James M. Redwine

Manifest Destiny

The Crusade Charade

by Leave a Comment

The Crusades were the outgrowth of many factors but they are generally categorized as a series of wars between European Christians and Middle Eastern Muslims occurring from 1096 to 1291 AD involving competing claims over the Holy Land, especially Jerusalem. The catalyst for the first Crusade was a call to Christians made by Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont in France in November 1095. Urban declared that God had willed Christians to oust Muslims from the sacred sites. Urban promised remission of sins for any Christian who died in this vital service of Christ. Thousands of English, French, German, Italian, Spanish and others “took up the cross.”

Later in the New World, priests, clerics and politicians and plain Americans have spent from the 15th century to 2024 spreading the gospel at home and continuing to attempt to control the beliefs and behaviors of Middle Easterners. Manifest Destiny was based on the premise that the god of Christians had ordained that America must eliminate paganism and not commit the sin of omitting to develop the land. Such “crusades” as the Trail of Tears were the outgrowth of European immigrants and their descendants’ beliefs that their god had ordained that America was the Promised Land for Caucasian Christians and that Native Americans had to be evicted, killed or converted to Christianity. This ingrained racial memory from 1492 until today may influence the justification for our invasions into the Muslim Middle East. Just as Native Americans had to be destroyed to save them, Muslims are still the enemies of Christ who must be saved from their misguided faith.

Most recently the United States has continued the tradition of the Crusades by invading Iraq twice and belligerently engaging Iran and such groups as ISIS, Hamas, Taliban, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and others. America designates these groups as terrorists but they claim to be part of a resistance movement. These organizations are generally Islamic in their religion as were the native Arabs and Persians during the original Crusades. There were Jewish populations in the Holy Land during the time Christian Europeans were seeking to take over the Middle East, but they were a small minority and could not mount an effective resistance to the Crusades.

Today, due to the world’s post-holocaust revulsion of the Nazi atrocities and the beliefs of many American fundamentalist Christians, such as dreamers in the Rapture, the United States is defending Israel’s aggression and is allied with the Zionists against Muslims, especially Iranians. Many of our politicians and much of the national media are on a crusade to support the hegemony of Israel under the guise of its self-defense. Israel has nuclear weapons it developed by spying on the United States and has an extremely modern and powerful military. It has nothing to fear from the rag-tag Muslim militias even if they are backed by countries such as Iran, China and Russia. Israel does not need our military support. And its current aggression in Lebanon, Iran, Syria, Gaza and elsewhere, to say nothing, as most media does, about Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians, clearly proves Israel does not deserve our support.

Israel is conducting its own crusade against Muslim countries in the Holy Land. If the United States cannot find the moral courage to confront this decades long injustice, we should, at least, not supply it with weapons and diplomatic immunity. It is long past the time America atoned for its own sins against our native population and that we not repeat those sins in the Middle East. To do so, all we need is to be guided by those principles of our Constitution and the philosophy of that Christian faith many Americans profess. Perhaps, if we make a good faith effort to act in the Middle East as the country we claim to be, we will not be misled by the Zionists among the Israelis into the same type of disaster those holier than thou European Crusaders had to endure a thousand years ago.

 

20,000 “Accidents”

by Leave a Comment

Photo by Peg Redwine

Israel’s soldiers killed three former Israeli Jewish hostages December 15, 2023 in the Gaza Strip. According to Israeli Defense Forces accounts the three men were unarmed and shirtless. They carried a white flag with the word “HELP” written in Hebrew. The men cried out to the soldiers for help in Hebrew as they held their arms up while emerging from a building. The Israeli soldiers immediately shot and killed two of the men and wounded the third man who retreated back into a building. The soldiers followed him, and even after their commander ordered the firing to stop, the soldiers killed the third man.

Israel called the incident a “tragic accident”. But the killings were intentional, not accidental. Those three killings of unarmed Israelis were the same as the 20,000 intentional killings of Palestinian civilians by Israel since the October 07, 2023 intentional killings of 1,200 Israelis by Hamas.

Israel is responsible for the destruction of water resources, hospitals, mosques, churches, businesses and homes in Gaza. By preventing humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza, Israel is responsible for the endemic disease, thirst and starvation of up to 2.2 million Palestinians, 70% of whom are women and children. The armaments, money and political cover given to Israel by the United States enable this deliberate genocide.

Israel asserts that by dropping leaflets that order civilians to abandon their homes Israel is absolved from killing them. But the people have nowhere to go as the 2.2 million Palestinian civilians in Gaza have the Mediterranean Sea to their north, Egypt to their west and are otherwise surrounded by Israel. Egypt and Jordan have taken some refugees in but have no obligation to do so. Israel is responsible for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and should be mainly responsible for assuaging it.

Gaza is an area of 360 square kilometers and Israel has 22,143 square kilometers. If, in fact, Israel wishes to avoid civilian casualties, it should allow the Palestinian civilians to shelter inside Israel, especially East Jerusalem, until the war ends and Gaza is re-built for human living. Border crossings from Gaza into Israel could be opened with quick and efficient security checks. Aid from the United States could provide temporary shelters, food, water and medical care. Great Britain, that created Israel out of Palestine starting in 1917 through 1948, also could and should help provide border security and humanitarian aid.

A reasonable alternative, if Israel does not wish to have the Palestinian civilians sheltered within the borders of Israel, would be to have non-Hamas Palestinians moved to the current illegal Israeli settlements in both Gaza and the West Bank. These areas are already free of Hamas fighters and have shelters, water, medical facilities and security checkpoints in place. The illegal Israeli squatters would have to be ordered to vacate the areas. But that is already called for by international law. If East Jerusalem, Gaza and the West Bank were used to shelter Palestinians, that would be consistent with the pre-1967 borders and consistent with the Oslo Accords for a two-state situation.

Of Gaza’s 2.2 million population, at the most 40,000 are with Hamas. Screening the refugees would not be onerous as anyone who has walked through a magnetometer or who has been scanned with a hand-held unit can attest. Once the conflict ends, that is, once Israel is satisfied Hamas is no longer a threat, the United States, Great Britain, Israel and the United Nations could carry out a Marshall Plan to repatriate the Palestinians or the state of Palestine could finally be established.

 The United States is almost alone in its support of Israel’s genocide of Gaza’s Palestinians. The United Nations has called repeatedly for a humanitarian ceasefire and humanitarian aid to Palestinians, but until December 22, 2023 the U.S. blocked such action by veto. Finally, the U.N. Security Council managed to pass a weakly worded resolution allowing some humanitarian aid; the United States abstained. However, Israel has indicated it will not cooperate with the resolution, so innocent civilians will continue to be killed by Israel and those not directly killed by Israeli military action will die from or be degraded by deprivation of basic humanitarian necessities.

Why is America putting its prestige on the line to support Israel’s position? The answer may lie in history. Israel claims its god gave Palestine to the Hebrew people and helped them escape bondage in Egypt. Most estimates are the Book of Exodus was written during the 13 century B.C. A part of that divine intervention was the killing by Israel’s god of the first-born child of every Egyptian from Pharoah’s, to those of prisoners in dungeons and even the first-born of maidservants. The Israelis still celebrate this genocidal slaughter of innocent humans on Passover. Also, their god caused the Red Sea to part and drown all of Pharoah’s army. Then, according to the Jewish myth, their god gave the Hebrews the land already owned and inhabited by the Canaanites and others. See the Book of Exodus, Chapters 10-13.

Many of our early American ancestors of mainly European descent believed their Christian god gave us mainly white Americans all the land from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, Manifest Destiny, even though it was already inhabited by millions of Native Americans. And just as Israel has demonized Palestinians as terrorists for many years, America’s Declaration of Independence describes Native Americans as:

“He (King George III) … has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

The cultural memories and Volksgeists of America and Israel are strikingly similar and the religions of both assuage any moral dilemmas from eliminating the original inhabitants of coveted land and resources by any means deemed necessary. The German philosopher Friedrich Carl von Savigny (1779-1861) and the Austrian philosopher Hans Kelsen (1881-1973) described these memories as the Volksgeist or spirit of a people. And the German psychologist Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) said these subconscious suppressed memories can actuate behaviors. Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) was a Swiss psychologist and psychiatrist who posited humans act and react as archetypes based on historical myths that are sometimes misinterpreted or misapplied.

What this may mean for America is we Americans often see ourselves as always doing good. As French sociologist Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) said, “America is great because she is good”. Many of us tend to believe that whatever we do is divinely inspired and cannot be wrong. Israel may see itself as an historic victim that must always be in a self-defense mode, a Volksgeist of being in constant fear of annihilation. And many of us Americans have often seen ourselves as that miraculous shining city on a hill that gives light to the world and is always on the side of right.

That may be why Israel and America stand virtually by ourselves on the developing genocide in Gaza. We both may need to re-examine the validity of our myths and the morality of our actions.

Scene of Washita Massacre. Photo by Peg Redwine

 

Hot Lead or Cold Water

by Leave a Comment

At the Washita Battlefield, November 21, 2021. Photo by Peg Redwine

Charles Brill’s account of the November 27, 1868 incident between Black Kettle’s Cheyenne tribe and U.S. 7thCavalry troops led by Lt. Col. George Custer is entitled, Conquest of the Southern Plains: Uncensored Narrative of the Washita and Custer’s Southern Campaign. Brill’s 1938 publication relied on eyewitness accounts from aged Indian survivors of the conflict. Brill personally took Cheyennes Magpie and Little Beaver and Arapaho Left Hand along with government interpreter John Otterby, a.k.a. Lean Elk, to the site of the attack. This article relies on the 2001 republication of Brill’s accounts by the University of Oklahoma Press re-titled Custer, Black Kettle, and the Fight on the Washita.

The fertile Washita River valley area on the western edge of Indian Territory (Oklahoma) had been a common peaceful wintering ground for numerous Indian tribes for countless years before 1868. There was an abundance of water, game, shelter and vegetation. It was also an area set aside for the Indians in several treaties with the United States between Black Kettle’s Cheyenne and other tribes. On the bitterly cold, snow-covered morning of November 27, 1868 the Indians’ only concerns were keeping warm and tending to their horses. Then Custer’s seven hundred mounted soldiers came charging at the sleepy Indians from all sides with rifles blazing and sabers slashing.

Black Kettle & Medicine Woman Later Crime Scene. Photo by Peg Redwine

Black Kettle was alerted by a woman who had been tending to the horses and first saw the approaching soldiers. When she yelled out “Soldiers, soldiers!”, Black Kettle fired a warning shot with his rifle to awaken the camp. Then Black Kettle drew his wife, Medicine Woman, up behind him on his pony and attempted to flee as he and Medicine Woman shouted warnings to the camp. He and Medicine Woman were then shot and killed. Magpie, one of the eyewitnesses Brill relied upon, heard Black Kettles’ warning shot and exited his lodge just as he heard a trumpet blast from the nearby trees and then saw the mounted soldiers charging into the village from all sides. Magpie was shot in the leg but managed to escape death by entering the freezing water and hiding in the brush along the banks.

As reported by Brill at page 159:

“From every side came the heavy report of carbines. Occasionally an Indian rifle answered. But these were notable for their infrequency. So sudden had been the attack, only a few of the red men had opportunity to arm themselves. Most of those who did so had only bows and arrows. They were powerless to offer serious resistance. Flight was their only objective.

Those villagers whose tepees stood nearest the stream fared better than their friends in the center and on the south side of the camp. First to dash through the icy waters of the Washita and scramble up the opposite bank found themselves running into scouts and sharpshooters who had deployed in the timber there. They also encountered troopers, mounted and dismounted. Seeing escape shut off in that direction, the fugitives accepted the only avenue left open to them, the channel itself. It was misery to wade its ice-fringed waters, but it was either that or bullets.

Women and children, as well as braves, plunged into the stream. Most of them were scantily clad. Many were without moccasins on their feet. Frequently the water reached to the armpits of adults who had to carry the children through these deep pools to prevent their drowning. Desperately they splashed their way beyond the lines of their enemies.”

Sometimes the fog of history eventually is pierced by uncomfortable facts. The Washita massacre was originally reported as a great military victory over savage foes by courageous heroes. Those reports originated from the “heroes”. The facts managed to slowly ooze out over a great deal of time. Those facts established the betrayal of morality and violations of treaties. They do not tell us, “Why?” The reasons may be explained by Pawnee attorney and scholar of law and history Walter R. Echo-Hawk in his book on bad court cases involving Native American treatment by the dominant white culture.

In the Courts of the Conquerors, The 10 Worst Indian Law Cases Ever Decided contemplates the roots of the doctrine of Manifest Destiny and its raison d’être, The White Man’s Burden:

“A popular justification for colonialism among the colonizing nations was the white man’s burden. Originally coined by Rudyard Kipling, the term is a euphemism for imperialism based upon the presumed responsibility of white people to exercise hegemony over nonwhite people, to impart Christianity and European values, thereby uplifting the inferior and uncivilized peoples of the world. In this ethnocentric view, non-European cultures are seen as childlike, barbaric, or otherwise inferior and in need of European guidance for their own good. As thus viewed from European eyes, colonization became a noble undertaking done charitably for the benefit of peoples of color.” See p. 16

The concept of exterminating Native American culture as justified because it was replaced with the blessings of Christianity and civilization is hardly a new idea. The Romans by force of arms visited their supposed superior culture on “lesser” peoples as have many dominate societies for thousands of years. The germ of “destroying a culture to save it” is easily discovered by any powerful society that wants to take what some weaker society has. However, that there was ample precedent for the massacre at the Washita does not expiate Custer’s assault and does not obviate the moral imperative to remember it.

Washita Battlefield. Photo by Peg Redwine