Kyle Mantyla's blog

Barton Backtracks, Falsely Claims He Wasn't 'Justifying' Brutal Treatment of Native Americans

A few weeks ago, we posted some audio clips from a "WallBuilders Live" radio program in which David Barton explained the concept of just war theory during which he justified the brutal treatment of Native Americans by white settlers and the American government on the grounds that they needed to be destroyed in order to be taught a lesson and eventually made civilized.

Shortly thereafter, WallBuilders posted a message on its Facebook page claiming that Barton was not "justifying" this sort of treatment but merely "explaining" what had happened:

David was not justifying, but merely explaining the historical context of what happened, in the same way that he explained the British march to the sea. He made a parallel between the two as to tactics and strategy that were used during war at that time. David was explaining the historical events regarding King Philip's War, not the atrocities that were in general committed against the Indian tribes and nations, which we in no way condone. There is a big difference between justifying and merely explaining or reporting.

Like so much of Barton's work, this explanation holds up only so long as one blindly accepts Barton's nonsensical interpretation and doesn't bother to verify what he says, which is pretty easy since we produced a transcript of it at the time.

As anyone can see, Barton was not merely "explaining" what happened but was actively defending it on the grounds that "you cannot reason with certain types of terrorists." As Barton said at the time, the Indians had "declared war on all the white guys" and so "we had to go in and we had to destroy Indian tribes all over" until they got the message:

You have to deal, a lot of it, with how the enemy responds. It's got to be based on what the enemy responds [to,] you cannot reason with certain types of terrorists; and see that's why we could not get the Indians to the table to negotiate with us on treaties until after we had thoroughly whipped so many tribes ... What happened was the Indian leaders said "they're trying to change our culture" and so they declared war on all the white guys and went after the white guys and that was King Philip's War.  It was really trying to be civilized on one side and end torture and the Indians were threatened by the ending of torture and so we had to go in and we had to destroy Indian tribes all over until they said "oh, got the point, you're doing to us what we're doing to them, okay, we'll sign a treaty."

...

Take, for example, what happened in the western plains wars in the late 1800s when we were taking on the plains Indians.  I'm not talking about treaties, I'm not talking about behavior of Americans toward Indians or vice versa, there were violations on both sides of nearly every treaty.  I'm talking about what happened in ending those wars after Custer and everything that went on.

People complain about the fact that the American military and buffalo hunters went out and wiped out all the buffalo in the western plains.  Doing that was what brought the Indians to their knees because the Indians lived on those wide western plains where there were very few towns; Indians didn't go into town to buy supplies, they went to the buffalo herds, that's where they got their meat, that's where they got their coats, the hides provided coats, they provided covering for their teepees.

If you don't have the buffalos, those Indians cannot live on the open western plains without those buffalo and so what happened was the military wiped out the supply line by wiping out the buffalo.  That's what brought those wars to an end, that's what brought the Indians to their knees and ended all the western conflict.

The focus of the radio program was a discussion of just war theory and Barton's purpose in bringing up this issue was to explain that these tactics were justified specifically because they do not appear to be justifiable.

Barton was not merely "explaining" what had happened, but was justifying it on the grounds that when your enemies refuse to abide by the "rules of civilization, you still have to secure the life and the property and the protection of your citizens" in whatever way you can.

Akers: Atheists Trying to 'Finish the Job' of Bringing Down the Twin Towers

Last month, a judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by American Atheists seeking to prevent a pair of beams in the shape of a cross that was pulled from the debris of the collapsed World Trade Center from being included in the official 9/11 Memorial and Museum.

On today's "Faith and Freedom" radio program, Mat Staver and Shawn Akers discussed the lawsuit, with Akers calling it "religious McCarthyism" and saying that it is ironic that "extremists from a particular religion brought down the Twin Towers, but the atheists are coming in to finish the job":

Jacobs: Our Prayers Exposed a Terrorist Sleeper Cell

As she has several times in the past, Cindy Jacobs revealed on the most recent episode of "God Knows" that her prayers have prevented a terrorist attack.

As Jacobs recalled it, she and her husband Mike and some friends were taking a vacation in upstate New York when, while sitting at lunch one day, "the Lord began to tell me that there was a terrorist attack being planned in that little town." 

So Jacobs rose and went outside when God instructed her to share that information with a group of man standing outside the restaurant, who just so happened to be a group of local pastors. 

Together they all mobilized their prayer networks and "everybody began to pray and it was exposed; there was a sleeper cell in that area that got exposed":

Right Wing Round-Up - 4/9/13

Right Wing Leftovers - 4/9/13

  • Rick Santorum says "it would be suicidal" for the Republican Party to accept marriage equality.
  • Melissa Harris-Perry responds to the right-wing freakout over her MSNBC promo.
  • Diane Gramley, president of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania, responds to news that Sen. Bob Casey Jr. now supports gay marriage by saying that "if Bob Casey, Sr. was still alive, he would be extremely disappointed in his son."
  • Judging by the fact that its website is now defunct, we are guessing that the Newt Gingrich-founded and Jim Garlow-led Renewing American Leadership effort is no more.
  • Glenn Beck calls the Obamas the "most ostentatious family I've ever seen in my life."

Cathie Adams: UN Climate Change Treaty Is the New World Order

Yesterday, Cathie Adams, the president of the Texas Eagle Forum, delivered a presentation to the Southeast Texas Tea Party on the dangers of environmentalism and Agenda 21 in which she made the case that the environmental movement is like a watermelon: "green on the outside and Marxist red on the inside."

Adams said that environmentalists are blasphemers because "these people worship the creation instead of the Creator" and that is why "our children are being taught now in public schools to capitalize the "E" of "Earth"; it is an object of worship."

When Adams later asked rhetorically why President George H.W. Bush went to Brazil in 1992 to sign the United Nations Climate Change convention, an audience member blurted out that he did so because "he's a traitor!" which prompted Adams to declare that "this climate change treaty is exactly the New World Order":

Schlafly: Obama Pushing Immigration Reform in Order to 'Destroy Our System'

Back in February, Phyllis Schlafly was the guest on Rick Scarborough's Tea Party Unity call where she fielded questions from participants on a range of topics, including whether those pushing for immigration reform are doing so in order to place millions of new immigrants on government programs so as to bankrupt the nation.

Schlafly, not surprisingly, declared that that is exactly what President Obama is trying to do:

Caller: My name is Jim Mason, I am the state coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots here in Nebraska. Mrs. Schlafly, concerning the illegal alien issue and the influx coming into the nation, we are looking at somewhere between ten and thirty million that will be allowed amnesty.  The cost to be able to have this number on relief could be all but unsustainable for the nation. Is that the intent of these pro-illegal alien groups? Are they hoping to fundamentally change the United States away from the way that it is now? Are they trying to bankrupt the nation intentionally? I'm just curious.

Schlafly: Well, people have different motives and maybe some of them have sincere motives - I wouldn't indict everybody, but I think it's clear, what you said, that it is Obama's motive. And I do believe that that is what Obama's motive is. Now there are other people who have been co-opted into supporting him for various innocent and other reasons but I do think that these socialist-minded people really want to destroy our system.  They hate us!

Right Wing Round-Up - 4/8/13

Right Wing Leftovers - 4/8/13

  • Anti-gay/anti-Mormon pastor Pastor Robert Jeffress opened a new $130 million campus at his church and Gov. Rick Perry was on hand to dedicate it.
  • Glenn Beck returned from a week off today and guess what he talked about?
  • This is actually an article from CNSNews: "Obama Responded Faster to Ebert's Death Than He Did to Thatcher's."
  • We predict that this story about the Army supposedly calling evangelicals a threat is one of those things that we initially dismiss as obvious nonsense, but then end up having to write about because the Religious Right goes nuts over it.
  • Ken Blackwell says there can be no comparison between the fight for gay rights and civil rights because "not all racists oppose same-sex marriage, and not all who oppose same-sex marriage are racists. To say otherwise is disrespectful and frankly ludicrous."
  • Finally Rick Scarborough warns that "the drive to legalize same-sex unions is the linchpin of an effort that will eventually result in the criminalization of Christianity and traditional Judaism ...  This is tyranny masquerading as enlightenment."

Beck: Gay Marriage Is Winning Because it is About Freedom and 'the Principle of it is Right'

Glenn Beck's position on the issue of marriage equality is kind of hard to figure out since he tends to wander all over the place as he vacillates between declaring that he doesn't care so it should be legal and fearing that if it does become legal, progressives will try to shut down churches that refuse to perform them.

On his radio program today, Beck delivered a typically stream-of-consciousness monologue where he touched on the topic again during which he proclaimed that "the reason [proponents of gay marriage] have won is because they've made it about freedom." 

Beck said that fighting against the principle of maximum freedom by saying that marriage has always been between one man and one woman is why opponents have lost and been painted into a corner as bigots "because the principle of it is right":

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious