The Observation Deck

Gary Rice wrote:As one who has been involved for many years with the Native American community, you may rest assured that they have an entirely different perspective as to who might constitute an illegal immigrant.

As the saying goes, from their point of view, they've been fighting terrorism since the 1400's.

Perspective is everything. We face different perspectives because we often come from differing premises.

It would be well for all of us to step back and work on positive, rather than political solutions in this land- that seems so filled with hate and divisiveness these days. Think about it, if you will.

People so often speak, with nothing to say. One day, if evolution is real, we may find ourselves without ears; for having not used them for so long...

I thought that Native Americans did not believe in land ownership???

A million or so folks probably died durin the partitioning of India.

Pakistan was East and West Pakistan for a While. Bangladesh was East Pakistan. When East Pakistan seceded from West Pakistan 300 thousand to three million bangladeshis died in the ensuing slaughter. It was very sad.

In the Dominican Republic, Rafael Leonidas Trujillo Molina became president. He was a graduate of the U.S. military training program there. Later, he ordered 15 to 30 thousand Haitians mass destructed by Machete. He succeeded as being a total pimp, getting a cut of deals all over town. Finally, he was assasinated.

African tribal leaders getting in on the slave trade was no clear cut issue. It is obvious if many of them didn't provide slaves they would simply be taken as slaves. As there were thousands of tribes, the "market" provided the efficient solution we all lament and dread. Had this market failed to rise, European Slavers could have simply opened slave breeding camps.

But Mexico's population is at least 500 percent greater than it was 70 years ago. They don't have 500 percent more fresh water than then. They got a lot more dioxins in the available water from new factories of outsourced American manufacturing capacity. There will eventually be some kind of mass death war there. There ain't enough muslims there for it to be al queda, so hopefully one side will at least be communists. That is the best way to stretch out a massive death war.

The Koreas will also probably see some kind of genocide. North Korea is basically the pan handler of geopolitics. the kind that is somewhat threatening, but when you react tersely they accuse you of being unfair. they've got no real oil or anything: there isn't much they can do but nuke south korea. South korea isn't very important to us, other than for sentimental reasons. South Korea has a population of about fifty million in an area the size of Indiana. I doubt things will go there well for long, no matter how well entrenched their tycoons and big families are in the U.S.

It is all very sad.

Brian Pedaci wrote:Cutting $20 billion out of the budget could fund the Iraq war for another 3 months. What a bargain!

and when these "illegals" that you want to make legal go to collect Social Security in 20 or 30 years that $20 billion a quarter on the war will seem like peanuts...

Gary Rice wrote:As one who has been involved for many years with the Native American community, you may rest assured that they have an entirely different perspective as to who might constitute an illegal immigrant.

As the saying goes, from their point of view, they've been fighting terrorism since the 1400's.

Perspective is everything. We face different perspectives because we often come from differing premises.

It would be well for all of us to step back and work on positive, rather than political solutions in this land- that seems so filled with hate and divisiveness these days. Think about it, if you will.

People so often speak, with nothing to say. One day, if evolution is real, we may find ourselves without ears; for having not used them for so long...

Did the Indians just set back and let the whiteman took their "land"? Your logic about who is an illegal here is a bit flawed. This country has been well established for over 200 years. We are not here illegally here anymore only the English ever were . It is Karmically funny, that we now need their(Indians) knowledge, guidance and help to heal this land. People should watch what they wish for....

Stephen,

Truth can never be flawed. Nor is my logic, at least in this particular case.

Actually, if you look at some of the court cases going on these days, there still remain very real questions of legal ownership and land rights.

George Washington signed an agreement that Native Americans would hold certain New York land forever. That land, along with Seneca leader Cornplanter's grave, now lies under the waters created by the Kinzua Dam. Time and again legal treaties have been broken with Native Peoples.

It's one thing to win land as a prize of warfare, Many Americans think that's why we have Native lands, but the truth is that illegal usurpation of valid treaties have provided many present-day questions concerning land ownership. As to your private ownership point, that is a myth as well. Some Native peoples lived communally and some did not. In any case, I am certain that ill-gotten Native lands will be contested now and in the future, until justice is served. As a point of example, the Black Hills of South Dakota are still in dispute.

You are a prolific and sensitive poster, Stephen. There is much for you to learn regarding our Native Americans. I would encourage you to do so. Native Americans are not only of the Past, but are here today as well.

Justice, morality, Truth, and wisdom are not unique to any race of people. Each group can, however, bring unique experiences and perspectives to this great table of life. We would all do well to listen to the wind, and learn....

As for healing this land? That is something that I feel we cannot do alone. We will need the help of Grandfather (God). Many Native Americans do feel that something was lost, but that it will come again. There is the legend of the White Buffalo; to some, a metaphor for Christ, and to others, a more vague return to the old values, and to a more spiritual life.

Many branches of the tree of life exist Stephen, but there's only one trunk...Truth.

As for those "illegals"? Is there one among all people living in our land, who has never done something "illegal", even if it were only dropping a gum wrapper to the ground? We need to approach all people with compassion and care. Only when we walk the Red Road in wisdom, will we find the answers that we seek.

Stephen,

Truth can never be flawed. Nor is my logic, at least in this particular case.

I strongly disagree. It is nothing more than a great protest sign. (you are all here illegally). The US government now controls this territory. According to US law, I am legal. (I am actually just bustin balls on this one) I am a bit of a smart ass

As to your private ownership point, that is a myth as well.

Are you saying that the Indians had the same concept of land ownership as the Europeans (Monarch)who came here to explore? I have always read that land title and etc were European in base (Monarchy). Please share what the Indian concept of land ownership was..

You are a prolific and sensitive poster, Stephen. There is much for you to learn regarding our Native Americans. I would encourage you to do so. Native Americans are not only of the Past, but are here today as well.

I once attended a sweat lodge .. I will never ever forget how hard that was for me but well worth the experience.

Stephen,

Thanks for your thoughtful post. Not everyone is invited to a sweat lodge, so that must show that you have a strength of character, and a wish to do more for the world than simply pass over it like an inconsequential breeze.

As to your first retort? I think that you do in fact understand my point. In the more sublime sense, the question of all our "legality" remains exactly that. We might be "legal" in one sense, but if someone comes back at Moses Cleaveland for trading, I seem to recall, 100 gallons of whiskey, a few silver coins, and two beef cattle, for the land now called Cleveland, those east of the Cuyahoga might be in trouble. Here on the West Bank, those treaties are probably even more tenuous to actually be called "legal".

As to whether the Native Americans have the same concept of land ownership, (the word "Indians" of course, came from the Columbian explorations, and the resultant Arawak decimation and enslavement, and is not often used these days by Native groups) in some ways, they did. After all, the Iroquois Federation itself served as a model for American Federalism. The nomadic plains tribes were another matter, as their food supply necessitated rapid mobility.

Much of what you, and so many others in the non-Native world have read in school, (even these days) is a long way from the Truth.

You make good points. The more you know, the better.

Migwich (thank you) for your interchange!

As to your first retort? I think that you do in fact understand my point. In the more sublime sense, the question of all our "legality" remains exactly that. We might be "legal" in one sense, but if someone comes back at Moses Cleaveland for trading, I seem to recall, 100 gallons of whiskey, a few silver coins, and two beef cattle, for the land now called Cleveland, those east of the Cuyahoga might be in trouble. Here on the West Bank, those treaties are probably even more tenuous to actually be called "legal".

Yes, I understand your point.. All treaties signed by the US with the Indians should be honored.


PS You would be lucky to get 1 cattle for Cuyahoga County right now

You say that ALL treaties with the US should be honored?

Then don't you mean that Native Americans could go back and ask for the removal of Kinzua Dam and get their land back; in the treaty that George Washington agreed to?

If ALL treaties should be honored, remember that many original treaties were signed that were relatively good for Native Americans, were broken later.

Native American would probably LOVE for the government to honor some of those original treaties!

All VALID treaties should be honored, of course, but treaties brought under deception, coercion, greed, or by force of arms, are by the very definition of the word "treaty", of questionable legality, at least to me, and by logic, it would seem they would be renegotiable. If we are truly to be a nation of laws, then the government above all, should be accountable before the bar of justice.

For a very interesting discussion of the early dealings with the Native AMericans, a really good read is Mayflower: A Story of Courage, Community, and War by Nathaniel Philbrick. Goes into great details on what happened after they carved the first turkey....

Jeff

Gary Rice wrote:You say that ALL treaties with the US should be honored?

Then don't you mean that Native Americans could go back and ask for the removal of Kinzua Dam and get their land back; in the treaty that George Washington agreed to?

If ALL treaties should be honored, remember that many original treaties were signed that were relatively good for Native Americans, were broken later.

Native American would probably LOVE for the government to honor some of those original treaties!

All VALID treaties should be honored, of course, but treaties brought under deception, coercion, greed, or by force of arms, are by the very definition of the word "treaty", of questionable legality, at least to me, and by logic, it would seem they would be renegotiable. If we are truly to be a nation of laws, then the government above all, should be accountable before the bar of justice.

at the very least, the US should review the conditions that these treaties were signed under and try to correct any wrong doings by the US..

Amen.