David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
The United Nations has made great profession of honor toward American Indians. The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (September, 2007) lauded the existence and preservation of all tribal peoples of the earth, and promised to protect them. Has the UN made any effort to protect American Indians? I discussed the matter today (November 17) on the Scott Hennon radio show. (UN advocate Ellen Ratner was also a guest.)
The continual removal of American Indian images, names, and logos from American college campuses, from secondary and elementary schools, says no. The United Nations, despite its lofty professions, has not lifted a finger to prevent this protracted genocide against American Indians.
The famous “Fighting Sioux,” proud mascot of
the University of North Dakota.
Speaking of genocide, the United Nations Mandate of 1948 vowed to prevent genocide, and provided a definition of genocide which included “serious mental harm to members of the group,” whether the harm was done to aspects of the “national, ethnical, racial, or religious group” (Article II b).
The removal of American Indian images, names, and logos from public view comprises an act of genocide, according to the United Nations. I have appealed three times to the United Nations now: American Indian Genocide: An Appeal to the United Nations (September 26, 2011); Indian Removal II: 2nd Appeal to the United Nations (September 28, 2011), and American Indian Images: An “Indigenous Right” (September 30, 2011). I addressed Mr. Francis M. Deng, Mr. Juan Méndez, and Mr. Edward Luck, Special Advisors on the Prevention of Genocide, all. As yet, I have received no response. I will continue to pursue this matter, according to law. (I have presently an Oklahoma conservative attorney who is most interested in filing against the United Nations. At this point, however, I wish to enlist the support of the UN, rather than to create an adversarial relationship.)
The United Nations is clearly committed to the preservation and protection of the “mental integrity,” of all tribal peoples. In the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the commitment is stellar. Article 15 states: “Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information.”
Indians should have control over our public image, indeed. But how can we if there is none?
From the beginning, the principle force behind the removal of American Indian images, particularly those on American university and college campuses, has been the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). Of course, when the United States Commission of Civil Rights published their statement against Indian mascots, the NCAA used that as a justification of Indian genocide. The truth is the NCAA had listened to Leftist-trained professional Indian protesters before that.
But no one ever listened to what American Indian people had to say. We have been surveyed by professional statistic-gathering companies on mascots. In 2002, in the March 4 issue of Sports Illustrated, the Peter Harris Research Group reported that 81% of Indians surveyed (off reservations) did not feel Indians mascots contributed to prejudice or discrimination against American Indians. The University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Foundation conducted a survey of Indians in 2004 which revealed that 91% of Indians found the “Washington Redskins” moniker “acceptable.” As Betty Ann Gross (Sioux) reported to Sports Illustrated, “There’s a near total disconnect between Indian activists and the Native American population on this [mascot] issue.”
The great Washington Redskin, the highest honor.
In my appeals to the United Nations, I have cited the NCAA and the USCCR as the principle offending agents in the genocide against American Indians. Indeed, in 2009, the Civil Rights of the Dakotas (a local group in Sioux Falls) called for the elimination of the USCCR altogether. The same might be said for the NCAA, although, as a mere athletic community tournament organizer, the NCAA need simply eliminate its genocide policy toward American Indians.
In my interview with Hennen I emphasized the potential of the American Indian as a key contributor to American patriotism. I believe the Indian is the most essential element in the mix, in fact. However, I confessed that, among professional conservative talking heads, there are simply no talking points about American Indians. Until now, conservatives have simply not seen the Indian as an important item. They view the Indians as a welfare recipient, thus ignoring all the history of war, blood, and treaties—the very force behind the Indian warrior images glorified in the mascots.
I hope the United Nations will help preserve the Indian warrior image everywhere.
23 responses so far ↓
1 zephyr // Nov 17, 2011 at 5:16 pm
“Cooperate” with the UN–dance with the devil.
2 Thrasymachus // Nov 17, 2011 at 5:32 pm
I believe that ALL traditional American heroes are under the same assault. The reason for the removal of the American Indian images is the very same reason that George Washington’s name has been removed from countless public schools.
These people want to destroy the entire past of the United States. It is like the “memory hole” in Orwell’s book 1984.
Your people are under attack from the very same source as the mine, Dr. Y. We have common cause in this.
Whites have always looked upon the image of the American Indian warrior with instinctive respect.
3 Thrasymachus // Nov 17, 2011 at 5:35 pm
It’s Communism, or whatever name you wish. We are obliged to worship images of Dr. King, but the heroes of the past are anathema to the ruling Liberal elite. It’s all part of the same program and agenda.
I believe that Whites should rally to the cause of saving and restoring the American Indian mascots.
4 David Yeagley // Nov 17, 2011 at 5:51 pm
If I defeated a ferocious enemy like the Indians, I’d be mighty proud of it!
5 Thrasymachus // Nov 17, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Warning: this video clip is absurd to people with rudimentary skills in logic! It’s the mental illness of Liberalism at its ugliest.
Look at this LUDICROUS video equating the American Indian mascots with “racism”! This is a real puzzler, as the “reasoning” here is unintelligible.
Liberals hate traditional America and true history. Liberal thinking is beyond crazy!
One Liberal white (?) woman has a placard which reads, “American Indians are people, not mascots.” What?!
“Remove the Offensive Imagery & Civil Rights March Carpinteria, CA”
6 David Yeagley // Nov 17, 2011 at 8:47 pm
Mascots are people, too!
7 Pamela K. // Nov 17, 2011 at 10:00 pm
No. The UN Is not a friend of American Indian tribes. Or any of the rest of the American people. The only reason why Obama signed The Declaration On The Rights Of Indigenous Peoples, something both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush before him refused to do, was to help the Palestinians declare statehood. This is why Abbas now refuses to negotiate at all with Israel. Now that he has declared recognition for a Palestinian State, Abbas is determine to use the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Declaration to proclaim that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the land of Israel. Furthermore, there is already a long-standing UN mandate to order the division of the City of Jerusalem. I guess we’ll have to stay tuned to see what happens next in this very precarious situation.
I don’t know how anyone can equate American Indian mascots with racism. The image of the proud and noble warrior represents the very heart of America.
No other nation can claim this image.
“These larger than life busts are hand carved marble portraits of Native peoples. The inspiration is bourn out of respect and an attempt to capture the proud character of these people. ”
Mystic Warrior Of The Plains
By Artist Doug Beiniek
http://www.mnartists.org/uploads/users/user_16269/e0dcc6bf0bcd6e9b506cb26681b4d4dd/e0dcc6bf0bcd6e9b506cb26681b4d4dd.jpg
8 Pamela K. // Nov 17, 2011 at 10:12 pm
While liberal American Indians seek to remove “offending mascots” their Arab comrades in the universal solidarity movement are attempting to obliterate the history of Jerusalem.
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=246012
9 David Yeagley // Nov 18, 2011 at 10:27 am
There are no indigenous “Palestinians.” This is a 60 year-old lie. These people are Jordanian, Southern Syrian, and some Saudi-types. They are not indigenous to Palestine at all. This is incredible. I’ve written so much against this, but, I guess there are preferred lies in the world, and those in charge of media and words chose what they want to promote.
10 Pamela K. // Nov 18, 2011 at 11:07 am
I agree. I loathe to say or even write the word, “Palestinian” because there are no such people.
In fact, the word was first coined by former PLO Chairman Yassir Arafat.
And he was born in Egypt!
11 David Yeagley // Nov 18, 2011 at 11:45 am
“Palestine” is Anglicized from the old Hebrew, pel-esh-ti. If it comes from pelesheth, it means migrating, rolling, or moving on (.org)! The archeologists have said that the Philistines were an Egyptian consort, migrated up the coast. Always and enemy of Israel, but they had great fear of Israel’s God–when they had reason to believe that He would intervene.
They came to the coast of Cana’an after Israel was already established there. They were not among the Cana’anites who were evicted when Israel came in.
What does “indigenous” mean when you are talking about a place that has had so many inhabitants over the millennia? The Jews were certainly not indigenous to Cana’an. It was (is) there simply because God declared it such.
I know that doesn’t set well with many, but, I for one accept it as the mandate of Heaven.
12 Pamela K. // Nov 18, 2011 at 12:16 pm
God gave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants. Although many peoples have since lived in the region of land renamed Palestine, including Romans, Greeks, Jews, Arabs, Assyrians, Armenians, Turks, and British, the land, if you choose to believe in what the Word of God says, belongs to the Jewish people. And Jerusalem stands as their eternal capital forever.
Jerusalem is the center of the world. As a Christian, I believe my eternal destiny is linked with this city, when all believers will return there with our Savior and Messiah will rule the world from Jerusalem. Only then, will God’s perfect justice be implemented and Israel will be fully restored politically as a nation, and reconciled spiritually to God.
“Many people shall come and say, “Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths. For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.”
Isaiah 2:3
13 Thrasymachus // Nov 18, 2011 at 3:16 pm
“If I defeated a ferocious enemy like the Indians, I’d be mighty proud of it!” — David Yeagley
You and I understand that the Indians were heroes in their wars against the European invasion.
Anyone with common sense understands that people name schools and sports mascots after heroes only.
So to say that these images and mascots are expressions of “racism” is absurd.
But Liberals do not want heroes. They live by the dogma that all races, nations, and cultures are totally equal.
Liberals are “levelers”. That is, they only believe in one common “humanity,” every member of which is absolutely “equal” and exactly the same. Their motto is, “There is only one race – the human race.” Therefore, there can be no independent national groups — especially ethnic nations.
Liberals are HUMANISTS. “Humanity” is their god.
Therefore, all persons must be absolutely equal and interchangeable. Otherwise, this god would have unequal members. Unthinkable in such a religious fantasy.
This is why liberal heroes must never be representative of any proud and independent people with nationalistic aspirations.
14 Kris // Nov 19, 2011 at 4:48 pm
Just a passing thought, Professor; weren’t Obama and Bill Ayers two members involved with the Annenberg Foundation in Chicago having to do with education initiatives? k
15 Pamela K. // Nov 19, 2011 at 6:56 pm
Most liberals fall under the category of secular humanists. They worship the culture of man and/or nature, instead of the Creator.
Although all people on this earth come from one human race,God created three distinct groups: Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid.
Today, more than ever before, there is a fourth group which has emerged, people with various shades of brown skin, ranging from dark olive to a pale, almost jaundiced-looking yellow color. This is the result of interracial relationships, mainly between white and black people.
Back in the mid 1980′s a popular weekly news magazine predicted that in the future there would be no longer be a white race in America. Whoever wrote that article was right.
I recently found out that the Smithsonian Museum is opening a new wing of their organization called, “The Museum of African American History.” Can you imagine the uproar if they dared to open “The Museum of White American History.”?
Why is it that all non-whites can celebrate their history and heritage, yet white people are purposely left out?
16 Thrasymachus // Nov 19, 2011 at 7:27 pm
I first became alarmed about the “Race Question” in 1993, when Time Magazine came out with its Special Fall Edition bearing the title, “The New Face of America.” This edition was a celebration of miscegenation and proudly proclaimed a raceless future for the country. It claimed that the result would be a superior society made up of persons of great physical beauty — persons who were an ideal blend of all races and ehtnicities presently found on this Earth. No original peoples are allowed to preserve themselves in this fantasy utopia of the Liberal elites. All must intermarry.
If God created races, He must have had some purpose in mind.
17 Thrasymachus // Nov 19, 2011 at 7:46 pm
“Why is it that all non-whites can celebrate their history and heritage, yet white people are purposely left out?” — Pamela K
Perhaps it is because in the Church Age, the administration of the Faith of Jesus Christ has been placed into the hand of the children of Japheth — the Caucasian Race — which is commonly called “Christendom.”
18 Thrasymachus // Nov 19, 2011 at 8:07 pm
“Why is it that all non-whites can celebrate their history and heritage, yet white people are purposely left out?” — Pamela K
Here is what one highly controversial Jewish Orthodox Christian say in answer to this question:
Christian Roots Of White Nations
19 Pamela K. // Nov 19, 2011 at 8:45 pm
Jewish Orthodox Christian?
Not quite.
More like just another loser on the “When all else fails, blame the Jews” bandwagon.
20 Thrasymachus // Nov 19, 2011 at 9:11 pm
Yest Pamela, but what about 1 Thessalonians 2: 14-16:
“(14) You, brothers and sisters, were like the churches of God in Judea that are united with Christ Jesus. You suffered the same persecutions from the people of your own country as those churches did from the Jews (15)who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and who have persecuted us severely. They are displeasing to God. They are enemies of the whole human race (16) because they try to keep us from telling people who are not Jewish how they can be saved. The result is that those Jews always commit as many sins as possible. So at last they are receiving [God's] anger.”
Will the Jews who reject the Messiah Yeshua in this life be saved?
21 Thrasymachus // Nov 19, 2011 at 9:45 pm
I do not personally believe that the Jews are the cause of the problems of the world.
What actually happened in the United States was a sudden loss of power in the WASP elite. The original founding stock of the nation “lost its nerve,” as one scholar put it. Then, after WWII, the same thing happened in Europe.
White Guilt! Whites are paralyzed by an overwhelming and overmastering collective guilt complex. Therefore they cannot lead the world to Christ.
22 David Yeagley // Nov 19, 2011 at 10:22 pm
Heavy medicine, Thras. Very heavy.
23 Pamela K. // Nov 20, 2011 at 1:21 pm
How is it that this nostalgic image of a beautiful and wholesome Indian maiden promoting butter:
http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/0/6/8/2/0/3/webimg/464686776_tp.jpg
has been deemed a ” kneeling, subservient, butter-offering “squaw”… patently offensive to the historically aware, and denies the heritage of active Native-American womanhood.”
Source: Blue Corn Comics
I have always liked and admired the Land O’ Lakes maiden. For the life of me I can’t understand how her friendly, smiling image plays a role in “denying the heritage of active Native American womanhood”
To me, she represents America and our unique indigenous history, as well as what popular slogans early advertisement agencies felt would actively sell one of the best tasting butter brands that can still be found on the market today.
Furthermore, liberals have erroneously cited the word, “squaw” as a nasty slang word coined by whites (of course!) for a Indian woman’s genitals.
This is as disgusting as it is false. The word, “squaw” is actually a corruption of an Algonquian word, “squa” which means, “female”.
Oh, by the way, here’s another liberal “tribute” to the Land ‘O Lakes Maiden, being aimed at children to teach them, “critical thinking skills.”
http://americanindiansinchildrensliterature.blogspot.com/2008/03/eric-gansworths-poem-loving-that-land.html
Critical thinking? More like corrupting innocent minds!
You must log in to post a comment.