... Al. though I would add some further thoughts:

There is no question that the U.S. government's official Indian policy for many years was to steal the Indian lands in the West -- and, if necessary to the accomplishment of that purpose, to exterminate any Indians who tried to defend their land or their way of life.

Here's an example of what happened (California only, which isn't even often thought of as a site of Native American genocide). This comes from the following website:

http://www.moles.org/ProjectUnderground/motherlode/gold/native.html

>> "The bulk of California's Indians were conquered, and died, in innumerable
>> little episodes rather than in large campaigns ... it serves to indict not a
>> group of cruel leaders, or a few squads of rough soldiers, but in effect, an
>> entire people; for the conquest of the Native Californian was above all else a
>> popular, mass, enterprise" -- Jack Forbes, contemporary native historian.

>> The Gold Rush incited ambushes, massacres and deliberate extermination campaigns
>> of native peoples in Calfornia. Some key statistics include the following:

>> Indigenous impact of the Gold Rush in California:

>> Estimated native population before 1848 gold rush: 150,000
>> Estimated native population in 1870: 31,000
>> Estimated native population killed by new diseases brought by gold rush settlers: 60%
>> Price for native American severed head in Shasta in 1855: $5
>> Price for native American scalp in Honey Lake in 1863: 25 cents
>> California state government reimbursement for scalping missions in 1851: $1,000,000
>> Estimated number of native American children sold: 4,000
>> Price for young boys : up to $60
>> Price for young girls : up to $200

>> In 1860 the Alta California reported a massacre conducted by a Captain Jarboe
>> among the Achomawi peoples of the north-east.

>> "The attacking party rushed upon them, blowing out their brains,
>> and splitting their heads open with tomahawks. Little children
>> in baskets, and even babes, had their heads smashed to pieces
>> or cut open. Mothers and infants shared the same phenomenon
>> ... Many of the fugitives were chased and shot as they ran
>> ... The children, scarcely able to run, toddled towards the squaw
>> for protection, crying with fright, but were overtaken,
>> slaughtered like wild animals, and thrown into piles.
>> ... One woman got into a pond hole, where she hid herself under
>> the grass, with her head above water, and concealed her papoose
>> on the bank in a basket. She was discovered and her head blown to
>> pieces, the muzzle of the gun being placed against her
>> skull, and the child was drowned in the pond."

A sad, disgraceful part of our American past. All conducted under the banner of the stars and stripes.

And this is not to even mention slavery (sanctioned by the Constitution of the United States from 1787 until 1863 -- when the Emancipation Proclamation eliminated slavery in the Southern States -- or 1865, when it was finally wiped out in the entire country by the 13th Amendment). It is not just the Confederate flag that symbolized slavery, but the American flag as well.

Does that mean we should all now revile the American flag -- and any item on which it happens to appear? I frankly doubt that even most Black or Native American people would hold that view.

Unfortunately, the Jewish Holocaust at the hands of the Nazis is not unique in human history. It is not even the worst genocide ever (the Soviet Russians are estimated to have murdered 61 million people during their rule; estimates of the number killed by the Chinese Communists range from 38 million to a staggering 140 million; even the Nationalist Chinese are thought to have murdered between 5 and 18 million of their own countrymen). The estimated 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis represent only slightly more than 25% of the total Nazi victims (thought to exceed 21 million altogether).

Make no mistake, I abhor what was done to the Jews (and others) by the Nazis. On the other hand, and consistently with my belief that people should take personal responsibility for their actions, I also believe that people should not be required to take responsibility for the actions of others over which they had no control.

Hence, those Germans who came before the Nazis bear no responsibility for the Holocaust. Nor do those who came after. Nor do those who refused to participate in or sanction what the Nazis did.

I understand the strong feelings expressed by Bernie, Terry, Jay and others about the Holocaust itself. I can even understand their automatic revulsion at the sight of the swastika.

I cannot, however, accept the proposition that the Nazi use of the swastika automatically taints that symbol for all people and for all time (before, during and after the Nazi regime). To accept this position would logically compel acceptance of the analogous conclusion that all other symbols used by all other people who have ever perpetrated an atrocity should also be reviled -- including, based on the treatment of Native Americans in the U.S. during (primarily) the 1800's and Black Americans during (at least) the first century of our country's history, the American flag.

----- jim o\-S