Post by hushasha40 on Apr 4, 2007 14:51:03 GMT 1
Houston Councilman: Stop Apologizing to American Indians
By Rogers Cadenhead
Monday, April 2, 2007
Watching the Watchers
A Houston city council member said on his radio talk show that the U.S. should "stop the continuous apology for what was done to the American Indians" and drop federal programs and treaties that provide casino rights, educational support and welfare.
Michael Berry, a Republican councilman in his third term and mayor pro tempore who hosts a morning show on KPRC, said on the air March 27 that he opposes such benefits for the same reason he opposes paying slavery reparations. "If you're against apologizing for slavery, then you gotta be against giving welfare to the American Indians because of the fact that 200 years ago they were whipped in a war. ... We conquered them. That's history....Hello!"
Representatives of the American Indian Genocide Museum in Houston have been e-mailing Berry's remarks, urging people to contact the station and Houston mayor's office in protest.
Jim Roberts, a Sioux/Chippewa member of the PowWows.Com community, challenged Berry's premise that American Indians lost a war. "If American Indians were 'conquered,' why did the United States put peace treaties on the bargaining table to end the wars?" he posted. "A conquest is an unconditional defeat of an enemy, and many Indian tribes were never defeated (since they were never at war with the U.S. in the first place)."
Berry, who claimed to have "enough American Indian in me" to be justified in making his comments, actively courts controversy in a morning radio timeslot he began in early 2006.
"Our entire Department of the Interior, practically, is the Department of Indian Affairs. Why are we still giving Indians exclusive rights to gamble, exclusive rights to print money -- which is also known as a casino?" he asked listeners.
When a caller said that the programs result from treaties rather than an attempt to make reparations, Berry responded, "The treaty involved land and sovereignty. It did not require that we continue to pay for education. It did not require welfare programs. It did not necessarily mean we had to grant them casino licenses."
There are more than 1,000 casinos, bingo parlors and other gambling facilities operated by Indian tribes on tribal land or reservations. They grew from a $5.4 billion industry in 1995 to $19.4 billion a decade later, according to the Indian Gaming Commission.
This isn't the first time reparations have been an issue of emphasis for Berry. The Houston Chronicle reported in 2006 that he was originally elected to the council by "an unusual coalition of blacks and conservative whites," but when he voted against a study of reparations, black activists held a protest in front of his home and declared that his "ghetto pass" had been revoked.
Here's a transcript of his remarks from the 8 a.m. hour of the March 27 show, available as a download from KPRC's web site:
"Now let's be consistent here. If you don't want them issuing an apology for slavery because this isn't, shouldn't be, which I feel -- if you believe with me that way then you should also believe with me that we need to undo, do away with, starting today, all this stuff for American Indians.
"And if -- I dare you to call me up and give me your reasons why. If we're not going to apologize for slavery, then we need to stop the continuous apology for what was done to the American Indians. We need to stop that right now too. We need to stop apologizing to the American Indians, which we continue to do on an ongoing basis, day in, day out. We do it with incredible resources from our treasury. Our entire Department of the Interior, practically, is the Department of Indian Affairs.
"We continue to give land -- you know, at the Grand Canyon this group that got a private developer to come in and put this $30 million dollar glass skywalk out over the Grand Canyon, which I will go and see, I admit it, as tacky as it is --- why are we still giving Indians exclusives rights to gamble, exclusive rights to print money, which is also known as a casino? Why are we still doing that?
"If you believe that we should not issue an apology to the descendants of slaves for what happened 150 years ago, then it strikes me that you have to believe we need to stop apologizing to the American Indians, which we continue to do. And I got enough American Indian in me that I qualify for enough things that I can say that. And even if I didn't I'd still say it.
"It is stupid and inconsistent to me that we don't want to apologize to the slaves, which I don't, but we do apparently want to continuously apologize to American Indians and give them money. You tell me why that's consistent. ...
"'ve read the treaties; I'm intimately familiar with the treaty. ... first of all, the treaty involved land and sovereignty. It did not require that we continue to pay for education. It did not require welfare programs. It did not necessarily mean we had to grant them casino licenses. We can argue over that, and by the way it's almost 200 years ago. ...
"You'd be surprised how many Anglos out there that will say in one breath, 'Stop kowtowing to this whole slavery issue; this is just ridiculous political correctness; they're trying to get the black vote,' but then you say well what about the American Indians? 'Now thats not right we did them people wrong.'
"It is funny how inconsistent and hypocritical people are. Do you know why that is? Because most Anglos in this country either identify with American Indians or think that they have some American Indian in them. And so as a result they want to help that. So let me tell you something. You know who impresses me: People that impress me are blacks who say, 'You know what, Michael, don't send me my $40 reparation check. I don't want it. I want to live as a full citizen. I want my kids to be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin.' That's who impresses me.
"If you are saying, 'Well, you know, I'm really just if my group can be be benefited, if i got some American Indian in me then I'm for the whole American Indian thing,' you know what? You don't impress me, 'cause that just means if your ox is being gored then your going to squeal, but otherwise you really couldn't care less. You really couldn't care less.
"So you dont care about 'the principle of the issue's 150 years old, we ought not be dealing with it.' You just don't like those people that might benefit from it. And if that's your shtick, I cant go for that. I cant go for that. Have a principled philosophical reason for why you oppose it and not because you don't like rap music. That's, I sense that, I don't like it.
"If you're against apologizing for slavery then you gotta be against giving welfare to the American Indians because of the fact that 200 years ago they were whipped in a war. And let's just call it what it is: They lost a war. Why don't we go hand the Germans a few million dollars and the Italians and the Japanese -- OK, so we did rebuild their country -- we don't continue to give them aid because they sit around whining about a war from 200 years ago. Are you kidding me? Seriously? And what's interesting is, it's one thing when we do stupid things as a government and we oppose it. Whats interesting is how many people out there believe thats a good idea -- 'Oh, you gotta help the American Indians, what we did was so wrong.' What'd we do? We conquered them. That's history. Hello!"
watchingthewatchers.org/news/1194/houston-councilman-stop-apologizing
By Rogers Cadenhead
Monday, April 2, 2007
Watching the Watchers
A Houston city council member said on his radio talk show that the U.S. should "stop the continuous apology for what was done to the American Indians" and drop federal programs and treaties that provide casino rights, educational support and welfare.
Michael Berry, a Republican councilman in his third term and mayor pro tempore who hosts a morning show on KPRC, said on the air March 27 that he opposes such benefits for the same reason he opposes paying slavery reparations. "If you're against apologizing for slavery, then you gotta be against giving welfare to the American Indians because of the fact that 200 years ago they were whipped in a war. ... We conquered them. That's history....Hello!"
Representatives of the American Indian Genocide Museum in Houston have been e-mailing Berry's remarks, urging people to contact the station and Houston mayor's office in protest.
Jim Roberts, a Sioux/Chippewa member of the PowWows.Com community, challenged Berry's premise that American Indians lost a war. "If American Indians were 'conquered,' why did the United States put peace treaties on the bargaining table to end the wars?" he posted. "A conquest is an unconditional defeat of an enemy, and many Indian tribes were never defeated (since they were never at war with the U.S. in the first place)."
Berry, who claimed to have "enough American Indian in me" to be justified in making his comments, actively courts controversy in a morning radio timeslot he began in early 2006.
"Our entire Department of the Interior, practically, is the Department of Indian Affairs. Why are we still giving Indians exclusive rights to gamble, exclusive rights to print money -- which is also known as a casino?" he asked listeners.
When a caller said that the programs result from treaties rather than an attempt to make reparations, Berry responded, "The treaty involved land and sovereignty. It did not require that we continue to pay for education. It did not require welfare programs. It did not necessarily mean we had to grant them casino licenses."
There are more than 1,000 casinos, bingo parlors and other gambling facilities operated by Indian tribes on tribal land or reservations. They grew from a $5.4 billion industry in 1995 to $19.4 billion a decade later, according to the Indian Gaming Commission.
This isn't the first time reparations have been an issue of emphasis for Berry. The Houston Chronicle reported in 2006 that he was originally elected to the council by "an unusual coalition of blacks and conservative whites," but when he voted against a study of reparations, black activists held a protest in front of his home and declared that his "ghetto pass" had been revoked.
Here's a transcript of his remarks from the 8 a.m. hour of the March 27 show, available as a download from KPRC's web site:
"Now let's be consistent here. If you don't want them issuing an apology for slavery because this isn't, shouldn't be, which I feel -- if you believe with me that way then you should also believe with me that we need to undo, do away with, starting today, all this stuff for American Indians.
"And if -- I dare you to call me up and give me your reasons why. If we're not going to apologize for slavery, then we need to stop the continuous apology for what was done to the American Indians. We need to stop that right now too. We need to stop apologizing to the American Indians, which we continue to do on an ongoing basis, day in, day out. We do it with incredible resources from our treasury. Our entire Department of the Interior, practically, is the Department of Indian Affairs.
"We continue to give land -- you know, at the Grand Canyon this group that got a private developer to come in and put this $30 million dollar glass skywalk out over the Grand Canyon, which I will go and see, I admit it, as tacky as it is --- why are we still giving Indians exclusives rights to gamble, exclusive rights to print money, which is also known as a casino? Why are we still doing that?
"If you believe that we should not issue an apology to the descendants of slaves for what happened 150 years ago, then it strikes me that you have to believe we need to stop apologizing to the American Indians, which we continue to do. And I got enough American Indian in me that I qualify for enough things that I can say that. And even if I didn't I'd still say it.
"It is stupid and inconsistent to me that we don't want to apologize to the slaves, which I don't, but we do apparently want to continuously apologize to American Indians and give them money. You tell me why that's consistent. ...
"'ve read the treaties; I'm intimately familiar with the treaty. ... first of all, the treaty involved land and sovereignty. It did not require that we continue to pay for education. It did not require welfare programs. It did not necessarily mean we had to grant them casino licenses. We can argue over that, and by the way it's almost 200 years ago. ...
"You'd be surprised how many Anglos out there that will say in one breath, 'Stop kowtowing to this whole slavery issue; this is just ridiculous political correctness; they're trying to get the black vote,' but then you say well what about the American Indians? 'Now thats not right we did them people wrong.'
"It is funny how inconsistent and hypocritical people are. Do you know why that is? Because most Anglos in this country either identify with American Indians or think that they have some American Indian in them. And so as a result they want to help that. So let me tell you something. You know who impresses me: People that impress me are blacks who say, 'You know what, Michael, don't send me my $40 reparation check. I don't want it. I want to live as a full citizen. I want my kids to be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin.' That's who impresses me.
"If you are saying, 'Well, you know, I'm really just if my group can be be benefited, if i got some American Indian in me then I'm for the whole American Indian thing,' you know what? You don't impress me, 'cause that just means if your ox is being gored then your going to squeal, but otherwise you really couldn't care less. You really couldn't care less.
"So you dont care about 'the principle of the issue's 150 years old, we ought not be dealing with it.' You just don't like those people that might benefit from it. And if that's your shtick, I cant go for that. I cant go for that. Have a principled philosophical reason for why you oppose it and not because you don't like rap music. That's, I sense that, I don't like it.
"If you're against apologizing for slavery then you gotta be against giving welfare to the American Indians because of the fact that 200 years ago they were whipped in a war. And let's just call it what it is: They lost a war. Why don't we go hand the Germans a few million dollars and the Italians and the Japanese -- OK, so we did rebuild their country -- we don't continue to give them aid because they sit around whining about a war from 200 years ago. Are you kidding me? Seriously? And what's interesting is, it's one thing when we do stupid things as a government and we oppose it. Whats interesting is how many people out there believe thats a good idea -- 'Oh, you gotta help the American Indians, what we did was so wrong.' What'd we do? We conquered them. That's history. Hello!"
watchingthewatchers.org/news/1194/houston-councilman-stop-apologizing