NAFPS Forum
General => Welcome & News => Topic started by: educatedindian on February 11, 2006, 08:25:53 pm
-
Harjo: Fakers and phonies and frauds, egad: There ought to be a law Posted: February 10, 2006
by: Suzan Shown Harjo / Indian Country Today
http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096412438
Another Indian impersonator is unmasked: Nasdijj, who masqueraded as a Navajo and made a pile of money from best-selling books about his life as a
poor reservation kid with an alcoholic mother.
It turns out that Nasdijj is a very white man with some very dark secrets. He really is Tim Barrus of North Carolina. He did not grow up on or near any
Indian territory. Neither parent is Navajo or Indian of any nation. His mother was not a drunken Navajo.
At the very least, Barrus and his promoters owe all Navajo people, especially the women, an apology.
Nasdijj's true identity was exposed by Matthew Fleischer in an extensive article in LA Weekly's Jan. 25 issue, ''Navahoax,'' which asked the question:
''Did a struggling white writer of gay erotica become one of multicultural literature's most celebrated memoirists - by passing himself off as
Native American?''
The Nasdijj expose hit the stands the day before Oprah Winfrey's grilling of author James Frey about misrepresentations in his memoir. In less than one
week, Random House's Ballantine imprint announced it would cease shipping Nasdijj's ''Geronimo's Bones'' and ''The Boy and the Dog are Sleeping.''
Nasdijj was the darling of publishing for a hot minute. He won a prestigious award intended for Native writers. Critics heaped praise on his
writing; one called it ''achingly honest.''
Native people who read Nasdijj's work did not believe he was a Native writer because there was nothing familiar about the content. Non-Natives
embraced his work because of its familiarity - it ''derives its special power from his ability to capture the universal emotions that we all share,'' as one book cover put it.
It is this very familiarity that allows pseudo-Indians to rise so far so fast in circles controlled by non-Indians. They write with what non-Indian
reviewers like to call ''universal appeal,'' meaning that they appeal to other non-Indians because they are non-Indian.
Once these pseudo-Indians are revealed as the non-Indians they actually are, many of their enablers continue to support them, even chiding those who have brought the hoax to light as mean-spirited, small-minded or jealous.
And what happens to the posers? Like actors who've deep-ended in their roles, they either hold on to their fictionalized personae until the laughing dies down and then adopt a ''so what'' attitude - so what if I'm not actually an Indian? I'm now an Indian expert by virtue of having portrayed an
Indian - or they shift into another shape to please a new audience.
And what happens to all the damage they caused and the money they made and the accolades they garnered under false pretenses? They abscond with the money and goods and leave the mess for the people they pretended to be.
The pseudo-Indians should not be held harmless. They should be made to pay.
There ought to be a law, you say? I couldn't agree more.
During the hearings in the 1980s on amendments to the Indian Arts and Crafts Act, I testified on behalf of the National Congress of American
Indians that Congress should establish a new law that would authorize a tribe to bring a federal action against those who profit from false claims that they are people of that tribe.
And what about people who don't profit from their false Indian identities?
This is not the norm. In the vast majority of these cases, the non- Indians are pretending to be Indians for profit of some kind - for tenure, a
job, a book contract, a record deal, a movie role. Look into the eyes of a pseudo-Indian and
you see gold.
A new cause of action for Native nations should be more than a cease and desist order. Budding pseudo-Indians should know that there are
potential consequences for identity theft.
There should be a law for Navajo Nation to sue Barrus for the profits he made while committing the crime of stealing tribal identity.
There already are ways for Native writers, who were finalists for the Native writing award that the Poets, Essayists and Novelists organization
bestowed on Barrus, to seek redress. Both Barrus and PEN should hope that the snubbed writers don't use those laws to recover damages.
Some Native nations might not want to engage these fakers. Some may not consider this offense against Native people to be offensive; perhaps
the same ones who think that the mascoting of their tribal identities and heroes is not a problem. So, they wouldn't sue the pseudos.
Other tribes could exact some of the profits the pseudos made off their good names and reputations, and could provide time in the slammer for the offenders to reflect on their next career moves.
-
Pt 2
Here are four ways Congress could legislate to address this problem.
First, enact a statutory cause of action for Native nations to pursue impostors across state lines, try them in tribal courts and impose triple damages
against those found to be guilty. These are offenses against a particular people, who should have the authority to do something about them. This authority does not exist under current law.
Second, amend the Indian Arts and Crafts Act to include all artists, including but not limited to writers, dancers, singers, actors and curators. The
law now covers only visual artists. When its penalties were increased more than 15 years ago, many pseudo-Indians traded their visual art careers for writing and curating careers, and continue to vex Native peoples.
Third, amend the Federal Trade Commission's Indian arts and crafts statute to include all arts marketed to the public. The FTC pursues these cases as consumer fraud and encourages arts and crafts outlets to clearly mark products as Native-made and non-Native made.
Bookstores do not differentiate between books written by Native people and those whose authors are not Native. Anyone can write about anything
they want, but the public should be informed about which books are in a Native person's voice and experience, and which are not.
Fourth, enact an updated version of the pseudo-Indian act, which was first introduced in 1933, as part of the Indian Reorganization Act package. The bill would have made it a ''crime to represent one's self to be an Indian, and providing punishment therefore.'' Its language was simple and direct:
''It shall be unlawful for any person other than an Indian to represent himself to be an Indian for the purpose of obtaining employment or any contract
for the rendition of services, or of obtaining pecuniary or other assistances, or of securing to himself or to any other person any of the privileges
or benefits conferred by law upon Indians. Any person violating the provisions of this Act shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned for not longer than one year, or both.''
Congress needs to enact new authorities and to remove present restrictions against tribes acting on their own in these areas. Congress also needs to exercise its oversight responsibilities and let the federal agencies know that this is a priority, and to provide monies to enforce existing laws.
Congressional members and staffers know what to do to properly address the Barruses who perpetuate a fraud on Native and non-Native people. The question is: Why don't they do it?
Suzan Shown Harjo, Cheyenne and Hodulgee Muscogee, is president of the Morning Star Institute in Washington, D.C., and a columnist for
Indian Country Today.
-
Is that THIS Susan Shown Harjo?
http://tryworks.blogspot.com/2006/01/harjobellecourt-report.html
-
Yeah, this is also her.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22suzan+shown+harjo&btnG=Google+Search
She's got a long history of doing good and is pretty respected from all I've heard. That link you posted is mostly just pointing out the irony of the law she'd like to pass, how the same methods used against Ward Churchill could be used against her. Outside of, ironically, Churchill himself, I've never heard of any claims she's a wannabe. (Churchill insisted she dyes her hair and is a natural redhead.)
-
Unfortunately, the recent smear campaign against the Good Professor was waged largely by an alleged Irishman (I've not seen his papers or his enrollment card) named Charlie Brennan, a reporter for the Rocky Mountain News who largely relied on the Bellecourt/Harjo camp for his anti-Churchill campaign. The Rocky's anti-Indian cant has a long, genocidal history all the way back to the Sand Creek Massacre, and continues to this day.
Funny how a three-year old essay by Professor Churchill became hot, front page news immediately following the acquittal by jury of the Denver Eight for blocking the annual incitement-to-genocide, Columbus Day parade in Denver. Professor Churchill was one of the Denver Eight, who themselves were but eight of 230 who were charged with "failure to obey a lawful order" to leave the street in October 2004.
Both Colorado Aim - www.coloradoaim.org and the Transform Columbus Day Alliance - www.transformcolumbusday.org have more details on the annual confrontation with the Convoy of Conquest and the local media's reaction. The editorial pages have been especially virulent.
-
THis is Susan Shown Harjo's mother's obit. Seems like her mom was plenty Indian as is her dad, that usually means the kids are too.:
Douglas, Susie Rozetta Eades
Susie Rozetta Eades Douglas, 81, was Cheyenne and Pawnee and an enrolled
member of the Cheyenne & Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma. Her great-grandfather
was Bull Bear, who was a Cheyenne peace chief, leader of the Dog Men
Society and the first signatory to the Medicine Lodge Creek Treaty of
1867. Her grandfather, Thunderbird (Richard Davis), an artist and writer,
is credited with preserving valuable ceremonial information at a time when
the Sun Dance and other Cheyenne ceremonies were outlawed. Born in Pawnee,
Oklahoma, on July 2, 1921, to Richenda Aspenall Davis Eades and Joseph
Cleveland Eades, Sr., she was raised in El Reno, Oklahoma, graduated from
Chilocco Indian School in 1940 and earned an associate degree in business
from Haskell Institute in Lawrence, Kansas, Class of '43. Homemaker and
Eastern Star, she was a Quilting Society member and an active volunteer
worker for the Democratic Party. As an Army wife, she traveled extensively
and lived in Oahu, Hawaii, and Naples, Italy, before settling into her
longtime home in San Antonio, Texas. Mrs. Douglas is survived by her
husband of nearly 59 years, Freeland Edward Douglas, Hodulgee Muscogee,
and her daughter and son, Suzan Shown Harjo and Dennis Gene Douglas, both
Cheyenne and Hodulgee Muscogee. Her daughter credits Mrs. Douglas as the
inspiration for the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and sacred
places protection and repatriation laws. Her grandchildren are Adriane
Shown Harjo and Duke Ray Harjo II, Hodulgee Muscogee and Cheyenne; Cate
Star Douglas and Francine Nicole Douglas, Acoma, Cheyenne and Muscogee;
and Denise Jean Douglas and Fawn Fixico Douglas, Palute, Cheyenne and
Muscogee. Her son Rickey Dean Douglas, sister Rebecca Elizabeth Eades and
brothers Miles Richard Eades and Joseph Cleveland Eades, Jr., preceded
her. Mrs. Douglas also is survived by sisters Emerydean Eades White and
Esther Eades Lamebull; sisters-in-law Mildred Millican Eades, Naomi Bland
Eades and Tsianina Douglas Powell; and brother-in-law Jack Byron Powell;
as well as a host of great-grandchildren, nieces, nephews. grandnieces and
grandnephews. She passed away in San Antonio on Jan. 21, after a bout with
pneumonia and complications of diabetes and Alzhelmer's disease. Services
for Mrs. Douglas will take place at 1:00 p.m. on Saturday, Jan. 25. at the
Huber-Benson Funeral Home in El Reno. Burial will take place at the
Cheyenne and Arapaho Cemetery in Concho.
-
(Churchill insisted she dyes her hair and is a natural redhead.)
I'm not taking sides in the Churchill/Harjo thing here but being a natural redhead I just have to point out that Malcolm X also had red hair. Nobody seriously argues that that made him somehow not black.
-
Yeah, it didn't make much sense. My old boss at Arizona State was Dr. Joyce Kievet, who is Eastern Band Cherokee and has reddish brown and very curly hair.
The whole thing with Churchill was pretty appalling, that's why I signed petitions in support of him even though he's personally pretty repugnant in some of the things he's done and said, such as spitting on elders he disagreed with, attacking tribal govts as collaborators, and being rude with Annika for no reason. He was demonized partly because people like Bill OReilly (Falafel Boy) needed someone to distract the public from their own scandals. That the Bellecourts worked with the OReilly types says a lot of their own lack of character. I've always been pretty disgusted by the enormous amounts of time wasted by the feuds among the original AIM leaders.
-
Professor Carroll:
I have not heard the story of the spitting on elders before, but I have learned through the hideous witchhunt of Churchill to always ask for a source / witnesses for any accusations hurled at him. They usually fall apart on further review. Did you witness this incident personally or can you elaborate further on the accusation?
I have been one of Ward's students and found him to be respectful always, but harsh where it was warranted. Considering the subject matter he teaches - the genocide of Turtle Island's indigenous people by Euro Americans - I did not, as a person of European heritage, find anything he said to be something I did not need to hear. No amount of harshness he could convey could ever match the reality of that which he tries so hard to bring to the awareness of the general population.
The point about Susan Harjo is that if she is going to play purity police, she needs to be sure her own "proof" lives up to the standards she demands of others.
As a person of Gaelic ancestry whose only proof is what my grandpa told me, I am in no position to judge Professor Churchill's degree of "Indianess" and will not stand for other whites - like Charlie Brennan - trying to do so either. It's the old divide and conquer tactic that Europeans have used so well in their centuries-long campaign to dominate the world and all her indigenous peoples, including those of my own heritage.
-
Dragonessa,
People will always play "I am more Indian then you." Churchill himself has engaged in this game of one upmanship. It was back a few years ago, but he did it. Now, Harjo has always had it in for Churchill. And while playing purity police is ugly, she DOES have her proof as BOTH of her parents are enrolled. I have friends who had the misfortune of working with her. They said she was a world class bitch, but she is Indian. My feeling is that whjen you engage in that kind of mudslinging, it comes back on you. I don't know if Churchill has Indian ancestry. I give him the benefit of the doubt on this because I know how hard some things are to prove. And however satisfying it is to sling the mud back at Harjo, it serves no purpose.
-
http://www.native-net.org/archive/nl/9404/0064.html
This was from a meeting where Carol Standing Elk was spat on and Churchill'swife tried to break her wrist. There's also a series of posts in response where some believe that it was more a matter of the two women flinging coffee and insults. The problem is, Churchill himself never denied the incident and has even played it up, saying she deserved to be spit on.
Churchill and many of his supporters like to claim he's being singled out for his beliefs. Nonsense, many Native professors and activists have beliefs equally as radical. It's his behavior that many people can't stand far more than his beliefs. And because his behavior attracts headlines, it also has the effect of distracting from the issues he's pushing, discrediting people of similar views, and degenerating into a debate about his personal ethics. As far as his views, there are many I agree with and some I disagree with.
I almost met him. He was at ASU at a conference of leftist activism as the keynote speaker. The night before there was a concert and lots of actvists booths. I was probably the only (other?) nonwhite. I saw him standing about ten paces away. He saw me and immediately took off the other way, then went back towards me right past me without looking at me. My guess was that he was afraid an NDN guy would try to challenge him or debate him. Or maybe I just look like someone he's had problems with in the past.
As you might guess, I don't particularly care about whether he's NDN or not, since his writing doesn't hinge on that being so or not. And the claim by the Bellecourts or Harjo that he's profiting from this is bizarre. Profs don't make a whole lot, esp not from academic writing.
-
I find it hard to believe that the right wing, rabidly anti-Indian Rocky Mountain News, as well as the Bill O'Reilly show and Denver's local hate radio jocks, would single him out for a year's plus worth of headlines and investigation just because his "behavior" is like, ya know, rude.
Sir, you've never met him. And you say he may not have been approachable at one conference where you almost met him. The Churchill I know works very well with Indian people in Denver. Check out the supporters from the Indian community that were on stage with him the night he gave his speech at CU. CSPAN has the video. As does Free Speech TV.org. It has been my experience with virtually all American Indians I have met, that they were very reserved or reticent until they got to know a person better through repeated encounters, especially if that person is white.
The behavior the empire is going after Churchill for is that he is a UNITER not a divider. Witness his part in organizing the yearly confrontation of the Columbus Day convoy of conquest in Denver. The hundreds and hundreds of people who turn out to confront that hate speech parade are made up of people from many nations. His writings have brought a lot of people like myself to a better understanding of how the mythology of Columbus undergirds white supremacy, and colonization of Indian Country undergirds the power projection of the US Empire. When confronting such a genocidal war machine, does a person have to be polite?
What was likely even more galling to the white establishment in Denver than the parade confrontation was Ward's expert testimony during the trial of the Denver 8, who were prosecuted for blocking the parade in October 2004. That testimony was a key factor in the jury's acquittal. It absolutely stunned the local apartheid establishment that an all white jury came back with a not guilty verdict after the city had spent hundreds of thousands on the trials. The witchhunt began two days later as the media went into overdrive over an essay that was already three years old.
I hardly think the fact that Churchill might not be "polite" is the reason that the media went after him. It has not been my experience that non-Indians in this country get too worked up over NDNs being rude to each other.
If that were the case, the FBI would have long ago investigated the murders of Lakota traditionalists killed during the Reign of Terror on Pine Ridge in the 1970's.
As to the Standing Elk, Haimes alleged brawl, do you have or have you seen a police report from the incident stating that Ms. Standing Elk almost had her wrist broken? You would think something so violent would surely have generated a police record stating as much.
And is Carol Standing Elk not allied to the Bellecourts?
-
Ironically you make my point for me. Rather than discussing the issues, we've spent most of this thread discussing him and his behavior.
It goes way beyond rudeness or politeness, as the alleged incident with Standing Elk shows. (Once again, he's never denied it and wears the incident like a badge of honor.)
More than that, attacking tribal govts as "collaborators" as he frequently does, it does little except alienate the very people and institutions you have to work with or work to change. For that matter so does his whole pose of being a revolutionary. His tactics repeatedly alienate huge numbers of NDNs from him and his supporters.
If his shock tactics had accomplished anything substantial, or were aimed at anything other than a self serving more radical than thou desire to pat one's self on the back, then they could easily be forgiven. I see no sign of that. I see no sign of his tactics doing anything but making it HARDER for NDN activists to get things done. His best work is his analyses, none of which rely on harshness for its own sake, esp his expose of COINTELPRO vs AIM and the Panthers.
It was precisely because Churchill has alienated virtually every other NDN activist outside of the Denver area that the far right felt they could go after him. His recklessness almost became the wedge by which people like OReilly and Horowitz were able to initiate a campaign to shut down activists professors. Only the increasing failures and unpopularity of the Bush admin undercut that campaign. If Bush and Co had more success in Iraq, a lot of activist professors could've gotten fired. As it is, Churchill gave them a taste of success by resigning as head of Ethnic Studies.
-
So. The Indian is the problem, not the white apartheid attackers? Talk about blame the victim.
Professor. I asked you to show me proof of your accusation that he spat on anybody. So far you have only referenced a NAIM press release - and we all know that the Bellecourt gang are the avowed enemies of Churchill and autonomous AIM. I challenge you, sir, to show me anywhere that Ward bragged about spitting on anybody. Or that he even spat on anybody. So far you have not been able to back up your accusation.
And you know you have to vet your sources better than this. One accusation from the Bellecourts does not proof make.
I have never denied being a rapist. Does this make me one?
What makes it hard for NDN activists, like any other activists, to get things done is white supremacy and US fascism, not those who challenge it. Let's keep the focus on the enemy and not on the victims.
When you say "tribal governments" do you mean the BIA or Traditionals? I think the FBI backing terrorists like the GOONS at Pine Ridge probably makes things harder for traditional activists to "get things done" than alleged failings on Ward's part. Can you show me how Ward is complicit in the US government's murder of Indians? Something other than from the Bellecourts?
I find it interesting, too, how you have dismissed the support the NDNs in Denver have given Churchill. Do you think these American Indians are not capable of accurately judging the man's effectiveness or character? I mean, you know, from where you are in Texas?
Do you think it might be possible that those on the ground here in Denver might just know a WEE bit more about what goes on here than those observing from, like, hundreds of miles away?
Also, are you aware of Churchill's own stated reasons for resigning? Can you tell me what they are, as you know so much about the Good Professor and all.
And if lots of professors had been fired by their universities, would you blame Ward or the fascists?
Again, my concern is that you are blaming the victim. Perhaps to save your own job? Or comfort zone? Do you feel he was wrong about 9/11 or what?
dragonessa101@yahoo.com
-
The Indian is the problem, not the white apartheid attackers? Talk about blame the victim.
Al can speak for himself, of course, but I think he said that some of Churchill's behaviour causes problems for other Indian activists, not that Churchill himself is a problem. Since Al's also an Indian activist professor, I think he's quite well-placed to make that observation, despite not living in Denver.
What makes it hard for NDN activists, like any other activists, to get things done is white supremacy and US fascism, not those who challenge it. Let's keep the focus on the enemy and not on the victims.
I don't think it's for you to define for Indian activists what or who their enemies are, or what they should think of Ward Churchill.
Again, my concern is that you are blaming the victim. Perhaps to save your own job?
Oh, man. That's totally unwarranted. Do you think you know Al well enough to speculate about his motivations for disagreeing with you? I think you're way out of line.
Now, what do you think of Joy Harjo's idea for extending current laws to allow Indian nations to seek redress from frauds?
Edit; I meant Suzan Harjo, of course.
-
"The Indian is the problem, not the white apartheid attackers?"
If bad tactics are used, they are definitely PART of the problem. Since you bring up apartheid, let me point out that the ANC had a terrible record of lack of succcess as a national liberation movement, taking more than 40 years to succeed where most movements in Africa succeeded in far less time. Pointing that out sure doesn't defend apartheid.
"So far you have only referenced a NAIM press release"
Actually I referenced a long thread with discussion of its validity.
"I challenge you, sir, to show me anywhere that Ward bragged about spitting on anybody. Or that he even spat on anybody. So far you have not been able to back up your accusation."
Oh brother. Once again, you make my point for me, insisting that we make HIM the issue rather than any substantial issues.
This is the last time I'll indulge you on this. Then it's up to YOU to do your own research on the man you admire.
www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2716087,00.html
"I have never denied being a rapist. Does this make me one?"
I have no idea what you were trying to say, and I doubt you do either.
"What makes it hard for NDN activists, like any other activists, to get things done is white supremacy and US fascism, not those who challenge it."
So we can't disagree among ourselves about the best tactics? Nonsense.
"When you say "tribal governments" do you mean the BIA or Traditionals?"
Neither. I mean the legal (which is not the same as valid) tribal govts.
"Can you show me how Ward is complicit in the US government's murder of Indians?"
Try arguing with me about things I actually say, not things you invent me saying.
"Do you think it might be possible that those on the ground here in Denver might just know a WEE bit more about what goes on here than those observing from, like, hundreds of miles away?"
Obviously you've never heard of tunnel vision. What Churchill does and says affects far more than Denver's NDNs.
"are you aware of Churchill's own stated reasons for resigning?"
A direct quote from his letter of resignation:
"...it is my considered view that the present political climate has rendered me a liability in terms of representing either my department, the college, or the university in this or any other administrative capacity."
In other words, "Them bad guys are to blame for me not being able to do my job." No explanation as to why the same wouldn't be true of his job as professor, and ducking the whole question of whether he's giving encouragement to the ones out to get him and other activist professors.
I see it as lacking the courage of his convictions and throwing his attackers a bone, hoping they'll go away.
"And if lots of professors had been fired by their universities, would you blame Ward or the fascists?"
I thought what I'd said before was clear. I'd blame both.
"Again, my concern is that you are blaming the victim. Perhaps to save your own job?"
ROFL! Obviously you don't know just how little the State of Texas pays its professors.
If I were more worried about losing my job, would I have signed petitions siding with Churchill?
"Or comfort zone?"
On this point you're partly right, but it goes way beyond "comfort".
His attacks on tribal govts are as wrong as can be. It's essentially an indiscriminate verbal assault on a great many good people (along with far too many bad ones). Which is pretty much typical Churchill.
"Do you feel he was wrong about 9/11 or what?"
The little Eichmans comment? I know what he was trying to say, that technocrats in the WTC taking part in US empire served the same purpose as Eichman did, but that under US military doctrine, the other victims were "collateral damage". The second part is historically accurate. The first part...a World Bank bureaucrat is not sending people to death camps. Enforcing policies that make it more likely people starve is reprehensible in all kinds of ways, but it's not genocide. It devalues ACTUAL genocide to claim that, and it makes it harder for people to take actual genocide seriously.
-
Sorry Dr. Carroll, but the burden of proof is on you to substantiate your accusation that Ward spat on anybody. ? YOU made him the issue when YOU accused him of spitting on an elder. ? Unfortunately, your Denver post link only pulls up today's front page, but I'd be willing to bet my booty that the Denver Post uses NAIM's press release as it's sole source. ? Talk about a circularity of citations! ?
Again, you accused a man of assualt on an elder, so the burden of proof is on you to produce reliable evidence that he did so. ? I am not making Ward the central issue here, but YOUR accusation that he committed wrongdoing. ? Rules of evidence say that the prosecution has to provide evidence of wrongdoing to the jury, and it is never incumbent upon the defendant to go seek out proof of her or his own guilt.
Also, you said he bragged about the spitting incident. ? Where? ? Did he say this himself or are you quoting Bellecourts/NAIM again? A debate on an open forum does not count as hard evidence of anything. ? ?
And really, does a woman who runs with the likes of the Bellecourts qualify as an elder? ? Elderly perhaps, but elder?
In any event, produce your evidence or drop the smear charges, sir. ? I will debate nothing else with you until you show me that you can use a better class of sources than the Bellecourt/Denver media inquisitors.
And if anyone would like a little more background on CO AIM and the decades-long bad jacketing of Ward Churchill by NAIM and their allies in the Denver media, check out Faith Attaguile's article "There's a Reason Why We Call It Struggle":
http://tinyurl.com/cjwgg
-
Um, I don't think that, YOU, as a non-Indian have the SAY on who is and who is not an elder. And you know, you come across as trying to out Indian Al. Plenty of Indians, traditional, non-traditional, activist and non-activist, dislike Churchill. Plenty of Indian people like the Bellecourts. As to your thing on tribal governments, you need to visit reservations and ASK people. Ordinary people, what THEY think of the tribal government. And if you do I have one piece of advise: Close your mouth and LISTEN. Because while you are spouting the revolutiobary party line as told to you by Churchill, you turn off a lot of very traditional people. It may surprise you to know, that in soe places, AIM is not well thought of. This is not a slap at Churchill, it is just my observation, from being around traditional people. Like I said in a previous post, I do nopt know if Churchill is Indian. In fact, I don't care one way or the other. But the way he thinks, is not the way many many Indian people think. He is from the world of scholars and the eductaional system. And most of them are not real in touch with the regular people.
-
More than anything else, it seems to really bug you when NDNs don't live up to your preconceptions of them as somehow natural allies of those who fancy themselves revolutionary leftists.
Sorry, but that just often isn't true. NDNs are pragmatic people, I'd say, and not about to automatically put themselves on the line for those who play at being revolutionary, not without darned good reasons. There may be times when the wishes of NDNs and revolutionaries coincide, such as the Zapatista movement, but that doesn't mean it should always be automatic.
In playing at being revolutionary, you sure seem to have adopted some of those tactics, such as thinking anyone who doesn't agree 100% must be an enemy or an ally of your enemies. ? So here you are accusing me of being one of the Bellecourts' participants in "smearing" Churchill.
And claiming once again that he is not the issue, you spend your whole post defending him. Incidentally, since you didn't answer a single one of my other points, I take it you concede them.
Plus you top it off with a link telling me your side of an issue I clearly already know better than you. Thank you, Oh Great White Revolutionary. Whatever would we poor dumb NDNs do without you?
LIke Debbie pointed out, the Bellecourts are not entirely bad people. They have the support of some very traditional NSNs, and to claim they are on the far right or collaborators is just wrong. After all, the Bellecourts have worked with both the Mohawk and Ojibwe Warrior Societies, every bit as radical as AIM and in many ways more traditionalist.
I also think Debbie has a good point about people in academia often being out of touch with people in the communities. It's something I try very hard to avoid in my own work. In some ways it's easier for me to do that, since St. Phillips' is hardly the Ivy League. (It's a former Freedmen's College.)
It's a point that you might consider yourself. I honestly hope that you don't leave us, just that you listen to us more instead of thinking you know what's best in such a paternalistic way.
BTW, if you'd bother to look into it, you'd have seen the source for the Denver Post was Churchill's own lawyer.
-
Sorry folks. ? I don't see any evidence presented for YOUR assertion that Churchill spat on anybody. ? Be glad to discuss everything else with ya'll AFTER you provide more substantiation ? - i.e. eye-witness reports, police reports, newspaper articles, etc from more than just the Bellecourts - who are avowed enemies of Autonomous AIM and widely held to be complicit in the murder of Anna Mae Aquash.
Lots of interesting things to talk about, but you still have not backed up your inital accusation. ? David Lane does not accuse Churchill of spitting on anybody. ? Nor does he concede that Churchill did.
Again. ? Churchill is not the issue. ? YOUR accusation is the issue, as it is one of the key judgements upon which you are basing your assessment of his character. ? Please back up your claim with evidence.
Oh, hey. ? Did you know there is a San Francisco Chronicle article about the entire incident? ? Wonder if it even mentions Churchill... Such a shocking thing this business of spitting, surely that would warrant a newspaper mention? Might even help your case.
Again. ? Love to discuss with you effective tactics and strategies for indigenous and earth liberation, but you must play by fair rules of evidence. ?
And I don't know of any tradition (except maybe neo-nazi) that would consider someone who runs with drug dealers (yes, Clyde was convicted for selling LSD to NDN youth), and smears an innocent person, and is the darling of the racist media in Denver to be a wise elder. ? Nobody has to be American Indian to make that call. ?
-
Wow, Had to put my shades on. I am dazzled by your brillance Dragonessa!
-
Indigenous and earth liberation? Girl, you're on the wrong forum. But if I told you what I do, I am sure it would not be good enough for the likes of the young white saviors of everything. Even so, I wouldn't discuss it with you cause I learned long ago that to fight for Indian rights, it is better to do what ya gotta do and not dicuss the hell out of it.
-
I'm every bit as dazzled as Raven and Debbie...
I truly must've hit a nerve when I pointed out you seem to only want NDNs to play the role that self styled revolutionaries want them to play. No wonder you're so (pardon the bad and unintentional pun) spitting mad.
"I don't see any evidence presented for YOUR assertion"
It's not "mine." And you must be willingly blind.
"...widely held to be complicit in the murder of Anna Mae Aquash."
That's another case with accusations that've gone back and forth endlessly, with both sides using her memory in a pretty low way. Now you go beyond amusing to show a similar lack of character.
"Again. ? Churchill is not the issue. ? YOUR accusation is the issue"
Again, it's not "mine" since even he and his own laywer do not deny it.
"Love to discuss with you effective tactics and strategies for indigenous and earth liberation,"
"Earth liberation"? I'm as amused by the term as Debbie is!
"but you must play by fair rules of evidence."
Y-a-w-n...I'm hardly a court.
Quit blaming me because you're too lazy to read the thread about the incident. ?
"I don't know of any tradition (except maybe neo-nazi) that would consider someone who runs with drug dealers (yes, Clyde was convicted for selling LSD to NDN youth)"
Obviously you don't know the Mohawk and Ojibwe Warrior Societies.
Or for that matter, many of the original AIM members. AIM was formed in a Minneapolis jail cell, remember? Many of the original AIM people had criminal records.
Do you really expect every NDN elder to have nothing to do with any of the huge numbers of NDNs who have criminal records? Remember that NDNs get imprisoned at much higher rates than Anglos. You're asking elders to cut off contact with people who need their guidance the most.
Come on, would you expect elders to cut off contact with Peltier?
"Nobody has to be American Indian to make that call."
Once again, thank you Oh Wise White Mother, for showing us poor dumb NDNs you know far better than we possibly could. It's really, really mighty white of you.
-
Dragonessa,
I think Al just counted coup on your a**!
-
I have been following this thread from the beginning and it seems that this person is overly defensive of Harjo. Certainly wants to bring others over to her/his way of thinking. NO that won't happen here. This person is apparently Churchill or someone who has been mesmerized by him.
Al your right on the mark, your stance is appreciated.
JA
-
Al:
Ya got the evidence yet? ? Nope.
It is a bedrock of human rights law that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. ? Failure to deny guilt is not evidence a person is guilty.
Maybe Al's obsession with loogey-hocking is a non-female thing, but he and all his Twinkie groupies,
The evidence is surely out there....Why is it taking days and days and days for you to deliver?
-
Dragonessa, I believe you wasted good money taking classes under Churchill.
Instead of trying to argue the fact of spitting, why don't you go into the prison system and argue cases for all those poor innocent souls that were convicted under circumstanial evidence.
At least you would be a productive human being.
I'm glad you are not in my camp, as loud as your snoring is, you would give our position away to the enemy.
-
This has gotten pretty boring. A thread about an important issue, the use of the law against frauds, has been hijacked almost from the beginning by one Churchill follower's obsessive and increasingly childish behavior.
So as to not reward said childishness, the worst aspects of it were removed, while her essential message was kept.
"Ya got the evidence yet? Nope."
Like I said before (THREE times) it's up to you to quit being so lazy as to not read a link put right in front of you. Natchat already went into detail about this.
"It is a bedrock of human rights law that the accused is innocent until proven guilty."
For the second time, Oh Dense One, this is not a court.
"Failure to deny guilt is not evidence a person is guilty."
A person's lawyer defending what his client did rather than denying is a pretty clear admission. I won't say "of guilt" because this is not a court.
"Maybe Al's obsession with loogey-hocking"
MY obession?
ROFLMAO!
You're the one who won't let this go for how many posts now? For how long?
"is a non-female thing"
I suppose that's a pseudo-feminist's way of saying "male"?
"but he and all his Twinkie groupies"
ROFLMAO!
You just can't help but dig yourself in deeper, can you?
Not just by your continued childishness, but also by its laughable falseness. After all, we have on this forum traditional storytellers and a leader from a reserve government, along with many of the better known ANTI Nuage people in NDN Country.
"The evidence is surely out there....Why is it taking days and days and days for you to deliver?"
The Natchat link was put in front of you over a week agao. Why are you too lazy to read it?