For centuries, Native Americans have been on the receiving end of some of the worst atrocities committed on U.S. soil, driven from their homes and isolated on impoverished reservations. How can the U.S. government begin to repair the damage done to Native American communities, and compensate in some small way for the injuries done to them?
Well, giving back Mount Rushmore would be a start.
That's among several suggestions made by United Nations special rapporteur James Anaya, who will formally recommend the U.S. restore land previously owned by various tribes — including the Black Hills of South Dakota, home of the famous national monument.
The granite promontory, carved with 60-ft high visages of four U.S. presidents, sits on a site considered sacred by the Sioux. . .
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/05/09/should-the-u-s-give-mount-rushmore-back-to-the-sioux-the-u-n-thinks-so/?hpt=hp_t2#ixzz1uO5cHbzo (http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/05/09/should-the-u-s-give-mount-rushmore-back-to-the-sioux-the-u-n-thinks-so/?hpt=hp_t2#ixzz1uO5cHbzo)
So, if the repugnican party wants to cut government spending, how about giving back what this country stole from Native Americans? That would eliminate the upkeep and maintenance costs within the national park system!
I wonder what the tribe would do with the land and the monument if it were given back to them.
I think the debate would center around whether it should stay as a money-maker or be blown up as an ugly desecration of sacred ground.
Quote from: followsthewolf on May 09, 2012, 12:21:44 PM
I think the debate would center around whether it should stay as a money-maker or be blown up as an ugly desecration of sacred ground.
Exactly. However, I am thinking that the money will be too much of a temptation to pass up. Like the casinos, it would be used as a means to generate income. At least in part.
It also might depend upon the exact location of the sacred grounds in the area. Knowing how the US has pretty much done things to eradicate all things sacred to Native Americans, I'd almost bet that those faces reside upon a key location. . .
The Taliban blew up those religious statues in Afghanistan, you don't think that this could happen our Presidents statues and be destroyed too. The religious bigots are capable of doing anything in the name of their god. Even if the god is mother earth. :yes: :yes: NO, NO, they can't have Mount Rushmore.
If this is true, then we should give back Afghanistan to the Taliban. Right? :wink: Just saying. :rolleyes:
Native Americans have a long history in the Black Hills.
After conquering the Cheyenne in 1776, the Lakota took over the territory of the Black Hills, which became central to their culture. In 1868, the U.S. government signed the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868, exempting the Black Hills from all white settlement forever. However, when European Americans discovered gold there in 1874, as a result of George Armstrong Custer's Black Hills Expedition, erstwhile miners swept into the area in a gold rush.
The US government re-assigned the Lakota, against their wishes, to other reservations in western South Dakota. Unlike most of South Dakota, the Black Hills were settled by European Americans primarily from population centers to the west and south of the region, as miners flocked there from earlier gold boom locations in Colorado and Montana.. . . (Wiki)
The US in recent years has offered to compensate the tribes for the possession of the Black Hills area, but the tribes refused the money, saying they want the lands taken from them back.
Won't go into my reasons for feeling this way but I think it should be given back.
Quote from: me on May 09, 2012, 01:21:02 PM
Won't go into my reasons for feeling this way but I think it should be given back.
If that's you opinion, then we should give back Southern California, Texas and Arizona back to the Mexicans, Hawaii back to the Hawaiians. Right? Just saying. :rolleyes:
Quote from: The Troll on May 09, 2012, 02:11:39 PM
If that's you opinion, then we should give back Southern California, Texas and Arizona back to the Mexicans, Hawaii back to the Hawaiians. Right? Just saying. :rolleyes:
I actually am following your logic on this one Troll.
I just read the article. The UN should not be involved in it in any way shape or form.
Quote from: me on May 09, 2012, 04:21:43 PM
I just read the article. The UN should not be involved in it in any way shape or form.
What makes you think they would be involved in any eventual decision? They won't be. They have no jurisdiction.
Quote from: Locutus on May 09, 2012, 05:41:07 PM
What makes you think they would be involved in any eventual decision? They won't be. They have no jurisdiction.
I was reading in my UAW newsletter the "Solidarity" that one of our members donated to the Joseph's Indian School regularly and she received a "Dream Catcher" an easily recognized Native American symbol as a gift. Since this school in South Dakota she thought the Dream Catcher was made at the school or the tribe made it. :doh:
Guess what, IT WAS MADE IN CHINA! Damn they got our Indians buy shit from China. :rolleyes: :rant: :haha: It would be funny if is wasn't so damn serious. :trustme:
Quote from: Locutus on May 09, 2012, 05:41:07 PM
What makes you think they would be involved in any eventual decision? They won't be. They have no jurisdiction.
QuoteIn a 12-day fact-finding mission, Anaya visited tribes from Oklahoma to Oregon and Alaska to South Dakota to gauge the impact of the U.N.'s proposed Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which President Barack Obama said in December 2010 that the U.S. plans to sign. In his findings, which he'll present to the U.N.'s Human Rights Council in September, he says that restoring land would prove the biggest step in providing reconciliation for the tribes. Some of the land most sought by the various tribes includes the Black Hills.
Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/05/09/should-the-u-s-give-mount-rushmore-back-to-the-sioux-the-u-n-thinks-so/?hpt=hp_t2#ixzz1uRPJbgyt
You may not agree with me on this but if Obama does not intend to abide by it he shouldn't sign it. If he intends to give the land back it should not involve the UN in any way.
Quote from: The Troll on May 09, 2012, 07:31:07 PM
I was reading in my UAW newsletter the "Solidarity" that one of our members donated to the Joseph's Indian School regularly and she received a "Dream Catcher" an easily recognized Native American symbol as a gift. Since this school in South Dakota she thought the Dream Catcher was made at the school or the tribe made it. :doh:
Guess what, IT WAS MADE IN CHINA! Damn they got our Indians buy shit from China. :rolleyes: :rant: :haha: It would be funny if is wasn't so damn serious. :trustme:
Troll not many things really piss me off but you'd better back off on this one. I have very strong feelings about certain things and this is one of them so don't go there.
Quote from: me on May 10, 2012, 01:23:45 AM
You may not agree with me on this but if Obama does not intend to abide by it he shouldn't sign it. If he intends to give the land back it should not involve the UN in any way.
There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that land is going back to the Sioux Indians. That would require approval of Congress and anything like that would be dead on arrival. I can't see politicians on either side of the aisle supporting something as radical as that.
I'm not denying that Native Americans were stripped of their lands, relocated unjustly, and marginalized by the early settlers of what would eventually become our nation. They absolutely were and it wasn't right. I'm just speaking of the likelihood of any of those lands being returned to anyone. Those chances are zero.
Quote from: Locutus on May 10, 2012, 01:35:28 AM
There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that land is going back to the Sioux Indians. That would require approval of Congress and anything like that would be dead on arrival. I can't see politicians on either side of the aisle supporting something as radical as that.
I'm not denying that Native Americans were stripped of their lands, relocated unjustly, and marginalized by the early settlers of what would eventually become our nation. They absolutely were and it wasn't right. I'm just speaking of the likelihood of any of those lands being returned to anyone. Those chances are zero.
I realize that too which is why I think it would be wrong for anything to that effect to even be signed.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 09, 2012, 02:13:14 PM
I actually am following your logic on this one Troll.
Hell hath truly frozen over! :biggrin:
Quote from: Locutus on May 10, 2012, 01:56:37 AM
Hell hath truly frozen over! :biggrin:
kind of scarey!!!! :spooked:
Quote from: me on May 10, 2012, 01:25:16 AM
Troll not many things really piss me off but you'd better back off on this one. I have very strong feelings about certain things and this is one of them so don't go there.
Just why can the American Indians make their own "Dream Catchers". Instead of buying them from China. Put our Indians back to work making Dream Catchers. :rant:
Besides the Chinese are yellow not red. :wink: :smile:
Quote from: The Troll on May 10, 2012, 08:57:40 AM
Just why can the American Indians make their own "Dream Catchers". Instead of buying them from China. Put our Indians back to work making Dream Catchers. :rant:
Besides the Chinese are yellow not red. :wink: :smile:
I think it was probably the fact that there weren't enough of them to make the amount they needed to send out so they just did what they needed to do to get them mass produced. The mom of a friend of hubby's used to donate to them and gave us the dream catcher key chain she got and it was nice but you could tell it had been mass produced and wasn't hand made. She gave us some other things she had received from them too and some were better quality than others but I don't believe any of it is made there. I've been to Pow Wow's where you have to watch close what you buy too because some of the people will have what looks to be authentic at their booths and you turn it over and it say's "Made in China." Needless to say we don't buy from those booths.
Quote from: me on May 10, 2012, 09:36:04 AM
I think it was probably the fact that there weren't enough of them to make the amount they needed to send out so they just did what they needed to do to get them mass produced. The mom of a friend of hubby's used to donate to them and gave us the dream catcher key chain she got and it was nice but you could tell it had been mass produced and wasn't hand made. She gave us some other things she had received from them too and some were better quality than others but I don't believe any of it is made there. I've been to Pow Wow's where you have to watch close what you buy too because some of the people will have what looks to be authentic at their booths and you turn it over and it say's "Made in China." Needless to say we don't buy from those booths.
My grandmother and grandfather were out in Arizona years and years ago and bought a Dream Catcher and granddad bought a big silver and turquoise ring. But I do think it's a shame to sell Chinese Dream Catcher. Why, probably they don't work like a lot of the other crap from China. :wink: :biggrin:
I was just going to mention that you can buy very nice ones in the markets in and around old town Scottsdale, AZ. And they're all handmade.
Quote from: The Troll on May 10, 2012, 09:57:57 AM
My grandmother and grandfather were out in Arizona years and years ago and bought a Dream Catcher and granddad bought a big silver and turquoise ring. But I do think it's a shame to sell Chinese Dream Catcher. Why, probably they don't work like a lot of the other crap from China. :wink: :biggrin:
They work just fine as long as you're dreamin' in Chinese! :biggrin:
Quote from: Locutus on May 10, 2012, 12:06:49 PM
They work just fine as long as you're dreamin' in Chinese! :biggrin:
:doh: :bow: You're right! :haha: :haha: :salute: :flag:
They all work on shit weasels.Jui :haha: