David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
Some “Native American Studies” professors have shown deep error and misconception in their condemnatory attitude toward the recent Arizona immigration law. Their thoughts are foolish, tragic, and can work nothing but havoc and harm on American Indian people–if they’re taken seriously. (Fortunately, they aren’t.)
BadEagle.com, as an American Indian patriot site, has often challenged the political and social positions of other ‘liberalized’ Indians (and certainly white professors like Ward Churchill who have claimed to represent Indians). Generally speaking, it has been Indians who, not as tribal leaders or elected officials, but as self-appointed spokesmen, have presented ideas and values which BadEagle.com considers not only anti-American, but pernicious to Indian people at large.
The 2.8 million acre Tohono O’Odham Reservation, the second largest in the United States, just west of Tucson, Arizona, is an illegal immigration battle ground. A Senior Customs Patrol Officer looks across the desert after discovering a footprint, or sign in the desert. He will track them until they are caught.
We speak of Indians in the field of education and media–those twin socialist operatives in American Communist society. Specifically, we are concerned with IndianCountryToday, no doubt the largest, and most “liberal” media outlet among American Indians. We are concerned over a recent piece by a superficially Indian-type author Rob Capriccioso (who is also associated with homosexuality): “Immigration law rattles Indian studies group.” Such an article is intended to give significance to a group that is hardly known at all, and has no influence. IndianCountryToday must therefore be complicit in the err. IndianCountryToday may have some actual influence, at least among liberalized Indians. The intent is therefore obvious.
Professor Robert Warrior (Osage)
The Native American and Indigenous Studies Association is debating whether or not the new Arizona law is moral. That’s right. They want to think it is immoral! People like Robert Warrior (University of Illinois–and NAISA’s president), Simon Ortiz (University of Arizona), Debbie Reese (University of Illinois), and Scott Richard Lyons (Syracuse University) feel that Arizona’s law about statehood, and by implication, nationhood, is wrong. They imply that borders, language, and race have no part in the definition of a people. It is immoral to be a nation! Protecting nationhood is evil!
Nothing, of course, could be farther from the truth–about Indian people themselves! Our fathers gave their lives to preserve us, and won for us our “reservations.” These reservations are our little “nations,” as it were. We prize this ineffably. We have a little land left. We have borders, customs, language, race, and even religion at the heart of each of our nations. What foolish person would deny such realities to other people–and expect to preserve them for themselves?
For people who claim to be professional spokemen for Indian people to make statements against law, borders, statehood, nationhood, and people-hood, is outlandish and ridiculous. It is approaches a crime in and of itself. These pretentious “spokesmen” are purely racist. Liberals are always purely racist. Deceptively racist. They claim to honor race–only when it serves to disrupt or harm another race, namely, the white race, specifically, white America.
Professor Debbie Reese, Nambe Pueblo.
We understand that many Indians have been educated by white professors to believe that resenting America is a positive force. They have been taught white, Communist racial agitation, and feel, like the white Ward Churchill, that if they hate America, that makes them more “Indian.” If they become professional and perpetual protesters, they earn their feathers as “Indians.”
But it is time that these liberal-trained “Indian” types understand their position in the context of social reality. No one loves being a people more than Indians. Indians know, above every other people in America, what it means to be a nation–in the midst of challenge. But these liberals want America to be without borders! These Communist professors make complete fools out of Indians.
Can we expect Indian nations to open their reservations to Somalis, Arabs, Hindus, or even American whites? Can we see an alien, lying black African Communist becoming Chairman of the Navajo? For that matter, would one expect a white person, or an Indian, to become the president of Kenya, or Nigeria? But this is what the liberal professors want everyone to think. This is what they put forth as “Indian” values. This is “morality” in their liberal, Communist value system. No race. No nation. No borders.
Using traditional Native American tracking techniques, these four Senior Customs Patrol Officers are personally responsible for hundreds of thousands of pounds of marijuana being interdicted on the Tohono O’Odham reservation in southern Arizona.
This is NOT Indian. Never has been, never will be. Any Indian or Indian organization (white created and dominated or not) which advocates open borders for America is a deceived and lying “Indian,” and an enemy of all Indian people. A strong America is the only hope of peace for Indians. Anything less will mean the dissolution of Indian people. The first thing that will go is our land. True national values must be held by Indians, above all people. This is our truest, most important message to America. America must love and value itself as a nation, or it will dissolve–into the murkey, menacing, meaningless miasma of the Third World.
Indians should never, ever seek association or covenants with other races. Indian people are not liberal. True, educated Indians are often trained to be liberal. Democrats and liberal Communists have often tried to claim the Indian, and to use the Indian against America. Why, who has more right to resent America than the Indian? Thus, they make the Indian their “mascot” of hate and anti-Americanism.
This is good for Indian people? Please! This is self-destroying. This is beyond naive. This is lethal.
Every Indian in the country should support Arizona’s immigration law. In doing so, Indians make our own “borders” more secure. What liberal Indian media outlets never talk much about is how the illegal immigration social issues adversely affect Indian people–right there on those Indian reservations in Arizona! Reporting on that would be responsible, “Indian” news. (IndianCountryToday is capable of it, when reprinting an AP story anyway.)
When “Indians” err, make sure they’re Indian–or at least thinking like real Indians. The NAISA does not represent Indian people in any way.
24 responses so far ↓
1 geronl // May 7, 2010 at 7:00 pm
“It is immoral to be a nation! Protecting nationhood is evil!”
Looking back at history I would think the last thing a native American would support was open borders. I doubt the Navajo Nation is going to want to transplant a part of Mexico to its land.
2 David Yeagley // May 7, 2010 at 7:46 pm
These things are obvious–except to those deluded with liberalism, or Communist “equality.”
3 wyoman // May 7, 2010 at 9:11 pm
I spent the first four months of this year in southeast Arizona. The people who live there are virtually unanimous in their support of the new law. That includes White, Hispanic and Apache. (the Navajo and Hopi reservations are further north and I do not personally know anyone there.) The issue is not people looking for work as that traffic has slowed to a trickle, but criminals and smugglers. The opposition seems to come from outsiders and people with a stake in the illegal activity.
4 Tweets that mention Liberal “Indians” Err on Arizona Law: Some “Nataive American Studies” professors have shown a deep error and misco... -- Topsy.com // May 8, 2010 at 6:50 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by davekehnast, davekehnast. davekehnast said: Liberal “Indians” Err on Arizona Law: Some “Nataive American Studies” professors have shown a deep error and misco… http://bit.ly/czKC3F [...]
5 colleague graduate // May 8, 2010 at 7:21 am
David, you said Indians should never seek association with other races. How much association? What about marriage to a white? My sis in law has indian blood and she married my little brother who was an Emory grad and had a little blue-eyed boy with him, the boy now a child black-belt. My little brother’s Godparents were a white Ga Tech student/grad married to the late Cherokee head nurse at Ga Tech in the 50′s and 60′s. There’s certain associations that cannot be prevented. I hope you aren’t bashing these associations. Also, I am a white. Are you saying you do not want me on this site because of that? I’ve asked you this before, and you said it was ok to visit here. So how much association are you referring to here? I’m already banned from the NAC because I have no indian blood, even though I’m an uncle of a nephew with this blood, and living in SC prevents me from legally growing the NAC’s American land sacrament of peyote. Isn’t that enough of an avoidance of association? What would you wish for, for my little brother and his wife to become divorced? They were married in a little, tiny stone Episcopal church on Sullivan’s Island here in Charleston one afternoon, the same island Jenny Sanford lives on. They had a private wedding of only a few family members there including me, and my sis-in-law had already had my nephew before marriage. He was an infant then. So you won’t break up our associations. And I recall when an Indian kidnapped a 13 year old white girl in a raid on a wagon train and kept her as his bride. There’s just certain associations you won’t be able to prevent- the ones involving love and intermarriage of white and indian, or of me wanting to understand an Emory educated indian point of view as an uncle of someone with indian blood. The boy does not want to go to Emory for a college, by the way.
6 colleague graduate // May 8, 2010 at 7:38 am
This Arizona law was bashed by what’s know as impulsiveness, or making a decision without thinking. I heard wher there are 400,000 illegal hispanics in AZ. That’s alot in a relatively uninhabited state. To pull them over and question them would be easy. What do they look like? Like their own race, not like white or black or indian, who have their own races. Are some of the hispanics criminals? Yes, if they’re illegal immigrants. Do they need to be in somewhat of a “police lineup” when a cop pulls them over or stops them on a city sidewalk? Yes. And some hispanics in the “lineup” will have ids. Hooray, hooray, they get to pass, no problem, thanks officer for acknowledging they aren’t criminal, they were glad to help. The criminals will get caught. The criminals don’t pay taxes for public services so they won’t get caught, making public servants work too hard for what they get paid, and making taxpayers in effect pay for themselves and those who won’t pay. This is very unfair. So the AZ law is very simple to understand if thought about. Why protestors on May Day all over the country wanted to burden AZ taxpayers is an attack on the taxpayers, an attempt to steal money from them to take care of illegals, and the AZ cops have every right to stop anyone at random who looks hispanic and question them about their citizenship or green card status.
7 colleague graduate // May 8, 2010 at 7:41 am
Consumers sometimes do impulsive behavior where they buy products without thinking about what they’re buying. This is what happened on May Day with the protestors. They claimed “racial profiling”. If in a police lineup, that’s exactly correct.
8 geronl // May 8, 2010 at 12:57 pm
colleague graduate- The new law does not empower police to stop someone for looking hispanic. It simply says that during other police duties, like arresting a drug dealer, they may ask/check about citizenship if its possible the person is an illegal.
My city, Irving TX, has been doing that for years. Arizona won’t be doing anything very different from my city. It is right in line with federal law.
Another issue is that there are people coming over the border who are NOT hispanic. They are coming from asian nations and Muslim nations too.
9 colleague graduate // May 8, 2010 at 4:02 pm
geronyl- hey, how’re ya doin? I believe the recent law at first empowered cops to stop anybody. Then they in AZ succumbed to pressure and changed it to be used only when a crime was committed. The only thing is, there have been 400,000 crimes committed in AZ by illegal immigrants since there are an estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants there. Now how are these illegals going to be rounded up? Well, everybody in AZ who is legal can show ids, so stopping them at random roadblocks will be ok. But when illegals are stopped, they get busted. Then would illegals avoid road travel? I doubt it. Also, flatfoots walking a beat on a Phoenix sidewalk stopping anybody is now not ok, the stopped person has to be a crook. Well, like I said, they might be a crook, so why not stop them? I have heard of only one illegal immigrant coming over the border who wasn’t a hispanic, but instead was an Iranian. In AZ, I believe they should stop anyone and everyone until the 400,000 are removed or move to another state. For Jan Brewer to agree with those who believed there would be racial profiling is a cop out. Percentage wise there would be hispanic profiling. I would imagine 90% of the illegals in AZ are hispanic. Stopping anybody would also eliminate drunk drivers and people on pot. The asking for ids would not require a pat down, unless the person did not have an id. I go along with the strict enforcement of removal that was originally passed, but the provision for a citizen to sue a cop because they did not believe the cop was doing “enough” to catch an illegal I don’t go along with at all.
10 wyoman // May 8, 2010 at 4:49 pm
College Graduate, You are wrong in so many ways I can’t imagine how to address the errors in your take on this situation. I don’t mean to be derogatory or insulting as I don’t see any bad intent in your comments. It is just a matter of you seeing things from an east coast perspective and the situation in question being a southwestern matter. Being from Wyoming I did not realize the situation until I spent time in the area in question. The issue is only a small part about honest people who are breaking only one law. The real problem is the criminal element coming to stay and the smugglers who are violent criminals dealing in poison. When you realize nearly half of the law enforcement personnel in southern Arizona are Hispanic in origin it makes the racial profiling concern a lot less realistic. A lot of smuggling comes across reservations. Are you accusing the reservation police of profiling? Like I said, if you are not on the ground there the situation is probably hard to understand. By the way I am mostly European in ancestry. I have a number of Mexican ancestry and Indian friends but I would not presume to speak for them. By the way Phoenix does not have flatfoots walking beats that I have ever seen. Just another East – West difference?
11 colleague graduate // May 8, 2010 at 5:27 pm
Hey wyoman the name’s colleague graduate, not college graduate. I’ve never been to Wyoming, although I’m sure it’s a cool place-literally during the winter. I’ve driven through AZ, but never hung out there. All I heard was that there are 400,000 illegals in AZ itself. That’s alot. What illegal immigrants do by not paying taxes is racial profiling when they take out their garbage for blacks to pick up and they don’t pay taxes to support the blacks public service work to pick it up. Also they run over painted lines in traffic causing repainting of the lines and they dont pay taxes to fund road repair. That’s the problem with illegal immigrants. We have some here in SC. I know there are alot in Atlanta. You know, I’m 100% European ancestry, and I’m beginning to have doubts about my visitation here. The site says it’s for American Indian Patriots. I’m thinking of leaving, and maybe you should too. Perhaps I just needed someone to talk to while the commenting area on AOL is down. It’s been down there since just before the Haiti earthquake. It’s a real ripoff over on AOL. They say they want a new commenting experience w/o the hateful comments. Well, maybe a female would want that, but me as a guy gets a big guffaw over all the trash talk. It’s really funny, and I don’t mind any of it. It gives us on AOL a glimpse into the real state of mind of the commenters which is important for Freedom of Speech. AOL words it like they’re developing a commenting area that will restrict Freedom of Speech- w/o any hateful comments. Anyway, I might leave this site because I’m not an indian, I’m just an uncle of one who has indian blood, with his original great grandmother being a full blooded Cherokee supposedly. She died of a heart attack when she was 38. Also David went to Emory where my nephew’s dad went. But even with these connections, I’m still not indian. I can’t join the Native American Church and drop peyote buttons with the congregation, which I find annoying actually. Not saying that I ever would drop any, but the interest is there. If there were kids in the congregation dropping it, and they weren’t sent off to Sunday school prior to this taking of the desert sacrament, then I feel I would be really missing out on a memorable social experience. Listen, I’m not accusing anybody of profiling, you brought up the word, because that’s what you believe is a player here. I don’t know where you came up with that, because I didn’t even mention reservation police, just AZ police in general. Like I said, I don’t see where profiling is a player here except by those who view a good original law with impulsiveness, IN MY OPINION. If there are various races coming over, there’s no profiling. Just have cops stop anybody and ask for ids, that’s the solution to catching the 400,000. Profiling is a fad catch word that’s impulsive in it’s creation. A police lineup to catch a Mexican illegal would line up hispanics, and out of the 400,000, PROBABLY 90% are Mexican, however I’m not sure what the percentages are. If they in AZ know the 400,000 figure, they probably have broken it down by race also. And listen, they need flatfoots in Phoenix now to ask for ids at random stops, just like random dl, ins and reg checks on highways.
12 colleague graduate // May 8, 2010 at 5:49 pm
wyoman- you said you were mostly European in ancestry, and that you had injun friends; I’m 100% European, no hispanic like the Mex you have; I’m Eng, Scot, Germ, Fren; I’ve already said this ancestry here and David has not asked me to leave; but when he says something like he said here about races, it’s sounding like he’s changed his mind or something, or is asking me to leave at this time- I just don’t like the way it was written by him, so sorry; you don’t have to accept everything a professor says, because he is only a “claimer” by definition; David said “Indians should never, ever seek associations or covenants with other races”, so maybe David wants us to get lost; I’ve noticed where other visitors here who said they were celtic and Italian, etc., have dropped out; maybe they read the meaning of the site and decided to leave; it’s important to prove you know how to read sometimes
13 colleague graduate // May 8, 2010 at 8:09 pm
wyoman- what further compounds my reluctance to get ostracised from this indian patriot site by David is the fact that David and I are about the same age, he one week and two months older than me, and that my dad’s side was from Shawnee, a suburb of OK City, and my grandmother on my dad’s side was born in Indian Territiory of OK, then not a state, and also around OK City; his dad in Army in WW II, mine too; we got alot in common perhaps astrologically, but not by race; still though, when David says he as an indian doesn’t want us, maybe we should honor that request; maybe he now has changed his mind about the NAC and taking peyote and wants non-indians out of this site. It’s hard to interpret what he meant.
14 David Yeagley // May 8, 2010 at 8:19 pm
CG, by association with other races, I mean political conglomerates. Indians should seek to be classed with Third World races–under the insipid nomenclature of “indigenous.” Indigent means POOR. Naked. Beggary. Know what I mean?
Liberals are trying to give Communist “equality,” equal status to life in the woods or in the desert, to life in a mansion. The men are of equal attention in the eyes of the Lord, no doubt, but, among men, I don’t see the equality. I see profound difference.
Liberals want all non-whites to be considered “native.” A nice, neat category, as if all are the same, as if all are like American Indians.
Nothin’ doin’! Ain’t no native fought the white man like Indians. No people relate to the white American like the American Indian. I will share that “status” with no other. We killed white people. We fought white people. No one else could have subdued us. We therefore owe nothing to no one. We acknowledge the American white man, and that’s it.
No one else deserves our handshake, or even attention, really. We’re talking socio-political terms here, in history. I don’t mean to sound arrogant. Just exact.
15 geronl // May 8, 2010 at 8:40 pm
I don’t think the word immigrant applies, I think it only applies to those who come legally. I use the word colonist. They are colonizing the southwest because there really is no law stopping them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s
16 David Yeagley // May 8, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Colonizing Mexicans, like the colonizing Arabs and Pakistanis. Most definitely the appropriate term–especially with respect to the Muslims. This is their sole and express intent.
Indians have been through this once already! I’m not for more of it!
17 zephyr // May 8, 2010 at 10:49 pm
These are the type of people who support illegal immigration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8L_Zv-s5dM
Gee, you think some of them might be criminals?
As the demonstration broke up, the pro-illegal mob followed some of the Tea Party people to the bus station, beat them, maced them, and stole a backpack.
Some in the mob were arrested and charged with assault with a deadly weapon, robbery, and conspiracy.
No country needs more people who behave like this.
18 Educational Equity, Politics & Policy in Texas: Arizona law draws … | Educational Arizona // May 9, 2010 at 1:16 am
[...] Liberal “Indians” Err on Arizona Law [...]
19 colleague graduate // May 9, 2010 at 6:39 am
David, glad I can stay. Thanks. I don’t know what you mean by being classed as third world. Indians should be classed as Americans! Right? The “colonists” in AZ are third worldly. I agree with zephyr. Ganging up on tea party members and assaulting them is not surprising for illegal immigrants status(I need to use illegal immigrant’s because that’s the term used by the lawmakers). What ii’s want to do is drive in the back of pick up trucks from Home Depot in the early morning and get carried to the construction sites. I saw this in Atl out in a city called Smyrna on the Marietta Hwy. This is out near where The Weather Channel is located, at I-75 and I-285. And I heard of it in AZ. For one thing, this type of transportation is against the law. Passengers must use seat belts, even in the back of pickups. What this type of transportation appears to me to look like is like how Taliban and insurgents ride around in Afghanistan and Iraq. We don’t want that to become a norm in AZ with the 400,000 “colonists”, nor do we want that in Atl or anywhere else in the US. Listen David, I of course knew indians killed alot of white men. I know of none of my relatives who were killed by injuns. My grandmother lived in Indian Territory and was never attacked. Recently on AOL I read an article which pictured the US as once inhabited by 100 million indians, more people than were in Europe. The article also pictured bodies of water as somewhat contaminated by significant charcoal deposits from the charcoaling of food by them, as seen as hardened layers of stalagmites from inside caves, I believe from 12,000 years ago. It must have tasted great, but was probably dumped into rivers to put the fires out. So the indians have dwindled in size to the white man’s increasing in size, and therefore you don’t sound particularly arrogant to me. Perhaps indians maybe have even gotten punished by a thunderbird for attacking white men by their population dwindling so much as contrasted by the white man’s increasing. But of course we have bandied recently about how races other than white are now the primary reproducers and inhabitants in the US.
20 colleague graduate // May 9, 2010 at 7:03 am
The photo at the beginning of this article depicts an agent holding a rifle. I had an opportunity to hold a rifle like this once. It was a Colt. It was very lightweight, it had wonderful crosshairs in it’s scope, and it had a canvas cloth strap. It was all black in color. It was a magnificent rifle. I looked through the scope at the crosshairs. Great focusing power. I did not fire it. I had the opportunity to hold it and look through it in an outdoor wooded location.
21 colleague graduate // May 9, 2010 at 7:36 am
Above on 5 at the end of the article, I said “The boy does not want to go to Emory for a college”, which is the way it came out of my mind at first. I know I use colleague instead of college for my pen name. I don’t want anyone to think I don’t regard my little nephew as some outcast or something since I didn’t use the word colleague. He is more than a colleague, of course. But Emory is a colleague. In retrospect I should have said colleague, because he will associate with colleagues at whatever colleague he selects. He sure doesn’t want to go to my alma mater and his grandfather’s on his dad’s side, Ga Tech. I think he thinks Tech people are math nerds. We beat his favorite team Clemson in the ACC football championship and during the football season, however.
22 colleague graduate // May 9, 2010 at 10:52 am
The excuse opponents of the AZ law are giving referring to Constitutional law providing equal protection for every citizen irregardless of race only applies to actual US citizens. ii’s in AZ should not be provided equality. People say that the new law will make it like Nazi Germany when “papers please” was asked, and that’s exactly what should be done. If a person gets questioned by an AZ cop because they look like they could be from Mexico since they would have brown skin and dark hair, “hispanic” traits, and they show id’s, then they check out ok, and they probably would be proud to prove they’re American. No I don’t see any problem with racial profiling here at all.
23 geronl // May 9, 2010 at 1:13 pm
The school that sent those boys home for wearing USA flag shirts but did not punish the 200 Mexicans for walking out in protest apparently has a MeCha Club.
That is a racist, anti-American organization.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/high-school-where-flag-flap-occurred-hides-racist-secret/
Yes, American Indians have been through this before. Anyone who has studied history would think this looks very familiar.
24 David Yeagley // May 9, 2010 at 4:37 pm
Here’s another article in IndianCountryToday, by the same homosexual advocate:
Arizona law draws widespread indigenous opposition
This is totally misconceived, and liberals are making complete fools out of Indians. Unbelievable blindness and propaganda.
You must log in to post a comment.