Conspiracies That Deal with the Indigenous Peoples of North America

[Scott Sommers]

So here's the thread.

I am found a number of conspiracy theories that deal with indigenous peoples of Canada and the USA, particularly Indians. In Canada, Kevin Annett has been pushing the idea that Indian residential homes were part of a planned extermination of Indians. His ideas include not only systematic murder but also accusations that the Queen of England personally kidnapped Indian children
http://itccs.org/2011/02/28/star-eye...uver-hospital/,
that Indians were subjected to bizarre tortures that resemble the sorts of claims made in accusations of Ritual Satanic Abuse
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/04/30/TruthAndAbuse/
and that the Vancouver City Police and other city elites are involved in a child slavery ring that targets Indian children
http://newworldorderreport.com/News/...Vancouver.aspx
The whole thing is very complicated. His Wiki is here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Annett

Connected to this are claims about the origin of Indians in North America that appear to be saying that Indians never arrived in North America but have always been here. There is a book that makes this claim, but I can't remember the name. I have also seen letters in Canadian newspapers protesting the celebration of Empire Days using this argument.

That's what I mean by Indian conspiracies.

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Connected to this are claims about the origin of Indians in North America that appear to be saying that Indians never arrived in North America but have always been here. There is a book that makes this claim, but I can't remember the name. I have also seen letters in Canadian newspapers protesting the celebration of Empire Days using this argument.

I think this one would fall more under "pseudo-history" or "pseudo-archaeology" than Conspiracy Theories. It's basically asserting that Native origin mythologies are more accurate than the current understanding of the archaeological record.

[seayakin]

Originally Posted by Horatius

I think this one would fall more under "pseudo-history" or "pseudo-archaeology" than Conspiracy Theories. It's basically asserting that Native origin mythologies are more accurate than the current understanding of the archaeological record.

If your including this, then I would also include the whole Mormon thing.

[Scott Sommers]

Originally Posted by Horatius

I think this one would fall more under "pseudo-history" or "pseudo-archaeology" than Conspiracy Theories. It's basically asserting that Native origin mythologies are more accurate than the current understanding of the archaeological record.

I was thinking the same thing, but I believe they are connected. One of things that a theory of Indian origins like this implies is a suppression of evidence. The book that I refer to is written by a journalist who has no scientific background. One of the points in the book is that some time in her 'research' the FBI began investigating her. I don't know the details because I have not read the book.

If we take this body of writing as a whole, the implication is that European colonial society planned to wipe out Indians. This did not succeed and history has been rewritten to cover up this fact. It is logically structured in the same way as Holocaust denial.

In fact, Kevin Annett frequently makes the comparison with the Holocaust. He takes this much further. One of his claims is that Nazi scientists were in Canada before WWII assisting with the extermination of Indian at the Kuper Island Residential School
http://www.heyokamagazine.com/heyoka.6.kevinanett.htm

My reading of this is that the discourse about Indian origins is just another angle on the theft of Indian history.

On a related point, Anthony J. Hall, who has written about the colonization of Indians in British North America is a prominent 9/11 conspiracy theorist. He publishes articles in Veterans Today, which is a venue run and promoted by Holocaust deniers.

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by seayakin

If your including this, then I would also include the whole Mormon thing.

Without a doubt. On the Skeptours cruise last spring, Cleon gave a good talk on this.

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

I was thinking the same thing, but I believe they are connected. One of things that a theory of Indian origins like this implies is a suppression of evidence. The book that I refer to is written by a journalist who has no scientific background. One of the points in the book is that some time in her 'research' the FBI began investigating her. I don't know the details because I have not read the book.

If we take this body of writing as a whole, the implication is that European colonial society planned to wipe out Indians. This did not succeed and history has been rewritten to cover up this fact. It is logically structured in the same way as Holocaust denial.

Well, there is quite often overlap in these things. How you choose to classify them is really a matter of degree , but it does have some implications for noticing similar trends of thought between otherwise unrelated topics.

[L.Y.S.]

Extermination was never the plan of the European colonists. Massive death from disease just happened. And when it did happen, those who it provided an advantage to exploited the advantage. If the goal were to exterminate then there would be no Native Americans. There are tens of millions of Native Americans south of the border, to the point where in some nations they even form the majority or the vast majority of the population (i.e. Mexico) has fairly recent mixing in their lineage.

In North America however, I think the goal is closer to keeping Native Americans who are making demands out of mind and out of sight. And they are such a small portion of our populations that these demands often go unheeded and they remain a figment of most Americans imaginations, to the extent that many Americans say "Native Americans don't even exist anymore, we killed them all." That's powerful mental magic if you can convince several people to adopt this mindset. This suggests a powerful mental block.

[Border Reiver]

If your second paragraph is what the dominant society is trying to do in NA we're failing miserably.

The Council of First Nations, and the government (Dept of Indian and Northern Affairs) don't seem to have gotten the memo

[Gazpacho]

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

Extermination was never the plan of the European colonists. Massive death from disease just happened.

Oh I don't think you can quite say "never."

[Tomtomkent]

Originally Posted by Border Reiver

If your second paragraph is what the dominant society is trying to do in NA we're failing miserably.

The Council of First Nations, and the government (Dept of Indian and Northern Affairs) don't seem to have gotten the memo

True. And is not helped by a popular image of the culture of Native Americans being adopted across the world. The image of the proud and noble warrior staring into the distance with spiritual thoughts behind his eyes may be stereotyping, but it is as much an icon of Americana as cowboys, cheeseburgers and The Nighthawks.

There is an awful ot of history that America (and others) doesn't like to linger on, but that does not mean past mistakes have not been admitted and recognised. But if they are taking the stance of putting their fingers in their ears and pretending it didn't happen then their whole "learning from history lest we repeat it" attitude is the wrong way to keep it quiet. What with talking about it loudly and all...

[Scott Sommers]

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

Oh I don't think you can quite say "never."

The point that Kevin Annett is trying make is different from this. He is claiming that residential schools in Canada were a part of this strategy in the same way that concentration camps were in Nazi Germany. While many Indians escaped death in a residential school, this was because of either an error or a limitation in the killing machine. He states that this killing machine continued in operation up until the 1960s and that , like the Nazi Final Solution, operated with the conscious knowledge of the highest state officials.

He makes minor claims to support this position, that Queen Elizabeth II personally abducted Indian children in a Royal Visit to Kamloops. He claims that officials in the Vancouver City Police regularly abduct Indian children, sometimes on the instructions of serial killers.

So his point is not that smallpox was used to systematically kill Indians so it would be easier to confiscate their land. His claim is that the Canadian State has and continues to systematically kill Indians as a part of a policy.

[Gazpacho]

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

The point that Kevin Annett is trying make is different from this. He is claiming that residential schools in Canada were a part of this strategy in the same way that concentration camps were in Nazi Germany. While many Indians escaped death in a residential school, this was because of either an error or a limitation in the killing machine. He states that this killing machine continued in operation up until the 1960s and that , like the Nazi Final Solution, operated with the conscious knowledge of the highest state officials.

First, I'll remind you that the statutory definition of genocide goes beyond mere killing.

Second, like the "3/5 clause" in the US constitution or the Mandan smallpox epidemic, there is a fundamental question of perspective involved: Can one trust aboriginal people to interpret historical events, to identify causes and effects, or does every claim have to be refereed by "objective" white people? Annett comes up with far more evidence, mostly from aboriginal sources, than writers on the former examples have.

[L.Y.S.]

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

Oh I don't think you can quite say "never."

Well you know on a forum of skeptics and not conspiracy theorists you have to be sort of careful with making accusations. I have no doubt that there is some sort of desire to remove the indigenous, but if there was a desire to exterminate, why haven't they been completely exterminate?

[twinstead]

What is the motivation for exterminating indigenous North Americans in this day and age anyway?

[carlitos]

To get control of the lucrative casino and tobacco businesses. Open your eyes, sheeple!

[Gazpacho]

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

Well you know on a forum of skeptics and not conspiracy theorists you have to be sort of careful with making accusations. I have no doubt that there is some sort of desire to remove the indigenous,

No LYS, the word that appears in the sources is "exterminate." Not just "remove."

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

but if there was a desire to exterminate, why haven't they been completely exterminate?

Because it's a huge logistical problem. Because the victims resist. Because people raise moral questions. This argument makes no more sense in the context of North America than it does in the context of 20th-century Europe.

[Travis]

Has any factual evidence of purposeful smallpox infection ever been turned up?

[Scott Sommers]

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

First, I'll remind you that the statutory definition of genocide goes beyond mere killing.

Second, like the "3/5 clause" in the US constitution or the Mandan smallpox epidemic, there is a fundamental question of perspective involved: Can one trust aboriginal people to interpret historical events, to identify causes and effects, or does every claim have to be refereed by "objective" white people? Annett comes up with far more evidence, mostly from aboriginal sources, than writers on the former examples have.

Thank you for raising the issue of genocide. It was not a word I had used so far, but it is where Annett is trying to take this.

One of the things about Annett's claims that is quite different from other similar claims is that no one has responded by calling him a conspiracy theorist. In fact, he has received quite positive response from people who otherwise are very opposed to the whole idea of a conspiracy theory. The reasons for this, I suspect, are 2 fold. One is that this is a topic that at some level we all agree on. Who on Earth wants to defend, at any level, the murder of Indians?

But the second reason is that Annett seems to be following some sort of legitimate investigative principles. He seems to be citing evidence that he uncovered using techniques that are widely used in other forms of investigation. I think this is what you mean when you say,

Quote:

Annett comes up with far more evidence, mostly from aboriginal sources, than writers on the former examples have.

As far as I can tell, almost everything that Annett says about evidence, is about evidence he says does exist but that he can not show to you. He provides statements from eye-witness testimony that such things exist, but the content of these statements is - for lack of a better word - weird. The whole idea that Queen Elizabeth II personally kidnapped Indian boys and girls is so strange as to destroy the credibility of any further claims he makes.

I suppose what I'm saying is that he looks and sounds like he's making scientific statements derived from a principled investigation, but the content of his statements is bizarre. The content of his statements matches no known description. He can find no verified evidence to corroborate his statements. For example, the idea that The Queen committs crimes is not so strange to me that I could not believe it, but the details of his allegations involve the The Queen and her entourage in a small Canadian town vanishing from the public eye for almost an entire day without any record of this existing anywhere. His claims are the only source of proof for his arguments.

His arguments appear much more like those used to support Ritual Satanic Abuse, or even the existence of the Illuminati, than a real criminal investigation.

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by Travis

Has any factual evidence of purposeful smallpox infection ever been turned up?

AFAIK, it's pretty anecdotal. Don't think I've ever seen any indication it was large scale or organized in any significant fashion.

[Gazpacho]

Originally Posted by Travis

Has any factual evidence of purposeful smallpox infection ever been turned up?

Is the link I posted regarding the Fort Pitt siege not what you're looking for?

[Gazpacho]

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

As far as I can tell, almost everything that Annett says about evidence, is about evidence he says does exist but that he can not show to you. He provides statements from eye-witness testimony that such things exist, but the content of these statements is - for lack of a better word - weird. The whole idea that Queen Elizabeth II personally kidnapped Indian boys and girls is so strange as to destroy the credibility of any further claims he makes.

His allegation of aboriginal children being kidnapped by the Queen is pretty far out. However I cannot dismiss all his allegations about the residential schools so easily. Many of them (spreading of disease, poisoning, disappearances) are just the kind of atrocities that occur when one group of people dehumanizes another, from Mississippi to Abu Ghraib.

[L.Y.S.]

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

No LYS, the word that appears in the sources is "exterminate." Not just "remove."

Wow, I'm lost for words. I think I'll put that post as my quote so people have fair evidence of what is going on.

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

Because it's a huge logistical problem. Because the victims resist. Because people raise moral questions. This argument makes no more sense in the context of North America than it does in the context of 20th-century Europe.

Gazpacho, you know me bro, I make those arguments in this forum all the time. They go unheard by individuals needing more evidence or trying to silence me. Typically those conservative persons who want to hear nothing of the subject. Who continue to think that there is nothing wrong with the present treatment of Native Americans.

It is one of those things that nag my moral conscious every day. IN my heart I love this country but it is seriously something I am not too proud of. And it truly does upset me that we do not do more to right this situation.

[Travis]

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

Is the link I posted regarding the Fort Pitt siege not what you're looking for?

It was never independently verified. Smallpox was already endemic in the region at that point.

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Scott Sommers

Thank you for raising the issue of genocide. It was not a word I had used so far, but it is where Annett is trying to take this.

One of the things about Annett's claims that is quite different from other similar claims is that no one has responded by calling him a conspiracy theorist. In fact, he has received quite positive response from people who otherwise are very opposed to the whole idea of a conspiracy theory. The reasons for this, I suspect, are 2 fold. One is that this is a topic that at some level we all agree on. Who on Earth wants to defend, at any level, the murder of Indians?

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

His allegation of aboriginal children being kidnapped by the Queen is pretty far out. However I cannot dismiss all his allegations about the residential schools so easily.

I think this is a factor. From the blurb Scott linked to:

Quote:

His book, Unrepentant, details his story of how refusing to remain silent about the history of abuse and death in Canada’s Indian Residential Schools

No reasonable person would deny that there were serious abuses in the Residential Schools. In so far as he speaks to those issues, lots of people would therefore agree with him. It then becomes a question of why his other ideas, like the Queen Elizabeth claims, don't get more attention. It could be that he targets his message to his audience, only talking about the more reasonable claims when in front of a mainstream audience, so people just aren't aware of his more outlandish claims.

It could also be the Crazy Uncle effect. You listen to what your crazy uncle says when he's telling you about things that are reasonable, and that can be confirmed by other evidence, but when he starts off onto his Crazy Tangents, you just ignore him. Because even crazy people can know some truths, and just because he doesn't have adequate evidence for some of his beliefs, doesn't mean he lacks such evidence for all of his beliefs.

[Scott Sommers]

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

His allegation of aboriginal children being kidnapped by the Queen is pretty far out. However I cannot dismiss all his allegations about the residential schools so easily. Many of them (spreading of disease, poisoning, disappearances) are just the kind of atrocities that occur when one group of people dehumanizes another, from Mississippi to Abu Ghraib.

No one in Canada doubts that the residential school system was barbaric. In fact, the Canadian government has held extensive hearings on this, The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC)
and the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Payout plan,

Quote:

sets out the terms and conditions for the payment of restitution to former students of Indian Residential Schools. The Settlement Agreement stipulates that $1.9 billion be set aside for the direct benefit of former Indian Residential School students. Subject to verification, each eligible former student who applies will receive $10,000 as well as an additional $3,000 for each year of residence beyond the first year. It is expected the average payment will be about $28,000

In fact, Kevin Annett is a direct attack on this. I can not find any references to this, so perhaps I heard them in his documentary Unrepentant, which you can find in its entirety on Youtube.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Annett has a group of supporters who follow him around and terrorize groups willing to accept the results of the Canadian government's Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. You can find all sorts of things about his claims by Googling his name.

I suspect one of the reasons you don't hear more about Annett and other outlandish claims made about Indian history is that people just feel too guilty about it all. Who wants to be the person associated with defending the Canadian government against charges of racism? No matter how outlandish the claim may be, there's a feeling in the back of even my mind that Canada and its white settlers - like me - deserve it all.

But all of this is conspiracy theory and Annett does make claims linking residential school atrocities with more conventional conspiracy claims, like MKULTRA
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/04/30/TruthAndAbuse/
and his websites are of interest to gang stalking advocates
http://osnanaimo.org/
This site claims to link residential schools with Nazi atrocities
http://www.whale.to/b/mengele.html

[Gazpacho]

Originally Posted by Travis

It was never independently verified. Smallpox was already endemic in the region at that point.

Fort Pitt is the clearest example of Europeans intending to infect, and acting to infect the Indians with smallpox. I can't imagine what kind of evidence you might want that would be available from that time.

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by Gazpacho

Fort Pitt is the clearest example of Europeans intending to infect, and acting to infect the Indians with smallpox. I can't imagine what kind of evidence you might want that would be available from that time.

Well, even for argument's sake accepting Ft. Pitt - how is one isolated incident indicative of a mass concerted effort toward genocide?

[Gazpacho]

Originally Posted by Robrob

Well, even for argument's sake accepting Ft. Pitt - how is one isolated incident indicative of a mass concerted effort toward genocide?

I didn't refer to it in isolation.

[L.Y.S.]

Originally Posted by Robrob

Well, even for argument's sake accepting Ft. Pitt - how is one isolated incident indicative of a mass concerted effort toward genocide?

I highly doubt this is an isolated incident, and I further doubt that evidence of such atrocities would be scattered around for easy use. What nation wants these sorts of demonizing acts hanging over their heads? I am guessing that other than indirect evidence, most evidence is either destroyed or buried deep within the confines of government. Gazpacho makes a pretty good point and whether or not we desire to accept this, it is a complete plausibility that Native Americans were a target in extermination.

I think the greatest evidence is in the population difference between Latin America and America. In Latin America where the population was simply mixed, there are tens of millions. In America were the population was thoroughly separated and isolated there are only a few hundred thousand natives of one race and about 2 million of “other races”. In fact, the largest growing group in Latin America are the indigenous. The average Mayan woman has 7 children, and there are already 7 million Maya. There will be hundreds of millions of natives in Latin America by next century if this trend continues. However, in America the population growth is stagnant and according to some demographic studies, declining. The number of natives in America will shrink to dangerously low levels by 2050. This leads me to believe that there were practices to help keep and maintain the low populations in America, but at this point, it is nothing more than speculation on my part.

[Captain_Swoop]

It's well known that QE2 likes to snack on a child from one of the Colonies every now and then.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

I highly doubt this is an isolated incident, and I further doubt that evidence of such atrocities would be scattered around for easy use. What nation wants these sorts of demonizing acts hanging over their heads? I am guessing that other than indirect evidence, most evidence is either destroyed or buried deep within the confines of government. Gazpacho makes a pretty good point and whether or not we desire to accept this, it is a complete plausibility that Native Americans were a target in extermination.

I think the greatest evidence is in the population difference between Latin America and America. In Latin America where the population was simply mixed, there are tens of millions. In America were the population was thoroughly separated and isolated there are only a few hundred thousand natives of one race and about 2 million of “other races”. In fact, the largest growing group in Latin America are the indigenous. The average Mayan woman has 7 children, and there are already 7 million Maya. There will be hundreds of millions of natives in Latin America by next century if this trend continues. However, in America the population growth is stagnant and according to some demographic studies, declining. The number of natives in America will shrink to dangerously low levels by 2050. This leads me to believe that there were practices to help keep and maintain the low populations in America, but at this point, it is nothing more than speculation on my part.

So the fact that there's no evidence is the best proof that it took place?

[tsig]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

It's well known that QE2 likes to snack on a child from one of the Colonies every now and then.

Who doesn't?

[Border Reiver]

Only if they've been properly marinated.

[Scott Sommers]

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

I think the greatest evidence is in the population difference between Latin America and America. In Latin America where the population was simply mixed, there are tens of millions. In America were the population was thoroughly separated and isolated there are only a few hundred thousand natives of one race and about 2 million of “other races”. In fact, the largest growing group in Latin America are the indigenous. The average Mayan woman has 7 children, and there are already 7 million Maya. There will be hundreds of millions of natives in Latin America by next century if this trend continues. However, in America the population growth is stagnant and according to some demographic studies, declining. The number of natives in America will shrink to dangerously low levels by 2050. This leads me to believe that there were practices to help keep and maintain the low populations in America, but at this point, it is nothing more than speculation on my part.

This is a great conspiracy idea. I don't believe it is true, though. At least the US Census says it's not. But then maybe that's the conspiracy and you've got the real source of info from the Planet Nibiru.

During the 1990s, Indian fertility was astronomical
http://www.census.gov/population/www...e/amerind.html
More recently it has declined to levels comparable with other ethnic groups in the USA
http://hailtoyou.wordpress.com/2011/...ace-1980-2008/
In 2009, it was still higher than Non-Hispanic whites.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db60.htm

The anomaly is the Mayans, whose fertility is paralleled by Hispanic American fertility. I suspect it's a Catholic thing.

This article
http://www.tuftscopejournal.org/issu...ayan_guatemala
states that Mayans don't have access to birth control

Quote:

Because of sociocultural barriers, it is difficult to imple- ment a Western model of birth control in rural Guatemala...At the heart of the matter is the Mayan attitude towards childbirth.

But then, this was written by scientists and they're just the lackeys of the New World Order secret global government, as I am also.

This is also interesting, as it points out that the high Mayan birth rate is a recent issue arising from the introduction of modern agriculture
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3631612

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

I highly doubt this is an isolated incident, and I further doubt that evidence of such atrocities would be scattered around for easy use. What nation wants these sorts of demonizing acts hanging over their heads? I am guessing that other than indirect evidence, most evidence is either destroyed or buried deep within the confines of government. Gazpacho makes a pretty good point and whether or not we desire to accept this, it is a complete plausibility that Native Americans were a target in extermination.

So, the evidence for this conspiracy is the very lack of evidence for this conspiracy?

Quote:

I think the greatest evidence is in the population difference between Latin America and America. In Latin America where the population was simply mixed, there are tens of millions. In America were the population was thoroughly separated and isolated there are only a few hundred thousand natives of one race and about 2 million of “other races”.

Nothing at all to do with the fact South and Central America were homes to rather populous and organized civilizations rather than scattered, small and disorganized tribes?

Quote:

In fact, the largest growing group in Latin America are the indigenous. The average Mayan woman has 7 children, and there are already 7 million Maya. There will be hundreds of millions of natives in Latin America by next century if this trend continues. However, in America the population growth is stagnant and according to some demographic studies, declining. The number of natives in America will shrink to dangerously low levels by 2050. This leads me to believe that there were practices to help keep and maintain the low populations in America, but at this point, it is nothing more than speculation on my part.

Out of curiosity, did you know the more educated and well-to-do a family, the fewer children they tend to have?

You don't know anything for certain, are purely speculating and have no facts to back anything up? Really, you might want to do some research. For example: What do you think the average Mayan native's level of education and affluence might be?

[L.Y.S.]

Originally Posted by Robrob

Out of curiosity, did you know the more educated and well-to-do a family, the fewer children they tend to have?

There is no evidence that education is the reason why the birthrates on reservations are low. A fair amount of people have little education on some reservations in America, yet they aren't producing children like wild.

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

There is no evidence that education is the reason why the birthrates on reservations are low. A fair amount of people have little education on some reservations in America, yet they aren't producing children like wild.

I never said it was.

I said if the Mayans were reproducing like wild that might be the reason.

[L.Y.S.]

Originally Posted by Robrob

I said if the Mayans were reproducing like wild that might be the reason.

Unfortunately there are no reasonable grounds to prove such a phenomenon. Thought it is a possibility, not a very likely distinguishing factor, seeing as many Natives who live on reservations tend not to get much in the way of education.

[Scott Sommers]

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

There is no evidence that education is the reason why the birthrates on reservations are low. A fair amount of people have little education on some reservations in America, yet they aren't producing children like wild.

Originally Posted by Robrob
I said if the Mayans were reproducing like wild that might be the reason.

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

Unfortunately there are no reasonable grounds to prove such a phenomenon. Thought it is a possibility, not a very likely distinguishing factor, seeing as many Natives who live on reservations tend not to get much in the way of education.

I suggest you read the publications I linked to. You'll find that you are quite wrong. Economic development is exactly the reason that explains differences in Mayan fertility.

American Indian fertility on reserevations has not low over time. A better interpretation is that it was once extremely high and has now moved toward national norms.

[Robrob]

Originally Posted by L.Y.S.

Unfortunately there are no reasonable grounds to prove such a phenomenon. Thought it is a possibility, not a very likely distinguishing factor, seeing as many Natives who live on reservations tend not to get much in the way of education.

Once more for the slow folks, the average Native American in North America has far and beyond a higher education and wage base than the average Mayan (Native American) in South and Central America.

It is fairly well established that birth rate is inversely proportional to education/income.

Not that correlation implies causation but it does suggest an alternate and objective hypothesis contrary to your subjective claims.

Remember, you're the one who claimed the lack of evidence for the conspiracy is evidence of the conspiracy. I'm the one presenting actual facts.

[L.Y.S.]

Originally Posted by Robrob

Once more for the slow folks

Keep the conversation civil please.