Post by Beelzebu DasHellPost by Floyd DavidsonHave you ever studied American History????
So far, I think a tad more than you ever did propaganda.
You must have slept through it. Or maybe you didn't get
past the 5th grade?
Post by Beelzebu DasHellPost by Floyd DavidsonDo you, by any chance, know how many people the crews of
Columbus himself killed? Never mind the other Spanish and then
later English and so on. Do you know how many people died at
the specific command of Christopher Columbus?
Do you realize the low estimates are in the hundreds of
thousands. The high estimates are in the *millions*.
Even if you are charitable and look the other way, it
probably runs over 1 million people.
That includes hundreds of thousands of women and children.
Some "epimediologic event".
Listen buddy, I know you seem to think all of the above is true, but
it is not. There were never "charges" into camps to kill millions of
women and children for the simple reason that it did not made sense
economically. There was a need for labor and the indians were a cheap
source. Fields needed to be planted, cattle raised and gold and silver
needed to be mined.
Do a web search on "Bartolome de las Casas", a contemporary of
Columbus who recorded the treatment of Native people by the Spanish.
His story does not match yours... He says Columbus' men killed
men, women and children, using swords, using guns, burning them
alive, an even raised large attack dogs trained to kill Indians.
Post by Beelzebu DasHellNow, if you were to study REAL history, you'd find that the biggest
indian killer was smallpox and the flu who ravaged tribes all over
since the indians lacked the natural antibodies to fight them off. And
that dear fella is the epidemiologic event I was talking about.
Eventually, yes disease killed more people than Columbus did.
But even then you don't seem to understand the significance.
The filthy living conditions in Europe are what caused these
diseases, and beginning in the 14th century as much of 1/3rd of
the European population died from epidemics. That is the reason
why diseases in 1500 did not kill Europeans but did kill off
native Americans. I'm not sure we should call that "natural
immunity".
And the Europeans were *well* aware that they were causing
epidemics in America just the way it had happened in Europe too.
Post by Beelzebu DasHellSo, I know it looks good for the propaganda efforts to have invading
troops blasting away at women and children (always women and children
though, never men... I wonder where were they) but the sad truth is
that those type of events were the exception, not the rule.
They were very much the rule for Christopher Columbus. It was
well documented at the time. In fact, when reported to the King
of Spain he even called a halt to expansion in the Americas to
determine if it was moral to treat humans as they were doing.
Columbus at one point was arrested and hauled back to Spain for
trial because of the mass murders.
See "Bartolome de las Casas: A Short Account of the Destruction
of the Indies", translated by Nigel Griffin, which is a 1992
translation of "Brevissima relacion de las destruccion de las
Indias" in which Las Casas *detailed* the genocide being
perpetuated by Spain. (There were at least 1 million people on
Hispaniloa when Columbus arrived, and twentyfive years later
there were 12,000 of them left. Those million people did not
die of diseases.)
Here is how a man who *saw it happen* described it:
And the Christians, with their horses and swords and pikes
began to carry out massacres and strange cruelties against
them. They attacked the towns and spared neither the children
nor the aged nor pregnant women nor women in childbed, not
only stabbing them and dismembering them but cutting them to
pieces as if dealing with sheep in the slaughter house. They
laid bets as to who, with one stroke of the sword, could
split a man in two or could cut off his head or spill out his
entrails with a single stroke of the pike. They took infants
from their mothers' breasts, snatching them by the legs and
pitching them headfirst against the crags or snatched them by
the arms and threw them into the rivers, roaring with
laughter and saying as the babies fell into the water, "Boil
there, you offspring of the devil!" Other infants they put to
the sword along with their mothers and anyone else who
happened to be nearby. They made some low wide gallows on
which the hanged victim's feet almost touched the ground,
stringing up their victims in lots of thirteen, in memory of
Our Redeemer and His twelve Apostles, then set burning wood
at their feet and thus burned them alive. To others they
attached straw or wrapped their whole bodies in straw and set
them afire. With still others, all those they wanted to
capture alive, they cut off their hands and hung them round
the victim's neck, saying, "Go now, carry the message,"
meaning, Take the news to the Indians who have fled to the
mountains. They usually dealt with the chieftains and nobles
in the following way: they made a grid of rods which they
placed on forked sticks, then lashed the victims to the grid
and lighted a smoldering fire underneath, so that little by
little, as those captives screamed in despair and torment,
their souls would leave them....
http://personal.pitnet.net/primarysources/casas.html
Now tell me again what you know of history you fucking idiot.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) ***@barrow.com