Posted on 01/27/2008 7:58:31 PM PST by blam
GGG Ping.
You are likely correct.
But, gathering these bones, and burying them, with government acknowledgment that they belong to their ‘tribe’, means a continuation of government funding.
It means they establish permanently that they ‘owned’ the North American continent, tribe by tribe, and we owe them for it.
Ironic, coming from a culture that professed to not being able to ‘own’ the land.
I guaran-damn-tee-ya that, if the Indians who now exist had ANY relationship with the ones represented by the bones, they were MORTAL FREAKIN' ENEMIES AND HAD NO USE FOR EACH OTHER! What a bunch of claptrap the present tribes raise with predictable regularity. It is a freakin' joke.
How curious, that once dead these humans become chattel! The profit motive overpowers the gift economy. Capitalism wins!
Why not? They'd make a great tourist attraction for their casinos.
Interesting post.
This tribe also in the eastern part of San Diego County has a large Resourrt Hotel and Casino along with Spas, restaurants, Golf courses, Tennis, etc.
Why do "native Americans" (among whom I have ancestors) figure they are the exception?
I remember reading a long time ago about a native group in that area, called the San Dieguito Indians, who were much more primitive than any of the other tribes of the area, and eventually disappeared.
The chances are there were many different tribes there over the millennia. The linguistic evidence might help determine how long the Kumayyay (sp) were there--who are they related to?
Currently the oldest such connection within California is 5,300 years (ancient skeleton to living lineal descendant).
There is an even older connection (10,300 years) between a southern Alaskan skeleton and living descendants stretching from southern California to the tip of South America.
Both of these seem to be associated with one or more early coastal migrations.
” Why do “native Americans” (among whom I have ancestors) figure they are the exception?”
One of my ancestors (grandmother) was a full blooded squaw from Oklahoma.
I actually think this came about when the government went on a rampage to try to eliminate the native tribes, instead of allowing them to live peacefully, which had been agreed to.
Then it turned into an opportunity for the selected ‘leaders’ of the tribes to gain wealth and power, while their tribesmen were confined to filth and squalor.
Once big money was involved, politics took over.
Hence, Indian owned gambling casinos.
“how we gonna help the Indians?”
“Uh... let’s help them build gambling casinos with free liquor!”
“I thought we were going to give them blankets and tents.”
“We no longer want them disrespected.”
Let’s see...if science could learn something important from examining the bones of one of my distant ancestors, I would oppose it because...
Anybody? I’m stuck.
I actually think this came about when the government went on a rampage to try to eliminate the native tribes, instead of allowing them to live peacefully, which had been agreed to.
I have to disagree with you here. In fact, I believe the opposite. I believe it's the advantage of victimhood.
I live near the New York-New Jersey border. There is a group in the Ramapo Mountains who claim to be an Indian tribe who intermarried with Hessian Soldiers during the Revolution. The last "chief" of the "tribe" took a name so ridiculous that it could only have come from a 1950's B western. Of course, they wanted recognition so they could build a casino. They have not been recognized by the feds, and, in my opinion, correctly. In a former career I had extensive contact with many of them and I believe the whole thing was made up. The local paper, of course, bought into the the whole thing.
It was probably just a tenured professor.
“You found out you were directly related to Hillary”
All right, now, that’s crossing a line.
There was case in Washington a few years ago of a skeleton found in Kennewick WA. The problem was, after reconstructing his face from the scull, he looked an awful lot lake a white guy. Looked a lot like Patrick Stewart actually.
The local tribes immediately sued to have all research stopped, and the remains handed over to them. Their argument was basically the same.
"Our people have been here since the beginning of time, so he must be one of our tribe. And how dare you question us anyway."
It did raise a lot of questions about human migration to North America, and put a serious dent in the claims of the Indians who have always claimed to be the "First Americans".
Google "Kennewick Man"
Here is the issue the article does not mention. Kennewick man was not native american genetically. White most likely, possibly japanese. OOpsie big problem if you are native american that claim that you were basically born out of the land... ( I am choctaw) all the sudden there is another older group of inhabitants in the land... then the question comes....
If we came second, can we be called “Native americans” ?
And if we survived and drove the real native americans off the land that really screws up our whole iron eyes coty ( Who was Sicilian not indian btw) victim image.
So tribes are trying to bury these guys as fast as possible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.