51 responses so far ↓

• 1 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 10:51 am   

  That such an advocacy should happen now, at this time in American history, against such a people as the American Indian, is unconscionable. It is a staggering display of the perpetual irresolve and irreconcilability in the minds of many white Americans toward the American Indian.

  BadEagle.com has most definitely failed in its mission, right here, in our home town, Oklahoma City.

• 2 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 10:56 am   

  Of course, in 1999 the Columbia School of Journalism declared The Oklahoman (then The Daily Oklahoman) the worst paper in the country.

• 3 Smile // Oct 30, 2009 at 11:36 am   

  Can you explain, “perpetual irresolve and irreconcilability in the minds of many white Americans toward the American Indian.” for me?

• 4 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 11:55 am   

  I’ve met it time and time again among nationally known “conservatives.” They feel bad about what happened to Indians, but don’t know how to improve or change things without compromising conservative principles. They see Indians as welfare recipients, something they eschew. They see Indians as dependents, irresponsible, yet, based on history, Indians have the right to whatever the treaties provide.

  Something’s wrong somewhere, but, no leader seems to have a solution. As a result, conservatives would rather not deal with the issue at all. In the meantime, liberals just use Indians to validate liberal anti-American positions, so, liberals really don’t count in this dialogue.

  My position: it is not anti-American for an Indian to choose to be Indian. Part of what it means to be Indian is the community, the tribal sovereignty. For this, our Indians fathers spilled their blood, did they not? Was this not the reason? Of course. To be Indian. They didn’t want to be part of the white society. Today, Indians inherit this.

  We have irreconciliation within ourselves, as well, because of our circumstances.

  Indians are nations, and they were recognized as such, through treaty, through war, through land. This is the way it is. We all simply have to learn to work with this. Work around this. Work through this. Whatever.

  I do not appreciate being put in a position to think that being Indian is anti-American, or being Indian is inhibiting, unequal, or wrong. This is what The Oklahoman, and many others (including David Horowitz) is saying. Dissolve the reservations. Dissolve Indian sovereignty. Dissolve all the foundations of being Indian nations.

• 5 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 11:57 am   

  I think the honor of America is involved in the preservation of the Indian nations.

• 6 Awen // Oct 30, 2009 at 12:29 pm   

  Ha Ha! The prospect of real “equality” hurts, don’t it? Is it possible some Indians are finally unhappy with being ruled by the despots in Tribal Councils? About time too! Nobody can, or should, have it both ways. Do not most Conservatives have a problem with the idea of dual-citizens involved in the running of our country? To which country belongs their loyalty, we ask. And when the chips are down, can Americans count on them to consider their loyalty to us first?

  You are either an American citizen or you are not. If you are not and prefer to be part of a separate nation, then you run your own affairs and pay your own bills. If any long-ago ‘treaty’ guarantees any people the right to exist as perpetual parasites on the rest of the country, and allows Tribal Councils to plunder and despoil their own peoples, it’s time to void them for the good of the nation. What’s anybody going to do about it if that happens? More war? I can’t wait to see today’s couch-potatoes trying that on but, perhaps everybody these days does need a memory refresher on who won and why and a reminder of which side their bread’s buttered on also.

  What’s good for the nation as a whole has to come first in the minds of patriots; we can worry about “sensitivity” to one ethnic group or another later – in fact, we should re-evaluate the perceived benefits of a nation presently at war bothering with something so wussy as ‘sensitivity’ at all. It’s about time SOMEBODY had the backbone to bring this up in public. I don’t usually bother with news rags but I think the Oklahoman has proved itself worthy of a subscription, he he he.

  Here in the Southwest we had a lot of illegals demonstrations, as most people know, and marching right along with them were a few (thank all the Gods not too many….) misguided Indians. Oh yes, let’s turn the Southwest into another Mexico! By all means. Do you all know what the common term for an Indian is in Mexico? Even among a people who are themselves 90% Indian blood? Animalito. That means a savage. There is no “tribal sovereignty,’ no freebies from the tax-payers and darned few civil rights and when they step out of the place assigned to them by mainstream Mexico, they get Chiapas, women and children gunned down by the Mexican Army. Now, there is poetic justice. All these Tribal rabble-rousers will be on their knees begging the hated white-European to come and save them. I think even the Tribes know better than to count on the blacks, Asians or whatever else we have because all those people don’t like them either.

• 7 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 12:54 pm   

  Awen, there are many reasons one can chose to be discontent, as there are sources to blame. You are not Indian. I do not expect you to understand what it means to Indians.

  Yes, there are Indians who, for one reason or another, are angry at other Indians. They may be so abused or unhappy themselves that they want to destroy the Indian nations, and Indian people. This isn’t unfamiliar in Indian country.

  So long as you understand one thing: this issue is not about equality. That’s your “American” point of view. This issue is about being Indian.

  Maybe if you thought of yourself as an American who’s being forced to be an alien Communist, you’d have a inkling of the issue.

• 8 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 12:55 pm   

  indians are not to be classified with any other ethnic group in America. This is the bottom line, the historical truth, and the reality Indians know at heart. I don’t expect you to value this, but, this is what Indians value. One, or even two malcontents do not represent the reality of Indian country.

• 9 Smile // Oct 30, 2009 at 1:03 pm   

  Though I disagree with some, I truly find interesting and love all and various people. The less mutt and more full bred, the better. That being said, I want to present some honest ideas and ask questions.

  I agree a bit with all the various sides to this, based on my limited knowledge.

  My only concern is that I don’t want to risk being offensive by my lack of knowledge or ideas.

  I do think America needs to honor her treaties. So do the American Indians.

  I’d like to address:
  1. intermarriage
  2. dual citizenship
  3. race relations
  4. What would it be like for all “tribes” or nations in this country to say, think, want the same. As in: If it’s correct then it isn’t despised for any nation.
  5. Comparisons between the black and the American Indian.
  6. Biblical perspectives

  What do you think, Dr. Yeagley? Perhaps I should send a private enail. I’ve thought of that. Certainly, some of this should be discussed here, don’t you think?

  Hopefully I’ll have time to formulate some thoughts this evening depending on your input, Dr. Yeagley.

• 10 Awen // Oct 30, 2009 at 1:25 pm   

  @ Yeagley

  I think the translation of that is: “some people are more equal than others?” LOL!
  Perhaps if the OP has spent as many years actually living on reservation land as I have, he’ll know that they are not humanitarian utopias, least of all for tribal members. The outrages against justice would curl your hair. Victims of assault, robbery and continual harassment have begged assistance from outside of tribal land only to be told that as enrolled tribal members, they remain under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Tribal Government and if that ‘Government’ doesn’t want to follow up, that’s just tough for them.

  It is NOT “more special” somehow to be one ethnic group than it is another. That’s just silly and from men, an unworthy contention. “Hand over your bag of candy now because I should have it more than you should!” – says the bully. “Come and try to take it” answers anyone with a backbone. We really need to stop this Global Whining, don’t we? It’s getting tiresome. Respect has to be earned; nobody’s going to give it to you just because you want it.

  There is only the one thing that makes this situation special and I have already explained it here: White European Americans and North American Indians are on the extermination list. For the last century, those who really run the country have spared no effort to keep these two apart and always at each other’s throats so that we can never get together to form a defense. Obviously that knowledge inclines me to suspicion of any evidence of ‘sudden enlightenment’ on the part of the MSM or the government.

  Finally, what anyone is lives on in his blood and that is not a thing anyone can take away from him. How much of his heritage he preserves is up to him, not a government agency and not any other people doing that work for him. YOU are your heritage and your unassailable prerogative is to represent it to the best of your ability.

• 11 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 1:36 pm   

  5.There is no comparison between American Indians and the Negro. Negroes are alien. They are imported. Imported by immigrant, invading whites, for white use.

  6. Biblical perspective: don’t mess with nationhood! The nations are ordained, at a fundamental level.

  4. Other ethnic groups have no “right” to separateness, though they are free to do so, as much as legally permissible. By the way, I consider the WASP the foundation of America. No other group, no, not even the Irish Catholic!

  1. I’m against intermarriage, espeically for Indians, because it is diluting what little there is left of us, in every way.

  2. Indians were declared US citizens, without consultation or discussion. The government, 8n 1924, simply declared us all citizens. There were some advantages, but it apparently was part of a design to finally liquidate us, as nations.

  3. Indians honor who we are, above all else. We’ve held on to what little we’ve had left. We’re being swindled out of it, though, by many of our so-called leaders, who are too easily flattered and swayed by material tempations. Many tribes, especially the smaller ones, are very mixed. This is crippling. Even Indians mixing with Indians is not the right way.

  Nationhood requires certain things. If we’re not willing to pay the price, we don’t deserve to be a nation.

  That includes America.

• 12 Awen // Oct 30, 2009 at 1:51 pm   

  I agree on #5. The exceptions make the rule in this case. (I’m a real fan of Thomas Sowell)

  #6. I’ve wondered if that was not the real meaning of the Commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”

  #7 If you are a White separatist, you are immediately branded as a nazi-who-wants-to-kill-6 million-jews and might even find yourself arrested. When’s the last time we told say, China, that there are too many Chinese there and they must have “diversity” and import all the alien and hostile peoples they can find immediately? Why is it that white nations and only white nations are not allowed to stay white? You know what’s happening in Europe and all about the destabilizing aims of the dreaded EU. For those who do not, I recommend the Brussels Journal, the Voice of Conservatism in Europe:
  http://www.brusselsjournal.com/

  So, believe me, I share your pain. That’s poetic justice too and I accept it. As I said and will continue to do till somebody finally gets it, we are on that list together.

  What about those of us with mixed blood? Yes, US. Should we all just kill ourselves? Hear this if you’ve heard nothing else and never forget it:

  Only God knows exactly what formula it takes to create the unique individual that you are. To rail against that is blasphemy.

• 13 David Yeagley // Oct 30, 2009 at 4:01 pm   

  Awen, I still think you’re a poet, or a philosopher with a sense of humor.

  I just think it is a legitimate value to love one’s own people. I’ve you’re mixed (and I am), you listen to your heart, and follow the wind (which is usually the mother’s genes.) You look at your life, you see what you are, how people regard you, and what you really love.

  Reality isn’t always crystal clear, but, you know what you feel.

  Being Comanche is the dearest thing to me–the old Comanche way, the free days. That’s where my heart is. This isn’t a matter of choice, in the end, but natural affinity. I know things have changed, this is modernity, but, there is a faithful guide in the old ways, a measuring rod.

• 14 Awen // Oct 30, 2009 at 4:23 pm   

  @ Yeagley

  Both of us on that extermination list have been programmed from the cradle to not love what we are, but of course, that doesn’t take on people who can think for themselves. It is completely unnatural NOT to cleave to what resides in your blood; that’s why I cannot understand why the unceasing war against American culture is not immediately apparent to more people, why they do not see that their extinction is being sought.

  The old ways do not reside only in the past – if they do we are all in trouble. Survival skills that have brought us all through millennia are what’s going to bring us out the other side of all these troubles; a society that has largely forgotten them will be obliterated.

  But I have another question which interests me profoundly at the moment: If your heart is kept in a largely idealized past, or encompassing grander things like nations instead of particulars, is there much of it left available to care for anything or anyone in the present?

• 15 John Sandusky // Oct 30, 2009 at 5:37 pm   

  “How ’bout it, boys? Are we ready?”

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sE1huPYerp0&feature=related

  Be careful what you start, couch-potatoes, casino profit softened and writers about Edgar Allen Poe and Adventism . . . X-warriors . . . this go-around you just might not get off so lightly.

  What peace-loving, Christian, white settler would want those four, up to no good looking miscreants, within five hundred miles of their homes and ranches?

  Making them cry, “uncle!” and sending them packing was the prudent thing to do, back in the day.

• 16 Awen // Oct 30, 2009 at 5:54 pm   

  @ Yeagley

  Don’t forget to answer that question up there first but I have others that perhaps, adhere closer to our chosen topic:
  Is it not a good recipe for psychosis to cleave to one side of one’s heritage and hate the other? Is it practical for us to try to navigate this dangerous world whilst failing to avail ourselves of every last bit of all the tools and luggage that God has sent us with?

  Whilst it is perfectly true that bloodlines are more logically traced through the mother, has it not been clearly established through centuries that we carry, not only physical, but also emotional and intellectual characteristics from both sides? And not only the parents, but also the ancestors of those parents, do they not lend their own little spice to the final stew? One sometimes sees a child display a mannerism, an expression or aspect of personality that is the exact replica of a great grandparent who is no longer among the living! How does this happen?

  and I know it’s not PC to point this out these days, but talents, intelligence and insanity are also hereditary! hmmm……..Remember that little Parable about the talents?

  I know some European WN’s who declare unabashedly that Americans of European heritage are unfit to move back to Europe because we are all mixed up with Indian and other Europeans that they ‘don’t like.’ We can no longer identify ourselves with one particular nationality or particular European race – and yes, there are many. It is the American condition to be a combination soup of a lot of things.

  Imagine those poor souls who are half Irish and half English: should the right hand take up arms against the left? Would anyone go to north of Ireland and announce that the English and the Irish are even the same race? The fact is that they are NOT. No American troubles himself over this in his own family line as it turns out to be fairly typical in some parts of the country anyway. But somehow, we mixed-up Americans have limped along with our patchworked heredity and raised the most powerful nation on earth. And that, REALLY pisses off the purists. Look at Europe, drained of good red blood, the best of their own talents gracing other lands with their toughest family stock, teetering on the brink of an abyss.

  Obviously there are fortunate combinations and those not so fortunate and all one need do is look around the world at examples of both cases in the resulting peoples. I shall not bother to enumerate these; most of us here already know the markers, do we not?

  It’s time to get over splitting hairs over those distinctions that are NOT a problem for us and build a future together as these new American creatures that we are. As the Mexicans said once: somos lo que somos. And there’s naught to be done about it.

• 17 Awen // Oct 30, 2009 at 6:13 pm   

  P.S. I think we patriots of all ethnic types, need to have our OWN ‘conferences’ and decide what kind of arrangement we can really put up with that preserves not only our unique and separate identities but also our mutual support and, believe it or not, unquenchable attraction for each other.

• 18 Smile // Oct 30, 2009 at 7:59 pm   

  Dr. Yeagley,

  In a previous post you’ve said:
  “I must point out that both Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus were greatly affected by their relations with the Jewish people. They learned superior policy and management. Cyrus was particularly blessed, as were Xerxes and Darius.” I think this is important. IMO, this outlook is helpful for not getting lost in the misfortune. Actually, what I want to say is, not getting lost in the evil. Evil has not been a respecter of persons. Neither have the individuals who allow evil to manifest through them been from one people, nation, or tribe. It’s been found everywhere and from everyone. Perhaps we could measure degrees. The reason I’ve brought that forward is to say, I believe God to be correct, His thoughts higher. That’s my starting base.

  1. Surely it’s fine to choose ones own race for marriage. I don’t believe that it’s important to do so, or be protective in that area for nation, tribal…reasons. I want to be clear that I don’t see a problem with it individually, but it doesn’t seem a necessity national, if we’re all one people. It doesn’t make sense from a biblical perspective. After Jesus’ ascension, the believer’s and followers of Christ did things differently then before the crucifixion, even though they were persecuted, that’s how sure they were. One of the things they knew, there was no more Greek or Gentile. The thing stressed was to not be unequally yoked. So, the crucial thing is for a believer to not marry an unbeliever, and even that isn’t a law of God. It is more, if you want things to go well. Also, if found otherwise, live in peace with your mate and the spouse of your youth. I’ve opined but I don’t have a personal either way. The only issue I see with it is, it focuses on things that I’m concerned could be divisive. I don’t like divisive. Before the gov’t over stepped in it’s opportunity ‘fix’ we had common law marriages. We didn’t look to the gov’t to provide the license nor interfere. The mess we create sometimes in our haste to have help now, rather then grow through wisdom. It’s the inner man that’s the dominate issue in all things, not a specific race of peoples. We would be better served if we were careful to be cognizant of God’s traditions. If we go back far enough, there was just a man and a woman. God thought that was good.

  2. How can you serve two masters? Likewise, how can you serve two nations? Will you not cling to one and abhor the other? This isn’t a question of benefits and treaties. It’s a question of unity and loyalty. If not a unified people, loyal to our Constitution and founding documents, there is the hairline cracks that are ripe for exploitation. These cracks can leak in perhaps a socialist agenda or worse. Yet, if Indians are unhappy with the declaration of their citizenship as unwilling this should be addressed openly and without animosity. I can understand how this would be problematic.There should have been a feeling of invitation rather then a feeling of force.

  3.The above two (staunchly against intermarriage/division) do nothing for race relations. I’m concerned that they undermine race relations.

  4. Of course it’s not anti-American for an Indian to choose to be Indian. I would even say that an Indian doesn’t have a choice not to as that was decided at his birth. “Part of what it means to be Indian is the community, the tribal sovereignty.” Yes, I think so. The founders of America did as well, with the help of Indians and even intermarriage. But “Something’s wrong somewhere…” Also, “They didn’t want to be part of the white society.” I think it was not this in the beginning, completely. Some yes. Some Indians were always unfriendly towards others, well before the settlers. After some settlers had established good relations and where they had even become family, I believe there was confusion between friendly and unfriendly which morphed into a general, you’ve seen one you’ve seen all, by the white folk. I think the Indians morphed into that stance as well. My concern is that this nation within a nation had it’s place, but we do not want to cling to the injustices of the past. That’s what cripples, not intermarriage. Please don’t construe this to infer my calling for an end to Indian nations. That couldn’t be further from the truth. I’m trying to explain that we need a willing and tender spirit to be open to a higher way of thinking. God is a healer. Not a divider. Any speech, thoughts, traditions of men that provoke divisiveness seems contrary to healing and unity. So, I ask for prayerful contemplation by the willing. It’s only the willing that count. If My people will humble themselves, pray, seek My face, turn from their ways that are twisted from Me, then I will hear and heal their land.

  5. In some social contexts I’ve noticed. Recently I witness a bald faced attack from one (so called) Indian towards another Indian (who is proud and respectful to be so, and even appreciatively an Indian) which is a condition I notice with blk folk as well. There is also (though for greatly differing reason) a separatism and a root of bitterness. This makes me sad as it is also pulling ones house down with ones own hand.

  6. Yes, imo I’ve used biblical perspectives.

• 19 Smile // Oct 30, 2009 at 8:10 pm   

  Awen,

  Your perspective is not only genuine and informative, it shows your strength of character.

  You’ve interesting questions as well.

• 20 Awen // Oct 30, 2009 at 11:32 pm   

  @ Smile,
  You always say exactly the right things. Do you not think perhaps that it is a higher perspective that brings us all here in the first place, even if we don’t know that at the time? Perhaps we are rather a race apart on our own, the thinkers, who are always a much discriminated-against minority all over the world and so we seek out each other because, finally, we can. Ethnic or tribal designations are necessary for those who do not or cannot look beyond a physical face, so at least they know where their friends are supposed to be. That’s not enough for people like us; we need far deeper connection.

  What we are doing here is finding ways to meet that are already unrestricted by surface and social identities; we look for what binds us together as souls for after all, we cannot even see those things that would confuse us on the surface. It makes us talk more freely and show far more of our true selves. It is astonishing to me still how deeply we can be made to feel the impact of a personality the expression of which is not hampered by time, space or ritualized social interaction. Tyrants hate this technology because they can no longer just point us at each other and say, ‘kill!’

  Newbies to this would say our interactions are only virtual and not real but we know better, and I can tell you, Smile, that all my tears along with my laughs have been real this month. I really thought I was all cried out when I lost my husband but there were still rivers to spare. Is it not magical that keyboards become crucibles? And do we not pray and witness together here just as if we were standing together in the same house of worship? We always find out what each of us is praying for because we always give it away, even if we think we don’t.

  It’s nice of you to tell me i have strength. It may be just being too stubborn to give up my message and my own personal quests and have naught to do with sense. I’m a little afraid of who I’m going to be when I am finally fed up with human hopes, sentiments and desires, when I kill the last of them because they’re so bloody inconvenient and distracting and too often make you feel as if you’ve been run over by a truck. I’ll never get them back. So, does such weary bleakness belong to any particular group of humans in the world? I think not. I think such things are ‘equal-opportunity’ and it causes a lot of trouble when people forget that fact.

• 21 Smile // Oct 31, 2009 at 5:08 am   

  “Do you not think perhaps that it is a higher perspective that brings us all here in the first place…” Well, Awen, I remember when I first started reading Dr. Yeagley. I was encouraged, intrigued, informed, challenged, and interested. Perhaps there’s a consideration for ‘deep calling to deep’, certainly there seems a benevolence and individual liberty with a basis of shared belief. There seems a strong desire for truth, regardless of the deceitfulness of this world.

  “I’m a little afraid..” Fear not, only believe.

• 22 Smile // Oct 31, 2009 at 7:12 am   

  Whoever we are, regardless of where we come from, individuals have displayed myriad evils in humanity. One can attempt to find the cause and reason. The circumstances vary. This display of evil has been found always everywhere. Often it’s only recognized when it’s full blown. Label’s and words can even be confusing, intentionally or otherwise. But one builds a dwelling one brick at a time. One doesn’t look at a brick and call it a home. It would seem prudent to bravely look at the things that we use to build posterity.

  The ‘penalty’ of ‘death’ is not just a return of a body to the dust of the earth. We know that is true and it happens by a process of degrees. It’s a separation from God that displays by degrees, as well.

  Though we see through a glass darkly, one can say that Adam and Eve displayed a disbelief in God’s word. One can say that it was full blown evil when Cain killed Able.

  Leaving out extra-biblical ideas or prejudices, we can see that there is regression rather then overcoming by accommodations to environment. Adam lived 800 yrs after fathering Cain, Able, and Seth. Adam “fathered sons and daughters.” Adam lived to be 930 yrs. So, Adam obviously had many sons and daughters and his body didn’t return to dust for more yrs then would seem reasonable by today’s standards. Staying with the biblical perspective, we can see that it took time for the ‘degrees of evil’ and/or ‘unbelief’ to erode mans stature on the earth. But ‘death’ did enter and we see it’s progressive results. The law forbidding marriage between close relatives wasn’t until the time of Moses. Eventually there were also reasons to allow divorce. Still, just physically, we can see a more healthy people then v. now.. One can say that they were not at risk for some of the same problems that we are at risk for today. So, we wouldn’t find success in building a race of people from our own stock. By degrees, this would lead to abnormalities and retardation. Yet, we consider ourselves so intelligent. In light of all our technology and discoveries, compared to those without the technology our accomplishments pale in comparison. So, we’re not so smart after all.

  It makes me wonder about that saying, nip things in the bud. Hmm, division, unbelief, evil, and death.

  We can see the first Adam and the last Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45) in light of Acts 17:26, And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.

  It may seem that God’s plan is thwarted. I think not. We are not the holders of all time, seasons, and wisdom. Perhaps when we hear that all are called but few are chosen, we can say that all are called but few choose. Choose this day.

  “So, does such weary bleakness belong to any particular group of humans in the world?” I think not, as well. If blessings and cursings have been set before us, ‘choose wisely grasshopper’.

  I love that Latin motto: semper fidelis

  Just a thought but perhaps the main objective of the advertisements in The Oklahoman are to cause division. IMO, it seems they could do this from all sides and perspectives. Regardless of not knowing or understanding, on its face they seem (if not despicable) distasteful and divisive.

• 23 Smile // Oct 31, 2009 at 8:37 am   

  Again, “I must point out that both Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus were greatly affected by their relations with the Jewish people. They learned superior policy and management. Cyrus was particularly blessed, as were Xerxes and Darius.”

  If one chooses to believe in God, He is not so small that He can’t provide a blessing in the midst of a curse else it would be difficult to see children as a blessing of the Lord. The curse being allowed into the earth by Adam and Eve, I believe this could mean that Eve bled for the first time and Adam knew her. Prior to this, they had intercourse with God in the cool of the day. Not considering that a thousand years is as a day…it is clear that God is the author of times and season, seed time and harvest, and all wisdom is from Him. Perhaps there are no words to adequately portray the dispensations of faith. Still, one can only begin to grasp at the ways of God by putting on the mind of Christ, in which we can initiate seeing through a glass darkly.

  In spite of what is meant to produce evil, God will produce good, He has provided a way of escape.

  Isn’t war a matter of degrees as well? Perhaps it starts in us individually. So faith comes by hearing, and we fight the good fight. It wouldn’t make sense to place guilt on a type of individual, group, race, or nation, though individuals have influence on these. We all are attacked by deceit. We can choose to recognize ways that are corruptible and ways that are higher or incorruptible.

  Regardless, from a biblical perspective, nothing can interfere with God being God.

  It may escape our understanding but let peace be your guide.

  It appears that there’s a time, place, and season for things. War doesn’t always mean a lack of peace nor peace a lack of war. There are those who are called to war, to fight with their armor on. One can hardly digest that first the natural, then the spiritual. FFT (food for thought): http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/15-46.htm
  But staying with this perspective, God knows the thoughts and intents.

  It might be noted that the advertisements in The Oklahoman are not peaceable.

• 24 Awen // Oct 31, 2009 at 11:23 am   

  @ Smile

  Why did you write that last line and why do you think so? It is high time we DID abolish the reservation system and offered all Indians the same rights every other American has without them having to dis-enroll themselves from the tribe. Under the current system, an enrolled tribal member is NOT covered by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Tribal Councils rule with absolute power and like all humans in like situations, are absolutely corrupt. It is time for change. As it is, tribal members have no power to change anything about their lives so long as they live on tribal land. That’s the deal that has been cut with Congress and the Tribal Governments, a perpetual marginalization, which is what political correctness forbidding open discussion is always really about.

  If you think this is about the feds grabbing more land, remember that they already own all that land! Has nobody here but me even read the law? Tribal land is federal land and is completely under the direct jurisdiction of the federal government. Anyone who thinks otherwise, Indian or not, is dreaming. No tribal member owns anything on tribal land; it is all under the control of the Tribal Council and then Congress. If there is any dispute over a piece he has got permission to homestead, he’ll maybe get his day in Tribal Court and he might wait years to get that. I honestly fear that nobody here but me has ever even lived on the reservation and my warnings are falling on deaf ears.

  What percentage of the population are all Indians put together, Smile? A little more than 2%? The federal government doesn’t give a damn what they think; they are far too busy pandering to larger minority groups. If Indians want to start trouble, just the new immigrants by themselves are enough to wipe them out. They are not bothered with silliness like political correctness and racial ‘guilt’ and consider that (rightly, I think) a weakness in white Americans. Only strength is respected, not good will. Look at their own countries, Smile, and see the future of ours. The fruit never falls far from the tree.

  This confrontation is not only possible in the Southwestern states, it is inevitable. I grew up ‘south of the border’ and I know that nobody from down there is going to take any nonsense from the Tribes. Same can be said for Middle Easterners, Africans, Asians, anybody but white European – and the last, when they’re tired of unceasing parasitism and demands, will simply feed the Tribes to all the above. It’s as well to know where one stands. It’s coming. There is no way around this. Whites will soon be in the minority in this country; and without them, what happens? We become just another third world hell hole.

  This is NO time to be starting a fuss with Indian “demands” and threats. Nobody gives a damn. People are losing their homes all over the country, they cannot get medical care for their children, tent cities are springing up even in affluent neighbourhoods and you think they have any tears left for a lot of Indians getting all that for nothing and haven’t even the grace to say ‘thank you?’ This entire issue is asking for trouble. When the backlash comes, and it certainly will, there will be a new, and ‘darker’ enemy to fight, one with no mercy at all. It’s not just their “ethnicity” that will be “harmed”
  (
  @Yeagley, I know that’s not your line because you could do better than that when you were 5, I’m certain);
  it’s their very hides!

  My counsel to you all is this; you may take it or ignore it – I don’t give a damn either, remember:
  American sovereignty itself is in trouble. If we do not avail ourselves of the might and talents of every single American person to work towards the restoration of a free Republic we are going to lose this one. God has joined us together, whether we like it or not and if we don’t figure that out once and for all and accept the part we must play together in history, we shall certainly all perish together. No more petty divisions here.

• 25 David Yeagley // Oct 31, 2009 at 8:17 pm   

  Ladies, your exchange is one of the finest on BadEagle.com. I’ll have to deal with it tomorrow.

  For now, I want to respond to Sandusky:

  John, I want to honor all nations. All ethnicities. I’ve never had any conscious aversion to America or toward white people. The trick The Oklahoman is trying to pull, and many other perfectionist conservatives, is to pit Indians against America. They have failed to succeed against the Negro, the Arab, the Mexican, so, their last easy shot is the Indian. When nothing else makes you feel fully American, attack the Indian. That’s the way it goes.

  This is pitiful, and pitifully wrong. I am an American patriot. I also am an American Indian. I do not see the two as contradictory. If they are, it is a coerced, circumstantial, theoretical push, by frustrated Christian patriots–who are in this instance acting like jihadists.

• 26 Smile // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:37 pm   

  Awen,

  Don’t tire of sharing.

  I’m looking further into these issues. I may need to retract a few of my comments. We shall see. I’ll need your help plenty.

  I too will have to respond further at a later time. Hopefully tomorrow, but asap.

  I deeply appreciate the opportunity to learn and have this vital discussion with everyone. I look forward to next time.

• 27 Smile // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:39 pm   

  Is this the same as we’re referencing? Area Woman on a Mission

• 28 Smile // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:52 pm   

  Dr. Yeagley,

  As time allows, can you tell me if you think the above sheds a different perspective on the topic for you?

  “The trick The Oklahoman is trying to pull, and many other perfectionist conservatives, is to pit Indians against America. They have failed to succeed against the Negro, the Arab, the Mexican…” I don’t know about this newspaper but on the whole I’m disappointed with the inclusion of conservatives. What is a perfectionist conservative?

• 29 Smile // Oct 31, 2009 at 10:54 pm   

  Dr. Yeagley,

  Do you have screen shots of any advertisements you referenced?

• 30 David Yeagley // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:18 am   

  Smile, Ragains has simply wrong concepts of Indian treaties. She is confusing the original context and meaning with modern political jargon. Indian treaty provisions are NOT entitlements! Wars were fought. Blood was shed. Many lives sacrificed. The treaty is the settlement. It is not in any way to be associated with a “government program,” an “entitlement,” or “welfare.” This is anti-history. This is like changing the Constitution!

• 31 David Yeagley // Nov 1, 2009 at 9:20 am   

  I have the hard copies from the newspaper, given to me. I don’t subscribe to The Oklahoman. My brother does. I have friends that do.

  I supposed I could scan some of this, and post it under an Indian Forum on BadEagle.com. However, the pages are full pages. This may be difficult.

  And, yes, I understand that Ms. Ragains put the same “ads” (advocacies) in a couple of other papers, like Kingfisher and Edmond.

• 32 Awen // Nov 1, 2009 at 10:36 am   

  @ Yeagley,

  As to this line: “Smile, Ragains has simply wrong concepts of Indian treaties. She is confusing the original context and meaning with modern political jargon.”

  She, I fear, is not the one who is confused. Reservation policy is not ‘jargon;’ it is its own separate monster and actually not much related to original treaties at all and was set up much later. I believe there is no scrutiny by you on these matters because it’s very hard for the Tribes to come off looking like victims when anybody shines a light on their behaviour. I believe this delusion can be cured. What is ‘unconscionable’ is the attempt I see here to belittle and silence the voices of Indian women who cry out for justice.

  So, who bothered to read the article linked in here from Oklahoma? Did anyone happen to scroll down and see this comment?
  “You are so much on the money. A tribe took my granddaughter from her mother because they have been given the right to enroll who ever they want and can take any child they want. We are not native and my grandaughter is half native but by what ever agreement tribe have with the government she can only be native and the tribe has the right to own her until she is 18-years-old and terminate the birth mothers rights to her child. I want to help. Contact me. this agreement with the tribes and the us government is one of the biggest money making scams because for all the money given to tribes the people still live in great without.
  toni, madras – Sep 28, 2009 at 9:00 am”

  Do you defend the Tribe’s behaviour, Yeagley?
  And now, if you will, read Ms. Ragain’s explanation of her TRUE purpose for it is my belief, that in this case, the object of my affections has rather badly jumped the gun:

  “I know Ron Jackson felt pressured to interview me quickly,
  however, the meaning of his statements are meant to encourage the same nightmare thinking that allowed the 1930 Indian Removal Act. I was shocked and disappointed to read his perspective of our 2 phone conversations. I hope you will forward this to Mr. Jackson and any Supervisor or Publisher that has the authority to correct his article.?

  I want to abolish the Trust Responsibility of the BIA over the Land Owners that are members of Tribes – NOT “…abolish all Tribal nations…”

  Ron Jackson is unaware of the difference between what federal subsidies are and the Bureaucratic nightmare that the Individual Indian Land Owners have had to Endure because of The Trust Responsibility Bureaucracy. It is the direct result of the Self-Imposed Trust responsibility of the BIA on behalf of federally recognized Indian Tribes and is unconstitutional. A competency hearing was never held for my ancestors or for me to hold the land and money in a Trust. We are American Citizens, we must be allowed to manage our own land and money and affairs for ourselves without Tribal or Federal restrictions.

  We must Improve Services for our Military, Protect All Citizens from too much Government and Create Economic Stability. The Tribes will continue as Genealogical Societies similar to the Daughters of the American Revolution. Ending the Trust Responsibility will allow the American Indian Land Owners to individually manage their own affairs to unite our country with cooperation to stabilize and re-invest in our economy. Frederick Douglass said “Truth is without color” and equality is guarantied by the US Constitution for all citizens equally. Sincerely, Lee Ann Ragains

  Read more: http://www.newsok.com/article/3404334?searched=Former%20tribal%20member%20Lee%20Ann%20Ragains&custom_click=search#ixzz0VckZfzTf

  Dear Readers: Please, go to kingfisherpress.net to read the article: Area Woman on a Mission by Christine Reid. This article in the Weds Sept 23rd Kingfisher Newspaper is accurate and complete. Unfortunately, Ron Jackson DID NOT READ MY REFERENCE INFORMATION OR THE LETTERS I SENT HIM. The 562 Tribes will continue to be Tribal we DO NOT need the Bureau of Indian Affairs as our Trustee. We are Competent to manage our own affairs without Tribal or Federal Restrictions. I invite all readers to confirm the history of my Reference Information and Comments posted at freedomworks.org “What would Henry Ford Do? Automakers VS Entreprenuers by Dick Armey. Sincerely, Lee Ann Ragains
  Lee Ann, Kingfisher – Sep 27, 2009 at 3:52 pm”

  Readers, if you will, come here:
  http://www.citizensalliance.org/
  and find out exactly where we all stand. If there be the least snick of a sense of justice in any of you, we can look forward to welcoming you as members.

• 33 David Yeagley // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:18 pm   

  Awen, you apparently have no idea of my background in these things. Please don’t assume I don’t know anything, and that you, as a “white woman savior” know everything about Indians. BadEagle.com has written about this attitude many times in the past.

  But, for your information, I was invited by the anti-sovereignty groups to speak at the National Press Club a few years ago. I get their papers. I know these people. I spent several days with them.

  I am not surprised that you don’t know this. You are not an informant on these matters.

  And, you do not know ‘what’s best for Indians.’ I’m not going to talk about your personal experience in this matter, but, be it known, the White Woman Savior thing is offensive to independent, thinking Indians. We’re not offended by people who care. We’re offended by people who think they know best.

• 34 David Yeagley // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:23 pm   

  Barbara Lindsay (National Director of One Nation United) and I wrote an article called The Use and Abuse of Indians. Please have a look. This article was wide spread. It is about the abuse of Indian sovereignty.

  Sovereignty itself is not the problem. It is greedy white people, combined with some self-serving Indian “leaders.” If white people object to “tax-free” Indian businesses (on Indian reservations), then let white people BOYCOTT those Indian businesses. Don’t blame Indians for the white people who spend their money there. That’s ridiculous and weak. That is the weakest position I’ve ever seen among white people.

• 35 David Yeagley // Nov 1, 2009 at 12:25 pm   

  Awen, furthermore, what are you doing referring people to The Oklahoman links I gave in the original blog here? as if you’re revealing some kind of inside information?!

  Something’s very wrong here.

• 36 Awen // Nov 1, 2009 at 1:49 pm   

  @ Yeagley

  You always back up your stories with relevant links but so often people don’t read them all so I have referred back to them. Few get the chance to read the follow-ups and they’re important, for you know as well as I do that the MSM cannot be trusted to tell the whole story. Ms. Ragain was not given the opportunity to defend herself and both her complaints and her purpose were being misrepresented.

  As for knowing what’s best, I ask you this and I want your answer as a Conservative American:

  Do you approve of child molestation? Do you think that any agency should be allowed to protect child molesters from prosecution? I know you are aware that even CPS has been guilty of forcing victims of incest and rape to remain in the homes where the crimes are taking place and I can see you quite easily taking them to task for it. But if it’s the Tribe doing the dirty deed, will there be no word from you? Give your opinion on this case:
  http://www.citizensalliance.org/links/pages/fact%20sheets/No_Reason_2_B_Pround.html

  This situation is not only not usual, it is a favourite pastime. But let us explore some other questionable affairs. All of what I’m going to tell you can be verified very easily. You may consult with Public Health, Indian Health Services, State and Tribal Police and for a good specialist in law, on of off tribal land, I’ll be back with a list for whatever state interests you most at the time. Former Senator Leonard Tsosie who now works for the Tribe, will be a help, especially if he’s told who referred you. I also recommend Tom Udall, even though he’s a Democrat, who I am glad to count as a friend of my family and who has been a treasure house of information about any important dealings between Congress and Tribal Governments. Pat Lyons, NM Land Commissioner and a Republican (from my favourite of all NM places, Catron County) can tell you much about the Pueblos’ amazing antics, I am sure. Had the Republican Party in NM any real sense, they’d back that guy for Governor.

  All a criminal being sought by Tribal Police has to do is leave the reservation – unless it be one that involves the feds, such as murder or big-time drug trafficking. For ordinary assaults, DWI’s, failure to pay child support and a long list of other things, the Tribe will not reach out an arm off the reservation and grab that offender. In Navajo land, at least, efforts are being made, largely by victims of the above arrangement, to change this.

  If you find yourself in a medical emergency on tribal land and you are not a tribal member, you will die. No ambulance from city or country is allowed to come for you and Emergency Services from the Tribe will refuse any aid to you. You might, if you have very good insurance and can get a call out, arrange for an air-lift paid for by your own policy. I have personally known contract workers involved with projects on tribal land, injured and bleeding all over the floor, to be denied service at the nearby IHS and be forced to arrange transportation maybe a 100 miles distance to another hospital. An emergency patient – will die.

  If you are the victim of a crime, be it robbery or assault and you are not a tribal member, no Tribal Police officer will even take a report from you. In the case of a capital crime, the FBI still retains authority but only they can force cooperation from the Tribe. If you are a tribal member and a crime victim, it will be up to the Tribe to decide to prosecute. In many cases, they won’t, especially if they believe there will be a scandal. And don’t forget they are all under-staffed anyway. One police officer may cover a fifty miles radius by himself. The Tribes have the money but they won’t spend it.

  If a drunk driver in a Tribal vehicle runs over your dog or even your child, whether or not this occurs on reservation land, ‘tribal sovereignty’ denies you any legal recourse. There is little to no reciprocity between State and Tribal law enforcement either. When two drivers in as many months, came out of the Indian Technical Institute in NM and killed whole families in head-on collisions, the Tribes refused to share with the State the fact that both had more than a half dozen DWI’s already and shouldn’t even have been on the road.

  If a man buys a truck and makes one payment and then takes it back to the rez and refuses to pay more, there is nothing the lien holders can do to get it back. His wages cannot be garnisheed if he lives and works on the reservation and knowing this, many dealers have begun insisting on a guarantee from the Tribe that all owed monies will be paid. This rather gets in the way of ordinary, respectable tribal members, who also live on the reservation, from obtaining credit they really deserve. Discrimination causing more discrimination – as is always the case in the end.

  Remember that all the above tribal sovereignty protection against legal action applies on ‘casino’ premises. No matter what anybody does to you whilst you’re there, you have no ability to sue for damages, be it theft, assault or accidental injury. I’m surprised this one wasn’t contested in the courts first, America being the litigious society it is now.

  There is no need on the world to attempt to dissolve all Indian nations in order to clean up this mess! The cases I present here are not based on miscarriages of nationhood but simple miscarriages of justice and this mockery of American standards of decency will continue as long as we allow corrupt local governments to do just what they like with no legal accountability to all the rest of us.

• 37 David Yeagley // Nov 1, 2009 at 3:18 pm   

  You’re diverting the issue entirely. Immorality is not an ethnic issue. All peoples have it now, worse than ever. Human law does not purify human nature. If you did look at the articles, you can see Ragains has her own personal problems, connected with the legal circumstances of being Indian. I plan to write about her and this matter, later. That is a different issue than The Oklahoman advocating the dissolution of all tribal government. She’s not using the paper. The paper is using her. That is my opinion.

  And please don’t assume that I do not know these Indian issues and reservation crises. You are very, very insulting and presumptuous in the way you are presenting yourself, and you would do very well to begin to realize this–if you indeed have good will in mind for American Indians. It seems doubtful to me.

  Whatever your personal reasons for being angry at the Indian situation, your energy is ill spent in this way. At least on me.

  I know you are not alone in how you feel. Many white people, “conservatives,” feel this way. For that cause, I accept your posts, and respond to them. Education in these matters is part of what BadEagle.com is for.

  Your statements will of course be used against me, as an Indian, because most Indians in media or with government jobs, think “conservatives” are the enemy. You are easily seen as one of those–true or not.

  I say true conservatism is pro-Indian and pro-American. I will be doing a full op-ed on this shortly. I will then truly appreciate your response.

• 38 Awen // Nov 1, 2009 at 3:28 pm   

  @ Yeagley,

  oulala! That’s quite an article you linked me to! Should I be flattered to be thought such a mortal danger to your virtue? Maybe THAT’s why my husband sheltered me so carefully at home on the rez, far removed from mainstream society, lest any looking upon me be tempted, and here I thought it was about keeping all the off-the-rez tomcats at bay. Should we all wear burqas, then? Aren’t you sounding a bit like a ‘jihadist’ yourself? First you write articles telling everybody we’re the world’s most beautiful and then more telling how much you hate us all.

  Do you remember the Native American Civil Rights Act? It got passed right after women got the vote, and to get that, they chained themselves to City Hall and died in prison. White women put a top to children being forced to work in the mines and in sweatshops; they passes laws to prevent men from brutalizing their wives and children; anywhere there was cruelty and injustice, they fought against it. They didn’t care if the victims were of another nation, race or colour. In short, they are truly just the nicest people in the world and that has ever been to their own detriment in my view, for IMO, human beings as a species are not particularly deserving of mercy.

  Are you aware that it is a serious sin to rail against your father’s house like this? To heap bitterness and scorn on your own blood and on the very people who have loved and nurtured you? What appears to be “wrong” here, is that you are flailing on an imaginary hook. Where is that hook? I don’t see one; do you? I can’t help wondering what your father would have thought of me but that’s just because I find you completely irresistible, in spite of all your baseless wrath.

  Now let us turn to some serious American concerns and I have some questions for you. Delete them if you like; maybe next time you hear them, it will be from the State Legislature:

  Do you support the balkanization of America on racial grounds? If that happens, who’s going to claim the mixes? The kind of people who go for that sort of thing are usually one-drop rule purists. The Mexicans want all the Southwest, not that they want the prospect of living off the European teat but that’s another issue for later. “For the race (they mean mestizo) everything. For those outside the race, nothing!” That’s their ‘slogan.’ They will not share with whites or Indians either. Where do you stand on this?

  Even the black racists are talking about separate statehood, though they also, intend to keep living off an ever-dwindling supply of tax payers from other racial groups. Look at Africa and you’ll see that’s how well they’ll manage it, too. Do you remember the PC dilemma when the Cherokee Tribe wanted to kick out all those blacks on their land? The media didn’t know what to do with that story so it didn’t enjoy daylight for too long.

  If we want to get shed of ‘racism,’ we shall all have to stop thinking like racists, don’t you think so? Are Indians all alike? Does it not enrage you when people insist that they are? Do you think you have the right then to say all white women are alike? Are you after Jackson and Farrakhan’s job, then?

  Are you trying to destroy, in one swipe, your most loyal Conservative support? In my opinion, you are literally worth your weight in gold to the Conservative base in America. You are intelligent, brave, articulate and extremely good-looking – and guess who controls most of the spending (and fund-raising) power in America: women do. They need you but even the most loving hand can only put up with so many bites. I repeat: God has joined us together whether we like it or not. Do you accept this, or not?

• 39 David Yeagley // Nov 1, 2009 at 8:17 pm   

  Support is not my goal. A career is not my goal. Votes are not my goal. I’m not into that.

  As any sensible person, I appreciate the good-will and sacrificial efforts many white people, men and women, have made for the benefit of Indian people. Americans have been unique in these efforts.

  However, at this point, Indians have to recognize and face our own problems. If we cannot do this, then we are left forever to the charity and kindness of others. This is a most humbled position.

  Neverthless, Indians will never surrender the idea of sovereignty. However duped and doped we may appear and may be, there is that one element in our consciousness, our hearts, our intution, that will never remove. We are Indians. This is what is most important to us. When we perceive that to be threatened, we are then unapproachable by any motive. The charity that would destroy our identity is not charity we can afford to accept.

• 40 John Sandusky // Nov 1, 2009 at 11:11 pm   

  If white people object to “tax-free” Indian businesses (on Indian reservations), then let white people BOYCOTT those Indian businesses. Don’t blame Indians for the white people who spend their money there.

  NO!

  It is the cigarette makers like Phillip Morris that should be pressured to stop the sale of large quantities of cigarettes to tribal smoke shops, and law enforcement needs to control the borders between the USA and all the Indian Nations.

  The only packs of smokes that should be sold without the taxes are cigarettes sold to tribal members for their own consumption.

  The same taxation paradigm should be applied to the consumption of gambling on tribal lands. All profits earned by non-tribal members should be taxed. Untaxed sales to non-Indians should be illegal.

  No treaty with over 500 tribal nations within the boundaries of the USA allows for the untaxed products bought on Indian lands to enter the United States untaxed . . . if there is, show it to me.

• 41 Smile // Nov 2, 2009 at 8:18 am   

  I don’t have time now to contribute anything specific or substantial to this important issue, of which I know little. directly.

  Indirectly, it appears that this blog is for learning purposes, as stated by Dr.Yeagley upstream. Comments can be turned off but are on. I assume these are also deemed a learning vehicle.

  This is the thing: Though this is an issue that obviously arouses much emotion, spurs feelings of loss, gain, and future problems with past regrets and disservices, where does any of this undisciplined, inflammatory rhetoric help? Find examples by re-reading through these comment posts. We can get guilt trips, attacks, divisive tactics, accusations….by listening to an Obama speech or that of his comrades. Where is the sense of employing those tactics here, in spite of the importance of the issue at hand?

  I’m requesting a cease fire. I’m disappointed at the various (more then once, when once was more then enough) belittling comments towards those who’re less then full blooded…which is especially curious when the one hurling isn’t full blooded either. Please people, apologize and repent of this unfruitful behavior. Do unto others. Can one not find a way to disagree, correct, provide info without this?

  This type of slap fest can only inhibit discussion between those who actually care. We can call others out while not resorting to derogatory cliche. Yes?

  If not, I’ve always thought it shows a weakness of argument merits.

• 42 Smile // Nov 2, 2009 at 8:31 am   

  I sincerely hope we can stay on this topic thread long enough to hash through these important issues.

  We can handle a bit of discomfort while allowing for exchange.

  Questions: What are the basics for a successful nation? Does the USA have that in her founding documents? Why would the basics be different for any other nation, while expecting success? Can a tribe be a tribe and yet be a citizen of the USA, or does it require being a separate nation? What is a sovereign people and should all people in this country be sovereign?

• 43 Smile // Nov 2, 2009 at 11:16 am   

  “Maybe if you thought of yourself as an American who’s being forced to be an alien Communist, you’d have a inkling of the issue.”

  There’s no maybe. There’s no if. It is clear that so vast a number of Americans are disgusted with this “forced” situation that it stalled that ‘emergency, rush to fix health care’ takeover. By this standard, many must have an “inkling.”

  I’m going to take the liberty of rewording this:
  However, at this point, AMERICANS have to recognize and face our own problems. If we cannot do this, then we are left forever to the charity and kindness of others. This is a most humbled position.

  Nevertheless, AMERICANS will never surrender the idea of sovereignty. However duped and doped we may appear and may be, there is that one element in our consciousness, our hearts, our intuition, that will never be remove. We are AMERICANS. This is what is most important to us. When we perceive that to be threatened, we are then unapproachable by any motive. The charity that would destroy our identity is not charity we can afford to accept.

• 44 Awen // Nov 2, 2009 at 3:39 pm   

  @ Smile,

  God bless you for your compassionate good sense and integrity. I have truly come to love you. I’m supposed to be finishing an article on Hebrew language and I know I shan’t be able to give my best to it, alas, until I have given my very worst to the object of my affections, which themselves are dying by the minute. Do you know what frightens me far more than caring too much for a person? It is if I were forced to find out that he is so much less a person than I thought he was, to realize with no hope of turning back the knowledge of it that my respect and caring have been spent on one so totally unworthy of them. I would honestly rather die than face this prospect now.

  I want every white person reading here now, by accident or on purpose to go and read here:
  http://www.badeagle.com/cgi-bin/ib3/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST&f=15&t=409

  see what Yeagley has to say about your mothers, sisters, wives and daughters. How he denigrates and degrades them in public, cruelly injures people who have done him no harm.

  @ Yeagley,

  I expect you to delete this post when you have read it – in fact, I ask you to do so because it’s the only chance I have to forget about this. I don’t think I can forgive it at the moment; that depends entirely on what decision you make now.

  My first question to you is: do you really want my mother to see this? Do you want me to show it to her today? You may delete my posts all you like but unless you delete that ‘hate crime’ of a post this minute she shall know about this. Do you think I can hide from her why I’m crying my eyes out today? She will forbid me ever to speak to you again through any medium and then, just for the hell of it, she’ll bring the might of a political machine you haven’t the least idea of right down on your head. If you leave that filth where it stands, I can no longer give you the excuse of just a bad mood one day on a forum. You leave me no way to forget about it.

  How can you call yourself a Christian and perpetrate such monstrous cruelty on a lot of helpless well-meaning women who haven’t done you any harm at all? How can you even call yourself a man and take pot-shots at poor women, who are already oppressed and put-upon, from the dark corners of a forum? Do you always pick on the defenseless instead of an opponent your own size? I cannot make myself believe you are that bad; maybe that’s only because I dare not believe it.

  Under my hand now is my mother’s rolodex and my, now-exhausted, hands have entered over two hundred e-mail addresses that she has in there. Senators, Congressmen, Mayors and County Sheriffs and every other kind of civil servant, state workers, clerks and all the Alphabet soup feds you can ask for. All major political Party workers, all the grassroots – which as you know are mainly nice hard-working ladies who will be horrified at how much you hate them. All the above shall receive this link.

  I have the links to everything you have put online, where it has been passed around to other sites – and if I need help with that, DHS can supply whatever Mother asks for – in case you do not know they hire people with nothing better to do than spy on all of us, especially us Conservatives. And especially now, with the recent ‘hate crimes’ legislation that will visit special wrath not only on nasty rhetoric against protected minority groups, but also protected ‘genders.’ (bleeh! awful isn’t it, what they do to the English language?) All the above again, shall receive this link, and awful shall be your fate; your own laundry lady will spit in your eye when we are done with you.

  Because it is the least important of your worries, I am putting this one last: I will not forgive you because every time I see this piece of shit you wrote, I’ll be hurt to the bone all over again. All my regard for you turns to ashes at the point where you refuse to act as a decent man and delete your foul screed and out of those ashes rises an enemy combatant.

  Now go and get rid of that crap if you have one decent bone in your body. Be a man, if you can. I don’t care what you think of me because there’s not a damn thing i can do about it anyhow but I do care very much what I think of you and I am truly enraged at you for taking that away from me too.

• 45 Smile // Nov 2, 2009 at 6:07 pm   

  Dearest Awen,

  I haven’t followed your link yet. I will when I’m finished with this missive to you. I hardly know where to start. I pray that God will give me the correct words to sooth your soul and also encourage. Also the correct words from a friend, me, to remind you where you might be in error. I pray you’ll hear and make wise choices. I will remain yours fondly, regardless of your choices.

  it seems you’ve been deeply wounded and mostly disappointed. I wish this were not so and I totally empathize with you.

  Yet, who among us is perfect? Who among us is one dimensional? For instance, if you deal with me on one of my faults, it’s not my whole story. There may well be other things about me that you admire much.

  If you become aware of one of my faults (of which there are many) you would still find other things about me respectable and you wouldn’t think me any less a woman.

  I also want to remind you that two wrongs do not make a right. They never have, no matter how serious.

  I sincerely believe that you should retract “be a man” and not use actions and threats to get him to do what you want. There are too many people in the country that will not at times be doing what you want, this can’t be the way to handle a blog post that you despise. I understand this seems a bit more personal for you, then this would be even more so important.

  Please take a few moments to hear my heart.

  I pray that you and Dr. Yeagley will resume discussion with forgiveness, patience, letting one another off the hook, and allowing that there are often differences with people. That is the way life is. But, we’ll catch more flies with honey.

  Now I’ll go and read but I wrote this first as I feel these things are an imortant base regardless.

  Please dry your tears, lets keep going, and try to imagine that you are getting a big hug from me to you. You have too much to offer to let this keep you down and…I need you.

• 46 Smile // Nov 2, 2009 at 8:40 pm   

  Awen,

  I’ve read the article. I’ll opine on it later. For now, I’m waiting to hear from you and Dr. Yeagley.

  I hope this finds you doing well and in good spirits.

  I’ll check back tomorrow.

• 47 Awen // Nov 3, 2009 at 10:01 am   

  @ Smile

  [Deleted by request]

• 48 Smile // Nov 3, 2009 at 11:39 am   

  [Edited]

• 49 Awen // Nov 3, 2009 at 1:21 pm   

  @ Smile,

  You are right, as usual. I shall pray on this very hard. I’m not going to be coming around here until we can resolve this conflict and that will give everybody a break, at least from me. In the meantime, I won’t play his game for him: I shan’t be engaging in any character-assassination or virtual tarring and feathering either. I simply can’t make myself want to.

  I believe a person’s written words, once he has put them out in public media, should stand for themselves and we can let the readers come to their own conclusions as to their merit or lack of same. I think I am doing no disservice to Yeagley to offer him a little extra publicity for his work and he can’t possibly object to all the places I’m going to send it now.

  As we say in Greek, one of my first languages,
  είπαμε πολλά καί σώνει
  άς λαλήσει άλλο ăηδόνι
  we have said a lot and it suffices
  let another nightingale sing

• 50 Smile // Nov 3, 2009 at 3:30 pm   

  Dearest Awen,

  Understood.

  I do know it takes a lot of self discipline but I think you’ll do just fine in taking a high ground and not sweating. I often have to bite my tongue in more situations then I care to think. I know you will.

  That said, we need to get your words out. So, don’t let this keep you from here. I won’t know what to say without you

  P.S. We can always send ‘someone’ a private email… That can keep ‘this’ seperate from ‘that’…

  Hugs!

• 51 Awen // Nov 3, 2009 at 3:38 pm   

  @ Smile
  I’d be glad enough just to know he knows what we’ve said here. Last time he responded to one of my e-mails, he was so ghastly cruel I kept it to look at it from time to time whenever I’m feeling too soft towards him so I can remember what an asshole he is. This one has a mean streak you can drive a truck through. Perhaps you’ll have better luck. Everything I say is always the wrong thing to him and everything he says to me is worse. My yahoo is annh0910ATyahooDOTcom
  Talk to me, Smile. I need you far more than you could ever need me.

You must log in to post a comment.