tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26527878.post3800266462001834480..comments2008-11-15T10:34:53.232-08:00Comments on quixoticals: Metapedia -- The Encyclopedia for Racists, by Raci...Christopher Trottierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07213876422367028713noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26527878.post-50781397994577168562008-11-15T10:34:00.000-08:002008-11-15T10:34:00.000-08:002008-11-15T10:34:00.000-08:00Heh. I also like the fact that this "encyclopedia"...Heh. <BR/><BR/>I also like the fact that this "encyclopedia" doesn't have entries for, say, "chess" or "chemisty" (who cares about THAT in a general-knowledge encyclopedia), but *does* -- naturally -- have one for "Jewish ritual murder".<BR/><BR/>They do have an entry for "Albert Einstein", though. Concentrating, naturally, on how the dirty Jew Einstein was a plagiarist who stole his theories from good Aryans like Poincare.Avital Pilpelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01442857394706283315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26527878.post-61580121540842868332008-03-28T14:44:00.000-07:002008-03-28T14:44:00.000-07:002008-03-28T14:44:00.000-07:00What they're saying there is that the indigenous p...What they're saying there is that the indigenous peoples were not called Americans, native or otherwise, during colonial/early American times. "Americans" were colonists, and later, citizens of the United States. "Native" simply means "born." You are either a fool, or you have adopted their technique of "not letting the facts get in the way."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26527878.post-59406012175980287662007-09-20T14:45:00.000-07:002007-09-20T14:45:00.000-07:002007-09-20T14:45:00.000-07:00To be more precise, what they should have said was...To be more precise, what they should have said was "born in the territory now know as the United States." That would include children of any of the Plymouth or other early European immigrants.<BR/><BR/>Actually the definition of "native," not just for America but for any country, continually changes over an historical time frame. The American Indians undoubtedly displaced earlier peoples in the remote past, and thus have no more of a claim on being known as "native" than are the descendants of the more recent White settlers.<BR/><BR/>Actually I doubt that the Apaches, Navajo, etc. would even WANT to be known as "Native <B>Americans</B>," since the very term "America" is a European derived name!Richard Brodiehttp://www.125.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26527878.post-34106873265134388552007-09-11T14:55:00.000-07:002007-09-11T14:55:00.000-07:002007-09-11T14:55:00.000-07:00To be fair, they're not quite as silly as you humo...To be fair, they're not quite as silly as you humourously suggest.<BR/><BR/>Their definition of Native American as you've quoted it here wouldn't include the English settlers at Plymouth, since they weren't born in the United States of America. By their definition, only people born after the creation of the US could be Native Americans.<BR/><BR/>Of course, what that makes the people born in America before 1776, I don't know.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26527878.post-88577444047517798612007-07-28T21:18:00.000-07:002007-07-28T21:18:00.000-07:002007-07-28T21:18:00.000-07:00Looks like metapedia has been hacked with lot of M...Looks like metapedia has been hacked with lot of MLK speeches. Ha. Did you have anything to do with that. They don't even know how to fix it. Hahaha.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com