From Historyworld. Net:http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ac84

Cuzco and the Incas: 15th century AD

In the early 15th century the town of Cuzco is a small place, the headquarters of one of many competing tribes within the region which was once ruled from Tiwanaku. But in about 1438 a younger son of the ruler defeats the neighbouring Chanca people, usurps power, gives himself the resounding title Pachacuti (’transformer of the earth’) and begins an astonishing process of military expansion. The policy is continued by his son, Topa Inca (also sometimes called Tupac Inca).

By the end of two long reigns (about fifty-five years in all) the Cuzco dynasty, known as the Incas, are in loose control of an empire stretching from Quito in modern Ecuador to the Maule river in Chile – a distance of nearly 2500 miles.

…

The Inca expansion also shares some features with Genghis Khan’s programme of conquest. A few brutal military victories suffice to terrify other petty rulers into cooperation, and the success of the Incas derives partly from excellent roads and communications.

From David A. Yeagley : http://www.badeagle.com/
David A. Yeagley was born in Oklahoma City. He is a direct descendent of Bad Eagle (quin-ne kish-su-it), headman of a Antelope (kwerharenu) Comanche band (1839-1909). Yeagley is an enrolled member of the Comanche Tribe, Lawton, Oklahoma.

Topic: A Comanche Look At Columbus, Why I Salute Cristobal Colon: Posted: Oct. 10 2002,2:11

By the 17th century Spanish culture was everywhere in the Southwest, but when Comanches first encountered it we did not see it as a restriction or an inhibition. We saw a grand opportunity, and it changed our future.

We stole some mesteños (Spanish mustangs), and the next thing you know, we were making raids in New Mexico in 1705. In little more than generation later, we were “lords of the south plains.” …

From A book review of North American Indigenous Warfare and Ritual Violence
Edited by Richard J. Chacon; Rubén G. Mendoza

Despite evidence of warfare and violent conflict in pre-Columbian North America, scholars argue that the scale and scope of Native American violence is exaggerated. They contend that scholarly misrepresentation has denigrated indigenous peoples when in fact they lived together in peace and harmony. In rebutting that contention, this groundbreaking book presents clear evidence—from multiple academic disciplines—that indigenous populations engaged in warfare and ritual violence long before European contact. In ten well-documented and thoroughly researched chapters, fourteen leading scholars dispassionately describe sources and consequences of Amerindian warfare and violence, including ritual violence. Originally presented at an American Anthropological Association symposium, their findings construct a convincing case that bloodshed and killing have been woven into the fabric of indigenous life in North America for many centuries…

From H. B. Nicholson, “Aztec,” World Book Online Americas Edition
http://houck.salkeiz.k12.or.us/student.assignments/WB.Aztecs/aztec.htm

Warfare was considered a religious duty by the Aztec. They fought not only to enlarge their empire but also to take prisoners to sacrifice to the gods. The highest goal for a young man was to be a successful warrior. Men who took many captives in battle were rewarded. They received land, high social rank, and important government offices.

Aztec methods of combat were designed to capture prisoners rather than to kill. …

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide
The Armenian Genocide … known as the Armenian Holocaust, Great Calamity … or the Armenian Massacres of 1915 — refers to the systematic slaughter and fatal deportation of hundreds of thousands to over a million Armenians as well as the intentional and irreversible ruination of their economic and cultural life environments under the government of the Committee of Union and Progress during the First World War from 1915 to 1918 in the Ottoman Empire.

The Armenian Genocide is widely acknowledged to have been the first true genocide of the twentieth century.[1][2]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

For Iris Chang’s book, see The Rape of Nanking (book).
The Nanking Massacre

The Nanking Massacre, commonly known as the Rape of Nanking, was an infamous war crime committed by the Japanese military in the capital of Nanjing, after it fell to the Imperial Japanese Army on December 13, 1937. The duration of the massacre is not clearly defined, although the violence lasted well into the next six weeks, until early February 1938.

Rwandan Genocide
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Rwandan Genocide was the 1994 mass killing of the hundreds of thousands of ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutu sympathizers in Rwanda and was the largest atrocity during the Rwandan Civil War. This genocide was mostly carried out by two extremist Hutu militia groups, the Interahamwe and the Impuzamugambi, during about 100 days from April 6 through mid-July, 1994. At least 500,000 Tutsis and thousands of moderate Hutus died in the genocide.[1] Some estimates put the death toll between 800,000 and 1,000,000.[2]

Flogging oneself over atrocities that happened long ago is not helpful in fact, it is nothing more than mental masturbation. Remembering it is helpful, preventing it in the future it is helpful.

According to Jensen, the United States was “just as guilty” as the hijackers in committing acts of violence. Jensen wrote that the Al Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center and The Pentagon “was no more despicable than the massive acts of terrorism…that the U.S. government has committed during my lifetime.” [1]

Letters to the editor and reportedly over 4,000 complaints to Jensen himself denounced his article as insensitive and extremist, coming just three days after the attack. Several letters also criticized the newspaper for printing the op-ed piece at all.[2]

UT President Larry Faulkner wrote:

In his Sept. 14 [2001]Outlook article “ U.S. just as guilty of committing own violent acts,” Robert Jensen was identified as holding a faculty appointment at the University of Texas at Austin. Jensen made his remarks entirely in his capacity as a free citizen of the United States, writing and speaking under the protection of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. No aspect of his remarks is supported, condoned or officially recognized by The University of Texas at Austin. He does not speak in the University’s name and may not speak in its name. Using the same liberty, I convey my personal judgment that Jensen is not only misguided, but has become a fountain of undiluted foolishness on issues of public policy. Students must learn that there is a good deal of foolish opinion in the popular media and they must become skilled at recognizing and discounting it. I, too, was disgusted by Jensen’s article, but I also must defend his freedom to state his opinion. The First Amendment is the bedrock of American liberty.

I can hardly improve on President Faulkner’s words.

@ Gary Lapon: That’s a good point. Unfortunately, there aren’t many opportunities here in Austin, TX, for solidarity with indigenous activism. And I don’t know what happened to the immigrants’ rights movement here, which manifested as a 15,000-strong march last spring but hasn’t been seen since.

I dispensed with birthday celebrations a while ago because of the consumerism and self-centeredness that the dominant culture bases them upon. I wanted to re-claim the holiday and give gifts to others instead, but folks wouldn’t accept them. When I declared I wouldn’t celebrate b-days any more, I was ostracized by some of my good friends, including radicals.

Instead of coming up with his own anti-Thanksgiving event, if Jensen really wants to struggle for native rights maybe he would be better off seeking out indigenous movements to work with, or participating in the immigrant rights movement (as many immigrants from Latin America are indigenous to the Americas). I agree with Jensen’s statement that the macro is far more important than the micro, but in order to be consistent this requires shrugging off the politics of private morality and embracing the politics of collective struggle.

What other troubling questions has he ignored too long? Where else has he gone along, to get along?

What absolution is he searching for when he asks, “Once we know, what do we do in a world that is not yet ready to know, or knows but will not deal with the consequences of that knowledge?”

For people who are truly concerned with knowledge, truth and justice, I strongly urge them to pick up a copy of Barrie Zwicker’s Towers of Deception and read it.

Those who died on 9/11 had much in common with the Native Americans who perished in days of yore: foremost, they stood in somebody’s way.

I don’t have a problem with this. The site goes on to state that the “historical significance” of the event has “acquired significance beyond the historical facts.”

Actually, it always had significance beyond that one event. I have some respect for Robert Jensen, but in this case, he’s way off. The celebration of the Harvest goes back far before 1600, and the importance of a local community coming together in good faith to celebrate far outweighs any tiny, almost mythological, link with recent history. And, that this one in particular is also associated with people from sometimes-opposing cultures coming together, however briefly or rarely, makes it especially worth celebrating.

But, then, celebrating along with everybody else doesn’t get you noticed or give you a chance to play holier-than-thou, does it? I refuse to let people for whom iconoclastic ego trips are a favorite hobby intrude upon my honorable, reasonable holidays.

Well I don’t know about that. Take a look at what’s happening in Palestine. In fact in the U.S. you’ll get huge resistance against Jensen’s advocacy from Zionists because if U.S. citizens become conscience of its own past it won’t tolerate its blind support for the Israel.

All the countries of the continent have followed the same pattern. Europeans invaded the continent, massacred the people, stole their land and destroyed their culture. They then kidnapped people in West Africa and brought them to America as slaves. The colonists then declared independence and further colonisation followed, from both Europe ans Asia. Nowadays, the international community would never allow such a thing to happen, but the consequences are irreversible.

The solution would seem to be that, since everybody is in the same boat, everybody should get together. A great American Union, from Nunavut to Tierra del Fuego!