David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
How many cold-blooded murders will Muslims commit before American conservatives are willing to condemn Islam? How many terrorist attacks will murderous Muslims be allowed before the cult of Islam is banned from the free world?
Conservative media mouths are as cowardly as liberals. Laura Ingraham congratulated herself all morning for her bravery and patriotism in calling the mass shooting in Ft. Hood, Texas, an act of terrorism. She repeatedly praised herself for being willing to “tell the truth” about the nature of the shooting. She tells it like it is. So she says.
Laura Ingraham, conservative talk show host, willing to condemn Nidal Malik Hasan as a terrorist, but willing to allow Islam in America.
But like all other media conservatives, she makes that fatal error of distinguishing between ‘good’ Muslims and ‘extremist’ Muslims. It is as if the media conservative must show nobility and level-headedness in allowing space for Islam. In fact, it is an act of patriotism to allow “freedom of religion.” Therefore, Islam, the murder cult, must be allowed in America!
The same way every other foreign race, religion and culture must be allowed to set up shop and prosper in America, the enemy of all freedom, Islam, must be allowed to plant its poisonous perspective and its murderous members here in America. The liberal, Communist concept of “equality” must include the right of the enemy to kill Americans. Conservative media mouths are infected with same Communist delusion.
But worse, while bragging about their superior patriotism and truth-telling, conservative media mouths willfully ignore the real target entirely. They are unwilling to call Islam what it is–a cult of death. (Amil Imani is certainly willing to call it what it is. Imani received the Bad Eagle Award for American Patriotism in December, 2008). Killing non-Muslims is the core cause of cult, and all so-called “good” Muslims do is provide mass camouflage for the true Muslims, the murderers. Of course liberals don’t even count in this conversation, but, the conservative duplicity and dishonesty in the matter is more repulsive than blatant liberal anti-Americanism.
Conservatives are still afraid of being accused of racism, prejudice, and bias. Conservatives media mouths are still cowards. (And who has defined racism, prejudice, and bias, anyway? Liberals?)
To make matters worse, Ingraham’s disdain for Indians came out again when she criticized Barry “Obama” for the way in which he addressed the Indian conference–which event she would never have mentioned at all (nor any other conservative media mouth) but for the Obama connection. She condemned Barry for not immediately announcing the shooting in Texas, but putting it off till a little later in his speech.
1) Ingraham disdained the fact that Obama acknowledged Indians first, in the opening of his speech, and that he acknowledged a Crow Indian veteran (Medicine Crow) to whom he awarded the Medal of Freedom (not the Medal of Honor), instead of initially announcing the Texas terrorism attack.
2) A caller expressed her collateral disdain for Indians when she complained to Laura that we just had an attack on our country, and “he’s up there giving a ’shout out’ to his homies?!”
Indians are just “ghetto niggers” to these lofty white female conservatives. That was more than clear on the Laura Ingraham show today. So often whites feel compelled to group Indians together with Negroes. This is, of course, racism.
The same could be said for Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, both of whom have expressed open disdain for Indians. Other conservative mouths generally simply avoid all mention of Indians or Indian issues.
Why is this? It is the irreconcilable history of Indians with white America. Whites are insulted if they are made to feel guilty for what happened to Indians, historically. They don’t consider themselves responsible. Yet, Indians must hold them responsible for the treaties their fathers made with Indians. Indians always want to honor our fathers. Whites must honor their fathers, too. Their white fathers made agreements with our Indian fathers. Nothing could be more honorable and patriotic, and traditional, and constitutional, then for white Americans to honor those agreements.
But media conservatives cannot seem to bring themselves to acknowledge this aspect of patriotism. Instead, they disdain Indians for our separateness, our cultural independence, and our insistence on history. White conservatives too often associate treaties with welfare, hand-outs, dependency, and the antithesis of conservatism.
This is simply a profound misunderstanding, and a denial of history. It is unnecessary and inimical to all concerned.
Indians don’t have to be “tolerated” like Muslims. Indians are not foreigners. Indians are not immigrants with a killer cult religion. (That would be ‘White America,’ in a manner of speaking.) Indians are not trying to destroy America. Indians are not trying to “change” America like Bolshevik Barry. Yet, to dismiss the Indian problem, conservatives class Indians as social enemies of the Republic.
Media mouth conservatives honor “good” Muslims, but, to this day, the only “good” Indian is a dead Indian–or, one they don’t have to talk about.
Obama’s 15-minute speech to Indians? A useless political ploy, full of misconceptions, denigrations, and idiotic, kindergarten expressions, like, “I understand what it means to be an outsider.” Indians are not outsiders! That statement implies we want in. We don’t. We simply want to be Indians. We don’t want to be part of mainstream Amercia. Barry, naturally, has no concept whatsoever of who and what Indians are. He sees only inner city black Communist community organizing opportunity. And because Indian leaders sat there and applauded him, the white woman caller protested to Laura Ingraham, “He’s up there giving a ’shout out’ to his homies?!”
Indian leaders look for improvement for their people, or so we believe. They are open to whatever Bolshevik Barry may say or do in their favor. Thus they show complete ignorance of Barry’s intent and character. In a way, Indian leaders are playing his race card for him, thinking it will benefit them to do so.
In the mean time, conservative media mouths honor “good” Muslims. (But, at least they haven’t yet acknowledged the “pre-traumatic stress sydrome” of the liberal analysts to account for Nidal Malik Hasan’s Muslim murder spree in Ft. Hood.) They haven’t called for the obviously necessary ban on Islam and the deportation of its practitioners, but, they’re more than willing to condemn Indians and to call for the ban of Indian nations in America.
16 responses so far ↓
1 David Yeagley // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:36 pm
At least 8 injured in Orlando, Fla. shooting; gunman on the loose AP. Orlando office building gunman on the loose
Is America under assault?
Jason Rodriguez, lone gunman, the lastest resport. Apprehended as of a few minutes ago (1:20 pm, CST). Former employee in the building where he murdered one, and wounded 6 others.
2 Elizabeth // Nov 6, 2009 at 2:53 pm
I came across your site a couple months ago and have enjoyed reading it ever since. I agree with you that there should be no room for Islam in America. It’s really frightening what’s happening.
3 David Yeagley // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Based on the rather poignant writings of Amil Amani, I came to that conclusion. Also, just looking at what happens to Western countries who have allowed vast Muslim populations to develop, one should definitely say no. Islam is an aggressive, coercive, “take-over” religion, and it is manipulating all Western concepts of freedom and decency, in order to keep the door open for itself to infect the societies.
There is incalculable financial resource behind it Islam as well. The oil-rich Islamic countries. The Islamic people to the Western countries are not refugees, not fleeing persecution, and not particularly poor. They are here to spread Islam.
Otherwise, they are simply wanting to take advantage of the economic opportunities–especially in America–which they do not have at home. But there is no moral reason that America is obligated to allow them entrance. There is nothing in the Constitution (or anyone else’s constitution that I know of) that invites anyone into the country. A country with open borders, required to be open, is not a country, but a kind of bazaare.
4 John Sandusky // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:34 pm
So much written in this post to give my two cents worth, yet not enough time to give it all at once.
I will start with a comment pertaining to the Fort Hood Muslim’s murders first, that absolutely no one has touched upon. I have the whole weekend to express my other opinions.
We are in a war with Islam, if you feel better about calling it it a war with radical Islam, so be it. Based on the general knowledge of this war, it is a disgrace that a Muslim, or any other sick, troubled person can kill and wound over 30 people on a military base before someone with a firearm can stop him.
Something is wrong and heads need to roll. This is a black eye on the Army’s preparedness. More soldiers should have been carrying sidearms and the murdering Muslim should have been taken out quicker.
Don’t think for one moment that the touchy, feel goody nonsense of liberalism hasn’t infiltrated our Armed Services also, because it has. I heard a strapping tall officer actually say, “this is our home, we don’t wear side arms.”
5 John Sandusky // Nov 7, 2009 at 1:15 am
“The same could be said for Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, both of whom have expressed open disdain for Indians. Other conservative mouths generally simply avoid all mention of Indians or Indian issues.”
Did it ever even enter your mind Doctor Yeagley, that the reason for the conservatives disdain for Indians, could be based on the fact that most Indians are the political and ideological enemies of conservatives.
I can remember after a Democratic candidate won a special Congressional election in South Dakota, the voting habits of the Native American voting block was expressed by the former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.) . . . “If you take out the Indian reservation, we would have won.”
You chastise conservative media personalities for their obligatory pronouncement that not all Muslims are extremists. However, you expect them to not take an opportunity to inflict a political blow to their enemy, because at the time Indians were involved and having a get together with their chief political leader, Barrack Hussein Obama.
Conservatives would have done the same thing if African-Americans were being addressed by Obama instead of Indians when the Fort Hood massacre went down. Being a conservative, I think a terrorist attack trumps the parting words of the POUSA at a “we need more welfare-fest.”
6 Ray // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:27 am
I must agree with David on this, but also Mr. Sandusky. There you have the balance of reality not only in American politics, but American culture, as well, including religious America, which is the greater concern, if, indeed, the Constitution was written for a moral and religious people.
7 CTgypsynNJ // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:42 am
WOW Dr.! That was a mouthful. Bravo! Also glad to see other readers taking this issue seriously. America is becoming a scarier place. Wish you all a good weekend and keep safe.
8 Awen // Nov 7, 2009 at 2:24 pm
@ John Sandusky,
You are saying that our military men and women are going about unarmed? Surely we have finally gone over that abyss into insanity! I don’t even take off my sidearm in my own house unless I am taking a bath! And then, it is inches from my hand. And why do I have to live like this? Because of liberal lemmings who have turned our nation over to be plundered and destroyed by evil-doers.
9 David Yeagley // Nov 7, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Sandunsky: most Indians are the political and ideological enemies of conservatives.
Most Indians don’t know what they’re talking about, politically. Or so it should seem to you. We have to talk with whomever is willing to talk. Conservatives normally are not willing. Liberal Dems, for whatever dissembling reasons, are.
But since you mention South Dakota, I remind you that Russell Means campaigned for John Thune, who in fact ousted Tom Daschel.
Indians are looking for something that works. So for, all we’ve gotten is casinos–due to liberal crooked politicians, syndicate bosses, land developers–and these are all white people. You want to make Indians responsible for white people’s behavior??
10 David Yeagley // Nov 7, 2009 at 8:59 pm
CTgypsynNJ, I have to say it, the Muslims have abused every aspect of trust in every dimension of society. They did this. No one else did this. Therefore, though I don’t enjoy hurting anyone’s feelings, Muslims must be deported to their own countries. Islam should be banned from the free world. It is an untrustworthy enterprise. We all know what it is about, and therefore it should not be tolerated. It is most foolish to retreated to some self-righteous abstraction like, “religious liberty.” This does not apply!
11 David Yeagley // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Awen, It seems as though we shouldn’t have to bear arms in our own country, but, alas, it seems to be a coming necessity. It is like the old frontier days, the early settler days. Only today, the “Indians” are the foreigners, and the frustrated white wackos. American society is the new frontier, the last frontier, for the free-booting murderers of the world.
12 John Sandusky // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:39 pm
I remind you that Russell Means campaigned. . .
Are you talking about the same Russell Means that founded and co-lead The International Confederation of Autonomous AIM with Ward Churchill and based in Denver?
13 David Yeagley // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Yep. He campaigned for the Republican Party. He has said he is Libertarian, but, I think he’s just looking for something that works.
And yes, he’s had some bad associations!
14 Ray // Nov 8, 2009 at 6:36 am
If Indians are Americans, Indians should consider running for every office open to them. They are looking for what works? Does the Constitution work? Does the vital makeup of American principles work? Then they should find people to run for office and take that image on the nickel straight to Washington.
David, are Indians like Obama, blaming everything on others and taking no responsibility for themselves? That is how it seems. Those like yourself, with a concerted set of principles and purpose, ARE in a major minority, are they not? What is it Indians want? If Indians want treaties to be honored, why do they not have people running for office to see that happens? There is something very … circular in all this.
I’m curious if you have ever tried to contact any of the conservative players out there via phone call (which is a million to one shot, I know), or email, or letter, hand written if necessary. Open some eyes. But it is off point to ask conservative talk show people to stand up for what they see as an entire voting block devoted to liberals and liberal policy. It isn’t logical to expect these people to entertain Indians any more than ACORN. To them it is all the same thing, right or wrong in perspective.
15 David Yeagley // Nov 8, 2009 at 8:43 am
Strong words, Ray. Good words.
Indians want to be Indian. This is the bottom line. That means separateness. That means preservation of culture, language, land, and bloodlines. (You know, the very things AMERICA needs to think about if America intends to stay America. Doesn’t seem to be the trend these days.)
Again, many (if not most) Conservatives are simply totally ignorant and moreover hypocritical when it comes to their perspective of Indians. That’s all. They need to be educated. I’m not saying the great white race isn’t the great white race. I’m saying that they need to accept certain realities of history–which their fathers created, and they need to honor those realities, not try to erase them.
Indians can’t do anything in Congress. There have been a few thin bloods and quasi-Indian types, but, they were elected to represent STATES. There is no Indian in Congress representing Indians. That is an impossibility, until such a seat is created. I would push for that, indeed.
What I don’t want is an Indian image that is anti-America. That is history, and is most unproductive now. It is cooperative coexistence that is needed now. And ONLY with the Indian, not with any other group. America owes nothing to any other “group.” Indians are NOT a minority. That is superficial illusion. That applies to all others. Indians are nations, the original peoples of this land. The rest are foreigners, taking advantage.
16 David Yeagley // Nov 8, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Ray, Indian political problems are cause by the fact that Indians have unwittingly identified themselves as welfare recipients, dependents on the government.
This is historically and ideologically completely false. Treaty provisions are not hand-outs, but the settlements of WAR. To ignore this is to deny the validity of blood.
But, in political talk, Indians have been, by Democrats, trained to think wrongly of themselves.
You must log in to post a comment.