Cherokee Nation Issues Statement Regarding Sen. Warren

Read through the article and some of the posts the following can be stated:

First thing to consider, is that there are 3 federally recognized tribes of Cherokee Indians in the USA. 2 are in the state of Oklahoma, and the other is east. The next thing is that there are people, who are not associated with any tribe that still claim such on various forms.

But the one thing that we should be more concerned about is this: The blood system is part of a racist past, which is still used today. At one time, it was used to discriminate, where if a person had a blood from a different skin color in their veins, they would be classified as a minority. So that means if a person had an ancestor that was African, then even though they looked white, they were classified as black and would have to go through life in the country as a second class citizen. Now it is used to classify those who are native American by percentages, same policy different outcomes.


Personally I think that this classification needs to be gotten rid of, as there is only one race, Human.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Tanga36

Would advise everyone...EVERYONE...read the book called TRAIL OF TEARS...where we were forced out of our lands of mountains rivers and abundance...

Many old and young died along the marching way...to the flat lands of praries...because the American gov. wanted the land east of the Mississippi River for white settlement.

M.S.
Cherokee/Eastern Band
Chickasaw

I understand that some were bloody savages who killed anybody not in their tribes, but the Cherokee helped us with scouts and warriors. I sure wish they were left alone.

Easy to say since I have Indian descent wife and some of her family currently live on a Reservation but it needs to be said.

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Tanga36

When the first threads about this started to appear, I spent some time googling and reading about Native American DNA. What I found is that there really is no such thing. A few trends, however did emerge.

The Indians are believed to mostly all come here from Asia to Alaska then gone south and spread out from there. Precolumbian Indians are believed to have Asiatic DNA markers. There are a few tribes of Mayan Indians with distinct DNA markers, perhaps some in Peru also. These tribes seem to have mixed into some American tribes so some of them have that. The DNA varies by region. Some eastern tribes have pretty distinct lineage but when you get to the southwest, Indian DNA is so mixed, it's not useful at all for determining tribal membership. Since the 1600's Native Americans have had so much intermarriage, there are very few individuals with pure blood of any tribe left. Indians counted not only people born from tribe parents as members but also spouses and adopted children.

When it comes to Cherokee DNA, you find different test results from nearly all other tribes. Their markers are not predominately Asian but Middle Eastern, North African, Berber, and Iberian. Apparently, they originated from the Mediterranean area not Asia.

The Cherokee I know say they are actually Polynesian and having studied with Samoan's and hung out with Cherokee, I agree with them. The Polynesians embrace the Native Americans like brothers also, and that makes "the cheese more binding" for me.

originally posted by: filthyphilanthropist
a reply to: Tanga36

My mom looks a lot more like a Native American than Warren, is 1/4 Cherokee, and still isn't officially recognized by the Cherokee Nation because the proper documentation is hard to come by, and I believe something to do with escaping the trail of tears and name changes. But my grandfather's father was a "full blooded" bear hunting with a knife Native America. We know this. You can clearly see the physical characteristics on my mom and uncle and definitely could my grandfather. Heck, I look more like one than Warren, and I'd only be 1/8.

My point is if the proper channels to be included in the Cherokee Nation prevent them and they accept it, then what sort of crack is Warren smoking to think she's so special?

I know some one of the Bear clan. They are interesting.

originally posted by: Tanga36

...This statement is a good reminder, not just to any specific individual, but to all of us Americans that our family's oral history is ultimately just a story...

Isn't this whole crazy world a mish-mash of stories?

She calls herself a Cherokee: and so many folks get upset, and reject her claim outright. "You're not! Your DNA proves it".
But if she decides to call herself a man: folks will go "Yes sir". Even though her DNA says she's a gendered female.

What up wit dat?

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Tanga36

When the first threads about this started to appear, I spent some time googling and reading about Native American DNA. What I found is that there really is no such thing. A few trends, however did emerge.

The Indians are believed to mostly all come here from Asia to Alaska then gone south and spread out from there. Precolumbian Indians are believed to have Asiatic DNA markers. There are a few tribes of Mayan Indians with distinct DNA markers, perhaps some in Peru also. These tribes seem to have mixed into some American tribes so some of them have that. The DNA varies by region. Some eastern tribes have pretty distinct lineage but when you get to the southwest, Indian DNA is so mixed, it's not useful at all for determining tribal membership. Since the 1600's Native Americans have had so much intermarriage, there are very few individuals with pure blood of any tribe left. Indians counted not only people born from tribe parents as members but also spouses and adopted children.

When it comes to Cherokee DNA, you find different test results from nearly all other tribes. Their markers are not predominately Asian but Middle Eastern, North African, Berber, and Iberian. Apparently, they originated from the Mediterranean area not Asia.

This is all intriguing and wonderful information that is news to me, especially the part about the Cherokee having distinct markers that differentiate them from other tribes. This brings more questions to my mind. I was aware of some of that information but some of the other info really has my mind doing some somersaults, like why are the Cherokee so different? How did they get here? When did they get here? How did they remain separate from the other tribes?

I guess you have given me something new to delve into and attempt to figure out my new curiosities!

a reply to: StoutBroux

At first glance, anyone with a logical brain would probably conclude that she used her "heritage" for personal gain and to get a leg up on the other applicants. And I really cannot see any other reason to put that on your resume or application unless you are trying to gain something from it (you don't normally include non-pertinent info or stuff that doesn't serve to make yourself look better). However, I still am going to give her the benefit of the doubt since she claims she only did it because she is proud of her heritage.

Personally, I think the more damning evidence of whether she used it for personal gain is what she put on her college applications. Maybe she wasn't "thinking" at that age and realize how much she would benefit by claiming Naive American heritage on a college app or maybe she just wasn't as proud of it then? Or maybe she actually did claim it and pretty much guarantee her admittance and numerous scholarships to whatever college she wanted? I'll be honest, I haven't looked into any of that, yet. And if Harvard is refusing to release her papers, I'm guessing any colleges she applied to would release the info either.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Tanga36

Boston Globe, Sept 1st:

Ethnicity not a factor in Elizabeth Warren’s rise in law

And then she separately released a bunch of personnel files on her website, here.

Of course they're going to deny it!

Because, if they didn't that would be openly admitting they were, well....RACIST!

Right?

Warren heritage:

Kevin Bacon - 1/5

Native American - 1/1024

Benedict Arnold - 1/2

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Tanga36

why does their opinion matter? DNA doesnt lie.

I assume you're asking why I believe the Cherokee Nation's opinion matters. Its been a long thread and I'm attempting to catch up so I might be incorrect about that assumption. If I am, let me know.

Well, I feel that their opinion matters because they are the group that she claims to be a part of. If she were so proud of her Cherokee heritage, she would defer to the elders and listen to what they feel is right and what is best for the tribe, as a whole.

Also, they are the group that is being relegated to political fodder by both sides of the spectrum. In my opinion (granted it isn't worth much), that is a demeaning and undignified thing to do. They didn't need to issue a statement and if it weren't such a hot button issue, I doubt they would have, but they chose to and they did it in a respectable way. Their words didn't degrade anyone, they didn't choose sides, they really didn't give either side any snappy quips to use to further a political agenda. Basically they gave the middle finger to all of us non-Natives in a very respectful way.

They deserved to be heard and they deserve to be the ones that say who is and who is not a part of their tribe. Sure DNA doesn't lie but political pundits do and depending on which side you are on, the results are being used to fit that narrative. Their statement should put an end to it but it won't. The MSM will ignore it, they will use what they can to spin it the way they want to and the group of people that both sides are attempting to exploit will be forgotten, once again, after a new issue arises.

a reply to: Tanga36
I have a " paper trail " leading back to real ancestors in the Nansemond, Cherokee, Lumbee, and Muscogee tribes. No tribe is going to just accept you on your word, you have to have census records or tribal roll records. I know many people who claim to be kin to Jesse James, but they only have word of mouth.

What I find absurd is the concept of genetic racial tribal heritage. Tribes are culture not race. You can be a #ing aboriginal from Australia and be Cherokee if they accept you into the tribe. You can also be full blooded "Native American" with direct descendants from the tribe and not be if the tribe doesn't accept you. Race is such a stupid concept, it has blurred the lines of culture and genetics to the point of making stupid nonsensical connections that don't exist. All it takes to be a part of a culture is to be accepted into it, all it takes not to be is to not be accepted by it.

Elisabeth Warren is not accepted into the Cherokee culture, that's the start and end of it.

a reply to: Puppylove

You are correct. I am an American! There is no DNA test that will be able to prove that for me. Only documentation does that officially.

The native people of this country truly seem to be wiser than the rest of us. They have always known and understood that neither of the political parties care about us regular folks...well, until we can be used by them.

a reply to: Tanga36

wah-doh ou-doh-hee-yu ou-chah-tee, First Nations People should be listened to more often.

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: Tanga36

...This statement is a good reminder, not just to any specific individual, but to all of us Americans that our family's oral history is ultimately just a story...

Isn't this whole crazy world a mish-mash of stories?

She calls herself a Cherokee: and so many folks get upset, and reject her claim outright. "You're not! Your DNA proves it".
But if she decides to call herself a man: folks will go "Yes sir". Even though her DNA says she's a gendered female.

What up wit dat?

50% of her DNA comes from her father. So she is more male than Cherokee by a long shot.

originally posted by: toms54
50% of her DNA comes from her father. So she is more male than Cherokee by a long shot.

No there's someone with a firm grasp on genetics. What a maroon.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Tanga36

When the first threads about this started to appear, I spent some time googling and reading about Native American DNA. What I found is that there really is no such thing. A few trends, however did emerge.

The Indians are believed to mostly all come here from Asia to Alaska then gone south and spread out from there. Precolumbian Indians are believed to have Asiatic DNA markers. There are a few tribes of Mayan Indians with distinct DNA markers, perhaps some in Peru also. These tribes seem to have mixed into some American tribes so some of them have that. The DNA varies by region. Some eastern tribes have pretty distinct lineage but when you get to the southwest, Indian DNA is so mixed, it's not useful at all for determining tribal membership. Since the 1600's Native Americans have had so much intermarriage, there are very few individuals with pure blood of any tribe left. Indians counted not only people born from tribe parents as members but also spouses and adopted children.

When it comes to Cherokee DNA, you find different test results from nearly all other tribes. Their markers are not predominately Asian but Middle Eastern, North African, Berber, and Iberian. Apparently, they originated from the Mediterranean area not Asia.

The Cherokee I know say they are actually Polynesian and having studied with Samoan's and hung out with Cherokee, I agree with them. The Polynesians embrace the Native Americans like brothers also, and that makes "the cheese more binding" for me.

Did not see that anywhere but I only spent 2 hours on it and about 15 minutes on the Cherokee. Maybe it's true.

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: Tanga36

...This statement is a good reminder, not just to any specific individual, but to all of us Americans that our family's oral history is ultimately just a story...

Isn't this whole crazy world a mish-mash of stories?

She calls herself a Cherokee: and so many folks get upset, and reject her claim outright. "You're not! Your DNA proves it".
But if she decides to call herself a man: folks will go "Yes sir". Even though her DNA says she's a gendered female.

What up wit dat?

Well, actually, those who say she's not a Native American are the same ones that would still call her ma'am if she tried to say she were a boy. And those that say "well if she's 1/1024th then that settles it, she's a Native American!" are the same ones that would call her sir if she said she was a boy.

a reply to: Tanga36

Do you imagine America will ever see the likes of a native Indian POTUS?

That really would progress in my humble opinion.

Then again if they were to start building walls 99% of the population might be on the wrong side.

a reply to: Puppylove

Belonging to a tribe isn't what's in question here. Having Native American DNA is.