In 1492 . . .

You know the line. My daughter Maddelyn learned it in pre-school class last year. She was 4 years old. I have that assignment pinned up in my classroom. It makes an interesting conversation piece.

Here are some quotes from the man himself, straight from his diary:

"They brought us parrots and balls of cotton and spears and many other things, which they exchanged for the glass beads and hawks' bells. They willingly traded everything they owned. They were well-build, with good handsome features . . . They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I showed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They have no iron. Their spears are made of cane . . . They would make fine servants . . . With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want."

"As soon as I arrived in the Indies, on the first Indies, on the first Island which I found, I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts."

In Columbus's report to Madrid, he said that on his next voyage he could bring back "as much gold as they need . . . and as many slaves as they ask."

"Let us in the name of the Holy Trinity go on sending all the slaves that can be sold."


The Indians, 14 and older, were enslaved to look for gold. When they did not find gold, Columbus ordered their hands to be cut off, which caused them to bleed to death. It was an impossible task, so they ran away, but were hunted down with dogs and killed. In two years, half of the 250,000 Arawaks were dead, through murder or suicide.

Bartoleme' de las Casas is the other source that wrote about the happenings of Columbus and the Spaniards. Here are some of his observations:

"Endless testimonies prove the mild and pacific temperament of the natives. But our work was to exasperate, ravage, kill, mangle and destroy; small wonder, then, if they tried to kill one of us now and then. The admiral, it is true, was blind as those who came after him, and he was so anxious to please the King that he committed irreparable crimes against the Indians."

"The Spaniards thought nothing of knifing Indians by tens and twenties and of cutting slices off them to test the sharpness of their blades . . . two of these so-called Christians met two Indian boys one day, each carrying a parrot; they took the parrots and for fun beheaded the boys."

Men slaved in mines, women slaved the soil, "Thus husbands and wives were together only once every eight or ten months and when they met they were so exhausted and depressed on both sides . . . they ceased to procreate. As for the newly born, they died early because their mothers, overworked and famished, had no milk to nurse them, and for this reason, while I was in Cuba, 7,000 children died in three months. Some mothers even drowned their babies from sheer desperation . . . In this way, husbands died in the mines, wives died at work, and children died from the lack of milk . . . and in a short time this land which was so great, so powerful and fertile . . . was depopulated . . . My eyes have seen these acts so foreign to human nature, and now I tremble as I write."

"There were 60,000 people living on this Island (when he arrived), including the Indians: so that from 1494 to 1508, over three million people had perished from war, slavery, and the mines. Who in future generations will believe this?"

Yet Columbus Day is a celebration . . .

I will leave this entry with Howard Zinn's conclusion from his chapter on "Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress":

"So, Columbus and his successors were not coming into an empty wilderness, but into a world which in some places was as densely populated as Europe itself, where the culture was complex, where human relations were more egalitarian than in Europe, and where the relations among men, women, children, and nature were more beautifully worked out than perhaps any place in the world.

They were people without a written language, but with their own laws, their poetry, their history kept in memory and passed on, in an oral vocabulary more complex than Europe's, accompanied by song, dance, and ceremonial drama. They paid careful attention to the development of personality, intensity of will, independence and flexibility, passion and potency, to their partnership with one another and with nature.

Perhaps there is some romantic mythology in that. But even allowing for the imperfection of myths, it is enough to make us question, for that time and ours, the excuse of progress in the annihilation of races, and the telling of history from the standpoint of the conquerors and leaders of Western civilization." -Howard Zinn

Now see here Mr. Nobel, lets review the situation.

Yesterday Morning:

Reporter: Barack Obama is this years winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. With it, he became only the third U.S. president to win the award. Mr. Obama said he was "surprised and humbled." The Nobel Committee's official reason is "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Back to you John.

Thanks Michelle. And in other news, Taliban militants detenated a bomb that killed 48 people in Pakistan. And later, (this news actually from today) militants attacked and killed 10 security personal and are holding up to 15 hostages. These attacks have shown that the militants retain the ability to strike at the very heart of Pakistan's security apparatus despite recent military operations against their forces and the killing of Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud in a CIA attack in August.

Later in the day:

Reporter: President Obama has given his public reaction to today's Nobel decision. In a short speech, Obama said "I accept this award as a call to action." And also said this award is for "everyone who strives for justice and dignity," and that "America will continue to lead." Back to you John.

Thanks Michelle. And in other news, two hours following his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama will have a meeting in the secret War Room to discuss whether or not the U.S. should commit another forty thousand troops to Afghanistan along with other anti-terror strategies such as killing people with missiles using unmanned drones . . .


Such is logic in the land of War is Peace.

For me, this is a point of amusement rather than "flipping out", as some are no doubt doing. A quick historical look should put the whole thing in a same old same old perspective, at least for U.S. presidents.

Teddy Roosevelt got the nod back in the day for something about Japan and Russia. Mmmhmph. We could just brush aside the fact that he presided over the war in the Philippines, when the U.S. military destroyed indigenous villages, killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, including women and children, all because they refused to be subdued. Not to mention his infamous "speak softly but carry a big stick" policy in Latin America; the countless "interventions" on behalf of U.S. business "interests", of course under the guise of the Monroe Doctrine, make the whole peace thing a definite eye-brow furrow.







Wilson might have a little more clout in the award. He did have the whole "14 points" thing going for him following "The War to end all Wars," which was most likely a concerted effort at prevention. However one can't help but to see the cause and effect created by the conclusion of said war (the treaty of versailles) and recognize how this whole peace venture was a direct cause (or the fuel at least) for World War II, the most bloody war in human history.

In regards to President Obama, it is obvious to see why the Nobel Committee would make this choice in terms of pushing him in certain directions. After all, he is, arguably, in the most powerful position in the world. Was this a "call to action"? Maybe. More than likely, it has more to do with the about face from the previous administration of unilateralism. A message for a simple change in rhetoric might be indicative of the power (and possibilities) the position holds.

Of course, rhetoric is all we have at this point. And while having peaceful/democratic rhetoric is better than belligerent rhetoric, a spade still looks like a spade. In other words, Obama's award, whatever the justifications regarding the "renewed global climate", carries some amusement towards ironies that are all too obvious to mention. It might even justify an eye-brow furrow.