Giago didn't say "all settlers were guilty of genocide." He didn't use the words "all" or "genocide" in the selection I quoted.
You don't think the Scots-Irish immigrants participated in attacks on Indians once they settled here and joined the Anglo-American mainstream? What's your justification for that belief?
Settlers were innocent?
The US government wasn't always the guilty party, you know. Often state or local governments, businesses, or individuals violated the federal "wish" to protect the Indians. The quote correspondent DMarks provided on this point is accurate:
Prove the alleged "bias"
Now that you've told us your position, Anonymous, do you have anything to say about what Giago actually wrote? Quote the line or lines you disagree with and say why you disagree with them.
I'd say Giago's "worst" claim is that "immigrants" (i.e., Euro-Americans in general) took the Indians' land "by hook, crook and force." Are you claiming this is generally false rather than generally true? If so, prove your case.
Consider the fact that Euro-American immigrants broke every one of the treaties signed with Indians. Again, the violators were often local officials or settlers who didn't want to be bound by federal dictates. For instance, Charles Ingalls in Little House on the Prairie.
Since you disagree with Giago, give us a few examples of Indian land that wasn't taken by "hook, crook, or force." Tell us how Scots-Irish people such as Andrew Jackson dealt with Indians fairly while other Anglo groups didn't. Good luck with your answer...you'll need it.
For more on the subject, see Genocide by Any Other Name....
Below: A typical Scots-Irish American?