dwelling," Indian Country Today, the national Indian
newsweekly, called it.
Innumerable consultations with Indians led to such unique features as a main
entrance that faces east, as Indian dwellings do; an outdoor offerings space
for religious ceremonies; and a 120-foot-high dome that echoes the classical
dome of the National Gallery across the Mall - and that will allow the
mapping of the solstices and equinoxes on the circular floor below.
"As a national icon, the building should appear like a natural element,"
says Duane Blue Spruce (Laguna, San Juan Pueblo), an architect and the
facilities planning coordinator for the museum. "It speaks to the long
history of Native peoples on the land."
But it's the content that counts, and on this point the Smithsonian promises
a different kind of museum, one in which the "content" gets to speak. This
is a departure for the museum world in general, and the Smithsonian in
particular: Many Indians in the USA have long believed the Smithsonian
hoards their ancestors' bones and artifacts while treating living people as
government property or anthropological curiosities. There are lingering
tensions over Indian demands to return more remains and sacred objects still
in the Smithsonian's natural history collections.
"The promise of this museum is that it's not going to be just about Native
people in the past tense, but in the present and future tenses," Harjo says.
Artifacts with tales to tell
For the three opening exhibits, 24 Native communities selected their own
objects to be displayed. They interpreted the ideas and philosophies behind
the objects' creation and use. And they tell the stories of what has
happened to them as individuals and communities. Other Indian communities
will be tapped on a rotating basis to do the same in future exhibits.
"We were very much impressed," says Vivian Juan-Saunders, chairwoman of the
Tohono O'odham Nation of southern Arizona and northern Mexico, one of the
first 24 tribes to be spotlighted in the museum. "They came out four or five
times to get the people's perspectives on our history rather than what
others have written about us. It was a different approach."
Sad numbers
The Indian holocaust will not be ignored in the museum, but it will not
dominate, either. In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the
Western Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians
left. By 1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000; today, the Census reports
4.1 million Americans claim Indian heritage. Still, the 500 years since
Columbus are just a fraction of the time Indians have lived in this
hemisphere, so the museum can't be just about death and destruction, West
says.
For many non-Indians, much of what they will find inside the museum will
come as a revelation - and will take their breath away. The museum's
collection of 800,000 objects is one of the world's largest and best
assemblages of indigenous art and artifacts. The core was acquired in the
early 20th century by a wealthy New Yorker, George Gustav Heye, who traveled
the hemisphere buying everything he could find, including carved masks from
the Northwest coast, painted hides and feather bonnets from the Plains, and
pottery and basketry from the Southwest. About 30% of the collection is from
outside the USA, representing the major indigenous cultures of Canada,
Mexico and Central and South America.
"What I want (visitors) to understand is the complexity, layering and
richness of the Native presence," West says.
Admiration and dissent
This richness will help Americans better understand their own land, says Tim
Johnson (Mohawk), executive editor of Indian Country Today.
"It's going to serve as a great educational resource that hopefully will
lead to more people engaging American Indians in their own parts of
America," he says.
There have been few dissenting voices. Bob Haozous (Chiricahua Apache), an
acclaimed artist, fears the museum will emphasize "pretty pictures" at the
expense of less attractive aspects of Indian life, such as racism, poverty,
health problems, unemployment and lack of education. He believes the museum
continues an "assimilationist" approach to Indians.
"It's removing the philosophical element of our culture and focusing only on
the decorative elements," Haozous says from his home in Santa Fe. "It's
glorifying mankind to be dominant over nature, which is totally contrary to
everything in my tribe. It's assimilation based on the notion that Native
culture is a thing of the past."
But this view is not widespread in Indian country, say those who live there.
Instead, there is a sense of optimism and hope.
After all, "it wasn't that long ago that I would visit the East Coast and
people would say to me, 'You look like an Indian; I thought you were all
dead,' " says John Echo-Hawk (Pawnee), director of the Colorado-based Native
American Rights Fund.
Few people are likely to make that mistake from now on.
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/destinations/2004-09-09-indian-museum_x.htm
.
|
|
| User: "Dale" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
27 Sep 2004 01:29:05 AM |
|
|
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eros" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
27 Sep 2004 08:55:16 PM |
|
|
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
EROS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What has theology ever said that is of the smallest use to anybody?
The achievements of theologians don't do anything, don't achieve
anything, don't even mean anything. What makes you think that theology
is a subject at all? "
– Prof. Richard Dawkins, Letter to Independant, Mar 22, 1993
.
|
|
|
| User: "Crusader" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
28 Sep 2004 02:35:38 PM |
|
|
"Eros" <eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ab0de77f.0409271759.6ccc5517@posting.google.com...
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message
news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left.
By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the
population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author
of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not
at
their murderous hands.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and
dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US,
mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred
to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the
US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the
first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and
the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the
killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
EROS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Our ancestor were murderers ALL of them,red ,whites ,brown and black,some
did it before the others but all did it at one time or other.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
06 Oct 2004 11:49:56 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 19:35:38 +0000 (UTC), "Crusader" <yxz@white.com>
wrote:
"Eros" <eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ab0de77f.0409271759.6ccc5517@posting.google.com...
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message
news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left.
By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the
population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author
of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not
at
their murderous hands.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and
dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US,
mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred
to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the
US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the
first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and
the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the
killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
EROS.
Our ancestor were murderers ALL of them,red ,whites ,brown and black,some
did it before the others but all did it at one time or other.
Thank you for the acknowledgement the Bible is one big book of
'loving' atrocities.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
27 Sep 2004 10:23:26 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:55:16 +0000 (UTC),
eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com (Eros) wrote:
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
[snip]
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
Killings which took place are more significant than those that did not
take place.
--
Matt Silberstein
Stones taught me to fly
Love taught me to lie
Life taught me to die
So it's not hard to fall
When you float like a cannonball
Damien Rice
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eros" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
28 Sep 2004 08:38:12 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:<kfmhl01j4g0760qjvskllvongseiq355m5@4ax.com>...
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:55:16 +0000 (UTC),
eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com (Eros) wrote:
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
[snip]
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
Killings which took place are more significant than those that did not
take place.
I agree, but your comment completely misses my point. The
fundamentalist Christians who invariably make damning moral judgements
with respect to those who accept evolution, take the Bible
literally... yet seem quite happy to conveniently ignore the more
depraved and violent parts of their Biblical "history" when it suits
them.
EROS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"To illustrate the vain conceit that the universe must be somehow
pre-ordained for us, because we are so well-suited to live in it, he [
Douglas Adams] mimed a wonderfully funny imitation of a puddle of
water, fitting itself snugly into a depression in the ground, the
depression uncannily being exactly the same shape as the puddle." --
Richard Dawkins, in "Lament for Douglas" (14 May 2001)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
28 Sep 2004 11:10:19 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 01:38:12 +0000 (UTC),
eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com (Eros) wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:<kfmhl01j4g0760qjvskllvongseiq355m5@4ax.com>...
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:55:16 +0000 (UTC),
eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com (Eros) wrote:
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
[snip]
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
Killings which took place are more significant than those that did not
take place.
I agree, but your comment completely misses my point. The
fundamentalist Christians who invariably make damning moral judgements
with respect to those who accept evolution, take the Bible
literally... yet seem quite happy to conveniently ignore the more
depraved and violent parts of their Biblical "history" when it suits
them.
It was not at all clear that was your point since this thread has
nothing to with those topics.
--
Matt Silberstein
Stones taught me to fly
Love taught me to lie
Life taught me to die
So it's not hard to fall
When you float like a cannonball
Damien Rice
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eros" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
29 Sep 2004 06:16:24 PM |
|
|
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:<hjdkl05ncdq08744d1oi34keeh94r90hak@4ax.com>...
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 01:38:12 +0000 (UTC),
eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com (Eros) wrote:
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:<kfmhl01j4g0760qjvskllvongseiq355m5@4ax.com>...
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:55:16 +0000 (UTC),
eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com (Eros) wrote:
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
[snip]
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
Killings which took place are more significant than those that did not
take place.
I agree, but your comment completely misses my point. The
fundamentalist Christians who invariably make damning moral judgements
with respect to those who accept evolution, take the Bible
literally... yet seem quite happy to conveniently ignore the more
depraved and violent parts of their Biblical "history" when it suits
them.
It was not at all clear that was your point since this thread has
nothing to with those topics.
Really. So, this thread has nothing to do with religion, murder,
morals and the Bible? Ya coulda fooled me!
Even if you were right... threads evolve too you know.
EROS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We're going to have the best-educated American people in the world."
-- US Vice President Dan Quayle, 9/21/88
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
06 Oct 2004 11:48:38 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 03:23:26 +0000 (UTC), Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:55:16 +0000 (UTC),
eros_talk_origins@hotmail.com (Eros) wrote:
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
[snip]
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
All that pales into insignificance compared to the Divinely-sanctioned
genocide in the Old Testament.
Killings which took place are more significant than those that did not
take place.
Certainly. However, nameless fervently believes they took place
because they're written in the Bible.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim Mellor" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
27 Sep 2004 09:04:26 AM |
|
|
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
....and often both simultaneously. For example, giving the indigeonous
poplulation blankets previously used by those infected with smallpox.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hank" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
27 Sep 2004 11:25:11 AM |
|
|
Tim Mellor wrote:
"Dale" <dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote in message news:<buO5d.1526$zc1.1009@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
...and often both simultaneously. For example, giving the indigeonous
poplulation blankets previously used by those infected with smallpox.
IIRC, there was only one example of intentional infection like this, and
it was a minor case. However, I also remember reading that the first
explorer (DeSoto?) to travel the Mississippi area left smallpox and
measles in their wake, which wiped out an estimated 90% of the
population in the central/lower Mississippi river areas.
<snip>
--
Assimilate a pitiful little species like you? I think not! - Q of Borg
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "A. Carlson" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
27 Sep 2004 12:18:54 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "J McCoy" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 02:47:52 AM |
|
|
"A. Carlson" <amcarls@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<dvigl0h8nv4qvi77mg96mpf3fd31rmv375@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
There you go, trying to blame "devoutly religious people." How do
you know?
Reading through the Louis and Clark journals I've noticed something
interesting. Credit was extended to Indians in question who did'nt
pay their due. And they weren't ignorant, they were sharp bargain
hunters who cheated and scammed. They've angered a lot of people.
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There
were brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians
mentality. You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
JM
.
|
|
|
| User: "dandelion" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 05:46:13 AM |
|
|
"J McCoy" <mccoy@sunset.net> wrote in message
news:3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com...
<snip>
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There
were brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians
mentality. You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
<snip>
The interesting thing in both is of course that fervent supporters were
likely victims (especially during Stalins Terror, see 'Treacherous Sun" to
get an idea). Unlike, for instance the Spanish inquisiton, the Salem Witch
Trial, the Crusades (in which *christian* Byzantium was sacked and pillaged,
too, btw), the Conquista (of south america), the 100, 80 and 30 year wars...
etc.
I assume you are familiar with those?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
06 Oct 2004 11:28:16 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 10:46:13 +0000 (UTC), "dandelion"
<somewhere@meadown.net> wrote:
"J McCoy" <mccoy@sunset.net> wrote in message
news:3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com...
<snip>
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There
were brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians
mentality. You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
<snip>
The interesting thing in both is of course that fervent supporters were
likely victims (especially during Stalins Terror, see 'Treacherous Sun" to
get an idea). Unlike, for instance the Spanish inquisiton, the Salem Witch
Trial, the Crusades (in which *christian* Byzantium was sacked and pillaged,
too, btw), the Conquista (of south america), the 100, 80 and 30 year wars...
etc.
I assume you are familiar with those?
They weren't "TRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" Christians.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Thompson" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 10:17:55 PM |
|
|
(J McCoy) wrote in
news:3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com:
"A. Carlson" <amcarls@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<dvigl0h8nv4qvi77mg96mpf3fd31rmv375@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians
left. By 1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the
population of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40
million as the author of this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and
not at their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and
dishonorable way in which the US government treated the indigenes in
the US, mentioning the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is
some kind of dishonest statistical sleight of hand. Since the first
and second numbers referred to the entire Western Hemisphere, while
the last number refers only to the US, which had fewer people than
the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number
of indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite
large, certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this
was done primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus
Christ and the Bible. When you figure it relative to the available
population, the killing of indigenous Americans by Christians
probably compares closely to the killings done by the Nazis and the
Communists.
There you go, trying to blame "devoutly religious people." How do
you know?
You goon. It's because this country was settled by religious nut cases
who were trying to get away from rational influences in Europe.
You're so, so, stupid.
Chris
snip
--
"We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and
then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so
as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry
on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that
sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually
on a battlefield." --George Orwell, 1946, "Under Your Nose"
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
06 Oct 2004 11:46:17 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 03:17:55 +0000 (UTC), Chris Thompson
<rockwallaby@TAKEOUTerols.com> wrote:
mccoy@sunset.net (J McCoy) wrote in
news:3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com:
"A. Carlson" <amcarls@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<dvigl0h8nv4qvi77mg96mpf3fd31rmv375@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians
left. By 1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the
population of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40
million as the author of this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and
not at their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and
dishonorable way in which the US government treated the indigenes in
the US, mentioning the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is
some kind of dishonest statistical sleight of hand. Since the first
and second numbers referred to the entire Western Hemisphere, while
the last number refers only to the US, which had fewer people than
the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number
of indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite
large, certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this
was done primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus
Christ and the Bible. When you figure it relative to the available
population, the killing of indigenous Americans by Christians
probably compares closely to the killings done by the Nazis and the
Communists.
There you go, trying to blame "devoutly religious people." How do
you know?
You goon. It's because this country was settled by religious nut cases
who were trying to get away from rational influences in Europe.
You're so, so, stupid.
Worse, it's the equivalent of Ebola.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Forrest" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 10:49:37 AM |
|
|
(J McCoy) wrote in message news:<3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com>...
<snipped> There's more to this story then what you're letting on.
And you seem to have a rather limited and blinkered view of history
People are people.
What an extraordinary revelation! I never knew that.
Not everyone was a Christian back in those days.
Well of course there were millions of Hindus, Buddhists, Confucians,
Shintoist, etc. Somehow I don't think these are the people you're
referring to...
Criminals were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of
them.
These criminals were the 'founding fathers' of the USA were they? They
were no doubt treated as crimials because they argued that their brand
of Christianity was better than the brand of Christianity practiced in
their countries of origin. Of course, once they had established their
colonies, they imported criminals (who almost certainly considered
themselves Christians) to work as slaves on their plantations. But of
course when they found a good source of non-Christian slaves in
Africa, they could not only get their labour more cheaply, but carry
out their Christian duty of converting them to Christianity at the
same time. Whips were no doubt a particularly eloquent form of
persuasion. I bet God looked down at their work and saw that it was
good.
Of course, you may be referring to the criminals we shipped out to to
Botany Bay, where they learned to chase kangaroos and beat us at
cricket. I understand that those criminals (who were of course
criminals because they commited the unforgivable sin of stealing
cabbages from the true Christians who formed the ruling classes in
England at the time to feed their starving children) have even managed
to educate themselves to the degree that they have universities which
award PhD's in philosophy now. I think that most of those criminals
considered themselves to be Christian, by the way.
There were brothels everywhere.
Of course, this marks them down immediately as non-Christian. No
country calling itself Christian has ever allowed a brothel to
operate. And nobody professing to be a Christian has ever visited a
brothel. Quite unthinkable!
Don't give me this blame the Christians mentality.
A curious phrase whose meaning eludes me. Could you elucidate?
You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
If those are the fruits of atheisms (which presumably that People are
no longer people) then I presume that you claim for Christianity the
Crusades, the Spanish inquisition, the burning of witches, the killing
of refugees in the Lebanese camps, the St Bartholemew's day massacre
in France, and so on. All carried out by professed Christians, some of
them in the name of Christ.
JM
RF
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eros" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 07:30:55 PM |
|
|
(Richard Forrest) wrote in message news:<892cb437.0410040754.62fe5e4f@posting.google.com>...
mccoy@sunset.net (J McCoy) wrote in message news:<3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com>...
<snipped> There's more to this story then what you're letting on.
And you seem to have a rather limited and blinkered view of history
People are people.
What an extraordinary revelation! I never knew that.
Not everyone was a Christian back in those days.
Well of course there were millions of Hindus, Buddhists, Confucians,
Shintoist, etc. Somehow I don't think these are the people you're
referring to...
Criminals were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of
them.
These criminals were the 'founding fathers' of the USA were they? They
were no doubt treated as crimials because they argued that their brand
of Christianity was better than the brand of Christianity practiced in
their countries of origin. Of course, once they had established their
colonies, they imported criminals (who almost certainly considered
themselves Christians) to work as slaves on their plantations. But of
course when they found a good source of non-Christian slaves in
Africa, they could not only get their labour more cheaply, but carry
out their Christian duty of converting them to Christianity at the
same time. Whips were no doubt a particularly eloquent form of
persuasion. I bet God looked down at their work and saw that it was
good.
Of course, you may be referring to the criminals we shipped out to to
Botany Bay, where they learned to chase kangaroos and beat us at
cricket. I understand that those criminals (who were of course
criminals because they commited the unforgivable sin of stealing
cabbages from the true Christians who formed the ruling classes in
England at the time to feed their starving children) have even managed
to educate themselves to the degree that they have universities which
award PhD's in philosophy now. I think that most of those criminals
considered themselves to be Christian, by the way.
There were brothels everywhere.
Of course, this marks them down immediately as non-Christian. No
country calling itself Christian has ever allowed a brothel to
operate. And nobody professing to be a Christian has ever visited a
brothel. Quite unthinkable!
Don't give me this blame the Christians mentality.
A curious phrase whose meaning eludes me. Could you elucidate?
You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
If those are the fruits of atheisms (which presumably that People are
no longer people) then I presume that you claim for Christianity the
Crusades, the Spanish inquisition, the burning of witches, the killing
of refugees in the Lebanese camps, the St Bartholemew's day massacre
in France, and so on. All carried out by professed Christians, some of
them in the name of Christ.
You can't blame them, they're just following the example of hostility,
violence and intolerance to those different from themselves shown by
their god in the Bible. It's the same old story... the "chosen"
against the Philistines.
EROS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Church angrily denounced the introduction of medicines,
antibiotics, anesthesia, surgery, blood transfusions, birth control,
transplants, in vitro fertilization, and most forms of pain killers.
Supposedly, these scientific tools interfered with nature and were
therefore against God's will. Today, the Church is fighting cloning
technology and genetic engineering. But when cloning laboratories
provide an unlimited supply of transplant tissue for dying children,
and when genetic engineering cures all forms of cancer, Church leaders
will once again forget their initial opposition and hail these
achievements as evidence of God's love for mankind. Today, science is
prevailing, but throughout most of recorded history, religion
strangled scientific inquiry and often tortured and executed those who
advocated the scientific method. " -- David Mills.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
06 Oct 2004 11:29:40 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 00:30:55 +0000 (UTC),
(Eros) wrote:
richard@plesiosaur.com (Richard Forrest) wrote in message news:<892cb437.0410040754.62fe5e4f@posting.google.com>...
mccoy@sunset.net (J McCoy) wrote in message news:<3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com>...
<snipped> There's more to this story then what you're letting on.
And you seem to have a rather limited and blinkered view of history
People are people.
What an extraordinary revelation! I never knew that.
Not everyone was a Christian back in those days.
Well of course there were millions of Hindus, Buddhists, Confucians,
Shintoist, etc. Somehow I don't think these are the people you're
referring to...
Criminals were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of
them.
These criminals were the 'founding fathers' of the USA were they? They
were no doubt treated as crimials because they argued that their brand
of Christianity was better than the brand of Christianity practiced in
their countries of origin. Of course, once they had established their
colonies, they imported criminals (who almost certainly considered
themselves Christians) to work as slaves on their plantations. But of
course when they found a good source of non-Christian slaves in
Africa, they could not only get their labour more cheaply, but carry
out their Christian duty of converting them to Christianity at the
same time. Whips were no doubt a particularly eloquent form of
persuasion. I bet God looked down at their work and saw that it was
good.
Of course, you may be referring to the criminals we shipped out to to
Botany Bay, where they learned to chase kangaroos and beat us at
cricket. I understand that those criminals (who were of course
criminals because they commited the unforgivable sin of stealing
cabbages from the true Christians who formed the ruling classes in
England at the time to feed their starving children) have even managed
to educate themselves to the degree that they have universities which
award PhD's in philosophy now. I think that most of those criminals
considered themselves to be Christian, by the way.
There were brothels everywhere.
Of course, this marks them down immediately as non-Christian. No
country calling itself Christian has ever allowed a brothel to
operate. And nobody professing to be a Christian has ever visited a
brothel. Quite unthinkable!
Don't give me this blame the Christians mentality.
A curious phrase whose meaning eludes me. Could you elucidate?
You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
If those are the fruits of atheisms (which presumably that People are
no longer people) then I presume that you claim for Christianity the
Crusades, the Spanish inquisition, the burning of witches, the killing
of refugees in the Lebanese camps, the St Bartholemew's day massacre
in France, and so on. All carried out by professed Christians, some of
them in the name of Christ.
You can't blame them, they're just following the example of hostility,
violence and intolerance to those different from themselves shown by
their god in the Bible. It's the same old story... the "chosen"
against the Philistines.
So, send all Christians to Pitcairn Island to fight out and determine
which sect is the 'chosen' one.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Root" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
09 Oct 2004 02:13:38 PM |
|
|
J McCoy wrote:
<snip>
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There
were brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians
mentality. You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
JM
But how many of them were _true_ atheists_? There you go with the
"blame the atheists" mentality again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
09 Oct 2004 07:35:59 PM |
|
|
Eric Root wrote:
J McCoy wrote:
<snip>
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There
were brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians
mentality. You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
JM
But how many of them were _true_ atheists_? There you go with the
"blame the atheists" mentality again.
I have just been reading a large set of volumes, History of the Great Civil
War - volumes 1 - 4 by
S. R.. Gardiner on the English Civil Wars of 1640 - 1660.
Huge numbers of people were sent to The Americas and West Indies,
not because they were criminals, but because the were prisoners of
war. After a battle, often a lot of prisoners were so treated,
you might have 2,000 Scots sent abroad this way after England
took the wars to Scotland. Royalists taken in battle by the
Parlimentarians were commonly divided into groups, those
pressed into service who were allowed to sign a pledge to support
the Parlimentarian side and not fight for the Royalists, and allowed
to go home, and the known volunteers and pro-Royalist partisans
who were transported. Sometimes they were sent to France or
or other European nations as military conscripts for their wars.
Early in these wars, Irish found in England were outright killed
if taken prisoner. Later many were sent to the Americas.
--
Kerry - two medals a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well they don't give medals
for going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry - a hero, Bush - a zero
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 09:36:58 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 07:47:52 +0000 in episode
<3f355ee.0410032352.7c0a66b5@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
mccoy@sunset.net (J McCoy):
"A. Carlson" <amcarls@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<dvigl0h8nv4qvi77mg96mpf3fd31rmv375@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians
left. By 1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the
population of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million
as the author of this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and
not at their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and
dishonorable way in which the US government treated the indigenes in
the US, mentioning the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some
kind of dishonest statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and
second numbers referred to the entire Western Hemisphere, while the
last number refers only to the US, which had fewer people than the rest
of the Western Hemisphere in the first place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and
the Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the
killing of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely
to the killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
There you go, trying to blame "devoutly religious people." How do you
know?
Because they said so.
Reading through the Louis and Clark journals I've noticed something
interesting. Credit was extended to Indians in question who did'nt pay
their due. And they weren't ignorant, they were sharp bargain hunters who
cheated and scammed. They've angered a lot of people.
Credit? Pay their due? What the hell are you on about? You trying to claim
the conquest was a repo?
There's more to this story then what you're letting on.
Yes. The involvement of the churches, the pastors, the devoutly religious
has been glossed over in the "history" written about the times. Enough to
write several devastating books that would make the author the new Rushdie
who'd probably have to flee the country.
People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals were
actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There were
brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians mentality.
You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk about the
anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the Communist purges.
Those are the fruits of atheism.
Figures. Atheism is always responsible if there's a single atheist
anywhere within a 12,000 mile radius but if every single person involved
in an event is a church going, bible believing, professing Christian,
Christianity had nothing to do with what happened.
SNORT.
But not *one* of you people can show any way for a lack of belief in
something to motivate people to do *anything.
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Being surprised at the fact that the universe
is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being
surprised at how well it fits its hole"
-- Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 12:00:59 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:47:52 +0000 (UTC),
J McCoy <mccoy@sunset.net> wrote:
"A. Carlson" <amcarls@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<dvigl0h8nv4qvi77mg96mpf3fd31rmv375@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
There you go, trying to blame "devoutly religious people." How do
you know?
Reading through the Louis and Clark journals I've noticed something
interesting. Credit was extended to Indians in question who did'nt
pay their due. And they weren't ignorant, they were sharp bargain
hunters who cheated and scammed. They've angered a lot of people.
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There
were brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians
mentality. You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
No, those were the fruits of terrible regimes. But the old rule about
revolutions stood, that too often the revolutionaries become as bad as those
they overthrow. Surely you're not calling the Czarist regime a good
government, or the pathetic, overindulgent Bourbon court a good government.
If these governments hadn't been as bad as they were, the revolutions would
have fizzled, as the revolutions of the mid-19th century did.
Read about the good Christian soldiers who marched into Peru, Mr. McCoy.
Read about the US Army being put to work killing Indians after the Civil
War. Surely there were plenty of people who admired the Indians, that is
until they decided they wanted the land the Indians sat on (and in many
cases had been driven on to by prior folks).
Here in Canada, there were places where there was systematic abuse of
Indians, removing children from their families, placing them in infamous
"residential" schools, many of which were run by churches. British Columbia
has had a number of trials in the last few years over this. The abuses ran
the whole gamut; physical, emotional and sexual. The whole underlying ethos
was to turn what were considered ignorant savages into good God-fearing
Christians. Use of the old languages was frowned upon, the potluck was
outlawed on the West Coast, old beliefs were mocked until they almost died
in some areas.
It is this implicit fear and hatred of other world views that was behind
these attrocities, and allowed demagogues to manipulate the average person.
You show these hatreds and fears yourself, just look at the lengths you will
go to to try to discount evolution, and the constant attempts at equating
atheism and evolution. You show the same symptoms of wanton ignorance and
fear that so many in the past have done.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
"My illness is due to my doctor's insistence that I drink milk, a
whitish fluid they force down helpless babies." - WC Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
06 Oct 2004 11:40:24 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 17:00:59 +0000 (UTC), AC
<mightymartianca@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:47:52 +0000 (UTC),
J McCoy <mccoy@sunset.net> wrote:
"A. Carlson" <amcarls@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<dvigl0h8nv4qvi77mg96mpf3fd31rmv375@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
There you go, trying to blame "devoutly religious people." How do
you know?
Reading through the Louis and Clark journals I've noticed something
interesting. Credit was extended to Indians in question who did'nt
pay their due. And they weren't ignorant, they were sharp bargain
hunters who cheated and scammed. They've angered a lot of people.
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them. There
were brothels everywhere. Don't give me this blame the Christians
mentality. You're wrong. IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
No, those were the fruits of terrible regimes. But the old rule about
revolutions stood, that too often the revolutionaries become as bad as those
they overthrow. Surely you're not calling the Czarist regime a good
government, or the pathetic, overindulgent Bourbon court a good government.
If these governments hadn't been as bad as they were, the revolutions would
have fizzled, as the revolutions of the mid-19th century did.
Read about the good Christian soldiers who marched into Peru, Mr. McCoy.
Read about the US Army being put to work killing Indians after the Civil
War. Surely there were plenty of people who admired the Indians, that is
until they decided they wanted the land the Indians sat on (and in many
cases had been driven on to by prior folks).
Here in Canada, there were places where there was systematic abuse of
Indians, removing children from their families, placing them in infamous
"residential" schools, many of which were run by churches. British Columbia
has had a number of trials in the last few years over this. The abuses ran
the whole gamut; physical, emotional and sexual. The whole underlying ethos
was to turn what were considered ignorant savages into good God-fearing
Christians. Use of the old languages was frowned upon, the potluck was
outlawed on the West Coast, old beliefs were mocked until they almost died
in some areas.
The same cultural genocide tactics were conducted in the US.
It is this implicit fear and hatred of other world views that was behind
these attrocities, and allowed demagogues to manipulate the average person.
You show these hatreds and fears yourself, just look at the lengths you will
go to to try to discount evolution, and the constant attempts at equating
atheism and evolution. You show the same symptoms of wanton ignorance and
fear that so many in the past have done.
The disease was so bad his name was removed and it remains;
*nameless.* It's gotten logrythmically worse in that five or six
years. "God" would be better served by calling him 'home' before he
climbs on an elevated platform and opens fire.
**
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "A. Carlson" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
04 Oct 2004 01:42:09 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:47:52 +0000 (UTC), (J McCoy)
wrote:
"A. Carlson" <amcarls@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<dvigl0h8nv4qvi77mg96mpf3fd31rmv375@4ax.com>...
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hemisphere; within 150 years, there were maybe 6 million Indians left. By
1900 in the USA, there were just 250,000"
No doubt there were millions of indigenes killed by Europeans in the
Americas, but 75 million is a pretty generous estimate for the population
of the Americas in 1490. Maybe it was more like 40 million as the author of
this web page suggests
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America.
Many if not most of the indigenous people who died in the 150 years
following 1490 were killed by diseases brought by the Europeans, and not at
their murderous hands.
One should not forget the policy of deliberately delivering disease
ridden blankets to the indians to help this process along.
Finally, and still recognizing the deplorable, shameful, and dishonorable
way in which the US government treated the indigenes in the US, mentioning
the number 250,000 in with the other numbers is some kind of dishonest
statistical sleight of hand. Since the first and second numbers referred to
the entire Western Hemisphere, while the last number refers only to the US,
which had fewer people than the rest of the Western Hemisphere in the first
place.
Still, even with all these caveats it's sure that the total number of
indigenous individuals directly killed by Europeans is quite large,
certainly in the millions or low tens of millions. And this was done
primarily by devoutly religious people, believing in Jesus Christ and the
Bible. When you figure it relative to the available population, the killing
of indigenous Americans by Christians probably compares closely to the
killings done by the Nazis and the Communists.
There you go, trying to blame "devoutly religious people." How do
you know?
There you go again, proving yet again that you are severely challenged
when it comes to reading comprehension. No mention whatsoever was
made up to this point concerning the religious beliefs of the
perpetrators.
Show me where I even referred to something even remotely similar to,
as you put it, "devoutly religious people". You're a liar, pure and
simple.
Reading through the Louis and Clark journals I've noticed something
interesting. Credit was extended to Indians in question who did'nt
pay their due. And they weren't ignorant, they were sharp bargain
hunters who cheated and scammed. They've angered a lot of people.
There's more to this story then what you're letting on. People are
people. Not everyone was a Christian back in those days. Criminals
were actually sent to the Americas as a way to get rid of them.
Are you sure you're not thinking of Australia here?
There were brothels everywhere.
Even in puritan Boston? You're contradicting yourself anyway. First
you get ***** because you apparently interpreted what I said as
blaming "devoutly religious people" and now you're referring to them
yourself as a bunch of whoremongers. Make up your mind.
Don't give me this blame the Christians mentality. You're wrong.
How can I be wrong about something that I did not convey to begin
with? Perhaps you're using some sort of warped rationalization to
deny that disease ridden blankets were deliberately given to indians
in the first place.
IF you want to talk about blood shed, talk
about the anti-religious blood thirsty French Revolution, or the
Communist purges. Those are the fruits of atheism.
I heard that the crusades weren't much of a tea party either. Or were
those also run by blood thirsty atheists as well?
JM
Alex
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Hank" |
|
| Title: Re: Remembering a Holocaust |
27 Sep 2004 12:46:16 PM |
|
|
"A. Carlson" wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 06:29:05 +0000 (UTC), "Dale"
<dmgreer@nspm.airmail.net> wrote:
"MAB" <bad-email@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2rpls3F1cm6hmU1@uni-berlin.de...
"In 1490, there were an estimated 75 million people in the Western
Hem | | | |
