Conquer Club

This looks like a pleasant discussion. I was speaking with a coworker today about the pity that demography even includes "race" distinctions. Sadly that is the case, and it's something that needs to be dealt with. However, I'd reckon that calling all white people cowards would be akin to describing all peoples of aboriginal descent (and who was really there first? "Do you have a flag?") as being stuck in the stone age (or me calling all religious people cowards). I imagine a more calmly espoused refutation of some of the absurd statements would be more appropriate than lowering oneself to bickering with the idiots belching nonsense about "red-skinned savages."

Look, to be honest, all people have a horrible-side to them...the people of a nation are a reflection of thier leadership...if the leadership is kindly and content then the people are as well...if those in charge are corrupt then the people (as a whole) of that nation will be corrupt...Not all whites are bad nor all indians, blacks or whatever culture one may hail from...we (as individuals) define ourselves by our words and our actions...if one wishes to act corrupt in thier words or actions then piss on them for they are ussually nothing but cowards when confronted face-to-face...I have nothing against any particular people but I see no reason to rub salt in wounds...I don't remind blacks of slavery why so why would I think it just for folks to remind Native Americans of what once was...There was a reason why Indians weren't allowed to follow thier cultures or speak thier native tongues...When Indians were captured they would suggest tortures to thier captors...Native Americans made muslims seem sane with their lack of fear of death...ya they killed settlers but after white killed entire villages...great white victories...

[/quote]Europeans are horrible people, I must admit. I have to admit that. There is no compromise with that fact. I have never met a native American face-to-face, so I don't know how much pain and resentment they show towards Europeans. I wasn't trying to be prejudice, because I have no idea about North American history, specifically USA, other than the Revolution and when Europeans came.[/quote]

pimpdave wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:In actuality, the natives here are still alive,

Please show where the Mohicans are. I'd like to meet one.


(and yeah, a whole big fucking list of others)

And the tribes that were around before the Inca? The Aztec? Yet when those tribes "disappeared," the Aztec and Inca took over their territory. For the Plains and Eastern Tribes? Well, other then by word of mouth, we really don't have many clues as to what happened BEFORE we came. The Natives were warring, killing, enslaving, and driving each other off their lands for centuries. To say that "devil whitey" is the only culprit is simply naive.

Nez Pierce, Pueblo, and Cherokee people are from different regions...Nez Pierce were originally from Idaho area...Pueblo are from southern rockies, texas and renged to arizona...cherokee were originally from mississippi region

muy_thaiguy wrote:First of all hidden, to help avoid confusion, maybe put the quote first and then your response to it, yes? Second of all, people have been killing each other off for each other's lands. The Natives (I REALLY don't want to list all the tribes) were doing it to each other in both North and South America LONG before the "evil white devil came." In actuality, the natives here are still alive, not many other conquered people can say that (though I mean no offense by "conquered people"). And weren't some of your ancestors enemies? You may not be around if not for integration.

Cherokee were in N. Georgia as well as parts of Tennessee, North Carolina, Kentucky, Northern Alabama, S. Carolina and even parts of Virginia before European settlers but they weren't in Mississippi.

I'm just going to leave this discussion because I actually have no idea what I am talking about, as stated beforehand. So, er. I dono. Carry on.

hiddendragon wrote:white-people are cowards...that is all there is too it...

And morons like you are just as prejudiced as any 'white people' you bitch about...

Try this little thing called 'acceptance' and get over it.

hiddendragon wrote: When Indians were captured they would suggest tortures to thier captors...Native Americans made muslims seem sane with their lack of fear of death...ya they killed settlers but after white killed entire villages...great white victories...

Wow, you are making some large assumptions that you certainly don't have the education or first-hand knowledge to make, and this is coming from another redskin...

Maybe you should take a break and chill out.

...I was just asking a question, I didn't mean to start a riot.
Incidentally, and please let's not all get heated about this one, when I went to the pow-wow here last year, I noticed that a lot of the cherokee were black. I was wondering if this was fairly common - obviously they or their ancestors had been adopted into the tribe. Is this commonplace? I didn't lile to aska t the time - my appearance already makes me an ovious outsider, my accent would have reinforced that.

..and on a sort of "let's say nice things about people", some of my son's friends, who are in a local scout troop, were rescued from a flash flood caused by a collapsed dam while camping in the Grand Canyon a few weeks ago by Havasupai . It's quite a story.

jonesthecurl wrote:...I was just asking a question, I didn't mean to start a riot.
Incidentally, and please let's not all get heated about this one, when I went to the pow-wow here last year, I noticed that a lot of the cherokee were black. I was wondering if this was fairly common - obviously they or their ancestors had been adopted into the tribe. Is this commonplace? I didn't lile to aska t the time - my appearance already makes me an ovious outsider, my accent would have reinforced that.

A lot of runaway slaves were accepted into the tribe, going way back. Also, there was a fair amount of intermarrying going on in the 1800s, both were "outsiders" and I imagine there was a fair amount of romance that developed between the two cultures.

I was sort of guessing that - also some tribes bought slaves too, and I'm guessing the chances of eventually becoming an equal part of the tribe were rather higher than when you were owned by europeans.

pimpdave wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:...I was just asking a question, I didn't mean to start a riot.
Incidentally, and please let's not all get heated about this one, when I went to the pow-wow here last year, I noticed that a lot of the cherokee were black. I was wondering if this was fairly common - obviously they or their ancestors had been adopted into the tribe. Is this commonplace? I didn't lile to aska t the time - my appearance already makes me an ovious outsider, my accent would have reinforced that.

A lot of runaway slaves were accepted into the tribe, going way back. Also, there was a fair amount of intermarrying going on in the 1800s, both were "outsiders" and I imagine there was a fair amount of romance that developed between the two cultures.

You said it before I could...

pimpdave wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:...I was just asking a question, I didn't mean to start a riot.
Incidentally, and please let's not all get heated about this one, when I went to the pow-wow here last year, I noticed that a lot of the cherokee were black. I was wondering if this was fairly common - obviously they or their ancestors had been adopted into the tribe. Is this commonplace? I didn't lile to aska t the time - my appearance already makes me an ovious outsider, my accent would have reinforced that.

A lot of runaway slaves were accepted into the tribe, going way back. Also, there was a fair amount of intermarrying going on in the 1800s, both were "outsiders" and I imagine there was a fair amount of romance that developed between the two cultures.

Also, some tribes viewed them as incarnations of bear spirits, and were thus, well recieved.

muy_thaiguy wrote:

pimpdave wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:...I was just asking a question, I didn't mean to start a riot.
Incidentally, and please let's not all get heated about this one, when I went to the pow-wow here last year, I noticed that a lot of the cherokee were black. I was wondering if this was fairly common - obviously they or their ancestors had been adopted into the tribe. Is this commonplace? I didn't lile to aska t the time - my appearance already makes me an ovious outsider, my accent would have reinforced that.

A lot of runaway slaves were accepted into the tribe, going way back. Also, there was a fair amount of intermarrying going on in the 1800s, both were "outsiders" and I imagine there was a fair amount of romance that developed between the two cultures.

Also, some tribes viewed them as incarnations of bear spirits, and were thus, well recieved.

And there was some natural variation amongst original peoples.

As for the Clovis/etc.

Apparently one of the latest theories is that a large number of Native Americans actually came from France ... and an earlier group from Australia (landing in way South America).

As for the conquering and "wishing for what was" ... that is true for many people, not just Native Americans. But the Native American conquests are recent enough to be remembered better ... AND were undertaken by supposedly "modern" and "enlightened" individuals promoting freedom. So, that makes it hurt worse.

But we cannot turn back the clock. Things are what they are, both good and bad.

Clovis technology was found also is france so it would make sense that stone-age europeans had a land bridge as well...It has long been assumed that the stone-age aborigonese of the south pacific were a sea-faring peoples and there is evidence in south america that the aborigonese people had settled there...With the history we know of the Mayan, Incan, and Aztec peoples they very well could have eliminated the people they saw as different...As too what happened to these stone-aged europeans in north america we may never know as most tribes didn't have a written history but an oral one and the American laws of the late 1800's to the mid 1900's forbid Native Americans from practicing thier own cultures....And yes "anarkistdream" if you were truely Nativve American you would know about what whites did with thier Native American captives...the white americans stopped taking Indains captive because the average Native American didn't fear death, this is documented...views the facts before you blurt shit anarcistdream

PLAYER57832 wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:

pimpdave wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:...I was just asking a question, I didn't mean to start a riot.
Incidentally, and please let's not all get heated about this one, when I went to the pow-wow here last year, I noticed that a lot of the cherokee were black. I was wondering if this was fairly common - obviously they or their ancestors had been adopted into the tribe. Is this commonplace? I didn't lile to aska t the time - my appearance already makes me an ovious outsider, my accent would have reinforced that.

A lot of runaway slaves were accepted into the tribe, going way back. Also, there was a fair amount of intermarrying going on in the 1800s, both were "outsiders" and I imagine there was a fair amount of romance that developed between the two cultures.

Also, some tribes viewed them as incarnations of bear spirits, and were thus, well recieved.

And there was some natural variation amongst original peoples.

As for the Clovis/etc.

Apparently one of the latest theories is that a large number of Native Americans actually came from France ... and an earlier group from Australia (landing in way South America).

As for the conquering and "wishing for what was" ... that is true for many people, not just Native Americans. But the Native American conquests are recent enough to be remembered better ... AND were undertaken by supposedly "modern" and "enlightened" individuals promoting freedom. So, that makes it hurt worse.

But we cannot turn back the clock. Things are what they are, both good and bad.

PLAYER57832 wrote:
As for the conquering and "wishing for what was" ... that is true for many people, not just Native Americans. But the Native American conquests are recent enough to be remembered better ... AND were undertaken by supposedly "modern" and "enlightened" individuals promoting freedom. So, that makes it hurt worse.

I'm not so sure about that. Manifest Destiny was sure as hit not about promoting freedom, it was securing the USAs borders, and taking the continent. Much like the wars Rome fought to secure the peninsula.

And before all of that, the first settlers, pilgrims, whatever you want to call them, weren't promoting freedom either. They were escaping tyranny. There's a significant difference. All too easy to become a tyrant oneself after having been subjected to it.

hiddendragon wrote:And yes "anarkistdream" if you were truely Nativve American you would know about what whites did with thier Native American captives...the white americans stopped taking Indains captive because the average Native American didn't fear death, this is documented...views the facts before you blurt shit anarcistdream

The same thing the Native Americans did to their captives, you ignorant fuck...

Jesus, you are lumping a vast amount of people together and trying to say they're all the same...

Are the Ethiopians the same as the Nigerians? They both were on the same continent...

How about you actually try reading TRUTH instead of whatever ignorant hate-mongering shit you speak, dumbass?

Anarkistsdream wrote:

hiddendragon wrote:And yes "anarkistdream" if you were truely Nativve American you would know about what whites did with thier Native American captives...the white americans stopped taking Indains captive because the average Native American didn't fear death, this is documented...views the facts before you blurt shit anarcistdream

The same thing the Native Americans did to their captives, you ignorant fuck...

Yay torture!

jonesthecurl wrote:So say: what do I call you?

"The conquered" should work.

HapSmo19 wrote:

jonesthecurl wrote:So say: what do I call you?

"The conquered" should work.

or in your case "the arrogant, ignorant, insensitive arsehole (who's ripe for scalping)". "fteclolbyaf"*.

I have already said at least once that I really would like this to be a thread where we can talk rather than pose and throw insults. If you have nothing constructive to offer, please be absent.

*"fails to even consider laughing out loud because you ain't funny"

I'm not reading all this mambo jambo, just giving an answer:

Both Native American and American Indian are fine. Just "Indian" is usually considered an outmoded term, except, of course, for people from Indian.

In Latin America, indigena (een DEE hee nah) is the preferred term, but ONLY if the person actually identifies as such (many Latin Americans may look very indigenous, but would be highly insulted if you indicated so).

jonesthecurl wrote:...I was just asking a question, I didn't mean to start a riot.
Incidentally, and please let's not all get heated about this one, when I went to the pow-wow here last year, I noticed that a lot of the cherokee were black. I was wondering if this was fairly common - obviously they or their ancestors had been adopted into the tribe. Is this commonplace? I didn't lile to aska t the time - my appearance already makes me an ovious outsider, my accent would have reinforced that.

You picked a thorny issue for many Americans, it was to be expected. However, I applaud you for having the guts and tact to ask it without causing more trouble than is current.

jonesthecurl wrote:or in your case "the arrogant, ignorant, insensitive arsehole (who's ripe for scalping)".

That sounds like a flame to me.
You should know that I'm 1/16 Chickasaw and that it doesn't make me an "arrogant, ignorant, insensitive arsehole" to state that I wouldn't take offense to that part of my ancestry being known as "the conquered". Maybe it was the smiley. I need to cut down on those.

jonesthecurl wrote:"fteclolbyaf"*.

What does that mean? Is that some native tongue or internet goon? I dont speak either.

jonesthecurl wrote:I have already said at least once that I really would like this to be a thread where we can talk rather than pose and throw insults. If you have nothing constructive to offer, please be absent.

I wasn't throwing insults around.
And let me correct you. Anyone who is born here is a native. If we were speaking of fish, you would be known as a "planter"(born in a hatchery and then shot out a bung into a river, lake or stream to provide sport for recreational fishermen).
Who cares what you call them as long as whoever you're talking to knows what you're talking about. What are you trying to accomplish here? Did you find another whiner band-wagon to jump on? Another pointless, centuries-old cause? How sweet. Your so sensitive.

jonesthecurl wrote:*"fails to even consider laughing out loud because you ain't funny"

Yeah well, I have an opinion of you too.

HapSmo19 wrote:You should know that I'm 1/16 Chickasaw

Hahahahahahaha

Your Grandma's grandma???

Hahahaha

What a joke.