It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Landmark Supreme Court Ruling Affirms Native American Rights in Oklahoma

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I wouldn't worry to much, the US government doesn't have a good record of honoring treaties with Native Americans.

Eastern OK is safe.

newrepublic.com...
edit on 10-7-2020 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Guiltyguitarist
I thought the Indians owned America, because they were here first. The U.S. Government is in no position to give them what they already rightfully own.



Actually to an extent true but what of the Caucasoid skull, marked as Caucasoid by it's square aviator glasses shaped eye socket's and other bone structure and teeth that was found in a cave during an excavation in the southern US in a layer that would date it far older than the supposed occupation of human being's such as the Mongolian ancestors of the native American's that crossed the bearing straits land bridge during the last glacial maximum, did the ancestors of the current native American's wipe out these probably proto European/American's or are they also there ancestor's, either way we shall never know because much as in New Zealand the Native population have agreement's and laws in place were that skull then had to be turned over to them for tribal burial.

What happened to the native people's was disgusting, many but NOT most of the US white population are descended from thug's and murderers that raped, murdered and stole that land - BUT remember most US citizens' are from people that arrived long after that began and even while it was happening they were back east so had nothing to do with it.

Also perversely many if not most of those that were the first settlers that raped, murdered and robbed also had some NATIVE American ancestry themselves since the settlers back east had intermarried with the tribes there - also you must remember an inordinately high number of German's moved to the US and many of those that committed the atrocity's were actually of German descent rather than English or Irish or French or what have you.

And if Soul's are reincarnated, I do not believe or accept that but it may be true for some, then were do you think those native American's are today?.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

What I don't get is the Yanks let the Mexicans and Canadians have their own lands................... Why not let the Indians have some to?



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:44 AM
link   
What about the countless other tribes who lost land?



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: LABTECH767

What I don't get is the Yanks let the Mexicans and Canadians have their own lands................... Why not let the Indians have some to?



They gave them Indian land.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:46 AM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

existing thread on topic.
edit on 01032020 by ElGoobero because: add content



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:46 AM
link   
What about the tribes that were erased by other tribes, how do we right that wrong?



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Actually I agree, in fact I have a hatred for those that committed those atrocity's but I don't like it being shoved in my face or yours or anyone else when in fact we have nothing to do with those long dead people that did those thing's.

But a list of crimes, Indian skin wallet's, Indian bone knives, some cavalry soldiers wearing Indian woman's dried ovary's as tassels.

I believe also that the native population have faces for far too long discrimination and persecution in there own birth land.

So yes they do deserve what is there's, I am actually glad they have had a tiny measure of justice here but let's see if they get back what belongs to them or if the US government will over rule and uphold the theft of those land's and the breaking of treatise that occurred against a people whom had already lost almost everything they once owned.

So in fact I am for the rule of law on this and also for the right's of those people but remember two wrong's never make a right so let's hope this turn's out best for everyone - except the real scum bag's, also remember the guy that brought this case had been convicted of rape and if he was actually guilty is it right that it may lead to his conviction being quashed if that is the case?.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Lysergic

At least they got some too
We are a tiny island crammed in like sardines and we still let the Wesh and SCots have some lands, looking at the size of America there must be enough space to share it out



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lysergic
What about the tribes that were erased by other tribes, how do we right that wrong?


Very good point, ever land was invaded by someone else, go back in time over here in England and you will find the beaker people (the English version) living here and they probably displaced someone even earlier then they were displaced by later invaders and they were then displaced by still later invaders but some of the genetic legacy of those earlier peoples still exists today among the modern population.

The same is true in the US, many whom think they are white descendants of settlers and also many that think they are black descendants of slaves have been found to have native American ancestry when genetic analysis has been done, it is not a high percentage but it is enough to ensure that all American's will one day be able to claim to have native ancestry and that is even more so true as the native population intermarries today and continues to do so with the newer population healing the rift over time so that there ancestors join hand's through there descendant's even if they did not do so when alive.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: LABTECH767

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Guiltyguitarist
I thought the Indians owned America, because they were here first. The U.S. Government is in no position to give them what they already rightfully own.

Actually to an extent true but what of the Caucasoid skull, marked as Caucasoid by it's square aviator glasses shaped eye socket's and other bone structure and teeth that was found in a cave during an excavation in the southern US in a layer that would date it far older than the supposed occupation of human being's such as the Mongolian ancestors of the native American's that crossed the bearing straits land bridge during the last glacial maximum,
Can you cite that, please? Also that whole Bering land bridge thing is yesterday's news.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

As long as the Indians also respect that the Yanks Canadians Mexicans have the right to live there to everything is all cool. There so much land over there it would be greedy too consume all of it at the expense of another tribe of people. Plenty more room for more people too.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

I can not I read it a long time ago but I am sure you are familiar with the case even if you dismiss it, the story if I remember was from the southern states either California or one of the other's but the skull had features of caucasian skull's such as the square eye sockets and nasal cavity that are absent or different in the native Indian population whom as you know have a more mongoloid characteristic with often more round eye socket's and wider nasal cavity's etc.

They could not do more research or carbon date (not that carbon dating is terribly accurate anyway but it would have helped to determine if it was ancient or more recent) it because native people had taken offence to the removal of this ancient burial and demanded it be returned to them for proper burial in there tradition's.

And they have a point, what right to Europeans have to dig up ancient people and disturb there rest in that way.

And how is the baring strait story old news, have you replaced it with the ancient European's (though at that time they were more mongoloid as well) that are thought to have crossed via the frozen ocean's during the ice age from western Europe or do you accept that there were several waves of migration to the America's (which in context makes the current settling just another wave) and so many native American's likely have ancestry dating back to not just two (or more) baring strait's migrations as was the old model with them fighting off short faced man eating bears but also to possible other migrant's that made there way there in other way's such as sea voyagers.

edit on 10-7-2020 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I wonder how many white people are going to pull the "my great great grandmother was a Cherokee/Choctaw Indian " card?


I know there is a million of you.

edit on 10-7-2020 by galaga because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
I can not I read it a long time ago but I am sure you are familiar with the case even if you dismiss it, the story if I remember was from the southern states either California or one of the other's but the skull had features of caucasian skull's such as the square eye sockets and nasal cavity that are absent or different in the native Indian population whom as you know have a more mongoloid characteristic with often more round eye socket's and wider nasal cavity's etc.
They could not do more research or carbon date (not that carbon dating is terribly accurate anyway but it would have helped to determine if it was ancient or more recent) it because native people had taken offence to the removal of this ancient burial and demanded it be returned to them for proper burial in there tradition's.

I suspect you're talking about Kennewick Man. If you dig around, you'll see how the Umilla Chemical Depot also figures into the politics of this case.
And if you take a look around, you will see that the peopling of the Americas is looking at sucesssive waves, including some from the south. Oh, and not only is radiocarbon dating pretty darn good, it is also used with other methods to get us pretty firm dates.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust
I think you are wrong! If you search in history when discussing ownership of the land (this is how white people got the land in the first place) the native Americans always said no one owned the land, it was just used by the people there and it was in their care. So no they've never owned the land. Aint it a bitch when something like that comes to bite you back.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: LABTECH767

What I don't get is the Yanks let the Mexicans and Canadians have their own lands................... Why not let the Indians have some to?


Your are right on Mexico. Canada repelled us at least twice. We sent Daniel Morgan during the Revolution and the US attacked again during the War of 1812. Neither time was Canada a free country as they are now. The British were using Canada to launch attacks and buy the Native American's guns they could hardly use compared to seasoned fighters.

That was the end of Native American War Councils with combined tribes until the Lakota sacked Custer's 7th. As they were helping the British for years leading up to 1812, the Americans were forced to remove them to Oklahoma or kill them all to end the terror from bands of Indian tribes going rogue. Genocide was nearly what the Trail of Tears was and my wife has family that survived. They hate Andrew Jackson, whose job it was to secure safety from the British and the Natives.
edit on 10-7-2020 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Sorry I accept your point but as for Radio Carbon dating, no it is not as good as you think, oh the isotopic decay curve is pretty damned accurate but only up to a certain point and the older you get the less accurate it becomes, not because of the Original Carbon 14 isotopic material but because we live on a living planet and fresh Carbon 14 can be deposited by everything from bacteria to wind blown dust and water seepage carrying this.

Usually caves are pretty damp places.

You will find that were carbon 14 is not naturally present such as some stone artefacts it is usually arrived at a dating by analysing other nearby artefacts, ashes or other material contemporary to the layer were that artefact is found but when that is not possible attempt's have been made to use other isotopes such as Argon Krypton dating were specific atmospheric isotopes can then have there radioactive level analysed with some accuracy but this only work's with any degree of accuracy were those stone artefacts have both been exposed to the atmosphere (so not buried) and also sheltered from erosion since there is little point trying to affix a date to a stone artefact that has had it's surface eroded away by this method.

But radioactive decay analysis is based on the OLD view that the universe is fixed and followed perfectly predictable law's, enter the quantum realm and it all becomes a bit more smoky and less reliable, then there is the reaction of isotopic element's to variable background radiation and how this may alter there dating, for example try dating some artefacts from a nuclear test site or inside a nuclear reactor, it is for us in our microcosmic view of the universe however still the best tool for dating unknowns we have at our disposal.

The Correct term is actually NOT Carbon 14 dating though that is accurate to the specific field most usually used in Archaeological circles but rather Radiometric dating is the more accurate term though it is the umbrella title for all isotopic dating.

Still I think you may be correct as to the case so once again thank you for the correction, still I accept your point and think you are correct in this case.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 06:32 PM
link   
if israel can get their land back after 1900 years being off it, why not the native americans? they were only kicked off less than 200 years ago.



posted on Jul, 10 2020 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: stormson

The MEEK shall inherit the world.

I doubt that means' warrior's or land thieves.

Race does not come into it were God is concerned except were he gave Jacob and his descendant's the holy land for all generations.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join