Posts: 2,481
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2008
The first people of North America were as diverse as anybody else. Some were comparatively noble and sophisticated. Some were mere gangs. The Comanches found a system that worked for them, extreme violence and intimidation. The fact that white people had no god-given or moral right to move onto their land is neither here nor there. Until the end when it became obvious how many white people there were and when other Native American tribes were no longer a factor, they did not deign to differentiate between who they were torturing and murdering. It was just what they did. Custer was able to enlist native scouts by asking any non-Comanches "Hey, anybody want to go kill some Comanches?" Tonkawas and Apaches frequently served as scouts for the cavalry. Tonkawas were widely believed to be cannibals but since by native standards the cavalry couldn't track a bull in a china shop and scouts were necessary this was overlooked. The Spanish priests tried for years to get the Apaches to convert. They always resisted. At one point though the Apaches suddenly seemed agreeable. They were eager for the Spaniards to build a mission in a particular area that they led the Spaniards to believe was special to them. Turns out it was Comanche territory. The Apaches were hoping to start a war between the Comanches and the Spanish. The Comanches pretty much killed everybody. Yes the land belonged to the Comanches. Heck, they had raped, tortured, and murdered a lot of people to get it. This is extremely important to come to grips with. There were the equivalent of motorcycle gangs back then and to get too teary-eyed over them is as idiotic as getting teary-eyed over any losses that the crips might suffer at the hands of the bloods. Insert two white supremecist groups or mix and match if you prefer, whatever you need to do to see the folly of thinking that any ancient native culture was magically any different than any modern culture.
Personally I wouldn't count on the argument that they were only eating somebody's head cause they wanted his mana to make it seem OK.
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 4
Joined: Sep 2014
Excellent post utilizing a wide, yet no-nonsense, perspective.
Posts: 10,070
Threads: 343
Joined: Apr 2009
Dakine ranted:
"[...]Right on man, more power to "ya". And hey if you'd like you can clump me in there with your Zionist, and all the other conspirators you got running around in your closet, under your bed? Or maybe they're just in your head? Sheesh, I am happy to join such an illustrious crowd of targets for you to blame all your woes on. Absolute. Please, go ahead, it's all my fault. Blame away!
And then on another thread Mtviewdude decided I'm "part of the problem". What problem that is I am at a loss to say. Whatever it is I'll wear that with pride too. I'll wear it for you! I mean gee I share an opinion, mine. Whereas some here just go on and on calling others silly names and rarely if ever articulate anything coherent. Even so I'm the one that's "part of the problem"? Kinda cool, eh? Ok, it doesn't matter, if you all need it I am more than happy to accommodate."
No idea why you ranted like this. The thread is about Hawaii history and cannibalism. It seems you want to make it about yourself though. That's OK, but please be prepared to see some of the more disgusting stuff you have posted in the past if you want to carry on with this crap. Your masturbation accusation was one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen on PW, but obviously you have an excuse for that as well. Portraying the victim once again despite you inviting criticism?
So, while you're here, what is your view on Pahoated's comment about non-cannibals eating human body parts?
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 4
Joined: Sep 2014
"But as to the actual practices of the Hawaiians in regards cannibalism I haven't contemplated it enough to make comment."
Someone must be in a chatty mood. That was a helluva long ramble to get to the part about not having an answer to offer. From rant to ramble, take your pick.
Posts: 5,640
Threads: 101
Joined: Dec 2008
Dory, I'll explain it for you. If someone (Ted) says that it's only cannibalism if they're eating people for food, then it follows that you're not a cannibal if you eat them for other reasons. Hence: "non-cannibals eating human body parts".
Posts: 490
Threads: 80
Joined: Mar 2013
I'll take Transubstantiation for $200.
Posts: 10,070
Threads: 343
Joined: Apr 2009
"Dory, I'll explain it for you. If someone (Ted) says that it's only cannibalism if they're eating people for food, then it follows that you're not a cannibal if you eat them for other reasons. Hence: "non-cannibals eating human body parts"."
Thank you, Paul. You have a remarkable talent for summarizing and getting to the point. That's exactly the reason this thread was started.
Fog and ice at the summit, I get some sleep before heading off east! See you all in a week.
Posts: 10,070
Threads: 343
Joined: Apr 2009
Dory asked:
" But I see nothing by Ted that's directly related to your question. He says nothing of the kind, only you do. Maybe I am missing something? Please help me here."
It's right at the start of the thread. Pahoated's comment:
" This is a continuing problem with white people never understanding the depths of the Hawaiian culture. It was a civilization, not tribes, not primitives, not savages, not cannibals, although they did eat human parts."
http://www.punaweb.org/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=21644&whichpage=9
So I asked how people eating human flesh aren't cannibals. It's a very simple question. If you can't understand how this is directly related to Pahoated's comment, well, I am quite stunned. Perhaps you should put down those rose colored glasses. His post was also racist and you had no problem with that either. In fact, your response to his disgraceful post was:
" Hey PT, that is well said!"
I know you and PT have a history of deleting posts you're embarrassed about, but don't worry, these ones have been saved.
Posts: 10,070
Threads: 343
Joined: Apr 2009
Dory ranted once again:
"Tom posts It's right at the start of the thread. Pahoated's comment...
Which is 100% a product of his (Tommy's) doing. Ted didn't post anything on this thread like that, Tommy did! Tom, carried over something Ted said elsewhere to start his rant here. And now continues to paint himself as some better than others kine guy and pull others (me) into his illusionary world of ghosts and goblins. Tom, Halloween is over. There's nothing to fear, you can relax, take a deep breath.
And besides, your use of the word racist at this point is pathetic. Sure once in a while pointing to someone's outlandish comments and saying they're racist might work, it's got a certain amount of shock value. But going on and on is just exposing yourself as some sort of phobic guy that's got way to many bogeymen in your closet. Saying Ted is racist and I didn't have any problem with it is ridiculous. What's your point besides being a bully? Really Tom, what in the world is someone who bills himself as some mucky muck kine guy doing grabbling around in the mud for anyways?"
So still no answer, Dory. I get it. You're wound up. Fine. How I'm going on and on is a bit of a mystery though. So why not answer the question I posted right at the start of this thread? Or are you just here to make noise? Mucky muck kine grabbling suggests you're here only to insult, but that's what you do.
Ghosts and goblins? Someone really has quite an imagination.
Posts: 10,070
Threads: 343
Joined: Apr 2009
"Still no answer? I said I see nothing to comment on. You're making stuff up. Creating controversy out of thin air. Ted rambles on there's nothing new in that. You make a mountain out a mole hill, same old same old thing. You're disrespectful, condescending, and generally a bully. Still nothing new in that either. Certainly nothing to get wound up over."
If you see nothing to comment on, you've sure made a lot of noise saying so. So exactly why are you commenting in this thread if you have nothing to say?
|
