Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Cherokees to Elizabeth Warren: ‘We don’t claim you!’....

Posted 2 years ago on May 30, 2012, 4:03 p.m. EST by tupacsugar (-136)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

More than 150 Cherokee Indians have joined a group online demanding more information from Massachusetts senate candidate Elizabeth Warren about her claims of Native American heritage.

“You claim to be Cherokee. …We don’t claim you!” the group “Cherokees Demand Truth from Elizabeth Warren” declares on its website.

Warren has been embroiled in a controversy for weeks after it was revealed that the Harvard law professor once touted herself as an American Indian minority. She has since struggled to prove those claims as critics argue she claimed that heritage to further her career.

According to a mission statement posted on its website, the group is made up of “authentic Cherokees and descendants devoted to sharing the truth about our history.”

The group said they are made up of descendants from the Cherokee Nation, the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.

“Our mission is to help people understand what a real Cherokee is and to show why Elizabeth Warren claiming to be Cherokee without proof is harmful and offensive to us.”

Cornell Law School professor William A. Jacobson first reported the existence of the group Wednesday morning on his Le-gal In-sur-rec-tion blog.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/30/cherokees-to-elizabeth-warren-we-dont-claim-you/#ixzz1wNvAWDQm

Another Leftist whose caught lying about their roots,kinda like the Preezy did.

85 Comments

85 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

A self serving lie, no matter how inconsequential it may be to the campaign, is a red flag. Plagiarized recipes and claiming to be Native American without any documentation don't rule you out for office, they simply indicate you lack character. I can see voting for her if you feel the alternative is worse, but she certainly isn't the saint people thought she was initially. It's isn't much of a stretch to believe she'll become as corrupt as anyone else in DC.

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

She may actually be part Cherokee.

[-] 2 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

That may be the case, but with no documentation it's difficult to prove. When someone makes a claim to some kind of status, the burden of proof is on them, not us.

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

This attack is too well-timed to not be a psychological operation. Check out the website for the "Cherokee" group. It's all identity politics.

http://cherokeesdemandtruth-elizabethwarren.blogspot.com/

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

It may be an attack, but that plus the childishly foolish plagiarized recipes make me wonder about her. Not that it matters much, I'm not able to vote in MA. If I were I'd have to look at both candidates and pick the least objectionable. What it comes down to for me is, she's not some saint working selflessly for the 99%. She is simply another politician.

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

Just to back-up my claims, check it out! Glenn Beck! lol

Glenn Beck dumbfounded by Elizabeth Warren doubling down again on her Cherokee heritage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaEKKt11QJI&feature=related

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

I don't doubt that her opposition will take advantage of this. I'm not sure it makes any difference in this particular election. It's a problem of Warren's own making. It's not like she were some uneducated girl from the backwoods. She should have known documentation might be needed when claiming that status for professional reasons.

The people in MA have a choice between two candidates. Look at what both say they represent and vote. Personally, I won't be too disappointed when whoever the winner is turns out to be just another corrupt politician.

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

If this is the biggest skeleton in Warren's closet, she is a f*cking Saint in comparison with any of her opponents.

Anyway, support Glass-Steagall!

Petition for a new Glass-Steagall: http://act.boldprogressives.org/sign/sign_glasssteagall/?source=bp

[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

Which part ? Sorry, couldn't resist that.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

Thanks for that honest assessment.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Birther 2

if this first time round didn't make you sick,

coming to a theater near you


[-] 2 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 2 years ago

At 57, I've heard people my whole life claim to be part Indian, most i doubt have ever really tried to verify it. Seems to me it may be hand me down family gossip, i cant say, but means nothing to me. I'm not defending this woman, i see both political parties as the problems. With the problems this country faces putting emphasis on such trivia matters as this is just as silly as claiming to be part Indian and not knowing if you really are.

[-] 2 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

Is there a point to this post, other than defamation of character?

[-] 0 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

I agree he's a little over the top, but the basic point is valid. Politicians tell us things and ask us to believe them. She may have told Harvard what they wanted to hear, just to get the position. It's possible she's telling voters what they want to hear now to get elected. If she's been just a little dishonest, what's to stop her from becoming just another corrupt politician?

[-] 2 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

I get a sense that people on here aren't aware of psychological operations. Elizabeth Warren is pushing Glass-Steagall right now. This most likely is a psyop to discredit her. The "Cherokee" group's webpage screams identity politics. Check it out.

http://cherokeesdemandtruth-elizabethwarren.blogspot.com/

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

I'm in New York so it doesn't matter to me. She may turn out to be great. She's just not as perfect as people thought she was at first. She may be the vote needed to get Glass-Steagall, or something may happen to make her change her mind later. Politicians make promises they can't always keep.

[-] 2 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

Some proof of my psyop claim, from one of the most ridiculous psyopers out there.

Glenn Beck dumbfounded by Elizabeth Warren doubling down again on her Cherokee heritage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaEKKt11QJI&feature=related

If you are with reinstating Glass-Steagall, sign the petition!

http://act.boldprogressives.org/sign/sign_glasssteagall/?source=bp

[-] 0 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

Beck has a view designed to make him successful in radio, he panders to the right, always will. Warren stepped into public life and is pandering to the left. Both may believe in what they say.

Warren made a claim that she can't back up, did she do it improve her chances of landing a job? The question voter have to answer for themselves, is Warren's undocumented story about herself important enough to rule her out for office?

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

Due to the importance of reinstating Glass-Steagall, I wouldn't care if she claimed she came from Atlantis.

[-] 0 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

If she can be trusted to actually do what she says she will do. She may, Glass-Steagall my fit her agenda. Her undocumented self serving claim makes me believe it's her agenda that most concerns her, not yours or mine. Maybe her concerns are yours, maybe she just wants to get elected and will put on a good act for you.

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

I'm not able to vote for her. She is in Massachusetts and Glass-Steagall is a national issue.

I find the level of cynicism in the general population astounding, by the way.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

So far it's all talk from her. When it comes time for someone that is actually in the Senate to vote, we'll see what she does. She has apparently profited from buying foreclosed properties making her actions more those of the 1% while her speeches on the campaign trail sounds like she supports the 99%.

http://bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1061136010

When it comes to limousine liberals, I pay more attention to their actions. It may be cynical, but I find I'm disappointed less often by politicians that way. They are what they do, not what they say.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

She created the best consumer financial agency the 99% ever had. The 1% hate her agency because it has the potential to protect middle class Americans from 1% crimes. The 1% wall st fin criminals hate her for the same reason. They fear her actions. This is telling. And the 1% efforts at politics of personal destruction shows real desperation and vacancy of substantial arguments. Warren rules. Wish I could vote for her!.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

Maybe, I never bothered looking into her history because it's not my State. The stories may be simply attacks, but there is some truth in them. It shows that she may be one of those people that play by two sets of rules. One set for her another for everyone else. She could be a great advocate for the 99%, as long as she's able to get rich and stay rich doing it.

Based on the words alone, she looks better for the 99% then Brown, but let's be honest with ourselves, she's firmly in the 1%. Could Harvard law professors scrape by on say $300,000, instead of the $400,000+ she gets? Maybe help reduce that student debt kids take on to go there a little. She may do great things for the people of Massachusetts, I just believe she's working mostly for herself. If it comes to a choice between her wealth and the 99%, I believe I know which side she'll come down on.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I agree some professors seem overpaid. But Just being wealthy or in the 1% doesn't make you bad. Plenty of 1%'rs support the 99%, and the policies that would help the 99%. At some point you have to listen to the individual candidate, analyze their past, set aside the partisan attacks and judge for yourself. It really ain't that difficult. The anti 99% pols are pretty shameless in their rhetoric against 99% policy.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

We ran out of replies below. I look at the issues and what each politician says they will do. Then I watch what they actually do in office after the election. She may very well mean everything she says. The character flaws she has just remind me that it's up to the voters to stay on her case and not take excuses just because she's better then the alternative guy. If she can't come through then she should go out with the next primary.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Biggest problem we have is the financial inequity/crimes against the 99%. She is at the forefront on these issues like no politician since FDR. We might get real change if we can get more like her elected.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

Sure you have to take a chance in every election. Comparing her to Brown in terms of what they both say they stand for is the only way we have to do it. I just see a self serving side to her and wouldn't want her (or any other politician for that matter) involved in any laws that could turn a profit for her personally. She is human, has demonstrated character flaws, and is as likely to become corrupt as any other politician.

People voted four years ago for hope and change and got Bush-lite, but you have to take a chance anyhow and hope politicians mean what they say. Same here, take a chance with Warren, but I wouldn't stop looking for someone better to run in 6 years to replace her.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I guess if you don't like her your gonna look for someone to replace her. And I guess if you think that Bush and Obama are alike in any way there is little hope of discerning good and bad. Must be very frustrating and confusing. Can you think of any politician in history that you might support?

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

You know what "flipping" a house means, right?

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

Yes I do. Taking advantage of conditions in the housing market to make money is no crime. It shows a certain entrepreneurial awareness and a desire to make a profit. The fact that some of it came as the result of foreclosures and the misfortune of others is just something that shows me she may be closer in attitude to the 1% then the 99%.

She's saying the right things now to get elected, work for her, vote for her. I'm just not going to be too shocked when some reason pops up later, after she's safely in office for a 6 year term, why she couldn't follow through on her promises.

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

She's building a coalition of people to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. This isn't simply lip service.

http://act.boldprogressives.org/sign/sign_glasssteagall/?source=bp

The thing people don't seem to get about American democracy is if you don't support the representatives who actually work in your interest, they have to compromise to get votes and stay in power. (A lot of vote getting is demographics.) But if they are given overwhelming support, by people with the same goals, they can plow through what they want to do. It's a great system, people just actually have to use it.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

Hey she's talking a good game, and like I said in a couple of these posts, she's better then Brown. At least with her, she's saying the right things. The problem is political promises are so fluid. She may even mean them, especially if it doesn't hurt her financial position at all.

I also agree that it can be a great system, but people tend to participate only on an emotional level. She says things that sound good, so you want to ignore that she embellished her resume, without proof, plagiarize recipes for some silly cookbook, and make money by the truckload playing in foreclosed properties. There is a side to her character that is very self serving. She may still be better then Brown, but at least see her for what she is. Make an informed decision when you vote not an emotional one.

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

I know many people who made money off of flipping houses and a few who believed they were part Native American. Using rhetoric hackneyed rhetoric and trying to put these common, and I would say relatively innocent behaviors in a negative light is an absurdity.

Appealing on an "emotional level" is what these smears are all about.

[-] -1 points by adaldk (-11) 2 years ago

the point is character, the lack thereof. she also lied about her parents, she said they eloped, they didnt.

[-] -1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

Someone who would lie about their heritage in order to further her career has no character.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Elizabeth Warren is a strong advocate for the American financial consumer. We can measure her character by the enemies she has made! The financial industry hates her, the republican right wing wacko tea party hates her, and the republican anti OWS trolls on this site hate her. Thats enough for me!. She works for the 99%. She is a good soldier.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

She'll win .... Brown held himself out as a moderate republican in a very left leaning state, but his alignment with tea party politics pretty much blew that game out of the water.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I hope so. It is least we should expect from this election cyclse. But the pro republican citizens united 1% money around the country and the republican voter suppression tactics in Florida (and other repub led states) are discouraging. Power to the people. Right on.!

[-] 2 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

She's probably better then the alternative, I agree, but she hasn't actually done anything for anyone yet except talk. She may turn out to be just another politician, saying whatever it takes to get votes.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

If that were true the repubs would have let her take over the consumer financial protection agency she created for protection of the 99%. And the criminal 1% financial industry would not hate her so much!. Support OWS. Vote out pro 1% wall st politicians

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

Sure vote for what you believe, I'm glad I live in New York and don't have to make the decision, because I simply don't trust her.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

New york is a good liberal state. But we also need help. We have to stay alert or the right suburban white flight racists will get there way and drag us away from supporting the 99%

[-] -1 points by Cweiss (-8) 2 years ago

You mean Pocahontas Warren, that one?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Vote out anti Volcker rule politicians

[-] -2 points by adaldk (-11) 2 years ago

she's a strong advocate for HERSLF, thats why she lied about her "heritage", calling herslf a "person of color"

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Your personal attacks on her (like your republican puppet masters) betrays the weakness of your position on the issues that affect the 99%. You speak for the 1% criminals who crashed the world economy and prey on you and your family. They cannot succeed without you voting against your own interests. You have been duped. You are being used. You have no honor

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

I measure someone's character based on their character. Not how other people may or may not feel about that person.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

she stands with the 99%!!!! I guess you stand with the 1%. They have you hook line and sinker!. They have armies of lawyers, lobbyists, accountants and politicians to rig the system against us and you speak for them. While they prey on you and your family you advocate for them. What does that say about your character?

[-] -2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

I know this comes as a shock to you...but MOST of the people in this country don't break the population down into two groups the 1% and the 99%. That would be irrational and immature. It speaks volumes about your character.

Neither you nor the 1% represent me. You don't get to assume to "speak for me" or anyone else-that would be usurping our rights to speak for ourselves-and 100% of Americans never voted or exercised their rights to "elect" you to speak for them either.

Don't pretend that you hold a position you were never given nor invited to hold by the people.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Get in line! Support the 99%. We march for you! We get arrested for you!. recognize who is hurting you and the working families of America. Elizabeth Warren is soldier for the 99%. You will stand behind her or you will be in her F$#@ing way! The 1% would have her defeated. That's all you need to know!

[-] -2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

Get in line! Do what I tell you to do! Don't think for yourself!

Perfect example of totalitarianism. If you speak for this movement, then it is doomed.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I speak for myself.! And you speak for the criminals who bankrupted the country. You work against your own class. There has been the largest transfer of wealth from working American families to the 1%. Elizabeth Warren acknowledges that and soldiers for the working American families. Support OWS. Vote out pro citizens united politicians

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

More politics of personal destruction. She is a soldier for the 99%. The 1% would have her defeated. That is all you need to know. Unless you stand with the 1% against your fellow working American families. You must choose! Choose wisely. Not poorly. Vote out pro norquist, anti Buffett rule politicians.

[-] -2 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 2 years ago

She's anti Buffett. When push came to shove, she chose to pay less when she could have paid more. She just talks the talk so knee jerk Libs like you support her.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You don't know what you are talkin about. The conservative tea party wackos prevented her from taking the lead of the consumer financial protection agency. Thats all we need to know. She's got the right enemies. Right wing Wackos. Get in line. If you dont get behind her your in her F$#@ing way.!

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

Why should I assume that she is the one lying?

[-] -2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

She has been unable to prove her claims. Clearly word of mouth (or family stories) is all one requires in order to take advantage of any opportunities we want to. My grandmother actually WAS half American Indian-making me 1/8th Indian. I had no idea I could or should use that heritage to further my education or profession! I demand restitution!

[+] -5 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

The point is that there are supposed OWS supporters that are merely Democrat operatives that will vote for this Lizzie fraud and they will come to this post to defend the Progtard Warren and further demonstrate what Democrat political hacks they really are.

[-] 3 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

Elizabeth Warren is pushing for Glass-Steagall right now, so STFU and sign the petition!

http://act.boldprogressives.org/sign/sign_glasssteagall/?source=bp

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

What pray tell is a "Progtard" ? is that some freeper lingo meant to defamate progressives? like conservative reactionary ideologies hold much utility for any of us,. they only aid the 1%,. the military/corporate/banksters. It is amazing how many working class folks get sucked into these conservative reactionary ideologies of hate and war,. and shting on anyone with less wealth,. . sad and more than a little pathetic.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

this type of useless hate crap should just be deleted by a mod.

[-] -2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

What is "hate" about this? Since when are facts hateful?

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

what fact? that some memeber of group claims that admittance to that group has to go through them and them alone?

"Another Leftist whose caught lying about their roots,kinda like the Preezy did." What facts are present in this statement??

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

Lizzie lies,Preezy Lies, one claims to be Cherokee the other claims he's not born in Kenya. Those are facts.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

lol you fail so hard it is not funny,. or it perhaps it is. lol.

how do you know either claim is true or untrue? what proof do you have,. oh I see you don't need any proof,. just hate and a support group of AM radio faith-heads that all suck the same right hanging tit.

[-] -2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

Lizzie claims to be Cherokee,....fact or false?

Preezy claims he's not born in Kenya......fact or false?

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

The Kenya thing is just a little red flag about Obama. He was born in Hawaii, but found that little white lie about Kenya helpful in pushing his book. Warren, to interpret her explanation a little facetiously, did it go get invited to more parties. Neither are important lies, but they speak to a lack of character that infects too many of our elected officials.

[-] 0 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

" but they speak to a lack of character that infects too many of our elected officials."

Ding,ding,ding......,we have a winner!! Very well said.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

really could not give two shts about either pretend 'issue',. Only a truly dimwitted tool like yourself would wast time and space with such vacuous drivel. got any real debatable criticism we could talk about?

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

No,you're dismissive post is plenty enough to prove my point. I wouldn't want to get into a war of wits with someone is so clearly unarmed.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

Or, more accuratlly,. you are unwilling to debate on a real issue? is that what the above post clearly states? yes, checked it,. and that is what it say.

sadly you seem to have nothing. too bad, I would like a good debate, only i require that it is about something,. not some GOP right-wing talking points that "the Donald" shts out his pie-hole on faux news.

At least come up with your own attacks,. it you choose not to debate around ACTUAL ISSUES, and must play in the kiddie pool, of lame assed slander and made up bull sht.

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

Don't get your panties in a bunch,I was only fucking around. Obviously you are smart and clearly you demonstrate it. I was just being a dick for the hell of it.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

fine, made you happy, made me happy,. hope we didn't hurt anyone.

[-] -1 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

Yeah,you didn't deserve that.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (20505) 2 years ago

First of all these folks should read Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities." Secondly, oral history has been an accepted form of history for thousands of years. Is that where her knowledge of her background comes from? It's not necessarily easy to prove oral history.

[-] 2 points by forjustice (178) from Kearney, NE 2 years ago

Excellent book!

[-] 1 points by ChemLady (576) 2 years ago

What do the Native Americans use to decide who is or isn't a member of a tribe? Warren is a bright woman, if she makes a claim in social circles that's one thing. If she makes it part of her professional profile then she should offer up the acceptable proof.

[-] -3 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

Thanks for coming to the party. Your arrival was highly anticipated.

[-] -1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

This is ridiculous! How many Europeans amalgamated with, had babies by or impregnated the alleged "different" races here and all over the world? How many people of color? How many people of other races did the same all over this great land and the world? Now, what I would like to see is scientists trace the Cherokee nation's bloodline and see how far back to Africa and Europe that goes! I mean, after all folks, where in the hell does everyone think they came from...THE MOON? No wonder the countries of the world are crumbling, everyone is daft about every damn thing that ever existed and still does!!!

[-] -2 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

What does this have to do with Lizzie lying?

[-] 2 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

How can a person lie about their origin, when their origin is the same as yours and everyone else on this planet? Really, mankind is not all that fabulous or amazing when the truth of the matter comes down to where we all originated from. So...how many people can trace themselves beyond that of the Asiatic (melanin origin) people and/or Europeans (no melanin)? NOBODY!!! In other words, if Lizzie's family was part European, (allegedly "white") then those said Europeans had sex with the people of color (original inhabitants) on these shores who they re-named Indians and now are called Native Americans but maintain their ancient tribal names!!. Now, how many forgot that Europeans had sex with the slaves (also originals) on these shores, as well? That is why prior slaves can also claim Cherokee heritage, Sioux, Iroquois, Blackfoot, English, Irish, German, Chinese, you name it, they all had sex with one another and created babies!!! So...here is your damned melting pot my friend!!! Now....Get Real!!!! Call them all what ever you want, but there are only two embodiments of race to choose from, no more, no less... Benjamin Franklin told you that!!! You all have been bamboozled!!! The notion of all these made up fake alleged Races is not only a lie, it's a joke!!!

[-] -3 points by tupacsugar (-136) 2 years ago

You may have your own reasoning on this issue but apparently the Cherokees don't share that same insight. Tracing everyone back to Africa and then making the case that we're all the same race is a hard sell and wouldn't go over well anywhere.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

I never said we were all one race....re-read....there are only two types...those with melanin and those without. Whether they or we or you came from Africa is your prerogative and yours alone to investigate.. Yet, one can say for sure whether or not they do or do not have melanin or traces of it in ones biological make up....and that my friends is the understanding of the beginning of ones origins. Somewhat like the original man.....whomever that might be... So, on that note who in the hell are you, or anybody else an expert on who or what we are or what we should call ourselves or where we came from, or how we got here?
Europeans name people whatever they want!! Now.......Where whence forth do you originate....and your family....and their families and their families family? Can you dig it?