[muawiyah]

What is hypothesized to have happened 6,000 years ago (which is several thousand years AFTER Clovis culture was pretty much destroyed by what seems to have been a comet that hit Canada) really doesn’t change the legal basis of the treaties between the Indians and the United States.

[Wallace T.]

There is more at stake here than treaties between the Indian nations and the United States or the individual states (treaties in the Eastern states were often between a particular tribe and a colonial or state government). The dominant cultural outlook in academia is profoundly anti-Western and anti-Christian. European civilization is projected as evil and inhumane, and the culture of the Indians is believed to be a variant of Rousseau’s concept of the Noble Savage. There is no certainty as to how the earliest human settlers of this hemisphere perished. If the Northeast Asian migrants acted like the Israelites did in Canaan or the Angles and Saxons did in Britain, the earlier inhabitants would have been subject to genocide and slavery, with the few survivors driven to safer havens. In other words, the Northeast Asians of several thousand years ago did the same thing to the earlier inhabitants as the Europeans did to them in the 16th through 19th Centuries. Any use of their society as an ideal contrast to the supposed evils of Euro-American culture would be seriously compromised.