Turkeys Died To Set The White Man Free?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

Because history is always relevant.

I agree, but you would also agree that history shouldn't be used as a tool to guilt people...correct?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

What a jumble.

The Wampanoag Confederacy was made up a many sub tribes, in 1614 and epidemic swept throughout the Confederacy, yet didn't decimate them to 2,000 or some claim after King Phillip's war down to a measly 400?

Do you have some sort of supporting cast for these claims?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Do you have some sort of supporting cast for these claims?

Yes, The State of Native America: Genocide, Colonization editor M. Annette Jaimes, Resistance, The First Frontier: The Forgotten History of Struggle, Savagery, and Endurance in Early America By Scott Weidensaul, Indians in the Americas: The Untold Story By William Marder, The Wampanoag: The People of the First Light By Janet Riehecky, and Atlas of the Indian Tribes of North America and the Clash of Cultures By Nicholas J. Santoro which gives you a list of the sub tribes under the WC.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I agree, but you would also agree that history shouldn't be used as a tool to guilt people...correct?

Yes. What happened way back has nothing to do with me as far as me personally hurting someone although it has a definite affect on people's cultures today.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

Yes. What happened way back has nothing to do with me as far as me personally hurting someone although it has a definite affect on people's cultures today.

What do you think about reparations?

Like Holocaust Restitution?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Yes, The State of Native America: Genocide, Colonization editor M. Annette Jaimes, Resistance, The First Frontier: The Forgotten History of Struggle, Savagery, and Endurance in Early America By Scott Weidensaul, Indians in the Americas: The Untold Story By William Marder, The Wampanoag: The People of the First Light By Janet Riehecky, and Atlas of the Indian Tribes of North America and the Clash of Cultures By Nicholas J. Santoro which gives you a list of the sub tribes under the WC.

Do you have a link for the source of your earlier facts?

Can you provide direct quotes from the sources you just quoted?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Yes, The State of Native America: Genocide, Colonization editor M. Annette Jaimes, Resistance, The First Frontier: The Forgotten History of Struggle, Savagery, and Endurance in Early America By Scott Weidensaul, Indians in the Americas: The Untold Story By William Marder, The Wampanoag: The People of the First Light By Janet Riehecky, and Atlas of the Indian Tribes of North America and the Clash of Cultures By Nicholas J. Santoro which gives you a list of the sub tribes under the WC.

Your first source

It says the North American Indian tribes may have been reduced by disease by as much as 75%!

It also says that the war may have been started BECAUSE the Indians suspected the colonists deliberately spread these diseases (more than one kind). Which means it was the Indians that were the aggressors

And it says these diseases spread before the Colonization began.

Clearly from what I have posted and this book you recommended, the Indians had been decimated numerically by disease prior to the Colonization.

The Indians blamed the Colonists and grew aggressive towards them.

War broke out between the tribes and the European colonists.

The Colonists were better at warfare.

That is not genocide. It's SUICIDE. It was suicide for a tribe to have been decimated by disease, know how strong the Colonists were militarily and then go against them in battle

http://books.google.com/books?id=rgO...panoag&f=false

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Your first source

It says the North American Indian tribes may have been reduced by disease by as much as 75%!

It also says that the war may have been started BECAUSE the Indians suspected the colonists deliberately spread these diseases (more than one kind). Which means it was the Indians that were the aggressors

And it says these diseases spread before the Colonization began.

Clearly from what I have posted and this book you recommended, the Indians had been decimated numerically by disease prior to the Colonization.

The Indians blamed the Colonists and grew aggressive towards them.

War broke out between the tribes and the European colonists.

The Colonists were better at warfare.

That is not genocide. It's SUICIDE. It was suicide for a tribe to have been decimated by disease, know how strong the Colonists were militarily and then go against them in battle

http://books.google.com/books?id=rgO...panoag&f=false

Bravo, you read the pages which concerning the Wampanoag Confederacy, and the American Indians dealing with the disease issue which I will get to, but if you look again at page 317 it gives the snippet concerning squaw-sachem Massachusetts Queen (as known by the colonials), the editor notes that she presided over her people during, one, decimation by disease, two, war, and three COLONIAL MANIPULATION? The colonial people were constantly causing issues with the natives. It is a fact that Roger Williams, founder of Rhode Island in 1636, argued with the Puritans and Secularists that they should pay the Indians a profit for their land. Yet, the Puritans, and Secularists believed it was their manifest destiny to weasel the land from the "savages" who lived in the New World? Again, this clearly shows the Europeans as the agitators. Robert Williams (as early as 1664) is quoted as saying that "God land will be (as it now is) as great a god with us English as God gold with the Spaniards." As more whites came to New England more Indian lands were needed. It was the business dealings with the Europeans which caused the Indians to have grievances, to not trust the Bible toting "BUCKLE" shoe wearing Puritans, not just the idea that some Puritans might of been attempting biological warfare among the confederations.

Now the issue of disease decimating the people, on page 31-32 of The State of Native America: Genocide, Colonization, and Resistance, the editor writes on page 31, in all probability the first epidemics occurred in Florida which were brought on by the Spanish explorers, and was spread by the Indians who traveled to other areas. So, these Europeans diseases came via ships. Yet, your post after reading just one book I offered may cause the causal reader to walk away believing that before any European ever set a foot on the soil of America?

It could look like you were trying to say that the Indians were dying off from diseases which were already in the New World, and therefore just looked at these Europeans as being the causes of all their ills and decided to attack the nice decent folks?

What is interesting, which you left out of your post, is that the Indians believed that the Europeans had caused there issues due to they believing the colonials deliberately spread disease among the confederacy. On the last sentence on page 31 to the top paragraph on page 32 it says that some anthropologists and historians believed that these Indians died of "natural disasters which the Europeans never intended, but there is considerable evidence" which this was not always the case. There is considerable evidence that the Indians were correct in their assumptions that they were deliberately contaminated by the colonists. On page 32 we have a quote from a letter written in 1763 from Sir Jeffery Amherst to his subordinate Bouquet stating that Bouquet send blankets infected with smallpox among the Indians. The Indians weren't ignorant of the fact that the Europeans who came among them would deliberately from times past try to infect them with their diseases. In 1517 when the Spanish first arrive on the shores of Yucatán under Hernandez de Cordoba. The arrival of the Spanish ushers in diseases brought from Europe, which were unknown among the Mayan, including smallpox, influenza and measles. Within a century, 90 % of Mesoamerica's native populations will be killed off. Therefore the Indians of the Wampanoag confederacy may of had a justifiable reason for their thoughts of biological warfare from their European neighbors.

I look at it this way, we are shown only one historical picture where the Indian is the ignorant savage, and the European Puritan, and Secularist, are just only trying to help this subhuman savages live a better life. Yet, since savages aren't capable of being able to coexist and adapt with decent secularist, it is THEIR fault when an uprising occurs? Is that the truth? No, the truth is empire which has nothing to do with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or the message of His Gospel. These Puritans and Secularists killed not only the Indians, but their own brethren and countrymen. Quakers, Baptists, the Puritans had disputes with the Secularists (Pilgrims) and it was Massasoit (the father of Metacomet a.k.a King Phillip) who tried to step in a straighten the issues out. The Puritans weren't the good guys waving Geneva Bibles and wanting to share vittles with the natives.

Thank you for taking the time to look up the book, and the Lord bless you and your family in Jesus name.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

What do you think about reparations?

Like Holocaust Restitution?

I think there is a place for reparations but each situation will be different.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

I think there is a place for reparations but each situation will be different.

What would be some situations which would make reparations unavailable?