Turkeys Died To Set The White Man Free?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Timmy

Never mind. I see you called it "sin", so I guess you're not cool with it. (People attacking and forcing other people out of their home land.)

Like when God commanded Israel to attack the Amorites/Canaanites and exterminate them, and take over their land?

[Praxeas]

I think it's odd that everyone talks about one group taking someone else land, but forget that the other groups did it too. Indians killed each other and took each others land and food.

This sort of Human behavior has been going on for centuries

[houston]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Like when God commanded Israel to attack the Amorites/Canaanites and exterminate them, and take over their land?

point?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

The Wampanoag tribe was whittled down from 30,000 to 2,000 that's not genocide because 2,000 manged to survive?

Did they die from a specific policy of the European settlers conceived with the purpose of exterminating the Wampanoags? Or were there other reasons for the decline of the Wampanoags? The article I quoted from earlier points out that the vast majority of 'decline' among 'native Americans' was due to disease. Also, the Indian tribes were just as busy fighting and killing and enslaving each other as they were fighting European settlers. Finally, the European settlers were not on a mission to exterminate the Indians, that's pinko commie revisionist 'history'.

I understand the whole history of how Thanksgiving became a national holiday, but what the real irony here is that the coming of the Puritan Europeans didn't bring anything to be thankful about to a people who were already living in North Eastern America.

So, bringing the bible, literacy, the story of Jesus, not to mention a national political structure where religious tolerance was and is possible, as well as a culture of scientific advancement (running water, anyone? electricity? internet? hello?) that far surpassed anything the Wampanoags or their cousins were going to come up with on their own is not 'anything to be thankful about'?

Did the Wampanoags lose their culture? Pretty much. Was their culture something to be preserved inviolate? Hmmm.. human sacrifice, cannibalism, idolatry, immorality, superstitious ignorance... vs The Bible, Anglo-Saxon common law/Magna Carta/Bill of Rights, representative government*, scientific advancement, the reformation, renaissance, the Enlightenment, literacy, concepts of political, economic, and religious liberty... hmmm, pretty tough call there, eh?

*I realise the US system of government was partially modelled on Iroquois tribal government, so no need to go there.

The Washington Post snippet makes everything pretty much vanilla, when the facts remain, like Columbus landing in Hispaniola which caused GENOCIDE of the Taíno Indians,

Balderpoppydash. Columbus was not sailing west to 'exterminate every savage he could find'. Nor was his primary (stated) interest just gold and wealth, either.

Next you know you'll be telling us how white christian civilization is the scourge of humanity. Oh wait, seems that is what you are getting at already...

the Pilgrims landing in Plymouth Massachusetts not the advent of Christian love, but death.

More lies.

The Pequot,

Known for their savagery, so much so all the other tribes feared and hated them.

the Narraganset, and the Wampanoag

Who joined with the Europeans in waging war against the Pequot...

all fell under the buckled shoes of the Puritans, and in time the rest of the American Indian population was next on the menu when the Europeans decided to populate the rest of the country.

It's amazing how many people have no common sense. You decry the very things that, without which, you would in all likelihood not even exist, let alone have a Bible to read and an internet to pontificate on.

Why do you despise the Providence of a Sovereign God, who both plants and overthrows nations according to His Will?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by houston

point?

Point being a blanket condemnation of 'one people taking another people's land' as 'sin' is error. God commanded it in the case of Israel and Canaan, and it was not 'sin'. God did it again and again as punishment for Israel and Judah's sins.

In fact, when a nation becomes abominable to God and their wickedness exceeds his longsuffering, he often will bring upon them a nation to oppress them, subjugate them, remove them from their land, and even exterminate them.

Which is probably why Americans need to keep an eye out for Russia and China....

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Genocide is a systematic slaughtering of a race.

King Phillip's War, which correctly should be called the Puritan's War, was fought over the Puritans cheating the Wampanoag tribe. It left the Wampanoag tribe with no choice but to fight against an oppressor. 30,000 of any race of people reduced to 2,000 is considered genocide. The 30,000 wasn't reduced to 2,000 only because of the two year war, but due to the Puritans slaughtering the Wampanoag until their numbers dwindled to a ragged people. By the way, they just didn't pike King Phillip's head, they sold his wife and children into slavery.

What happened to one tribe may not have been based on the attempt to slaughter them because they wanted to kill all Indians. Read the history and you'll see there was growing strife between various tribes AND the Pilgrims.

The U.N. General Assembly adopted this term of genocide and defended it in 1946 as "....a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups."

The Pequot and Wampanoag were denied their right of existence.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It was a war and in wars often one side loses

And the ones who win get to write the history and teach it to all the generations who succeed them.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The Pilgrims did not wear buckles.

Levity? So you are looking for historic accuracy in my sarcasm?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

King Phillip's War, which correctly should be called the Puritan's War, was fought over the Puritans cheating the Wampanoag tribe.

For the interested reader of this thread, the above nonsense was dealt with previously in this thread.

The U.N. General Assembly...

See? Pure commie kool-aid.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I think it's odd that everyone talks about one group taking someone else land, but forget that the other groups did it too. Indians killed each other and took each others land and food.

This sort of Human behavior has been going on for centuries

Do they have a celebration for any of these other groups who had their land taken from them? Do these other groups have a day of thanksgiving for a time when they and the other group were living in harmony? Then behind the facade of that bed time story you have the reality of the people being subjugated, oppressed, and exterminated? I agree this sort of human behavior has been going on for centuries, but no one has a kumbaya story making it into a celebration feast when in fact the real story was about a people having their lives ruined by the people they once shared sweet fellowship?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Do they have a celebration for any of these other groups who had their land taken from them? Do these other groups have a day of thanksgiving for a time when they and the other group were living in harmony? Then behind the facade of that bed time story you have the reality of the people being subjugated, oppressed, and exterminated? I agree this sort of human behavior has been going on for centuries, but no one has a kumbaya story making it into a celebration feast when in fact the real story was about a people having their lives ruined by the people they once shared sweet fellowship?

Purim?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

King Phillip's War, which correctly should be called the Puritan's War, was fought over the Puritans cheating the Wampanoag tribe.

Whether that is true or not, that's not "Genocide", that's war

It left the Wampanoag tribe with no choice but to fight against an oppressor. 30,000 of any race of people reduced to 2,000 is considered genocide.

As I already detailed. The Tribe numbered no more than 1000 not 30,000. It was reduced to about 400...from war. What was the oppression? The Tribe actually relied on the Pilgrims for protection from the other tribes.

Here is the definition of Genocide
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

In order for this to have been a case of Genocide you have to prove it was deliberate and systematic and not rather the result of one party attacking the other and one party being more successful

The 30,000 wasn't reduced to 2,000 only because of the two year war, but due to the Puritans slaughtering the Wampanoag until their numbers dwindled to a ragged people.

The tribe was reduced to 1000 by disease BEFORE the Puritans arrived

By the way, they just didn't pike King Phillip's head, they sold his wife and children into slavery.

Whether that is true or not, the facts seem to be that the Tribe numbered around 1000 by the time the Pilgrims landed, made a peace treaty with the Pilgrims and relied on them for protection. It was not until this Indian leader gained power that things went town hill. It was not Genocide

What happened to one tribe may not have been based on the attempt to slaughter them because they wanted to kill all Indians. Read the history and you'll see there was growing strife between various tribes AND the Pilgrims.

I did read the history. I even quoted it and provided the links.

The U.N. General Assembly adopted this term of genocide and defended it in 1946 as "....a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups."

Right, not a WAR between two parties where one side dismally loses

The Pequot and Wampanoag were denied their right of existence.

No, they had been reduced in number by disease. Then, after several years of peace with the Pilgrims the Indians revolted.

As I said, the issue isn't whether it's right or wrong to move into a new land, and repopulate it, the Indians had done that to each other for years. The issue you raised was Genocide and it seems that the Historical facts are the Indians attacked the Pilgrims and lost

That's not genocide

And the ones who win get to write the history and teach it to all the generations who succeed them.

IF that is true then you have no other history to go by and are going by something that was invented