To: blam
If the Indians were not the first people here, does that mean that they are not true "native Americans" and that they stole the land from the indigenous people?
2 posted on
05/11/2006 5:13:08 PM PDT by
djpg
To: djpg
I guess we get to keep the Southwest now.
7 posted on
05/11/2006 5:17:21 PM PDT by
Flyer
(Tag line changed to appease Lurker)
To: djpg
"If the Indians were not the first people here, does that mean that they are not true "native Americans" and that they stole the land from the indigenous people?" The DNA evidence suggests that there was at least some assimilation. The Obijawe(sp) Indians have the highest percent (25%) of this 'X-gene' today.
8 posted on
05/11/2006 5:18:00 PM PDT by
blam
To: djpg
"...does that mean that they are not true "native Americans" and that they stole the land from the indigenous people?" Any of'em that were born here ARE "native Americans", just like thee and me.
To: djpg
If the Indians were not the first people here, does that mean that they are not true "native Americans" and that they stole the land from the indigenous people? IMHO, if you are born here and accept the Pledge of Allegiance (with or without God in it), you ARE a Native American. That's the end of the story and exactly what I taught my kids. They are not hyphenated anything. They are Native Americans and it does not matter a damn which stone age DNA got here first. That stuff is all nonsense which ever way people want to spin it.
50 posted on
05/11/2006 7:59:05 PM PDT by
Ditto
To: djpg
as that communist organizer of the may 1 "boycott" said
"bbeeesa? weee don't neeed a beeeesa"
97 posted on
05/16/2006 1:36:58 PM PDT by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson