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.

 

House Approves 4.6 Billion Settlement For Native Americans And Black Farmers

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
there was a call in guy on Michael Savage radio last evening (9PM) and the well manner man was
a descendent of a Black man who owned a 10,000 acre farm up near Gettysburg PA...
which the government took for little to nothing in compensation...

if true, then that single settlement should take much of that national treasure ammount

but back then acerage was expensive at $5 an acre & gold was $35 oz...so a $50,000 settlement
would have been proper for some 10k acres




posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Who qualifies for this? What if you are half native american?


...i'm sure you have to have cdib card, regardless of claimed quantum...

www.edmondsun.com...

The settlement only covers those with an open Individual Indian Money account from 1994 to 2009. Because of this, the agreement fails to cover those with grievances dating back several decades or generations.


...wheres the money coming from?... "appropriated", yep = more fake money...



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   
awesome...another problem that just has "money" thrown at it...how stupid.

By the way haven't we been handing money to native's for 100+ years? Not that I'm against helpin' them out, but if you see the way they treat the money they're given, it may make you rethink the reasons why we give it to them in the first place...they treat it like a little kids allowance that they expect to get, don't work jobs, and drop out of school because they expect this money "owed" to them...if you ask me it's not the right way to fix things with Natives and if anything just separates them even more from the rest of the country by having reservations and the such



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I am wondering why they lumped these two issues together? It seems it would have been better to treat them separately, imo.

spec



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
It seems to me that people are confusing reparations for slavery more than 150 years ago with the settlement presently being proposed by Congress. I don't think it's accidental that the right is trying to confound the situation by conflating the two together. They are actually separate issues.

I agree that it is too late to pay reparations for slavery (although descendants of slaves may justifiably feel entitled to "twenty acres and a mule" which they were promised at the time of emancipation). IMHO our changed behavior toward African Americans and Native Americans now should be just payment for past suffering.

The only problem is our behavior and our oppression toward these two groups has NOT changed adequately. The cases being handled by Congress are recent abuses of government-sponsored loans to them, going back only, say, 20 years or so according to the OP.

If ANYONE who has been damaged by another's malice, greed or stupidity can find a just remedy through our legal system today, then that is the proper course of action for African and Native Americans to take. I think their lawsuit has merit in the present time and deserves justice.

No, we are far past the point when we can recompense their ancestors for their suffering, but we sure as hell can
remedy the dishonesty and swindling that has taken place in relatively recent years.
edit on 1-12-2010 by Sestias because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Many of the African Americans are likely dead and now the courts will have to try to find out who really get the money.
Many of there kin will be fighting for years in the courts trying to divvy up the money.

As for the Native Americans i wonder who will get the money. the tribe or some crooks on the tribal council.
or will this be another case where the BIA spends(steals) the money for the benefit of the tribe. like hiring contractors to build roads at 3 times the money that the state is paying for roads right outside the tribal land with someone in the BIA getting a kickback.
www.dickshovel.com...
www.phillyimc.org...
www.dickshovel.com...$2.4billion.html

In many cases the federal government will give a tribe money on paper and just use it to offset federal money for another program like the Indian health program.



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by billb1215
 




Just to bring a different side to this-

Does our generation treat the decendants of these people the same way our ancestors treated their ancestors??...


Here is a third side.:

Is this a Trojan Horse?


Think about it for a minute. Is this a divide and conquer diversionary tactic? Is it meant to set whites and Indians and Blacks at each others throats so the RICH can steal from all of us?

In 1970 Henry Kissinger said:
Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.

Control Money - Federal Reserve Act of 1913 - Check
Control Food - S 510 passed Tuesday - Check
Control Energy - Cap & Trade - Coming to you as a Christmas present Christmas Eve

Control of you very movements - RFID tags slated next.
see T.S.A. : Birth of A Monster, Coup Against American Rights, F.E.M.A. Started and D.A.R.P.A. Finished by SpartanKingLeonidas

WHERE exactly does that money come from? - the rich??




A REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT

Mr. President, you have been so correct in resisting attempts to balance the budget by increasing taxes. The tax load on the average American family is already at counterproductive levels with the underground economy having now grown to an estimated $500 billion per year, costing about $100 billion in lost Federal tax revenues per year.

The size of the underground economy is understandable when one considers that median family income taxes have increased from $9 in 1948 to $2,218 in 1983, or by 246 times. This is runaway taxation at its worst.

Importantly, any meaningful increases in taxes from personal income would have to come from lower and middle income families, as 90 percent of all personal taxable income is generated below the taxable income level of $35,000.

Further, there isn't much more that can be extracted from high income brackets. If the Government took 100 percent of all taxable income beyond the $75,000 tax bracket not already taxed, it would get only $17 billion, and this confiscation, which would destroy productive enterprise, would only be sufficient to run the Government for seven days.

Resistance to additional income taxes would be even more widespread if people were aware that:

* One-third of all their taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government as we identified in our survey.
* Another one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken.
* With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government...
www.uhuh.com...

100% of our taxes go to pay INTEREST - to who? The BANKERS

WHO actually BENEFITS




...Plenty of money is loaned to the government but never enough. Congress needs more money than that. They say not to worry. They go further down the street to the Federal Reserve building. The Fed has been waiting for them, that's one of the reasons it was created. By the time they get inside the Federal Reserve building the officer of the Fed is opening his desk drawer. He knows they're going to be there and he's ready and he pulls out his checkbook and he writes a check to the US Treasury for one billion dollars or whatever the amount is that they need. He signs the check and gives it to the treasury official.

We need to stop here for a minute and ask a question. Where did they get a billion dollars to give to the treasury? who put that money into the account at the Federal Reserve System? The amazing answer is there is no money in the account at the Federal Reserve System. In fact, technically, there isn't even an account, there is only a checkbook. That's all. That billion dollars springs into being at precisely the instant the officer signs that check and that is called "monetizing the debt," that's the phrase they throw at you. That means they just wrote a check, a big rubber check....
www.bigeye.com...


BUT what about Government Bonds?


..they print certificates and they're very fancy things with borders on the edge with an eagle across the top and a seal at the bottom and it says "US Government Bond" or "Note" or "Bill" depending on the length of the maturity of it. If you hold it up to the light it really says "IOU" because that's what it is. They print these things up and it looks very impressive and then they offer them to the private sector; they're hoping that people will come up and loan money to the federal government and a lot of people do and are anxious to lend money to their government. Why? Because they've been told by their investment advisors that that's the most sound investment that you can make. Why? We've all heard that these loans are backed by the full faith and credit of the US government. They're not quite sure what that means but it sure sounds good. I'd like to explain for you who are in doubt what that means. The full faith and credit of the US government means that the government solemnly promises to pay back that loan plus interest if it has to take everything you and I have in the form of taxes in order to do it, it's going to do it. It will take everything we have if necessary to hold its pledge. People don't realize that they're putting themselves on the line, they're going to get their own money back minus a substantial handling fee.


So the only ones who will really benefit are the bankers who give "counterfeit money" to the government and get paid back with our wealth (labor)



The rest of us, including the minorities get handed the vaseline not only through our taxes but through the "devaluation" of the dollar.



When new money is created it does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people's bank accounts or under their mattresses. Therefore money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money

It is these losses of the groups that are the last to be reached by the variation in the value of money which ultimately constitute the source of the profits made by the bankers and the groups most closely connected with them.
Mises on Money

Did you get that? This is the key point. Newly printed fiat money does not create new wealth it just transfers it from the poor, who are always the last to the trough, to the rich.

Yes I realize some individuals will benefit, but what about the people in the city? What about the white farmers who have also been "discriminated" against?



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   
I just wanted to say thanks for all the input and some angles have been brought up that I had not considered. I also apologize for not clarifying the fact that this order is only regarding injustices done since 94 for the Native Americans and between 81-92 for the African Americans and not the entire history of both.(huge can of worms)
Where the money will go to specifically is yet to be determined for the Native Americans but the blacks will be awarded individually.
Again thanks everyone for the perspective, I don't have much to add at this point that has not already been mentioned.

spec



posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist
this order is only regarding injustices done since 94 for the Native Americans and between 81-92 for the African Americans and not the entire history of both


...hey, spec - thought that part needed repeating - because - i've noticed that lots of folks dont take the time to read the news article...



posted on Dec, 2 2010 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by speculativeoptimist
 


No surprise there. Bachmann hates Muslims and now we can add Blacks and Native Americans to the list.

She can go straight to hell!



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join