On a website called Congress.org, there was a curious piece recently (Oct.30?) posted. One of my readers sent it to me last night. It is under the category of "Issues & Action," and identified as an "Action Alert."
Action Alert
Senator Wellstone murdered?
Shadow government and Israeli Mossad involved.
Senator Wellstone was seen as a leader in a movement that would have the U.S. take a more equitable approach in Middle East policy.There is a growing cabal of Zionist controlled political officials that has taken over our government.Putting pressure on Israel to give the Palestinians their own state is the last thing these dangerous individuals want.Senator Wellstone was seen as a threat,a voice of reason. This must be investigated.Ask Rudy Boshwitz or better yet,ask the Bush family.
Congress.org is apparenlty a public forum, and open to anyone. I am curious at the above suggestion. It was followed by supporting letter or two, calling for an independent investigation.
It is as if, nowadays, one can't even die by accident. It has to be a deep political plot, a terrorist design, or something significant. "Thou Accident, Thou art no longer innocent!" One can no longer die in peace. Death has to be someone's fault. It has to be an issue. Someone has to profit from it.
The death will be used for something, someone, somehow.
Jam Master Jay (Run DMC) was just murdered. "Chuck D, the founder of the hip-hop group Public Enemy, blamed record companies and the advertising for perpetuating 'a climate of violence' in the rap industry. 'When it comes to us, we're disposable commodities,' he said." (AP Amy Westfelt 10-31-02)
We can't even be murdered in peace. And the murderer can't murder in peace. At least not in the black community. It has to be someone else's fault.
So, who do we "blame" for his irrational atmosphere? Whose fault is this evasion of responsibility so intense that an accident is no longer innocent, and a murderer can't alone be guilty? This attitude is bordering mass hysteria. Perhaps my article on "The Horror of Christ" is not so far fetched as it might seem at first. Ultimately, we want to blame God for all bad things. Evidently, He anticipated our disposition.
Clinton was elected for his second term by a majority of 43% of Americans who voted. No, he did'nt get 43% of the vote. 43% of Americans voted. He got something like 25% of that. These figures are hardly accurate, but they serve to make a point.
Most Americans don't bother to vote. Why?
I think it is too inconvenient, and the individual has to confidence that his vote makes a difference. This attitude is what spawns corruption a the polls, particularly Democratic corruption. This attitude of not voting must be overcome quickly.
Why can't we use an electronic means from our homes? We entrust our money to credit card numbers, or social security numbers, over the phone. No one complains about that, government or people, and certainly not business. Why can't we vote over th phone? Our country's economy is growing more and more dependent on electronic transactions. There are occasional disasters, but, this electronic way is the trend.
I believe politicians actually prefer a low voter turn out, or, just enough so they can win. It is easier to control a lower number of the popultion, easier to influence. Granted, they win or lose based on who does turn out to vote, but if everyone did vote, I think we might see some marked changes in the country.
I say make it as convenient and easy as possible for people to vote. The ones that care will vote anyway. The careless might be more inclined. Since our country has very little care about who is a citizen and who isn't, why should the government care how easy or difficult it is to get out of the house and vote?
Sound Liberal? Forgive me. There are a lot of old people who could and should vote, but who don't because of the logistical difficulties. And often the people who have time to get out and vote are the non-working welfare people, who will vote Democratic.
As I said, we entrust our economy to electronic transactions. Why can't we vote by phone?
I said two days ago, the Chechnyan murderers who took over the Moscow theatre were Muslims. They are part of the Caspian Sea region of Muslims who are trying to make a super state there. The Chechnyan revollution against Russia is for the purpose of making Chechnya a Muslim state.
I have heard no news reports that bring this out. It is as if the news thinks it can avoid bringing on WWIII by hiding the fact that war is exactly what the radical Muslims want. It is the Middle Ages all over again. Christianity against Islam. The media thinks it can control this, by witholding information.
Reconsider the Balkan (southeastern Europe). Here Muslims penatrated four to five hundred years ago. There are mosques still there. No news reports ever went into the fact that Slobodan Milosavic, who caused so much bloodshed in recent years, might have been trying to keep Europe white and Christian. But he was too horrible a criminal, they say, and therefore did not merit association with any higher cause than mass murder.
He is like a modern
Today Bosnia (capital-Sarajevo) has a majority of Muslims in its population; Croatia is basically Roman Catholic. Serbia is Orthodox. These are mutually exclusive religions, to be sure. Religion is a powerful shaper of the human experience, at all levels. Add to religion the element of race, and we have the formula for trouble. A different race, with a different religion, cannot expect to find welcome and honor in a social environment diverse from its own. The extraneous group will eventually be challenged, no matter how many decades or centuries it takes.
Europe (and later America) has been historically Christian, and white. Islam (the Muslim religion) has historically been Arab, or comprising races considered non-white (with the one exception of Persia/Iran, which is racially Aryan). This is the foundation of the conflict, race and religion.
With the exception of the conflict in Northern Ireland (the IRA) Christians have never been terrorist murderers. Muslims have and are. Christians have fought wars, and committed great slaughter, but its been in the open, on the field of battle. Modern terrorism is the most cowardly, undignified, lowest form of conflict. Islam seems to breed this form today. And even this is not really in the tradition of Islam. Islam used to fight on the battle field, too.
There they would lose, today. (Two billion of them can't put Israel down.)
The radical, extremeist among them realize this. Therefore, they fight in the dark, like the cowards they are. In the history of warfare, the Islamic terrorists are the most ignoble creatures ever to evolve. Will they achieve their goals? They appear to be making progress, like a cancerous virus.
Therefore, our war against them may have to be fought in most unconventional ways. America could start with deportation of Arab Muslims, or will we lose the war in our own courts?
So they've decided to start the trial in Virginia, where both "suspects" Malvo and Mohammud might get the death penalty.
I still think they both should have been publicly hung the day they were caught. Despite Terry DeEulis' noble 'defense' of the Bill of Rights, and the necessity of trial, I can't see this sniper trial as anything but another demoralization of our American spirit, a demoralization that our courts have continually increased. No, we don't want the government to have a free hand over citizens. Theoretically that is part of what courts of justice are designed to prevent. But it seems to me that the courts have given free hand to criminals over citizens. This is demoralizing. If the prisons are too full, eliminate clientele. Would that increase more crime in the world?
Now consider this sniper situation. No one saw the murderers in the act. It's all essentially circumstancial evidence, intense as it is. That's part of my point, though. The tedious effort to gather the evidence to make the arrests should, in this case, merit a public hanging.
But the manipulative, murderous "suspects" can simply deny every charge. Finger prints on the rifle? "Yes, I've held that rifle." This is no proof that either of them fired it, let alone killed anyone with it. Maybe someone else with gloves held it, fired it, and killed people with it.
The Clintons proved, beyond a shadow of doubt, that there are no consequences for lying in court, except avoiding justice. Purgery is a tool, or gamble. Used wisely, it can always win in court. In fact, there would be no courts without liars. Lying keeps the court in business. And every abortion of justice, such as the Clintons accomplished again and again, is demoralizing. Whenever long, drawn out trials aggrandize what later are judged to be unprovable accusations, or dramatize clear wrong doing yet accomplish no consequence, then all that effort serves merely to demoralize the public. Futility is depressing, and will eventually cause a nasty reaction from the people.
And just as the "profilers" were completely wrong in their professional opinions as to who the killers were, so the psychologists will likely be wrong in their opinions on the motivation of these killers. There is something deeply ludicrous about this. Who cares about their motivation? This isn't preventative. This accomplishes nothing but fodder for psychologists and their professional careers.
We can look forward to a grand series on Court TV. New stars will be born, like Marcia Clark, in the O.J.Simpson trial. Say, if we can get some white female attorneys to try these black men, before a black female jury, perhaps these poor black males can look forward to all the freedom and sympathy Liberal Communist America can give them. I say it's golf in Florida again. O. J. should invite them for a match.
Just as we get a 41-year-old black man and a 17-year-old black boy incarcerated for multiple murders, just as we find out that the man was a Muslim, and the boy was an illegal immigrant, the MSNBC comes out with stories past cases of white male all-American murderers, and ever so appropriately, the cases of an adult and teenage murderer.
Last night John Speilenthaler hosted MSNBC Investigates, featuring a show about the Vampire Killings of 1996. Rod Ferrell was sixteen years old, white, and crazy. It is a ghastly, disgusting story. I didn�t get every detail, so I logged on to MSNBC internet to search. I saw other gruesome stories, on Satanism, exorcism, and one on Ted Bundy, the perfect white male murderer, adult murderer. So there you have it. MSNBC is one station that will not allow anyone to wholly focus on black murderers, young or old, and won�t allow focus on the Muslim factor, but rather on grim tales of Medieval Christian superstition, and their modern reenactments. We must have fair and balanced news. There must be nothing that smacks of racial or religious prejudice.
But if that�s not enough, the news on the Russian movie theatre crisis almost completely ignored the fact that the Chechnyan terrorist murderers were Muslims, in the cause of winning Chechnyan indepdendence from Russia. Chechnya wants a Muslim Muslim state.
And now there�s Oklahoma�s own shooting spree, from last night. And eighteen-year-old man, a high school student, in Sallisaw, shot up several people, then drove into a few others. So it was a man, a student. How vague can we get? Any bets on his racial identity?
Well, we can trust our American media to faithfully guard against extremism. They don�t want the American people to have any ill feelings toward blacks or Muslims. They nobly guard against any major crisis or war with the American homeland. No, they�d rather see us killed off one by one, or maybe a buildingful, or planeful at a time. That�s a sure bet. And isn't that better for all of us? With this kind of blind news, there won�t be any war on America's homeland. Instead, we�ll all slowly but surely be bled to death.
Well, I forgot. It�s almost Hallowe�en. This is a sick blog, and I apologize in advance. But I'm afraid its all only going to get worse.
I have Iranian friends here in Oklahoma City. I play soccer with them, I've been to many house parties, and have found wonderful friendships. Does the religion of Islam ("submission"), the religion of the Muslim ("one who submits") affect my relationships? Not with these guys or their families.
My friend Sagedhi recently said to me, "David, there are good Muslims, and there are bad Muslims. We are bad Muslims." This he said, with a cigarette in one hand and a beer in the other. We'd all just finished a long soccer workout, and we always had great conversations afterward, sitting around, eating fruit, sunflower seeds, etc.
What did he mean? These wonderful, kind, responsible, productive, and fatherly men were "bad Muslims?" I think he meant that they were just enjoying life, with no burden of social reform. They were free Americans, and they loved it. They had their beliefs, but they had put those beliefs on the shelf, and were out in the world a healthy citizens. They keep their religion to themselves, and don't ever try to force it on anyone.
Glenn Beck, as I pointed out yesterday, has dramatically declared that Islam is threatening the world. But he repeatedly says that the religion itself is wonderful, and that the problem is bad Muslims, or, those who take the fundamentalist, literal, and wrong interpretation of the Qu'ran. Mr. Beck is terribly mistaken. They are bad people, but good Muslims. The violent terrorist Muslims in the world are the good Muslims. They are the ones that put the ultimate power in the religion. They do what the Qu'ran says to do. Mr. Beck needs to familiarize himself with the Qu'ran. The Qu'ran is the problem.
I'll take the bad Muslims. They're better people. I'll take all my Iranian friends, who are unassuming, joyful contributers to American society, who never obtrude, never make trouble, and love America. Of all the foreigners ever to come onto American shores, the current American Iranians are among the most valuable in history. They are a treasure. I only hope more good Muslims in the world become bad Muslims.
I stand corrected, or at least refined. Last night a black American male (and his step-son) were arrested. It looks like the man, John Lee Williams (who changed his name to John Mohammad) is the sniper.
Monday, October 21, I made a journal entry about the DC sniper which included a note that there have been very, very few black men to have ever set themselves up against society, and become serial killers. It is psychologically anomalous for the American black race. Today's revelation is therefore extraordinary.
I would also point out that one of my readers commented on that entry, and suggested that maybe I shoudn't have been so sure, and then he referenced the "Zebra Killings." I thanked Mr. Ken Vaughn for his advice, but never imagined that three days later his warning would prove so dramatically insightful.
So much for my charitable attitude toward the black American male. I guess he really has become like the white male. Does this add new meaning to the idea of equality?
Oklahoma City local radio host Glenn Beck (KTOK-1000) said it happened, not because John Williams was black, but because he had become a Muslim. Beck says the enemy is Islam, plain and simple. Race was not the issue at all. In fact, Beck was glad the sniper wasn't an Arab, because this proved, to Beck, that the enemy is Islam, or, the Muslim religion.
Well, I watched the TV news quite a while this morning. I never heard anyone say the apprehended men were black. Even as they showed a picture of the two together, on the full TV screen, the news reporters referred to them as "men," or, believe it or not, "gentlemen" (as Rick Sanchez called them), "These two gentlemen," etc. So much for political correctness, I should say, political foolishness, in the media.
For now, it looks like the Muslim religion certainly influences the human mind to transcend race. Muslims truly are capable of literal interpretation of Qu'ranic-based hadith, like Vol.8, book 77, no.597, or of the Qu'ran itself: "Fight disbelievers near to you. Let them find harshness in you." 9:29, or "Accursed will be seized wherever found and slain with a fierce slaughter." 33:61
Beck went on to say the solution is in Muslims themselves. The good Muslims must enlighten the bad Muslims. It has to do with true interpretation of the intent of the Qu'ran, etc. This is like Bush proclaiming that Islam was "a religion of peace." Such mystical interpretations provide no foundation for any serious influence of reform in the Islamic religion. At least, no such salubrious solution has ever appeared in Islamic history.
I'm still recovering from Richard Poe's article on the voter fraud in our blessed America. Yes, I'm still naive, I still believe in patriotism, and that our country is a wonderful, beautiful place. It is very difficult to really understand and acknowledge just how immoral things have become. The facts in a report like Poe's make me feel stupified, rendered immobile, and paralyzed.
Today I posted my own Indian point of view in an article on what is happening with Indians, and our involvement in voting fraud: "Do Indians Matter, After All?" I must say, also, that there are special problems on reservations which contribute to the confusion. Many older Indians don't read or write English. Yes, that is true, believe it or not. They cannot fill out registration forms, or even sign their names clearly. They need assistance, and that very assistance at times is construed as fraudulent. This is a mistaken judgement.
If you're outraged that some Indians don't know English, I can only say, we didn't declare ourselves citizens in 1924. We were declared citizens by the U.S. Government. That actually had to do with the government's attempt to further subjugate us, actually. But that's different issue.
I just see this current situation as an opportunity for greedy, ruthless aggressors, such as Democratic campaigners, to take of advantage of a situation. Poor minorities are all weak and easily swayed. There has been voter fraud in the hispanic communities of California for years. Black people didn't even have the right to vote at all until the 1950's, if I recall correctly.
My conclusion is this: there should be a personal price to pay for citizenship. Does every person born in the world, in any jungle, any island, any slum, have a divine right to be an American citizen? Does America owe every born person the full benifits of citizenship?
I say no. These other countries need to become miniature Americas themselves, if they so value what America has. I say put the price of being American on the top shelf. Don't give it away. Freedom isn't free. Make it difficult to be an American. Make it precious. Make it mean something.
Another shooting. It's number twelve. It happened this morning, on a main street in DC (Connecticut Avenue) right at the beginning of the day's commuting hour. This is truly incredible. Yet, I still can't help but focus my frustration on the perversions of our modern legal system, and its demoralizing effects on us all. That was my entry on the day before yesterday (Oct.20), "Is It Time For The Guillotine?"
Readers may note the significant response of Mr. Terry DeEulis posted on that entry. DeEulis nobly defends the American Bill of Rights (one of the cornerstones of our legal system) and asserts clearly that the government cannot be given a free hand over the people. He says "The problem is that some people are evil and will have to be thwarted by the use of force." Indeed, he identifies the DC shootings as "urban guerilla warfare against the population," and reminds us that the US Constitution provides for different laws under those conditions. The Bill of Rights, however, is to prevent the government from taking a free hand to bully citizens, especially when it comes to law enforcement.
Okay. I'll hold off on the guillotine for the moment. I'll even say it looks like the police were a little aggressive on those poor, "innocent," and apparently illegal hispanic immigrants. But I want to say that I'm not talking about the fact that there are evil people out there committing crimes, and that they must be stopped with force. I'm talking about the crimes our leaders can daily get by with, due to the crimes of the court, and the malfeasance of judges, lawyers, and court clerks, who decide what cases will be heard. No major corporate crime or government fraud can be successful without the direct complicity of judges, lawyers, and court clerks.
Right now, an attorney in Sapulpa, OK named Craig Tweedy is in the process of issuing indictments (through county grand jury petitions) to Governor Frank Keating, President Pro Tempore Senator Stratton Taylor, and State Attorney General Drew Edmondson, for the very complicity mentioned above. The Oklahoma Bar Association operates without legislative authority, and those sworn by statutory duty to protect the people from the predatory use of law claim they have no authority over the OBA. We shall soon see.
An example of the predatory use of the law is found in the matter of voting fraud in South Dakota. Richard Poe exposes an incredible scheme there, and in the comments to his article, Betty Ann Gross, and Sioux woman from South Dakota testifies to the fact that the three Indians involved (one woman and two men) are likely to serve up to ten years or more for their civil infractions, while the Democratic leaders who paid them for the fraudulent acts will scarcely be named, let alone prosecuted. This is all par for the course in the Dakotas.
This is what I'm talking about. There are criminals in the legal system, or no one could ever get by with abusing someone else in court. Indians are thrown in jail with an epidemic constancy in South Dakota. And no system can protect them, or anyone from anything. Only people can protect people. We need men and women who have integrity, who are honest, who are true. That's all we really need, and all we've ever needed. That's what too many courts lack.
All I'm saying is that, at this point, I don't believe the American people really trust the system very much. It has failed to many times, and is only getting worse. The people will have to rise up and change it. We simply can no longer assume that the people running our legal system are worthy. I will do everything I can to help people who are willing to stand up and be patriots at this time of supreme national crisis.
This morning there is great commotion. A man has been taken in police custody for questioning, (though he's not labeled a "suspect") He may be connected to the recent sniper shootings in the Washington, DC area.
On a dark, rainy day, behind the tinted windows of his white van, a man was surrounded by police and apprehended. Two witnesses tried to describe him to the media, because the police released no information.
A black man witness (clearly identifiable by his manner of speech) described the man taken as "darker skinned, possibly hispanic."
Well, one black man has already been actually arrested in this sniper case for making up an entirley false story and telling it to the police. And I recall that during the Gary Condit case, a black man in California made up a completely false story about his daughter having an affair with Condit. So much for black witnesses and staged media appearances.
A white witness this morning, however, also suggested that perhaps the man the police took was hispanic. When I evaluate these two "witnesses," though, I'm not convinced that they could tell the difference between a hispanic and a Middle Eastern man. It was dark and rainy. We don't now how close they really were, though they described gray and black hair on the man. Back east, "hispanics" tend to be Puerto Rican, though there are great numbers of South Americans and many Mexicans there these days, too.
The point? This man is going to be a member of some race. Ward Connerly's dream of racial transcendence just isn't going to make it. Race is here. Race is part of what a human being is. And, uncomfortable as it may be to some who hold idealist theories, most people want to know what race this individual is. The world is practically at war, and a war based on race and religion. Dream on, Ward.
I will say this. In my studies in psychology, I note only one black man ever to become a serial killer. His name was Williams, and his victims were black children. This was years ago in Atlanta. I know of only one black man ever to have gone "postal." That was in a fast food restaurant years ago. Black men rarely ever act as individuals against society. A black man may shoot another black man over a pot roast, or a drug deal, but, that's personal. Black men don't think in terms of "me against the world." That is a white man's psychological phenomenon, or conditioning. White men love individuality and heroism. This attitude is actually reflected in white maniacs who attack society.
The man taken into custody this morning may indeed be hispanic. If they discover he's guilty, or he admits to the crimes, etc., all I hope for is a no-trial public hanging! But, all I expect from our system is a three year long media spectacular, staring all those brilliant layers. It's time for a new hispanic lawyer star, anyway. In fact, this may be a first! And who knows, if they call for an all (or nearly all) hispanic female jury, like they called a 90% black female jury for O.J. Simpson, maybe this apprehended man can look forward to more golf in Florida.
The sniper news from the DC area continues to demoralize Americans everywhere. What is our proper reaction? I feel what I felt when the Islamic murderers attacked New York and the Capital. Declare war! Hang them! Execute them. Off with their heads. Immediately, and publicly.
But others want to make sure the criminals have a fair trial. The most important thing on many of the minds of our leaders is the American legal system. We pride ourselves on our patience, our rule of law. Why, we will never turn to anarchy or tyranny, and behave like late 18th century France, or some like some modern Central African regime of mass murder and chaos.
And what's worse, many people want to analyze the minds of the criminals. Even our Vice-President's wife Lynn Chaney voiced this sentiment on a recent TV interview. Like many Americans, she expressed a fascination with the bizarre mental distortions of a criminal. Why does a person commit these horrible acts?
National Public Radio interviewed a psychologist (I believe in California) who cited research that there is genetic peculiarity in the frontal lobe of the criminal, so that, no matter what his environment or upbringing, he is prone to misbehave. What a wonderful, useful revelation.
Well, I don't really care why criminals commit crimes, or why serial killers, rapists, or Islamic murderers do what they do. All that this analysis of them produces is merely descriptive, and the descriptive is never causative. And to describe why is not to prevent anything. I want the murderers stopped, not understood. I want them executed, not analyzed. Let psychologists indulge themselves in a different country. Not America.
And I don't idolize the legal system. The balance between a "speedy trial" and "due process" does not interest me. There are killers who obviously did what they did. Why a trial? This is the most demoralizing aspect of the whole thing, not the crime, but the idea that there is a question about it when it is obvious.
Radical thoughts for this Sunday morning. Well, these are radical times, and they require radical solutions.
It is l'ironia della sorte, as Columbus might say, the irony of fate, that Indians today seem the most powerful agent of the Communist Left in it's campaign to demoralize America, and at the same time, as I am bringing to light, Indians are the "quintessence of conservatism."
Many conservatives see Indians as total paupers, bleeding the government, and resent our whole existence as a separate culture. They see us as the epitomy of liberalism, multiculturalism, government dependency, and all that represents the Liberal Communist anti-American philosophy.
I say rather Indians represent the desire to preserve, to conserve, and to honor tradition. This is the one lesson, above all others, that America should learn from Indians, and should honor Indians for so teaching, despite its costs to Indian life and material happiness. Indians do not seek to be "equal" with anyone. Most Indians, with the exception of the "university tribe," (those Indians trained by communist professors), do not intrude on white society, do not force themselves on whites, like the example set by the American Negro. (Of course, the American Negro did not have reservations, and therefore little choice but to "force himself off on the white man," as Cassius Clay said in the '60's.)
The point is, Indians represent politically conservative values. I hasten to confess that, morally, Indian reservations represent the worst of society's social ills, but, that is not so much due to the circumstance of having reservations as it is to the loss of personal warriorhood on the part of Indians ourselves.
Today on his blog Richard Poe added a fascinating note on the bravery of early, pre-Columbus Indians in the Carribean. I had questioned whether any Indians had shown the specific kind of bravery Columbus did, in launching out into unknown waters. I clearly overlooked the Carribean Indians. Poe is not an Indian, nor is he married to one. He simply sees the truth of the matter. With this kind of sincere appreciation for the value of Indian achievement, surely there is hope for conservative Indians. In turn, conservative Indians will prove the wiser path for all Indians in our future.
I must acknowledge to my readers that BadEagle.com is an unusual website, not only because of its purpose in giving a voice to conservative Indians, but also in its technical aspects. I wish to point out a few things which may help all readers understand how site works.
The home page begins with a Journal entry, usually daily. This is at the top of the home page. At the bottom of the entry is the identification information, and comments indicator. The next item (title), scrolling down, is the journal entry from the previous day, also with ID information and comments.
The third title seen on the home page, scrolling down, is an op-ed article, or editorial. It is also has ID information and comments at the bottom.
Now, on the left column of the home page is a list of options. Let me first call attention to the 'open book' icon. This is the blog. If you click on the book, you will be taken to the BadEagle Journal Weblog. This is set up as a normal blog.
BadEagle homepage simply posts the daily (and previous day) entries, but the archive and titles of all previous entries are clearly contain on the blog site.
The 'Forums' icon take you immediately to a gigantic selection of forums, or subjects. I insisted on this, (with objections from my webmaster.) It's not as complicated as it appears. The first forum is where you will find all recent articles (yet to be archived). There is a separate sub-forum called announcements.
Scroll down and find a special forum for INDIANS. This is where I hope discussions and genuine learning can take place among Indians. I encourage Indians to register, and begin to participate. The reason I encourage this is because discussions on the forum will be much easier to keep track of, than discussions on the blogs. I know the blogs seem quicker, and more immediate, but blogs don't stay as accessible as long. If you forget the title of the blog, or don't know it, how can you go to it, unless a friend has directed you there? The Indian Forum may be the better place to open discussions. I realize it is an extra "click" or two from the homepage, but, in the long run, it will probably be better.
There are a variety of forums, such as Jewish, Persian, Italian, and also Music, Death, Fashion, and Literature. I invite everyone to explore.
Of course, there is the Patriotism forum, and that is where I have begun, modestly, an online text containing my ideas about patriotism, and I will try to address questions like, What is a nation? Why are there nations? and so forth.
This forum reflects my experience as a teacher of humanities, and how I came to believe American Patriotism should be taught in public schools.
BadEagle.com has a fine search engine, as well, which can be of great help. More information under the "Resources" icon are being prepared.
BadEagle.com is certainly in the process of developing. I appreciate the patience of my readers, and hope that you will all continue to come with me on this fascinating old Indian trail! We will discover many exciting things together.
My ancestor, Bad Eagle (quin-ne kash-su-it) was professional guide in his later years (the last decades of the 19th century). Consider BadEagle.com in the finest of Comanche traditions.
With some embarrassment, I must confess that, although I was disappointed in the lack of media interest in Columbus Day issues, that very day, and 24 hours later, genuine interest did develope. Today, for example, Peter Brimelow posted my new article on Indians and immigration on his famous website, www.vdare.com. Richard Poe has for the last couple of days put great emphasis on the Indian issue, and feature my writings in a very pointed way in his daily blogs.
This greatly encourages me. Perhaps I should have been more patient, instead of pointing out the apparent failure of conservative media to reconsider the great conservative role that Indians could and should be playing in American politics.
Pat Buchanan's MSNBC show, "Buchanan and Press" gave a little time to Columbus Day, at the end of the show. Guest Lawrence E. Auriana, president of Columbus Citizens Foundation, which has hosted New York's Columbus parade for the last 58 years, told why he had forbade the actors from TV's "Sopranos" show to march in the parade. On this show Italians "are stereotyped as being ignorant, violent, and unlawful." Auriana said, "Our parade is about our pride in our heritage, and pride in our culture," speaking of the real Italian people.
Bravissimo, Signore! I've created an "Italian Forum" among my forums, in which I invite Italian Americans to participate, and speak their peace. I've always loved Italian people, and have already dististinquished between even the mafia and Al-Qaeda in my own journal entries of Sept. 15 and Oct. 6.
I was just disappointed that no one deemed the Indian story worthy of mention. I this, I shall take a lesson in the dreadful effects of liberal communist influence, that has so tainted the Indian as a socialist, anti-American entity that even major conservatives daren't touch Columbus Day, for fear of Indian riots, suits, and bad PR.
Well, I'm trying to do my part in reconstructing the modern Indian image into the conservative warrior that it really is. I am forever indebted to people like Richard Poe and now Peter Brimelow for supporting me in this critical effort.
Lastly, I don't believe David Horowitz has anything against Indians. I just feel that it is an error to ask Indians to assimilate. And people like Sabia and Berkowitz, who decry the pre-Columbus conditions of Indians are going too far. If Indians were miserable before Columbus, and miserable today, where can we expect to find ourselves and happiness?
Let me share a secret with everyone: primitive as we may be considered, Indians are happy with ourselves, before and after Columbus. All I'm trying to point out it this: if Indians don't wake up to the present political circumstances, I feel our existence as Indians is indeed threatened. We must take command of our future. I feel our best bet is to preserve, to conserve, everything that America is supposed to be. That America is what spared us from total annihilation. We're still here, so let's make sure we continue to be here. Let's preserve America.
David Horowitz has more compassion than I do. I actually expect that. He is Jewish. I'm 'heathen.' Yes, he comes from a communist background, and that ideology involves a forced equality. Yet, the Jewish person I think naturally has more advanced capacities of understanding, and, in a way, he is the same person, former liberal (communist) or present conservative. He is larger than any ideology. He cares about people. All people.
Therefore, I am particularly troubled by yesterday's Columbus articles, which indulge in hurtful, degrading remarks about American Indians. (See Oct.14 BadEagle Journal entry). These remarks obviously are meant to assuage or remove any remorse or guilt non-Indian people feel toward Indians. If Indians were so ungodly, were such hrrible, filthy, rotten animals, it can only be the mercy and God, through Columbus and the Europeans, that destroyed such evil Indian life. (Interesting that yesterdays authors, Sabia and Berkowitz, don't represent the White Anglo Saxon Protestant ethnicity, though they are obviously cultural Americans.)
This rhetoric, to degrade Indians so as to feel less guilty about history, is certainly not helpful to Indians, but also not necessary, and probably not really useful to white America. Only true Christians have reasonable motive for such thought. But even the Christian motive to change people is never to involve force or coercion. And that is exactly what happened to Indians. It was the inevitable course of history. Gen. George Armstrong Custer said civilization was like a locomotive. It could not be stopped. He felt regret for what it did to Indians.
I think it is better to leave the American story as a tragedy for Indians, and a triumph for White Anglo Saxon Protestants. I think there was a tremendous role Indians played in the shaping of America, both politically and even psychologically, but, I don't see the point in any rhetoric that tries to degrade one people to exalt, or even cleanse another.
I personally want Indian people to understand our Indianness as a fundamental factor in the creation of America's national identity. I want Indians to feel profound ownership of that, in positive ways. The Indian warrior image, so beloved by America, is just one example of our Indian influence.
Last month, when OU's conservative Fountainhead newspaper published a reparations joke, saying that if white people pay reparations today, they should each get a slave, David Horowitz was offended. He was contacted by myself and the paper, and he strongly condemned it as hurtful and not helpful. He even called for an apology.
I should do the same for the statements made in FrontPage on Columbus Day.
However, I won't. Rather, I simply learn a lesson. Even someone as profoundly committed to 'people improvement' as David Horowitz behaves differently toward the Indian. Why? Indians are different. Indians love who we are. We don't want to be like anyone else. We want to preserve ourselves and our ways. We don't want to assimilate. We don't want to be "equal" to other people. Non-Indians simply cannot understand that. I'm hoping Mr. Horowitz can come to understand that.
I'm not asking for sympathy, or that white people should feel guilty. I know Indians must take responsibility for ourselves. I advocate that. But I must object to any rhetorical dramatization of our miseries and failures, presently or historically. This is certainly not helpful to Indians, and I doubt that such indulgence is all that restorative to the conscience of non-Indians.
The truth of my words has again evinced itself. There is, as yet, no place for conservative Indian perspectives in any Columbus Day discussion. The Communist Left racial agitators have succeeded in making all Indians look like foolish protesters of inexorable history, and the media will not give room for a single Indian voice with a different view.
Over a week ago, I contacted all the major TV media stations, like FoxNews, MSNBC, etc., and suggested a debate or discussion on the Indian views of Columbus Day. I identified myself as the one conservative Indian speaking out, and gave a brief word of my own media history. Not one of the media outlets even bothered to respond.
I even wrote to Pat Buchanan, who had quoted my oroginal FrontPage article, "What's Up With White Women" in his best seller, The Death of the West (St. Martin, 2002). Not even an automatic e-mail reply.
I sent a copy of my article, "A Comanche Look At Columbus," to David Horowitz, with no response. Instead, today he published "Cornell Leftists Trash Columbus/America," by Joseph J. Sabia. A typical ant-Left article, Sabia indulges anti-Native rhetoric like "savage, vicious, animalistic," and calls Natives "brutal thugs waging constant wars," etc., and then in truly unforgivably gross generalization says Indians ate typically a three course meal of "maize, tree bark, and human flesh."
As if that weren't enough, FrontPage posted another piece by Peter Berkowitz about Columbus and America, in which he refers to Indian life as having been "nasty, brutish, and short." There was "no division of labor, little agricuture and scant permanent settlement." This is simply false. But Berkowitz says without the benefits of Western culture, "most of today's Indians would be infintely poorer or not even alive." This is more than false. This is free-wheeling racism, and clearly designed as moral justification of the same.
Such remarks must show where David Horowitz really stands with regard to Indians, too. This incendiary sort of journalism does no good for anyone, certainly not Indians. It is harmfully superficial, racist, and is nothing more than another form of communist racial agitation.
Yes, I say this because I offer a helpful alternative, and yet I am not regarded as worthy of hearing. Media prefers riotous news, not helpful news. That now obviously includes FrontPage, at least after Richard Poe resigned as editor in February, 2002. I cannot account for Mr. Poe's resignation, but I'm merely observing the nature of the editorial approach to Columbus Day right now.
At this point, it is more and more clear to me that the average conservative journal, even like FrontPage, has become a mantra of anti-Left mechanics, with a less than sincere design to really improve anything. Today, on Columbus Day, however, The American Enterprise Online proved itself above average.
In the latest issue of The New American (Oct 21, 2002), John McManus presents a review of a new edition of a history book called Quest of a Hemiphere, by Donzella Cross Boyle. It was originally published as a junior high history book in 1970. The new edition is published by Robert Welch University Press, 2002.
McManus says it was written "to tell the unvarnished story about the people and events that shaped, not only this nation, but an entire hemisphere." An ambitious undertaking, for sure. The textbook is 633 pages, hard cover, and sells for $24.95, a fair price. It can be ordered online.
In McManus' review, however, America's encounter with the Indian is conspicuously absent. In this simple review can be found a most critical psychological condition present in many conservative minds when it comes to understanding the Indians. Conservatives simply don't know where or how to figure the Indian into the story. The truth is, the Indian was 'in the way,' and therefore pushed out of the way. That is the simple history. In most conservative minds, the Indian does not play a significant, shaping role in the making of America.
But nothing could be farther from the truth. And fortunately, there is one leading conservative thinker who sees things quite differently. Richard Poe, former editor of FrontPageMagazine (the internet newsmagazine of David Horowitz), allowed me, a Comanche Indian, to develop the first, and so far the only, conservative Indian voice in American media. Poe sees great value in the American Indian presence and role in American history. Through Poe, I was able to express some important ideas about Indians in American history and about our place today's society.
BadEagle.com was created (with the help of a benefactor in North Carolina) for the purpose of continuing to develop American Indian conservatisim, and to provide a place for such Indians to express themselves.
But these opportunities are new. It will take time to establish a place for Indians in the conservative, patriotic camp of American politics. Conservatives think of Indians as losers, or paupers, and now blame Indians themselves, rather than consider the effects of the wars. I find no advantage in arguing that point. Rather, I see that conservatives simply do not understand the significant role Indians can and should play in the future shaping of a patriotic American Republic.
I wish to carve out such a role, and I believe I can. With the help of people like Richard Poe, who sincerely believes in the value of the American Indian warrior image, and all it stands for when translated into modern social values, I have a chance.
It is irrational for American Indians, or communist Liberals, to focus on Columbus as some iconographic culprit of Western Civilization, and hold him responsible for all the ills that indigenous peoples of the Americas have suffered since his arrival. This is actually ludicrous.
In their fervor to debunk America, communist scholars (calling themselves "revisionists") have come up with a goodly number of pre-Columbus discoveries of America. There are Phonecian, Carthagenian (North African), Chinese, Japanese, and at least a half a dozen other northwestern Euorpean explorers proffered as candidates for the prestigeous claim of having discovered America.
This in itself makes the liberal communist's orchestrated emphasis on Columbus both hypocritical and obviously incendiary. It's just the old fashioned communist tactic of creating racial conflict at critical points in American cultural history. Columbus Day really has nothing to do with White Anglo Saxon Protestant American culture, which is the basis of American constitutional government. Their attack is therefore greatly askew.
Whether Columbus was the first to discover America or not is not even a question. He wasn't. But he was without question the most important explorer to "re-discover" the continent. That is to say, the records and effects of his travel provided the opened door to Europe. Whatever his intents in that regard actually were, we shall never really know.
What we do know is that he was an extraordinarily brave man, launching out into uncertainty, danger, and likely death. Why analyze his motives? Has any one analyzed Einstein's motives lately? Did he intend the atomic holocaust on Nagasaki?
What about Democritus (ca. 460-370 BC), the ancient Greek atomist, to whom scholars like to attribute the atomic theory? Should we blame him for the nuclear threat over the world today?
Are we just looking to assign blame or credit, regardless of the historical logistics? Modern historians are often riotous, and many communist infiltrators in American education have the express purpose in mind to offend, to outrage, and to create conflict.
Count me out of this Columbus protest that Indians seem to find so important.
It is an embarrassment to me, and I rather see Columbus as an extraordinary man, with remarkable courage. I don't know of any Indian that set out over the ocean to find out where it ended. Even we Comanches, who loved to roam and move to new places, never set out so far as Columbus. His is the bigger coup.
I have already said that I support Russell Means in his bid for tribal president of the Oglala Lakota (Sioux) of Pine Ridge Reservation. I have been objective, rational, and humble enough to recognize his talents, and I have been willing to say that, in the long run, he will accomplish the most for all Indian people. I risk my own reputation in supporting a man who holds national oriented political positions which I myself detest and oppose. Nevertheless, I see a potential for good in Means that no one else holds.
Now, there are certain things which he needs to do, or to say, to make this long range good effect. It's not just economic plans and financial connections which will bring benefits to Indian people now and in the future. It is human character, behavior, and will power. On reservations, Indians have developed a life style which is detrimental in almost everyway. Reservations are replete with child abuse, sex abuse, violence, crime, alcoholism, drug abuse, and unthinkable heathenism. In my opinion, these are the worst problems. I am not convinced that they are essentially caused by poverty, or by the circumstance of the reservation itself, but rather, by Indians' unwillingness to change, to improve, and to face new "enemies," like regular work hours, self-discipline and control, and simple morality.
True, the kind of prejudice that exists in places like the Dakotas makes improvement terribly difficult. I know of Indians who have come off the reservation, try to work, try to become self-reliant, and the prejudice is so crippling that they wind up going back to the rez, or living in low socio-economic area of the towns and cities.
But what Russell Means needs to do is to be objective, rational, and humble enough to publically denounce immorality and life styles which degrade Indian people, and hold us in chains of vice and depravity. "Sin" is what degrades the human being, not poverty, if I may be so bold as to assert. Indian people need an example of monogomy--one man, one woman, married, with their own children. We need to see Indians who do not drink, who are not addicted, who do not abuse others physically or sexuall, old or young, and who care for their own children and family members. We need bravery in men, to control themselves, their families, and their lives.
Indian men, as I have said before, have greatly degraded our own people by showing complete disrespect for Indian women, and by having innumerable affairs with white women, as if this is a triumph, and by looking to white women for leadership. This is the worst possible situation for Indian people.
I want to see Russell Means address these things. Even if he has failed in many of these challenges in his own life, that should not stop him from recognizing the truth, and standing tall for the truth. He stands tall among Indian people, one way or another. Therefore, the responsibility for him to stand for the truth is greater than for any other Indian at this time, at least among the Sioux, and by extension, the rest of Indian Country.
Obviously, Russell Means is controversial, as are all the old AIMsters. Talk in Indian Country, especially their area, is replete with sordid stories of legendary misconduct. The AIMsters, like Means, the Bellecourts, Banks, Peltier, etc., are known for dissolute lives. They are known for irresponsible behavior, abuse of younger Indians, wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars, and setting the worst possible examples for all Indian people.
So, how can any of them be looked to for guidance at this point? Why did I risk my own reputation as a conservative Indian journalist by supporting Means as a tribal leader?
I believe he has the talent to lead. He has progressive ideas. All he needs to do is to publically acknowledge the "sins" of his youth, denounce everything connected with that life, and confess to today's Indian youth that he was wrong in all that. He clearly wants to do positive things now.
The point is, Indian people need strong leaders. Means is a strong leader. We just want him to lead in the right direction. If he does this, he will be the most help to all Indians.
Yes, I publically disagree with him on many major national issues. Yes, I oppose him on critical Indian matters. But, I recognize his power, and hope that he uses it positively. We Indians have to consider our options. We have few.
Call it 'real politics.'
Russell Means has returned to Pine Rideg Indian Reservation of South Dakota, to run for the office of president of the Oglala Lakota (Sioux) people. He did very well in this month's primary. He received 1,102 votes against incumbent John Steele's 759. In Indian Country, this is quite significant voter turnout.
I'm not known for agreeing with Means on severa major Indian issues. In fact, I have opposed his ideas strongly. However, in this case, I think he may be the best move for the Sioux of South Dakota. Today I have posted a new article on why I think he should be president of the Oglala Sioux.
I invite Indian people to respond, as well as any other readers, especially those who have followed my encounters with Means on radio, TV, and on www.frontpagemgazine.com. More information and updates will appear on BadEagle.com
The Oklahoma Gazettereports (Oct. 3) that University of Oklahoma president Boren, et al. have denied any wrong doing in the renaming of the University's football stadium.
In a previous blog, I noted the Gazette's report of the University's failure to follow procedures in the renaming of the renovated stadium from OU Memorial to "The Gaylord Family Memorial Stadium." There was apparently a violation of the Open Meeting Act, because the name change was made without being on the regents agenda for consideration.
Regent B.T. Blankenship, OU attorney and Vice-president Joseph Harroz, and OU spokesman Jeff Hickman all deny that there was any intent to pull a fast one, and that it was a case of "human error" at worst. They claim there was an internet failure to post the item on the agenda. Blah, blah, blah.
The point is this: the Gaylords of Oklahoma, a long established, wealthy family, donted $12 million to the stadium's $80 million rebuilding project, therefore wanted it named after them. Edward L. Gaylord owns, among other things, the The Daily Oklahoman, considered one of the worst papers in the country due do bias, prejudice, and other journalistic failures.
Blankenship failed to see the stadium as a memorial to WWI and WWII veterans. Since most of them were deceased, why shouldn't the philanthropist's name be memorialized? How crass and stupid.
But this is all the typical politics of money. I think the veterans are the losers here. The memorial was to them, now it's to the single man who donated the most money to it. This would be like finding out what man gave the most to the Lincoln memorial, and calling it, say, the Ralph Blitzer Lincoln Memorial.
Blankenship said if the OU stadium was named after Martin Luther King, Jr., no one would have objected. Why the flak over Gaylord? Clearly, Blankenship is a less than clear thinker. He's faulty on all points. 1) A memorial for vets, or for anyone else, is not for the living, but for the dead, and not for the donor. 2) the idea of naming the memorial after King is so irrelevant that is belies a racial resentment of some kind, as if Blankenship resents the fact that he has observed, or that a Negro social reformer would be more worthy than a wealthy white philanthropist wanting his name immortalized. 3) There is a main street right at the entrance of BrickTown, OKC named Gaylord Avenue. The next street to the west is Ron Norrick Blvd., after a former OKC mayor. How far does this go?
And this name thing isn't limited to individual egos. The BrickTown Ball Park had to take a hit, too, so to speak. It had to be the Southwestern Bell BrickTown Ball Park, after the phone company.
Well, it seems that money is the key here, not the veterans, or the people's will. People who have the money want to be known for having it, apparently. They want to memorialize themselves before any other consideration.
I suppose the veterans fought for such freedom and achievement. And they'll have to take second place at the University of Oklahoma.
One thing for sure, the Gazette has moved up a notch from a local "fag rag" to a voice willing to question a typically corrupt establishment. We'll just have to ignore their innumerable sexually oriented advertisements for now. Perhaps the Gazette can eventually outgrow such social immaturity as it progresses. After all, it's the only alternative to the Gaylord paper. He destroyed the real competition years ago, called The Oklahoma Journal.
I had intended this week to open the BadEagle Italian Forum with a topic called "Legends of the Italian Female." However, something has temporaryily taken precedence: Adam Buckman's review of the recent Sopranos episode involving a scuffle between mobsters and American Indians on Columbus Day.
Buckman doesn't seem to know very much about either Italian mobsters or American Indians. I lived in Connecticut nearly twenty years, and I won't divulge whom I'm acquainted with just yet, but suffice it to say, anyone living in the tri-state area (Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey) is likely to brush shoulders with organized crime. Just let me say that I've never met an Italian, "connected" or not connected, who did not have serious respect for American Indians. Maybe it's a fratelli dello cotello sort of thing, but it is very distinct.
The most important fact that Buckman missed in the Columbus Day encounter was not the improbability that real gansters would get involved in a parade scuffle (which may or may not be true), but the fact that the media has long attempted to paint the mob as an all-American entity. This particular episode was just the peak of ganster patriotism.
I've pointed out in an earlier blog, (Sept.15) entitled "Al Qaeda and Cosa Nostra," the mafia is quite different from the Arab thing. The mafia is a parasite, wholly dependent on the success of its host societies. Al Qaeda is bent on destroying target societies. On this very important difference, the mob media asserts the superior social status of the good ol' American mafia.
Why, even they are patriots now. Just look, they fought against American Indians in a parade. Why, that places the mob along with the great patriotic founders of America. See? To fight Indians makes you truly American.
Indians have been used to validate many social movements in the last 30 years, everything from natural food teas, environmentalist causes, to reverse racist movements like removing all Indian mascots and monikers from the nation. The Indian image tends to have a strangely powerful authority, and it is used whenever possible.
For the mafia to use it is really the final, greatest example of how to become an American. Just fight an Indian, over anything. This tells me that the Left-wing communists, and all the "labor" connections, really are in bed together.
I've told Indians ever since I developed a media voice, "Don't let the Left use you!" This was my message on www.frontpagemagazine.com, and continues to be my message.
In the New York Times Magazine (Sept. 22, 2002) there is a piece called "A Pox on Our House," by Susan Burton. Burton relates the story of Gregg Bourland, tribal chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux, of South Dakota.
It's about Bourland's request to Senator Daschle for small pox vaccinations, a request made after Daschle's office had the anthrax scare.
Bourland says that Indians are alway last to get anything, and he felt they should start asking now. The small pox disease is of special significance to American Indians, since it nearly wipe us out. "What are the plans in the event of an outbreak?" Bourland asks.
Bourland takes an aggressive "warrior" attitude toward the threat. I'm happy to see that my Indian warrior message is having a little effect in Indian Country. I might add here that Eric Enno, also a Cheyenne River Sioux, is the Indian at Univrsity of North Dakota who fought to maintain the honor of "The Fighting Sioux" mascot.
Unfortunately for Bourland, Burton's piece puts him in the context of the hired mourners, rather than the warriors. She uses the occasion to lament the horrible treatment of Indians by the White Anglo Saxon Protestants, citing an obscure 1763 incident in which blankets known to be used by small pox patients were given to Indians. I am not familiar with that incident, but more familiar with the 19th century cases in which it is clear that many, many white people on the western frontier were also infected by blankets, and died. Whole Danish settlements in the midwest were wiped out. It's the natural hazzard of small pox, or any other contageous disease. That's why Bourland is concerned.
Bourland's point about pushing for some preparation is a great one. Burton's cry-baby context is really an unfortunate use of the point.
Remarkable story from Denver. Jesus Apodaca, a Mexican national (illegal alien living in Colorado), graduated from a Colorado highschool with a good grade point average. He was used by the Mexican consulate in Denver to push the idea of taxpayer subsidies for higher education for Mexicans nationals in America.
In the midst of the controversy, Colorado U.S. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell ("part American Indian") spoke up and called the kid an American, and as an Indian, said the Denver Post, Campbell "is eminently qualified to make that judgment."
Well, as a Comanche, I don't see it, from any angle. In my "NationBuilding, Comanche Style" I expressed my basic view of the issue of modern immigration. I would here point out that Campbell does not represent the majority of American Indians on the issue. The truth is, Indians as a whole do not express an opinion as a group when it comes to serious political issues.
I am a conservative, and Campbell is quite liberal. I am only a columnist. He is a senator.
At any rate, the people of Colorado disagree with Cambell and the Denver Post on this issue, as well as many other issues. The media is liberal communist, and the people are more patriotic. The usual scenario.
Richard Poe posted an incredibly important blog today in his journal, on the subject of immigration and the fate of Peter Brimelow for speaking out against the modern, uncontrolled immigration in America. A must read.
Columbus Day is coming up. I will post an article or two on this, on BadEage.com, as well as elsewehere. That an Indian should welcome the Mexican, like Campbell does, is ironic, to say the least. I think Columbus was a great, courageous man, but I don't see him as the builder of America. That is an Anglo-Saxon accomplishment, not Spanish.
My mother is elderly, and I spend a lot of time looking after her. I observe the workings of her mind.
For a couple of years now, she has made the same statements many times, early in the morning.
"Israel's all that's left in the world," she will say.
"We [the U.S.] should turn everything over to Israel's air force."
"Those Israeli pilots are the greatest in the world. They're the smartest, and they don't miss."
My mother has made these statements unexpectedly, unprovoked, with no prior discussion. There have been times when these were the first words out of her mouth, in the morning, as she hobbles into the kitchen with her walker.
It is a strange thing, because she has never been the profound sympathizer toward Jewish people that I have been. Her remarks are objective, and unbiased. Therefore, they strike me as significant, in some deep way.
They come like a remote prophecy, from a distant world.
"Mom! I'm what are you talking about?" I'd respond. "I'm trying to cook breakfast here. What are you talking about?"
She usually wouldn't take the conversation much further. She just has this recurring thought, I should say, conviction, that the Middle East problems could all be solved overnight by the Israeli Air Force.
Several items of importance today.
1) Yesterday I received this e-mail:
Dear David:
You have been linked on the popular "Gene Expression"
(http://www.gnxp.blogspot.com) blog site. The guy who posted you --
"Razib K"
(Razib Khan) -- is a 25-year-old Bangladeshi biochemist. Here's what he wrote:!
posted by Razib K at 3:31 PM
Red-blooded Red Indian
Check out Bad Eagle, run by David Yeagley. A recent sample:
...Ward Connerly got his way. It is a Miss Person contest. (Please
refer to my article "An End Of Beauty.") The contest now demonstrates that one woman mustn't be considered more beautiful than another. That special element of womanly beauty must never be considered more important than her ideas or political causes. Down with beauty. We can't help how we look, and if we don't look so good, then that means we must never acknowledge anyone
who does. Miss America is now the triumph of diversity, and the elimination of aesthetic hierarchy. In the name of equality, any girl has a chance now. Someone on Yeagley's message board found his racial attitudes "disturbing", so I had to link to this guy!
I thank Mr. Kahn for his thoughts. I think sex, race, and religion are really the bedrock of human motivation. Understanding these things is critically important.
2) I'm getting more comments about my Ward Connerly articles on the subject of beauty. Interesting that the two articles I posted turned out the way they did. The piece I did on Anne Coulter ("I Don't Like Blacks, Either, Julia) is related to this subject. I think the bottom line is, one cannot dictate taste. No one appreciates being told what he is to consider attractive or beautiful. I commented today on a past blog, and said that I used Connerly as a reference because his idea of 'no racial distinction' has the opposite effect of its intent. I don't consider his position conservative at all, but rather communistic in the purer sense. All are equal, is what it boils down to. This is true in one and only one sense: we are human. Part of what human means is to be individual, however. We have different likes and dislikes.
Connerly's idea seems wonderful on the surface, but it is specious, and far from his intent, will lead to degrading results, as was manifest in the Miss America pageant. It is, as I predicted, a Miss Person contest. I see this as an inevitable application of the Connerly principle, though I say again, I'm sure he had no such application in mind.
3) I am hoping the Persian Forum becomes a place for all Iranian people to expresses their feelings to America, about all that concerns them. Persian Heritage Magazine is read mostly by Iranians, and is a wonderful triumph of ingenuity on the part of Dr.Shahrokh Ahkami. However, I know that many Iranians have something directly to say to America, and they want America to know how they really feel. I realize that Iranians (Persians) are for the most part very reluctant to talk openly, because they are a race of gentlemen. However, this Persian Forum should be a place where Iranians can speak openly to Americans, with no fear or embarrassment.