Cherokee Citizenship - David Cornsilk respones as Mike Graham Criticizes Black Caucus
publius2k
Posted By: David Cornsilk
Date: Saturday, 31 March 2007, at 11:25 a.m.
In Response To: Mike Graham Criticizes Black Caucus (Grant Perryman)
Mike Graham's diatribe against the Congressional Black Caucus would be laughable if it
were not for the fact that his half-truths and lies were not presented in such a
believeable format. Much like his hero Chad Smith, Graham is good at spinning his tales.
But here, his lies cannot stand close scrutiny. My thoughts follow his:
Is the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus Acting like the KKK and Custer over Indian
Nation vote?
March 27, 2007
Mike said:
Over two dozen members of the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus have taken it upon
themselves to fuel racial hate toward the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation over its special
election vote determining their official tribal citizenship.
David replies:
It is not the Black Caucus who draws racial ire toward the Cherokee Nation. The
destruction of the civil rights of Cherokee citizens of African descent was constructed by
Chad Smith and his cronies on the Council. The Black Caucus, and much of the U.S. and
world merely reacted to the heinous event that took place on March 3rd. Graham seems to
ask those who care about their fellow man to remain silent in the face of 1960s like
racist behavior by a government charged with protecting the rights of its citizens, not
destroying them. Genocide comes in many forms. The Cherokee Nation has perpetrated a
"paper genocide" against the Freedmen and it is uncubment upon all good men and women to
speak out against it.
Mike said:
The issue covers a group of individuals called Freedmen and Intermarried Whites who
want to include their descendants as members of the Cherokee Nation.
David replies:
While the Intermarried White section of the Dawes Roll was included in the amendment,
that was nothing more than a race-baiting smoke screen meant to provide cover for the real
attack on the black Cherokees. The descendants of the Intermarried Whites, having been
married to Cherokees, thus being called "Intermarried" appear on the by blood section of
the Dawes Rolls. Thus, excluding that section of the Roll does not exclude anyone. The
whole purpose of the recently adopted amendment was to rid the Cherokee Nation of its
Freedmen, plain and simple.
Mike said:
These Freedmen are not related to a Cherokee citizen by blood as listed on the
nation's official rollbook.
David replies:
Mr. Graham has obviously done no genealogical research on the Cherokees if he thinks
the Freedmen listed on the Dawes Rolls are not related to Cherokees by blood. There are
examples of siblings being divided, some placed on the by blood roll, others on the
Freedmen Roll and all having the same parents. Even the illustrious family of former
Oklahoma House Speaker Larry Adair and former Congressman Brad Carson have blood kin
connections to Freedmen families. Chad Smith himself is blood kin to large numbers of
Freedmen. They are our family.
Mike said:
It should be noted that the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus itself is a "Black race
only" segregated caucus. They're made up of 43 federally elected representatives. Members
of the caucus state that the group should remain "exclusively black." According to
sources, Congressman Pete Stark, D-Calif., (who is White) tried and failed to join the
caucus in 1975. He was reportedly denied membership because he is not Black. Stark still
serves today in the U.S. House of Representatives.
David replies:
The Black Caucus is and should remain comprised of black members. Imagine the
destruction of the purpose of the CBC if it were open to non-blacks. Just the same as the
Native American Congressional Caucus must be comprised of only Native Americans. The
minority issues addressed by these groups cannot move forward if they are subject to the
whims of groups of whites who could and would invade their ranks, dilute their mission and
even destroy their existance. Those who seek to caucus with minorities are free to do so.
And for those, perhaps like Mike, who might say "where is the white caucus," I say, look
around you. America is the white man's caucus.
Mike said:
Fast forward to 2006. Now freshman Rep. Stephen I. Cohen, D-Tn, who is White, pledged
to apply to the Black caucus for membership during his election campaign to represent his
constituents, who are reported to be around 60% black. It was reported that although the
bylaws of the caucus do not make race a prerequisite for membership, former and current
members of the Caucus agreed that the group should remain "exclusively black."
David replies:
More race baiting by Mike. Mike is a black man with a thin strain of Cherokee blood.
He gets to be a citizen of the Cherokee Nation at the suffrage of the full bloods and
higher degree Cherokees. He takes this priviledge for granted, but like the Freedmen, he
too may find himself on the outside looking in when his fight for a "blood" requirement in
the Cherokee Nation rises up to bite him in the backside.
Mike said:
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, without consultation with Cherokee Nation
elected representatives, have signed and sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Interior,
demanding the department intervene over the sovereign Cherokee Nation special election
citizenship vote.
David replies:
The leadership of the Cherokee Nation who support destruction of the rights of their
own citizens have deligitimized their own status. There is no need to consult with men and
women who have made their racist positions clear. Smith and his minion have had every
opportunity to present their case, and they have done so eloquently. They support the
racist view that Cherokees of African descent listed on the Freedmen Roll are not welcome
in the Cherokee Nation. Once the leadership of a rogue administration have committed their
acts of genocide, those who think and act right are no longer required to consider their
views. The only thing that matters following is to right the wrong. When P.W. Botha took a
brutish and violent stand against the rights of blacks in South Africa, he delagitimzed
his own government and the word reacted. No one consulted with him. Governments, as in the
case of the Black Caucus asserting their own vested authority, must take action regardless
of the views of the leadership.
Mike said:
Without hesitation the U.S. Black Congressional Caucus called into question
restrictions of federal funds and appropriations to the American Indian community to
include the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation. In doing so, the U.S. Congressional Black caucus
members are going straight for Indians' jugular veins, specifically targeting their
economic well being as U.S. citizens and concerning their sovereign nation's voting
rights.
David replies:
And well they should go for the jugular. The Cherokee Nation, as Mike so eloquently
points out, is a sovereign nation. Whether or not we agree with the actions of the Nation
to commit this genocide against the Freedmen, all can agree the right to do so exists. But
like all sovereign nations, there is a reward or price for their actions. The United
States, in its government to government relationship with the Cherokee Nation provides a
good deal of financial assistance. And much like other rogue nations that have harmed
their own citizens, it is uncumbant upon the United States to use its financial muscle,
rather than force, to rectify these wrongs. The Cherokee Nation has taken a sovereign
stand, asserting the might of the majority over a harmless and innocent minority. The
Cherokee Nation must now reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of that action, like
any sovereign would. Stop whining Mike. All the Black Caucus is asking the U.S. to do is
affirm the sovereignty of the Cherokee Nation by treating like it would any rogue
government, stop paying for it.
Mike said:
Not only did the U.S. Congressional Black caucus fail to correspond with Cherokee
Nation leaders, they did not consult on the issue with the U.S. Congressional Indian
Caucus, which has over 100 racially mixed members. They also failed to request input from
the National Congress of American Indians, which represent over 300 American Indian
Nations, concerning their sovereignty rights.
David replies:
The Indian Caucus could make their own presentation to the BIA. They have remained
strangely silent. Perhaps because the people being disenrolled are of mixed African/Indian
descent, the Indian Caucus, themselves being of mixed White/Indian descent, don't feel any
affinity with the disfranchised Cherokees. This is America where freedom of speech and
freedom of conscience reign. We should applaud the Black Caucus for the risks they have
taken to protect the rights of Cherokees. And we should decry the silence of the Indian
Caucus because only when there is silence can evil find a home. And the National Congress
of American Indians is just as culpible. They have been asked on numerous occassions to
make a statement. They too, have remained mysteriously silent. The silence of these two
very powerful Indian advocacy groups brings into question whether they believe that it is
okay to destroy the rights and lives of the citizens of indigenous governments, or even
worse, that its okay to destroy the rights and lives of citizens of indigenous governments
just because they have African ancestry. Which is it boys?
Mikes said:
The Congressional Black Caucus is pandering to the Freedman group concerning their
rights to full citizenship within the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation.
David replies:
Pandering? How? None of the Black Caucus members represent the areas of the U.S. where
Freedmen reside (Oklahoma). Pandering is one of those buzz words used to discredit
politicians when they do something to help a group and those against it don't like it.
Whether its pandering or representing depends upon which side of the issue you land on. If
its pandering that will protect the rights of Cherokee citizens, I say pander on my
brothers and sisters in Congress, we need your help.
Mike said:
The Cherokee Nation was forced to sign onto an 1866 treaty written by and for the
federal government.
David replies:
The Cherokee Nation was NOT forced to sign that treaty. Federal recognition was at
stake. We had made war against the United States and relinquished our recognition. The
Cherokee Nation could have simply said, no, we don't want federal recognition. But the
consequences would have been a total loss of control of lands and governance and a
relegation of the Cherokee Nation to a social club. And perhaps that is what has happened
by excluding the Freedmen. The Cherokee Nation has declared itself to be nothing more than
a social club made up of persons of like mind. We have voluntarily abrogated the Treaty of
1866, thus jeopardizing our federal recognition.
Mike said:
Part of the treaty covered runaway black slaves associated with Cherokee people.
David replies:
Mike is either ignorant of the Treaty of 1866 or he is intentionally distorting the
truth. The word "runaway slave" never appears in that treaty. The people he is probably
referring to are "free blacks" residing in the Cherokee Nation at the commencement of the
Civil War. These were not just any "free blacks." They were people who were Cherokee
Indians with negro ancestry who had been denied their rights of citizenship because of
their negro ancestry. The belief at the time of the Treaty was that negro blood so tainted
any other ancestry as to make the person "nothing but black." In order to uncomplicate the
status of these Cherokee Indians of negro descent, the writers of the Treaty called them
"free blacks" thus forever bringing into question who they really were. Freedmen President
Marilyn Vann's own ancestors, the children of Cherokee Indian woman Katherine Fields, were
classed as Free Blacks and were dumped onto the Freedmen section of the Dawes Rolls
despite their Cherokee blood ancestry. Mike apparently has no problem punishing those
living today for the racism practiced against their ancestors 100 years ago.
Mike said:
The treaty gave members of the so-called Freedman Group full citizenship within the
nation whether they had Indian heritage by blood or not. This action amounted to one
nation dictating to another sovereign nation. History shows that the federal government
went out of its way to trash and forget the 1866 treaty.
David replies:
The Treaty of 1866 is the ONLY Treaty the United States did not trash and forget. It
is the treaty that defines the boundaries of the Cherokee Nation, still used today by the
BIA and the tribe. The provisions of the Treaty were enforced and often paid for
throughout the 20th Century in a series of lawsuits, one that brought the Cherokees $14
million dollars in per capita payments in 1963. Its easy to point an accusatory finger at
the United States, it is guilty of breaking treaties. But not this time. And it is
important to the integrity of the United States that it enforce the Treaty of 1866 to
protect the rights of ALL Cherokee citizens.
Mike said:
The federal government abandoned the 1866 treaty completely when it dissolved the
Cherokee Nation Government and other tribal nations.
David replies:
Mike needs to learn a little more history. The Cherokee Nation was NEVER dissolved.
The 1906 Five Civilized Tribes Act continued the governments of the FCT in full force and
effect. Just about a year ago, the FCTs celebrated that act as being the rocket that
catapulted them into the present time and existance. The attempted disolution of the
Cherokee government had little to do with the Treaty of 1866. But one important point did.
The Treaty made clear that allottment and closing of the tribal government would be
voluntary. When the United States put to a vote whether the Cherokee Nation would be
allotted and the government dissolved, Mike's ancestors voted yes, as did a majority of
the thin blood Cherokees and intermarried whites. On the other hand, the full bloods
refused to participate. The real champions of the effort to save the Cherokee Nation were
the Freedmen, who voted NO.
Mike said:
In 1906, in anticipation of Oklahoma statehood, the federal government unilaterally
dissolved Indian Nations' sovereign governments.
David replies:
Again, wrong Mike, learn some history.
Mike said:
This action from the federal government brought about the U.S. takeover of Indian
Territory land now called the state of Oklahoma.
David replies:
The federal government already had control of the Indian Territory. The tribes were
and are domestic dependent nations. Our status is dependent upon federal recognition.
Without it, we are just a social club.
Mike said:
Later, Indian nations reestablished their sovereign government, and tribal citizenship
was set up on the Dawes Rolls Act 1887. The Freedman Group and intermarried Whites were
set up on a separate roll list. Indian nations maintained their own sovereign official
rollbook by blood quantum.
David replies:
OMG, what a bunch of garbage. The United States dictated through the 1906 Act that the
citizenship rolls of the FCT be closed forever. The chiefs of the tribes would be
appointed by the President and Congress could deem at anytime to finish the business of
the tribes and close their governments forever. Membership in the Cherokee Nation was
since 1906 and has ever since been determined by having an ancestor on the Dawes Rolls.
The Freedmen DO HAVE ancestors on that roll. The mere fact that the roll was segregated
does not negate their rights or the fact that their ancestors were Dawes enrollees. The
Cherokee Nation has NEVER kept a "blood roll" as Mike asserts. Since 1976, there has been
a registry of descendants of Dawes enrollees. Freedmen descendants were registered in the
Cherokee Nation, voted in the elections and fully participated in Cherokee life right up
to 1983, when they were unlawfully exluded by Ross Swimmer. Blood quantum is a federal
function exercised through the issuance of a Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood card.
That card does not constitute citizenship/membership. The fact that the BIA interprets the
1947 FCT Act to mean they cannot issue cards to Freedmen is false. In the past, the BIA
has issued proof of descent documents to members/citizens of the FCTs when no blood
quantum was records. These documents are known as Certificate of Indian descent. Even
descendants of the Adopted Whites have been able to obtain these sorts of documents, but
not the Freedmen. One has wonder what the mitigating factor was and is to prevent this.
Could it be negro ancestry? NO, say it ain't so.
Mike said:
Indian descendants today have to prove their tribal citizenship through a family
member listed on the official tribal nations' rollbook by blood linkage. Anyone of another
race claiming Indian heritage today has to prove their blood linkage to a family member
listed on the official Indian nation rollbook.
David replies:
The recently adopted amendment does appear to demand blood for membership in the
Cherokee Nation. However, this is not a correct assesment of the wording of that
provision. The amendment only demands that the applicant have an ancestor on the "by
blood" section of the Dawes Rolls. Since there are a number of Adopted Whites on that
section, the amendment has not had the curative impact the racists in our tribe had
claimed. They did not achieve an "all Indian tribe" but instead have created a social
organization of like minded individuals, some of Indian descent, some totally caucasian.
The real achievement, the fruition of the grand scheme was the removal of the descendants
of the slaves of the Cherokees, whether they had Cherokee blood or not.
Mike said:
In my opinion, the Congressional Black Caucus has chosen to revisit past U.S.
Holocaust policies used against the American Indian community. The caucus members are
overstepping their elected positions in threatening to cut funding of Indian health
programs, housing, Indian children's educational programs and Indian elderly programs.
This is a flash back to the dark days of Custer and Black Buffalo Soldiers raging across
America destroying Indian men, women and children any way they could. The caucus should
remember what happened to Custer!
David replies:
Actually, as I stated earlier, the Black Caucus is respecting the sovereign rights of
both the Cherokee Nation and the United States. It is through the government to government
relationship, usually via some sort of cash flow, that a force for good can overcome a
force for evil. The U.S. offers financial incentives to rogue nations in order to bring
them into line with the popularly accepted practices of human and civil rights. The
Cherokee Nation has placed itself among those rogue nations and there is a price to pay.
The U.S., through its popularly elected officials, has the right to embargo sovereign
governments when they act out. The Cherokee Nation has clearly acted out and is deserving
of all the recognition of its sovereignty a trade and funding embargo can bring.
Mike said:
Government bounties were offered for scalps of American Indians. A "savage" pricing
scale was set up covering prices to be paid for the scalps of Indian men, women and
children. It's not a stretch to say those taking part in the government's Indian scalping
policy were the true founding fathers of anti-American hate groups, such as the KKK.
David replies:
This doesn't even make sense. Stick to the issues Mike, historic blathering that has
no real application just muddy the waters.
Mike said:
The Congressional Black Caucus members have disgraced themselves as elected members of
the U.S. House of Representatives. Without regard to their American Indian constituent’s
well-being as citizens of this country by federal law, they are focused on putting Indian
Nation's governments back in their 1800's place.
David replies:
The CBC are not the ones in disgrace. It is the Cherokee Nation and her citizens who
should be feeling the sting of disgrace. But the leadership of the Cherokee Nation,
unrepentent for their evil deeds are without shame. Much like Hitler, Stalin, Botha, Chad
Smith and other leaders who justify genocide for the sake of unity, purity, economic
development, in the name of the STATE, cannot feel shame, because they have no conscience.
What about the well being of the Freedmen descendants, who have been citizens of the
Cherokee Nation for 140 years and present in the Nation since long before the Trail of
Tears. It is not the CBC who takes the Cherokee Nation backward. Racism is an antiquated
and hurtful philosophy rooted in the past, but living in our present. It is our future
that is at stake. The Cherokee Nation is a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic population. The
Freedmen are an integral part of the population. We cannot move forward as a Nation
without them.
Mike said:
All of this is happening because American Indians are exercising their right to
self-govern themselves under their Tribal Nations' sovereignty rights. Who can and cannot
be a member of an Indian Nation is up to the people of that Indian Nation, not the federal
or state governments. American citizens are united in telling the federal government's
elected members to stop threatening to eliminate Indian Nations' sovereignty rights and
social program funding! They are U.S. citizens and voting tax-payers too!
David replies:
Much of this is true and exactly why it is the duty of the United States and all right
thinking people to condemn the vote to destroy the Freedmen. Sovereignty of the Cherokee
Nation demands that it be treated like a sovereign nation and suffer the consquences of
its actions. The United States cannot justify this kind of racism and most certainly
cannot use the hard earned tax dollars of the CBC and the Freedmen (who are taxpayers too)
in order to fund a rogue government bent on destroying its own citizens.
Mike said:
The U.S. Congressional Black Caucus is missing in action when it comes to "real"
national American Indian issues. Where is their "Black caucus anger and outrage"
concerning the Indian Land Trust Fund issue? Over "100 billion dollars stolen". The
federal government says it's just missing and has been looking for it for over 100 years.
A lawsuit case has been before a U.S. Court for over a decade. The federal government
controls the Indian trust fund money. The federal government today is offering individual
Indians involved in the lawsuit around 8 billion dollars and call it even. There's been no
jail time or accounting over the years of where the other "92 billion dollars" went and to
whom.
A resolution has been before the U.S. House of Representatives for years calling for
an official apology from the federal government over its misguided policies against
American Indians. The word Holocaust was not allowed on the resolution, and to date the
resolution has not passed. The U.S. Congressional Black Caucus is missing in action again.
The caucus was silent in past years when the Native Hawaiian government's recognition
bill failed to pass. There was no press release from the group stating their outrage. For
several years a resolution has been before the U.S. Congress calling for a federal Native
American Day holiday. It has been passed over each year. Health, education and poverty
issues concern Native Americans. Again the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus is missing in
action.
David replies:
Most of the above is false. The CBC have long been staunch supporters of Native
American initiatives. Their voting record proves that. Indian Nations have depended upon
the CBC to support health and education funding to the tribes and to defeat bills that
threaten the sovereignty of the indigenous governments.
Mike said:
The Caucus’ knee-jerk reaction to the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation's citizenship voting
issue has fueled numerous national media reports and Internet postings calling Indians
"racist and bigots." Their action plays into the hands of anti-Indian groups like One
Nation United, and KKK members. Their tactics are one and the same one way or another,
fear mongering, and calling for an end to Indian Nations sovereignty rights. Indian
children are having to deal with this racial hate being directed toward them.
David replies:
The Cherokee Nation has brought the ire of America upon ourselves by voting in favor
of a constitutional amendment that destroys the lives of our fellow Cherokee citizens. If
we are bigots, then let the world recognize it and condemn it. It was Chad Smith and his
minion who promoted fear mongering among the Cherokee people as they lied time and time
again about the Freedmen in order to get the vote results they wanted. Much like Hitler's
propoganda campaigns against the Jews, Smith's propoganda campaign against the Freedmen
could have been lifted straight from the pages of Nazi history.
Mike said:
Some African Americans have made it a point to frame the Cherokee Nation's citizenship
issue as racist. Cherokee Nation Chief Chad Smith has stated his willingness to discuss
the facts and merits that brought about the special election vote. The nation's citizen's
vote set a start and correct equalized tribal citizenship for all that proved their
Cherokee blood line to the Nation’s official rollbook. Tribal council members were
available as well for information concerning the vote. Federal and state representatives
and heads of organizations around the country chose not to speak to Chief Chad Smith and
tribal council members, they went straight to the nation's media groups blasting Indian
people over their nation's citizenship vote.
David replies:
Again, Smith and company have deligitimized themselves. There was and is NO need to
speak to them about this issue. They have made their position clear, it is wrong and the
only thing left is to rectify it by any means necessary and lawful. Suffering the
consequences of a sovereign nation gone bad is the only way to resolve this issue. The
United States MUST assert its own sovereignty by withdrawing recognition and funding for
the Cherokee Nation until the Nation stops hurting its own citizens.
Mike said:
The 2008 election is on its way. Presidential candidates and their staff members
better take American Indian History 101. American Indians will be at the voting booth in
severe large numbers.
David replies:
I'm still laughing at this one. I seriously don't think 1.2 million Native Americans
constitute a "severe" number of voters. We Indian people are the minorities minority. And
in the Freedmen, we had every opportunity to expand our influence and bring in greater
support. I suggest Mike take a closer look at the numbers. African Americans constitute
"severe large numbers" and when the Cherokees and other tribes must defend their status as
sovereigns because of what Chad Smith and company have done, we should remember the one
man, Chad Smith, who brought this upon us.
Mike said:
As a citizen of the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation I have called and discussed the issue of
the Cherokee Nation's citizenship vote with U.S. Congressional Black Caucus
representatives' staff. I can tell you their knowledge of American Indian issues can be
compared to the ABC TV show "Lost".
David replies:
Well Mike, I think you could join them on that lost island. Your knowledge of the true
history of the Freedmen, Treaty of 1866 and the Cherokee Nation generally is sorely
lacking. Or could it be that Mike is telling lies about the issue to do what Chad Smith
has done for months, generate fear and hatred toward the Cherokee Nation in an effort to
cover for what the Cherokee people have themselves done. It was our vote, our assertion of
the sovereignty of our Nation to impose the will of the majority upon an innocent
minority. I've said before, and it cannot be said too many times, "just because we can,
does not mean we should."
Mike said:
America! The country will not come full circle till the people elect an American
Indian as president of this U.S.A. America's history began with the American Indians!
David replies:
Just being some degree of Indian does make one a loyalist to Indian people. The
history of our nations is riddled with traitors. And in case Mike does not remember, a Kaw
Indian served as the vice-president of the United States. He was but one heart beat away
from the presidency. Yet he, like so many Indian traitors before him, did little to truly
help Indian people and in fact, used his position to help destroy the rights of tribes.
Does anyone recall the Curtis Act?
Mike said:
More Cherokee Nation history: Long before the treaty of 1866 there was this one.
The treaty of 1785 between the Cherokee people and the Confederation Congress of the
United States in 1785: This treaty sought to end hostilities between the Cherokees and the
U.S. government and establish exclusive territory on which the Cherokee people would
reside.
David replies:
And Mike obviously does not even know that in 1785 the Cherokee Nation had already
become a multi-ethnic population with citizens who were white, black and other Indian. A
black woman named Molly was adopted into the Cherokee Nation by the Deer Clan. When a
white woman tried to take her away as a slave, the Cherokee Supreme Court rules that she,
by her adoption into the Deer Clan, had become a Native Cherokee. That is what adoption
means; its permanent. Anyone who would like to read more about Molly should read Tiya
Miles book, "Ties That Bind."
Mike said:
Ely S. Parker: Seneca-Iroquois Indian, was born in 1828. The U.S. Civil War surrender
documents are in his hand writing. Lieutenant Colonel Ely S. Parker was present when
General Robert E. Lee surrendered at Appomattox, and the surrender documents are in his
handwriting. Grant was bad at spelling and penmanship. After exchanging small talk, Lee
and Grant began drafting the articles of surrender for the Confederate Army. Once the
generals had agreed on conditions, Parker was directed to draft two copies of the articles
of surrender for signatures. Then General Lee while shaking hands with Parker said "I am
glad to see one real American here." Parker accepted the proffered handshake, responding,
"We are all Americans here."
Although Ely Parker is best known for his role in drafting the terms of surrender that
ended the U.S. Civil War, his life's work was far greater than that single act. He
attained the rank of brigadier-general and during Grant's presidency, served as
Commissioner of Indian Affairs. He is buried in Forest Lawn Cemetery in Buffalo NY.
David replies:
Again Mike, this is just irrelavent history and has nothing to do with the issues at
hand.
http://www.afrigeneas.com/forume/index.cgi?noframes;read=15284
--
Said American [Indian] Chieftain Acuera in reply to
the invader de Soto's demand for submission to
the king and the church so as to 'enjoy the benefits
of 'civilization' and service:
"I have long since learned who you [European Christians] are,
through others of you who came years ago to my land;
and I already know very well what your customs and
behavior are like. To me you are professional
vagabonds who wander from place to place,
gaining your livelihood by robbing, sacking and
murdering people who have given you no offense.
... Accordingly, I and all of my people have vowed
to die a hundred deaths to maintain the freedom
of our land. This is our answer, both
for the present and forevermore."
-- "Florida of the Inca" (1591)
by El Inca [aka Garcilaso de la Vega]
- First American Author to be published.