The 1890 Incident at Wounded Knee Was No "Massacre"

[DakotaKai_fan20]

I'm saying that it never would have happened had we not invaded their land in the first place, treating them so unfairly.

And if that was the case, I would be a full blooded Native American.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Who were the previous occupants 40,000 years ago?


So what? Were they bothering you?


RUBBISH. There were millions of buffalo. The Indians only took what they needed and used all of the buffalo, they did not slaughter thousands at a time and leave all the meat rotting while only taking the hides.


Again, it was their land. It was the USG who wanted the treaties, not the Indians. Indians don't use treaties.


Mention it all you want. Doesn't have any bearing on this conversation.


I'm saying that it never would have happened had we not invaded their land in the first place, treating them so unfairly.

You have no idea how the Plains Indians hunted Buffalo. My great-grandmother was a Comanche, and she described how they hunted. They would drive whole herds of Buffalo off cliffs or into ravines, take the choice cuts of meat and sinew and other things they used and leave tens of tons of meat to rot or be eaten by scavengers. The bows the Plains Indians used were not powerful enough to kill something as large and thick-skinned as a Buffalo.

 

[boevans]

The embedded armed warriors were akin to Gaza's Hamas today.

 

[toobfreak]

You have no idea how the Plains Indians hunted Buffalo.

I think I do. I have studied endless hours of documentaries on the Indian compiled by hundreds of people. You knew one Indian.

They would drive whole herds of Buffalo off cliffs or into ravines, take the choice cuts of meat and sinew and other things

Right. This was common practice, but only as much as they needed, and they took the meat and other stuff they needed. White man only wanted the hide. And the Indian did not hunt buffalo to extinction, white men did.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Who were the previous occupants 40,000 years ago?

So what? Were they bothering you?

RUBBISH. There were millions of buffalo. The Indians only took what they needed and used all of the buffalo, they did not slaughter thousands at a time and leave all the meat rotting while only taking the hides.

Again, it was their land. It was the USG who wanted the treaties, not the Indians. Indians don't use treaties.

Mention it all you want. Doesn't have any bearing on this conversation.

I'm saying that it never would have happened had we not invaded their land in the first place, treating them so unfairly.

These are typical of the arguments one gets from leftists when it comes to the American Indians. No one is talking about "40,000 years ago." We're talking about the period just before and during the U.S. expansion into the West. And, yes, the Indians did kill a huge portion of the buffalo population, as historian T. J. Stiles discusses in his Pulitzer Prize-winning book Custer's Trials. Whites killed more, but the Indians killed a large number.

You talk about "whitewashing" one's history, liberals and many Native American authors are quite willing to ignore or minimize the brutal and savage conduct of many tribes, both before and after they came into contact with American civilians and soldiers. Again, the way the Sioux and the Cheyenne, along with the Cherokee and the Apache, treated other tribes makes the U.S. Government's treatment of the Indians look excessively tolerant and mild in comparison.

The same radical leftists who want to tear down statues of Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson have to problem with statues of such murderous chiefs as Sitting Bill and Crazy Horse. Go talk to historically aware Crow and Arikara Indians about those two "leaders."

Don't like slavery? Well, several Indian tribes, including the Cherokee and the Sioux and the Seminoles, practiced forms of slavery and also slave trading.

If liberals are truly serious about giving just the Sioux "their" land back, as defined by the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, here is the land area we would have turn over to Sioux control:

Half the state of Nebraska
Half the state of South Dakota
One-fourth of the state of North Dakota
One-sixth of the state of Colorado
One-third of the state of Wyoming
One-seventh of the state of Montana

Really? Really?

As a good example of what it was like to try to reach reasonable deals with the Sioux, to this day, the Sioux have not accepted the enormous monetary settlement awarded to them in 1980 by the U.S. Supreme Court. Thanks to compounding interest, that settlement now totals over $1.3 billion. The Sioux could have this money next week if they accepted the settlement, but they still refuse to accept it and still insist they want "their" land back.

 

[Deadstick]

Oh so you support the genocide of my ancestors? The seventh Calvary herded them like buffalo and killed the innocents. I suggest giving this song a listen from their point of view.

You recognize that massacre but for some strange reason not the Gaza genocide.

 

[DakotaKai_fan20]

You recognize that massacre but for some strange reason not the Gaza genocide.

You stalked me only to put your nonsense here.

 

[whitehall]

It's a matter of opinion who fired first in a historic event like this and it makes no difference. The U.S. Cavalry cut down men women and children mostly shot in the back. Would it be more appropriate to call it "The Slaughter at Wounded Knee"?

 

[mikegriffith1]

If liberals are truly serious about giving just the Sioux "their" land back, as defined by the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, here is the land area we would have turn over to Sioux control:

Half the state of Nebraska
Half the state of South Dakota
One-fourth of the state of North Dakota
One-sixth of the state of Colorado
One-third of the state of Wyoming
One-seventh of the state of Montana

Really? Really?

I used an errant map of the 1868 treaty area, but the map wasn't terribly far off. Here is the corrected list:

2/3 of the state of Nebraska
1/2 of the state of South Dakota
1/4th of the state of North Dakota
1/4th of the state of Wyoming
1/7th of the state of Montana

 

[Moonglow]

One of the saddest and most misleading modern revisions of history involves the 1890 incident at Wounded Knee, South Dakota, between the 7th Cavalry and some 200 Indians. Far from being a "massacre," Wounded Knee was a battle in which in the Indians fired first.

If you don't believe any of the accounts of the soldiers and officers who were there, perhaps you will believe the account of Father Francis Craft, who was there serving as an interpreter and who witnessed the entire event.

In the parlance of the day, Father Francis Craft was an "Indian lover." He served as a missionary among the Indians for years. As mentioned, he witnessed the incident because he was there serving as an interpreter. Although his sympathies were strongly with the Indians, so much so that he publicly wished to be buried among them, he made it clear that the Indians started the fighting at Wounded Knee, and he exonerated the soldiers. I will first quote from a letter he wrote that was published in newspapers soon after the battle, and then I will quote from his deposition.

Letter:

I authorize you to contradict for me in my name, through the press, the reports in circulation that blame the army for the sad tragedy at Wounded Knee creek. Those reports do grave injustice to our soldiers, and are instigated by those averse to an honorable settlement to the present trouble, and hostile to the decree of every true friend of the Indian, that they be permanently transferred from the charge of the Indian bureau to the war department. It is only by such a transfer that the Indians can expect just treatment. The whole trouble originated through interested whites [some local settlers and Bureau of Indian Affairs personnel], who had gone about most industriously and misrepresented the army and its movements upon all the agencies [Indian reservations]. The Indians, were in consequence alarmed and suspicious. They had been led to believe that the true aim of the military was their extermination. The troops acted with greatest kindness and prudence. In the Wounded Knee fight the Indians fired first. The troops fired only when compelled to. I was between both, saw all, and know from an absolute knowledge of the whole affair whereof I say. The Indians state the case just [as] I do. I have every proof at hand, and when able will forward full statement and documentary evidence. (Father Francis M. J. Craft – Missionary Wounded in Battle)

Deposition (note that he called Col. Forsyth, the local commander, by his brevet rank of General, a common practice):

REVEREND FRANCIS M. J. CRAFT, Catholic Missionary Priest, being duly sworn, testifies as follows:

I am a missionary priest of the Catholic church, and have worked in that capacity among the Indians of the northwest for the past ten years. I came to Pine Ridge Agency in December, 1890, to visit the Catholic missions and schools as a representative of the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions, and also to render what service I could in the settlement of the Indian troubles. . . .

In the morning, while the troops were preparing to disarm the Indians, I learned from several Indians with whom I spoke that they had left their agency, alarmed by the reports of the Indians who escaped from Standing Rock after the death of Sitting Bull. The Standing Rock Indians were not with them, but, as they said, left them on the way down, and went toward the Missouri. I saw that the Indians with whom I was speaking were the worst element of their agency, whose camp had for years been the rendezvous of all the worst characters on the Sioux Reservation.

About 8:30 A.M. General Forsyth called all the Indian men from the Indian camp to the point marked on the accompanying map, P, in order to separate them from the women and children. This seemed to be a very necessary precaution, although no trouble was apprehended. General Forsyth then spoke to the men through an interpreter, kindly and pleasantly, and explained the necessity of taking the arms, and assured them that they were perfectly safe in the hands of their old friends, the soldiers, and that starvation and other troubles were now happily at an end. The Indians answered in a way that showed they were pleased. Big Foot and others, however, denied having any guns, saying they had all been burned up.

General Forsyth reminded them, however, that the day before every man was seen to have at least one gun. General Forsyth then began sending the Indians in, a few at a time, to the camp to get their guns. They returned saying they had none. General Forsyth then pointed out to the Indians how plain it was they were deceiving him, and begged them not to compel him to search for the guns, but to have confidence in him and bring them themselves.

A medicine man now began praying, singing and walking around the circle of Indians, his words indicating that the Indians were afraid of what might happen to them when their guns would be taken, and going through various ceremonies that the soldiers' bullets might not hurt them. General Forsyth told him he had nothing to fear, and he was induced to sit down and be quiet.

As the Indians did not care to produce their guns, soldiers were sent to search for them in the Indian camp, but returned with very few. At this moment a soldier saw guns under the Indians' blankets, and informed General Forsyth and Major Whitside. As quietly as possible they directed the Indians to come forward, one by one, from the location marked on the map "P," to those marked "S" and "R," and throw aside their blankets and lay down their arms if they had any. Colonel Forsyth spoke very kindly to them, and said he did not wish himself to take their arms, but would rather they would come forward themselves like men and lay them down.

The Indians began to come forward as directed, one by one, to lay down their arms. Fifteen or twenty guns had been thus collected, when I heard among the soldiers in the positions marked "O" & "U," some one cry out "Look out, look at that," and saw them attempting to fall back to the square surrounding the Indians. I looked toward the Indians in the position marked "P," and saw that some were taking their guns from under their blankets and others were raising them ready to fire. The Indians seemed agitated. . . . I am convinced that the movement came from their fear of what might happen when the guns would be all surrendered, as they saw them being given up one by one. I went up to them and tried to reassure them, but very few listened to me.

It is possible that nothing might have occurred had not one young man, said to be the son of Big Foot, suddenly fired. His shot was followed by many others from the Indians. The soldiers did not fire until they were actually compelled to, and after the Indians had fired many shots.

When the soldiers returned the fire, the Indians broke up into small parties and charged back and forth across the square, firing and trying to break through. Some broke through towards the southwest, and some, I believe, towards the southeast. As they passed the end of the camp, a few women and children ran out and joined them.

The Hotchkiss battery opened on them as they crossed the agency road. It is possible that by this fire some women and children were killed. If so, the killing was unavoidable, as the soldiers could hardly have distinguished them from the men among whom they were, who were firing backwards as they ran. Many concealed themselves in the ravine. This ended the main battle, which lasted from one half to three-quarters of an hour. After all was over at least two shots were fired from the Indian camp "C," but the soldiers did not reply to them.

I was wounded early in the fight, but kept up until everything was over, and attended to the dying. After I finally gave out I was carried to the field hospital "J." I heard a volley of rifle shots fired from the Indian camp "C." No shots were fired by the soldiers for some minutes, but I heard some one shouting in "Dakota" as if an interpreter was speaking. The rifle shots from the camp continued and the Hotchkiss battery shelled the camp, and also the tents at "K" and "M," from which Indians were firing upon the soldiers.

I afterwards learned that contrary to their usual custom of protecting their women and children from danger, and of respecting the white flag, which they had hoisted over their camp, these Indians had actually managed to get back to their camp and fired from it upon the soldiers. If women and children were killed in the shelling of this camp, the Indians who caused it are to blame. I have heard this act of these Indians severely condemned by Brules and Ogalalas, who denounced them as murderers of the women and children, and exonerated the soldiers. (Father Francis M. J. Craft – Missionary Wounded in Battle)

Those who paint the battle as a massacre sometimes quote a few carefully chosen statements made by General Nathan Miles. However, although General Miles believed that the local commander, Col. Forsyth, had provoked the incident by badly mishandling the disarming of the Indians, he never claimed the incident was a massacre, and he approved medals for some of the soldiers who fought in the battle (Setting the Record Straight Regarding ‘Remove the Stain Act’).

Women and children were killed, they were unarmed.

 

[Moonglow]

The 7th Calvary was paying back the death of Custer.

 

[Unkotare]

Your "Father Francis" has no knowledge of the genocide. I suggest you read this:

Wounded Knee Massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Wikipedia? Really?

 

[AZrailwhale]

I think I do. I have studied endless hours of documentaries on the Indian compiled by hundreds of people. You knew one Indian.


Right. This was common practice, but only as much as they needed, and they took the meat and other stuff they needed. White man only wanted the hide. And the Indian did not hunt buffalo to extinction, white men did.

That's because there were not enough Indians to kill off the Buffalo. Their ancestors did a good job on Mastodons, Giant Sloths and all the other mega-fauna.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I think I do. I have studied endless hours of documentaries on the Indian compiled by hundreds of people. You knew one Indian.


Right. This was common practice, but only as much as they needed, and they took the meat and other stuff they needed. White man only wanted the hide. And the Indian did not hunt buffalo to extinction, white men did.

I will take the word of someone who was actually a participant over documentaries made a hundred years or more after the fact

 

[frigidweirdo]

One of the saddest and most misleading modern revisions of history involves the 1890 incident at Wounded Knee, South Dakota, between the 7th Cavalry and some 200 Indians. Far from being a "massacre," Wounded Knee was a battle in which in the Indians fired first.

If you don't believe any of the accounts of the soldiers and officers who were there, perhaps you will believe the account of Father Francis Craft, who was there serving as an interpreter and who witnessed the entire event.

In the parlance of the day, Father Francis Craft was an "Indian lover." He served as a missionary among the Indians for years. As mentioned, he witnessed the incident because he was there serving as an interpreter. Although his sympathies were strongly with the Indians, so much so that he publicly wished to be buried among them, he made it clear that the Indians started the fighting at Wounded Knee, and he exonerated the soldiers. I will first quote from a letter he wrote that was published in newspapers soon after the battle, and then I will quote from his deposition.

Letter:

I authorize you to contradict for me in my name, through the press, the reports in circulation that blame the army for the sad tragedy at Wounded Knee creek. Those reports do grave injustice to our soldiers, and are instigated by those averse to an honorable settlement to the present trouble, and hostile to the decree of every true friend of the Indian, that they be permanently transferred from the charge of the Indian bureau to the war department. It is only by such a transfer that the Indians can expect just treatment. The whole trouble originated through interested whites [some local settlers and Bureau of Indian Affairs personnel], who had gone about most industriously and misrepresented the army and its movements upon all the agencies [Indian reservations]. The Indians, were in consequence alarmed and suspicious. They had been led to believe that the true aim of the military was their extermination. The troops acted with greatest kindness and prudence. In the Wounded Knee fight the Indians fired first. The troops fired only when compelled to. I was between both, saw all, and know from an absolute knowledge of the whole affair whereof I say. The Indians state the case just [as] I do. I have every proof at hand, and when able will forward full statement and documentary evidence. (Father Francis M. J. Craft – Missionary Wounded in Battle)

Deposition (note that he called Col. Forsyth, the local commander, by his brevet rank of General, a common practice):

REVEREND FRANCIS M. J. CRAFT, Catholic Missionary Priest, being duly sworn, testifies as follows:

I am a missionary priest of the Catholic church, and have worked in that capacity among the Indians of the northwest for the past ten years. I came to Pine Ridge Agency in December, 1890, to visit the Catholic missions and schools as a representative of the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions, and also to render what service I could in the settlement of the Indian troubles. . . .

In the morning, while the troops were preparing to disarm the Indians, I learned from several Indians with whom I spoke that they had left their agency, alarmed by the reports of the Indians who escaped from Standing Rock after the death of Sitting Bull. The Standing Rock Indians were not with them, but, as they said, left them on the way down, and went toward the Missouri. I saw that the Indians with whom I was speaking were the worst element of their agency, whose camp had for years been the rendezvous of all the worst characters on the Sioux Reservation.

About 8:30 A.M. General Forsyth called all the Indian men from the Indian camp to the point marked on the accompanying map, P, in order to separate them from the women and children. This seemed to be a very necessary precaution, although no trouble was apprehended. General Forsyth then spoke to the men through an interpreter, kindly and pleasantly, and explained the necessity of taking the arms, and assured them that they were perfectly safe in the hands of their old friends, the soldiers, and that starvation and other troubles were now happily at an end. The Indians answered in a way that showed they were pleased. Big Foot and others, however, denied having any guns, saying they had all been burned up.

General Forsyth reminded them, however, that the day before every man was seen to have at least one gun. General Forsyth then began sending the Indians in, a few at a time, to the camp to get their guns. They returned saying they had none. General Forsyth then pointed out to the Indians how plain it was they were deceiving him, and begged them not to compel him to search for the guns, but to have confidence in him and bring them themselves.

A medicine man now began praying, singing and walking around the circle of Indians, his words indicating that the Indians were afraid of what might happen to them when their guns would be taken, and going through various ceremonies that the soldiers' bullets might not hurt them. General Forsyth told him he had nothing to fear, and he was induced to sit down and be quiet.

As the Indians did not care to produce their guns, soldiers were sent to search for them in the Indian camp, but returned with very few. At this moment a soldier saw guns under the Indians' blankets, and informed General Forsyth and Major Whitside. As quietly as possible they directed the Indians to come forward, one by one, from the location marked on the map "P," to those marked "S" and "R," and throw aside their blankets and lay down their arms if they had any. Colonel Forsyth spoke very kindly to them, and said he did not wish himself to take their arms, but would rather they would come forward themselves like men and lay them down.

The Indians began to come forward as directed, one by one, to lay down their arms. Fifteen or twenty guns had been thus collected, when I heard among the soldiers in the positions marked "O" & "U," some one cry out "Look out, look at that," and saw them attempting to fall back to the square surrounding the Indians. I looked toward the Indians in the position marked "P," and saw that some were taking their guns from under their blankets and others were raising them ready to fire. The Indians seemed agitated. . . . I am convinced that the movement came from their fear of what might happen when the guns would be all surrendered, as they saw them being given up one by one. I went up to them and tried to reassure them, but very few listened to me.

It is possible that nothing might have occurred had not one young man, said to be the son of Big Foot, suddenly fired. His shot was followed by many others from the Indians. The soldiers did not fire until they were actually compelled to, and after the Indians had fired many shots.

When the soldiers returned the fire, the Indians broke up into small parties and charged back and forth across the square, firing and trying to break through. Some broke through towards the southwest, and some, I believe, towards the southeast. As they passed the end of the camp, a few women and children ran out and joined them.

The Hotchkiss battery opened on them as they crossed the agency road. It is possible that by this fire some women and children were killed. If so, the killing was unavoidable, as the soldiers could hardly have distinguished them from the men among whom they were, who were firing backwards as they ran. Many concealed themselves in the ravine. This ended the main battle, which lasted from one half to three-quarters of an hour. After all was over at least two shots were fired from the Indian camp "C," but the soldiers did not reply to them.

I was wounded early in the fight, but kept up until everything was over, and attended to the dying. After I finally gave out I was carried to the field hospital "J." I heard a volley of rifle shots fired from the Indian camp "C." No shots were fired by the soldiers for some minutes, but I heard some one shouting in "Dakota" as if an interpreter was speaking. The rifle shots from the camp continued and the Hotchkiss battery shelled the camp, and also the tents at "K" and "M," from which Indians were firing upon the soldiers.

I afterwards learned that contrary to their usual custom of protecting their women and children from danger, and of respecting the white flag, which they had hoisted over their camp, these Indians had actually managed to get back to their camp and fired from it upon the soldiers. If women and children were killed in the shelling of this camp, the Indians who caused it are to blame. I have heard this act of these Indians severely condemned by Brules and Ogalalas, who denounced them as murderers of the women and children, and exonerated the soldiers. (Father Francis M. J. Craft – Missionary Wounded in Battle)

Those who paint the battle as a massacre sometimes quote a few carefully chosen statements made by General Nathan Miles. However, although General Miles believed that the local commander, Col. Forsyth, had provoked the incident by badly mishandling the disarming of the Indians, he never claimed the incident was a massacre, and he approved medals for some of the soldiers who fought in the battle (Setting the Record Straight Regarding ‘Remove the Stain Act’).

And yet the US was encroaching on Native American territory (they're not Indians, they never have been).

Kind of like someone coming into your home, and then knocking stuff on the floor, hitting your wife, then you slap the guy and he kills you, and it's your fault for slapping him.

 

[toobfreak]

These are typical of the arguments one gets from leftists when it comes to the American Indians.

Except I'm anything but a leftist.

No one is talking about "40,000 years ago."

You were. You asked who the Indians displaced. Well current evidence suggests that the original settlers coming here crossed the land bridge from Asia into Alaska up to 40,000 years ago.

the Indians did kill a huge portion of the buffalo population

Why would they do that when they DEPENDED on buffalo to live. Clearly, whatever they killed, there were still millions of buffalo.

Whites killed more, but the Indians killed a large number.

Clearly a nonsensical answer.

You talk about "whitewashing" one's history

No I don't. Show me where I ever said a thing about whitewashing anything? Are you an idiot?

the Cherokee and the Apache, treated other tribes makes the U.S. Government's treatment of the Indians look excessively tolerant

You have a real hangup on how Indians conducted their own internal affairs. Apparently you think that one wrong justifies another. No matter what Indians chose to do among themselves hardly gives the USA the right to come here and slaughter a race.

several Indian tribes, including the Cherokee and the Sioux and the Seminoles, practiced forms of slavery

Most every nation around the globe throughout history, practiced slavery. Moot point.

If liberals are truly serious about giving just the Sioux "their" land back, as defined by the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, here is the land area we would have turn over to Sioux control:

Half the state of Nebraska
Half the state of South Dakota
One-fourth of the state of North Dakota
One-sixth of the state of Colorado
One-third of the state of Wyoming
One-seventh of the state of Montana

Then maybe the USA ought to honor their own treaty by coming to some agreement to give the Indians a "cut" off the top of all GDP from these regions for their benefit, say, 10%? That would be enormous. I think the USA needs to come to terms with what they did and come clean and make restitution to the Indians far more than they do with the Blacks.

The Sioux could have this money next week if they accepted the settlement, but they still refuse to accept it and still insist they want "their" land back.

Shame on them, wanting justice.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I’m a Native American and I have no lineage connecting me to tribes of this hemisphere. I was born, raised and have lived my life as an American. That makes me a Native American.
As for american Indians, it’s important to note that virtually every North American Indian tribe exterminated every preceding tribe. Genocide. Survival mode.
European settlers, while encroaching via progress, ultimately broke the cycle of genocide and provided reservations. Unfortunately, Americans reneged on some of those conditions once gold was discovered there.
It’s also important to consider the survival mode everyone was in in those days. Applying today’s standards is disingenuous to say the least.

 

[toobfreak]

Applying today’s standards is disingenuous to say the least.

You cannot apply modern standards to ancient times, whether it be Indians, slavery or anything else. We live the benefit of far greater science and hundreds of years of learning from past mistakes and errors which people long ago didn't have.

That is why it is called evolution.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

You cannot apply modern standards to ancient times, whether it be Indians, slavery or anything else. We live the benefit of far greater science and hundreds of years of learning from past mistakes and errors which people long ago didn't have.

That is why it is called evolution.

More importantly, people in previous centuries were constantly in a survival mode that we cannot even comprehend today. It weighed extremely heavily on decision making.

 

[toobfreak]

More importantly, people in previous centuries were constantly in a survival mode that we cannot even comprehend today.

I can comprehend it, but I'm sure that Gen Z cannot.

To kids today, a harrowing day is if the web goes down or the battery in their phone dies.

Its scary. I go out and /everyone/ has their face in a cellphone. I noticed recently that around 90-95% of all TV commercials at some point involve or at least show a cellphone.