Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
.......Sometimes in life its important to grow a backbone and pick a side, not waffle around trying to find the evil in good and the good in evil.
|
Quote:
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal">Indian Removal</a>
<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears">Trail of Tears</A>
<a href="http://www.cviog.uga.edu/Projects/gainfo/chero-br.htm">The Cherokee Cases: The Confrontation of Law and Politics</a>
Quote:
http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/n....jsp?id=h-2720
Worcester v. Georgia (1832)
In the court case Worcester v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court held in 1832 that the Cherokee Indians constituted a nation holding distinct sovereign powers. Although the decision became the foundation of the principle of tribal sovereignty in the twentieth century, it did not protect the Cherokees from being removed from their ancestral homeland in the Southeast.
|
|
Quote:
http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPa...ontentId=14068
Wednesday, July 05, 2000
Indian Land Claim Stirs Passions in Illinois
.........In the 1830s, the tribe said, that agreement was scrapped without the Miamis' agreement and as many as 12,000 tribe members were forced to relocate to Kansas with "significant" casualties along the way. Thirty years later, another forced migration moved them to their current home near Miami, Okla.
The land in question covers parts of 15 counties and is populated by more than 200,000 people. Mostly farmland, it is larger in size than an area encompassing all of Chicago and its suburbs.
For those being sued, there is dismay, skepticism and anger, particularly given that the families of many of the defendants in the Miami lawsuit have farmed their ground for generations.
<b>"If you ask me, I think this is a bunch of bull----," said Clarence Borries, a 72-year-old retired farmer from Effingham County, whose family has owned its property since the 1870s. "We've raised 11 kids here, and someone shouldn't be able to take it away.
"Like I told my son,'' he continued, "maybe we ought to get a bunch of shotgun shells on hand. We might need them.''
Tiger said his tribe hasn't decided what to do with the land's present-day occupants if it somehow prevails in its lawsuit. But he said he and his tribe empathize with the feelings of the landowners they are now suing.
"The feelings people have had and what they are expressing today is similar to what our people expressed at a time when many Indians were removed to strange areas. Indian people were in the same situation. And at the time, I'm sure our people thought it was BS too,'' he said.</b>
|
It is dangerous to walk a mile or two in the other fellow's mocassins. It is easier to "pick a side", and simply demonize the opposition. Black and white.
If you do allow yourself to ponder "the problem", all of the arguments that justify Israel's rights to "biblical (ancestral) lands", also justify the rights of native Americans to pursue the similar goals, and to the Palestinians, as well.
Isn't the US Government of our great great grandfathers, and the states of Georgia and Illinois, and Thomas Jefferon, in !802, the "evil", from the perspective of what was right and just?
How do we explain away the injustice that we do, merely by replying that we "picked a side", and called it "white"?