LaDonna Harris, a long time Comanche female political personality, has recently developed an international dimension in her labors for Indian people.
Her organization, Americans for Indian Opportunity (AIO) created a leadership program in 1993, to foster young American Indians with leadership potential. That program is sponsered in part by Kellogg Foundation, and each participant "Ambassador" Indian is essentially a Kellogg Fellow for a year. I was among the first fellows.
As of this year, Laura Harris, daughter of LaDonna, has stated, "As the globalization process threatens to become another form of colonization, Indigenous peoples have a unique opportunity to shape and influence world affairs." AIO is developoing a transnational network of Indigenous organizations, all in an effort to preserve, or, I should say, conserve the cultural identities of indigenous peoples.
LaDonna has always been Democrat, as is former Senator Fred R. Harris, her ex-husband. Fred is still exceedingly liberal. They may scream to hear me call LaDonna "conservative."
Yet, the principle of preserving something, not giving it away, is conservative by definition. I realize that Indians and "indigenous" people are associated with the grand Liberals and Communists, because these political enemies of America have used races and other kinds of groups to agitate social strife, and to divide America.
Yet, in the case of the American Indian, and perhaps the other tribes of the Americas, there is the most obvious lesson in preservation. I've recently stated that this is conservatism. I believe that, inadvertantly, AIO is making the same statement. I believe that Indians are settting an example of what America should do, as a country. American can no longer afford to foster such confused culture. If there is an American culture, it must be preserved. Multiculturalism weakens, not strengthens the country. This is the inevitable message of AIO and all Indian people who make conscious efforts to preserve our cultures.
My only contention is that Indians must learn to preserve ourselves, and not depend on treaties or "charities" (as the white man today tends to think of the treaties). Until we can do this, our existence rests on the moral ideology of the white man. If he keeps his word, we Indians continue as Indians. If he doesn't, we lose. I'd say that's a terribly precarious position to be in.
This is the position that America has almost fallen into. We depend on the cooperation of the world before we decide anything. Is this the fruits of global capitalism? If it is, we need to rethink our approach to the world, or America is going to become as dependent as the Indian.
The world has an enemy perhaps more aggressive than Communism: Islamic Fundamentalism. How do we show Thanksgiving at such a time?
The murderous radicals just struck again today, boming a hotel and firing missles at an airliner. The attacks were against Jews in Kenya, Africa.
Al Qaeda is the obvious culprit, and much information about the attack was disseminated vie internet e-mail before it happened.
How shall the world respond? The enemy Muslims have declared their enemies to be the United States and Israel. What have America and Israel done about this? I should say, what has the U.S. allowed Israel to do about it?
November 8, Dr. Sheikh Bakr Abed Al-Razzaq Al-Samaraai delivered a typical sermon at The Mother of All Battles mosque in Baghdad. "We need the grace of Jihad of the soul," he urged. Infidels, Jews, crusaders, Americans and Britons he condemned as enemies of Islam. "We will fight them with all kinds of weapons. Jihad, Jihad, Jihad, Jihad," he ranted. Then the killer thought: "Whoever does not defend Muhammad and the Koran, will not smell the aroma of paradise forever." "Jihad has become an obligation of every individual Muslim. Anyone who does not comply will find himself lost hell."
"Allah, help the Jihad warrors everywhere...Oh Allah, for Thee we fight, we kill and are killed."
Heard enough?
I'm sorry for all the Muslims who do not see Islam through this death-oriented lense. But, this is the Islam to the world now: death for all. This is what Islam means to the world.
I don't know that Mulslim people throughout the world can change this. They certainly have made no visible, effective effort as yet. At this point, he innocent Muslims can no longer be distinguished from the killers. The world cannot afford to distinguish them. Either they distinguish themselves, by turning aginst the Jihadists and declaring war on them, or they shall all have to be considered complicit.
The Christian Church once underwent a terrible division. The Protestants believe the Roman Catholic Church had abused its trust. There were wars that pitted Christian against Christian. Islam must face the same challenge. There must be non-murderous Muslims who are willing to actually fight against the murderous Muslims. This is the price that must be paid.
I offer at least a temporary solution: all Arab Muslims must return to Saudi Arabia, and the surrounding Arab countries. If possible, all Muslims must return to the countries of their origin. The world has become a killing field for the Jihadists. They have ruined it for everyone. To survive, we must kindly force all Arab Muslims back to Arabia, and all Muslims to their countries of origin.
If this means all Christians must leave Muslim countries and return to their countries, so be it.
The killing must stop. The world is fast spinning out of control. The American government is offering only band-aid solution, and preventing Israel from defending itself.
There are Arab citizens within the boundaries of Israel. Thousands of Palestinian Arabs work in Israel, then return their Palestinian quarters at night, like Mexican workers in America. This is a forumla for terrorist disaster. How can anyone expect anything but terrorism? What if Israel decided not to let any Arab Muslims in the country of Israel? Who would allow it?
But the Arab Jihadists are like a cancer in the world. They must be excised. Even this is not a death with for them. This is simply to say they must not be allowed out of their own country. The price? We must send all Arab Muslims back to Arabia.
How do we show thanks for America? By using common sense to protect America, and not allowing Communists in our government to work with the foreigners for our destruction. We call Communists "Liberals," but this is a deception. Liberals are communists in principle. Our country is full of them. They are white, bleeding-heart, give-away-America types, who love trees more than people, who love their own power more than America.
It would be hard to ship them out, but at least we should call them by their true name: Communists.
This is the way we can begin to show Thanksgiving for this great country of America.
I feel like Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) must have felt when, after writing a history of the French Revolution (in the form of a nine volume biography,
The Life of Napoleon, 1827) the manuscript was lost in a fire, and Scott doggedly sat down to re-write the entire work. Scott's life was beset with tragedy, hazard, ill-health, disaster financial and material, yet he accomplished miraculous literary feats. May his life and character inspire us all.
When BadEagle.com was recently hacked to pieces by undisclosed adversaries, the blog "The War With Mexico Has Begun" (Nov. 20) was lost. Therefore, I will now re-write it, with increased vigor.
The war with Mexico has indeed begun. The enemy? Hundreds of thousands of Mexicans, illegally crossing the border into America, taking advantage of every possible opportunity. They are coming over, and literally taking what belongs to American citizens. Before the days of political correctness (i.e., Orwellian doublespeak, or just plain professional lying), this Mexican "migration" would be called an invasion of America, plain and simple.
Some patriots still live in America, and that's how they see it. Cochise County (Arizona) newspaper, The Tombstone Tumbleweed, recently called for citizens to "unite and assemble organized citizen groups to patrol our southern border." The liberal media immediately identified this as a call to arms, a call for militia, and warns against such reckless vigilante-ism spinning out of countrol. Indeed, as if immigration is not out of control.
Furthermore, the ultra liberal Sierra Vista Herald calls the patriots "wacos," like Timothy McVeigh, white militia, socially marginal groups, and wholly denies any Aztlan movement of Mexicans. There is no attempt of Mexicans to reclaim the Southwest, says Bill Hess.
The Aztlaners themselves call the American patriots "anti-Mexican bigots," and in a pointed article defending th poor Mexicans, La Voz De Aztlan not once, not in a single instance, referes to the Mexicans as "illegal." It is peremptorily presumed that any Mexican is an American.
The Aztlan editorial is careful to provide a horrid photograph of some poor Mexican man's body laid out on a cold slab, proclaiming the man was tortured and hung. Civil rights groups are rushing to the rescue. The enemies of America declare that to defend America is illegal!
Back in 1994, the town of Nogales, AZ built a fifteen foot iron wall to keep illegals out. It has failed. The $952 million dollar buget Congress provided through the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act has failed. The Mexican hoards cross the border in remote desert areas. With their illegal entry, they bring crime, drugs, theft, and all things illegal.
It is as if, in the name of communist "equality," the American government cannot and must not defend itself. It is indeed left to the people, to the brave, to those that care, to the patriots! Vivan los Americanos!
Our government has also failed to protect us from certain Middle Eastern immigrants, legal or illegal. Our next step will be to arm ourselves against radical Arab Muslim immigrants, and keep them from entering.
During the recent BadEagle.com "security exploit" (better known as hack job), there was a brief issue over the infamous "Victoria's Secret" fashion show. It's over now, but I still think there a few important observations to make.
The issue was the nature of the show. Was it pornographic? Concerned Women for America, the National Organization for Women, and the Parents Television Council were among many groups that said yes. They objected vehemently. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) also protested. In fact, three women protesters were arrested at the show, for heckling model Gisele Bundchen about her recent contract with a mink furrier.
It seems to me this is all well meaning, but misses a serious point. These anorexic women don't really represent the prime meat in the matter of pornogrpahy. The best those of those models are in specifically pornographic magzines. Victoria's scrawny bodies, however bare, do not excite true erotic feeling. At least not in me. To show off something, there must be something to show off.
Not that I make a meditation on these things, but, there is a cultural failing here.
Through repetition, over exposure, and the constant drone of sexual exploitation, the public discretion becomes dulled. We can no longer discern accurately what is beautiful, and now we can't even tell what's sexy.
This Victoria's Secret exploit is just a major example of indiscretion of all levels.
It was rather juvenile, and in incredibly poor taste. What clips I saw on the news were pitiful. I was embarrassed for the women.
Victoria can keep her secret. It's nothing I'm interested in.
In an easily predicted crunch of fate, the 2002 Miss World pageant met disaster in the African country of Nigeria. Why, who would have ever expected that feminine beauty would be so despised, and treated with such violent hatred?
Anyone who knows anything about race and religion would know. Well, the current Miss World, Agbani Darego, is from Nigeria. I supposed they thought that gave them all an "in." But more than half of Nigeria is Muslim, and the the Muslim city of Kaduna is where the riots started.
The city's newspaper had published a piece which suggested that Mohammad, the Prophet of Islam, would have approved of the beauty pageant. The Kaduna Muslims immediately rioted, burned the news offices, injured 1,200 people, killed nearly 200, and left 12,000 homless.
Nicole Gazal, Miss Australia, felt bad that it was only a few people that caused the problem. Most of Nigeria "really loved us staying in Nigeria," she said. Miss World 2000, India's Priyanka Chopra, says the contest is "hugely popular in developing countries."
The bottom line is, this contest asks all societies to accept basically Western Aryan standards of aesthetic beauty. Despite the push to celebrate all racial beauty, the fashion industry has proven that the Aryan (white) look is the desired look. The American Negro female attests to that. Read black female scholar Nolive Rooks, Hair Raising (Rutgers, 1996). It's all about looking white. And the only alternative is to promote the idea that non-white looks must be considered equally valuable, and more importantly, marketable. The racial equality laws demand it. Never mind one's own sense of aesthetics. The law will tell you what's beautiful, and make sure you acknowledge it as such.
But to throw this in the face of Muslims, particularly black Muslims, has to be one of the most stupid moves in promotional history. There must have been a really dumb blonde in charge. They're lucky they got out of Nigeria alive.
And let's face it, Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo didn't have Miss World in Nigeria just to look at Nigerian women. Everyone dark man wants to luxuriate in the beauty of those glorious white women.
The contest was moved to London, slated for December 7. Let's hope London's thick Muslim population is a little more tolerant, or Westernized. Can we count on that "religion of peace"?
Halle Berry is all over AOL's news today. It's all about women getting "make-over" jobs, like new hair, new make-up, new figures (with surgical assistance, etc.). The black woman is surely equal to the white woman in sexual desirability. At least, the media has made desperate efforts to make this seem true.
It is as if sexual desirability is the true test of equality. One wants to be physically, personally craved. If one isn't, one can immediately cry racial prejudice of some kind. Every woman has the birthright of being beautiful.
Yesterday's journal entry noted the first use of Indian women to fill soft porn style pin-up calendar. This calendar is meant to put Indian women on a par with the sexual desirability of the white woman, of course, who has always been the world standard.
It doesn't end there, either. There are Indian men who manifest the same "white way" of relating to white women. Alfred LaFontaine, an 82-year-old Turtle Mountain Ojibwe (Chippewa) of Elko, Minnesota opened a strip club last month in the thriving town of 472, a settlement so small it isn't even listed on Minnesota's internet news agencies, cities or towns.
One Emad Abed had earlier remodeled the place into "a classy strip club," but was closed down on violation of a building code. Abed, then a resident of Minneapolis, is apparently part of the Turkish 'community' of Minnesota, as may be Tammy J. Oseid, who wrote the story about LaFontaine for Pioneer Press, also not listed on the state's news sites.
So what's going on in these remote, "innocent" part of America? Sounds like foreigners look for opportunities. LaFontaine reportedly tried, in 1959, to sell a third of North Dakota to the Soviet Union. Indians are a great target for foreign enemies of the United States. Indians stand at the remote crossroads of national identity and land ownership definitions.
When it's all said and done, however, the Indian woman, who is at the very bottom of America's social scale, will become a prime market item to sell, for sex. She's accustomed to it, however, especially in the rural, remote areas of America. Indian girls are subjected to prostitution very early. They are either kidnapped by non-Indians, or sold by Indian men. She's always been equal to the lowest of the low.
I wish sometimes that I were an Indian god. I would rain down the hottest hell since Sodom and Gomorah. My people are methodically destroyed, plain and simple. Democrats, Communists, liberals, leftists, foreigners, you name it, to them we Indians are sheep to be shorn. Foreigners have equal rights to exploit us.
I shall begin to expose more of this modern, ghastly demise of Indian America in the near future. I'm beginning to think that the state of the Indian reflects the state of America's soul. In the name of equality, America destroys itself, along with the Indian.
I have just discovered the ultimate removal of the American Indian warrior image--the substitution of a different image! I am stunned, appalled, and outraged beyond expression.
An Oklahoma company called Rez Dog Clothing (Norman, OK) is now putting out girly pin-up calendars of Indian women. Rez Dog has put the Indian woman in the most profoundly un-Indian role ever to be imposed on Indians.
Keith DeHass, (Standing Rock Lakota Sioux), CEO of Rez Dog Clothing, just published the 2003 calendar, with co-sponsorship of the Otoe Missouria Tribe of Oklahoma. The models were preped for Leslie Timmerman's photography by the beautician Susan Allasia, of South Lake Tahoe, CA (who appears to be an American blonde, but, judging from her name, may be hispanic.)
The girls are posed in the typical sexually exploitive fashion, in bikinis. I was actually heartbroken to see this. As if Indians don't have enough false values imposed on us through financial extortion, as if we don't have enough problems with "self-esteem," now a few of us have been duped into thinking that, if the Indian woman can be presented in manner that puts her in the world sex market, we somehow have arrived at the ultimate social value and marketability. We're truly equal. How tragic.
Indian women have always been attractive to non-Indians, since the day the Europeans arrived. She was wild, a creature of nature, an exciting diversion.
So whom is this calendar for? It isn't for Indian men. We traditionally don't react to Indian women on this superficial basis.
As an Indian male, I've always held her as a sacred thing. Her beauty is of a different order. She is like the earth, the wind, the rivers. She is indeed a creature of nature. That's what makes her different. That's what makes her beauty deeper, more powerful. It isn't just a visual attraction.
This calendar enterprise is the most offensive thing I've ever seen in my life. I don't think trying to make the Indian women "equal" in the sense of visual sexual attraction is an honorable enterprise, and I am horribly embarrassed and ashamed for these girls. They were duped. They were deceived. They were extorted beyond anything any white man could have accomplished by himself.
If DeHaas thinks this is going to bring Indian men and women together, he is completely mistaken. If there is some moral fantasy by which he wants to justify his egregious act, he fails utterly. Non-Indians alone will be attracted. He has weakend, not strengthen, Indians interpersonal relations.
I saw this calendar in a classy Indian shop called Dreamcatcher, in Capitol Hill (southern Oklahoma City). The owner Jinna Cota (a white girl, formerly famous rodeo queen) took note of my reaction when I saw the calendar on her counter.
"Well," she said, "it hasn't sold."
May it never sell. And may it's failure affirm my word. The beauty of an Indian woman is far different than the visual, gross sexual appeal so popular in the Western European profanities. To see Indian women put in such a circumstance is criminal, in my estimate. It is the lowest abuse yet of Indian people.
Frank Pallone, Jr., a seven term Democratic Congressman of New Jersey's 6th District, sponsored the NATIVE Act legislation before the House of Representatives at the 107th Congress, September 26th, 2002. This is the bill that proposes to pay America's schools to remove their Indian logos and mascots.
Pallone was born in Long Branch, New Jersey, and has lived in New Jersey all his life. His law degree is from Rutgers University. One wonders how he came to be the sponsor of an Indian bill, and one which threatens to accomplish a complete visual genocide of all American Indians across the country.
Coming from a highly populated, industrial coast area, Pallone has valiently served the cause of environmentalism. He is a very active and effective Congressman. However, this anti-Indian bill seems wholly irrelevant to both his interests and that of his state. To my knowledge, no Indians exist in New Jersey that are native of that land. There are no Indian schools there, no reservations, and no terribly significant historical moments, at least none which helped form the modern Indian stereotypes.
The NATIVE Act says its based on Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, and interprets that to mean the Federal Government has trust responsibility and obligations to Indians, and in turn, that means the government has the right to decide for Indians what's best Indians.
At this stage, the law would pay all schools to remove their Indian mascots, because the government has determined that the mascots are offensive to Indians. The next stage, obviously, will come when the government fines or penalizes the schools who do not remove their Indian mascots. There will be no choice in the matter.
Who in the world told Frank Pallone, Jr., that Indian mascots were offensive? Elsie Meeks? Was it a group of white female activists, who make a career out of "saving" Indians, while they very profitable personal careers? Who will impliment the bill? Not Indians. Indians will receive absolutely no tangible benefit from this bill. The only people who will profit are the activist facilitators and the workmen who remove the mascots from buildings, floors, and vehicles. This bill is not for Indians.
What will be left for Indians? The same problems we have now, which are totally unrelated to the mascots. The only difference will be that there won't be the activie, visual memory of Indians in society. Society will have been effectively cleansed of the Indian.
Tyrrany reigns again.
Well, not quite yet. Bill has not passed. I urged every freedom-loving, responsible American to write Frank Pallone, Jr, and deeply question his sources, and protest this peremptory act. Indian mascots represent a great opportunity for education about Indians, and this should be taken advantage of, not removed.
To Indians who blindly object to mascots, I say, to remove them is to assimilate to the white society. It seems ironic, but this is the immediate and long-range result. I thought we were different. I know I am.
The American government is still waging an all-out war against Indians. Only this time, the charge is being led by Indians.
Well, maybe not by real Indians, but white women, liberals, and homosexuals, who may be "part" Indian.
They got together, went to Washington, and got a sponsor for a new House bill, H.R.5487. The sponsor is Representative Frank Pallone, (New Jersey), and the bill is to proved money to help America's schools remove their Indian mascots. (It will also no doubt provide money for activists, who are mostly white.)
The Native Act to Transform Imagery in Various Environments (NATIVE) will pay schools to remove the names "Indians, Redskins, Braves, or Chiefs," or any other name that is derogatory or discriminatory on the basis of "race, ethnicity, nationality, or Indian or Native Alaskan tribal affiliation." The money is to pay for new gymn floors, new walls, new uniforms, etc., and whatever is needed as a result of removing the logos, mascots, monikers, etc.
The legislation was proposed September 26. It is not likely that is will be acted upon until next year, but, it has already been handed to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
In other words, the government wants to use American tax payers' money to remove all visible vestiges of American Indian warriors. There must be no more physical evidence that Indian warriors existed. The public must forget Indians, and the government will use tax dollars to make the people forget.
As a conservative Indian, I have fought against this from my beginnings as a journalist for FrontPageMagazine. I have spoken against mascot removal when I appear as an invited guest at different colleges and universities (sponsored by Young America's Foundation). I'll be speaking against it December 5 at Pennsylvania State University.
I would like to see more Americans join me in the defense of the grandeur and beauty of the American Indian warrior, and the protection of his memory. Verily I say unto the American people, if the mascots go, the Indian names of states, counties, cities, rivers, creeks, and companies will go next. This war will not end with mascots. That is only a battle. The war is to remove all memory of the American Indian.
We Indians shall be consigned to the museum, and there gather dust for eternity.
Today the issue of respect for the dead is becoming more focused on respect for the mourners. The Nov. 12 I blogged on the story of the German terrorist Ulrike Meinhof, and the removal of her brain (after her suicide) for testing at Tuebingen University.
There was more to the story. Betinna Roehl, daughter of Meinhof, wants the brain back. "You can only say there has been a proper funeral if the brain is buried with the body," she says. All sorts of primitive psychological instincts and superstitions are suggested by this thought.
"A dead terrorist has a right to be treated fairly and the right to a decent burial," Roehl claims. Now we are deep into primal Left-wing superstition.
Interestingly, a 74-year-old Cherokee woman, Barbara Crandell, was arrested last June 26 for criminal tresspassing on the burial mounds of her own ancestors. She was fined $250.
The mounds happen to be within a golf course. Crandell stopped to rest and pray near the No.10 green.
Ohio's Licking County Municipal Court judge, Thomas Marcelain, refused to allow evidence that the Ohio Historical Society leased the grounds to the Moundbuilders Country Club, and that the Octagon mounds therein are public grounds open from daylight to dark during the summer.
Crandell says she was there to pray, and she does not play golf, nor does she have $10,000 to join the country club.
So, whose is this "rights" issue? Does it pertain to the dead, or to mourners of the dead?
In white man's country, the burial business rakes in spectacular profit. But, again, whose rights are involved? The living make the rules on death and burial. Whence cometh the notion that the dead have rights? What does this profound notion indicate about human nature?
This is a big issue in Indian country, because so many Indian burial sites are underneath white lands, business, and public property. If there is a law about rights for the dead, or for mourners, it has to include these Indian sites. If it doesn't, then this is just one more example of the fact that Indians are not really considered "people."
Conservatives condemn us for our "special status," or "special privilege," but, we Indians pay a price for that status. We're something other than human. We''re some talisman, some magical power fetish, some nature creature, some mascot/jester of medieval superstition.
I'm prepared to accept that, myself. I don't speak for other Indians, of course, but the evidence is clear to me. Indians will never be considered "people" in this society. I think it's important to roll with reality. We can't destroy deep psychological stereotypes that exist in other peoples' minds about us. I say it's better for Indians to leave that alone, and be independent, like we've always been, in our own spirits.
In October, I posted a couple of blogs in which I expressed a confident notion that the black male was rarely a serial killer, rarely conceived of social issues in ways that would produce a “me against society” psychological dynamic in his mind.
I must confess that I was a victim of the Left Wing Media Black-out that attempts to make everyone think that the black male is somehow not capable of the monstrous acts he has repeatedly committed.
My readers have helped cure me of this false, media-induced good feeling about all blacks. There were the Zebra Killings. Then I was sent three other reports which turned my good will theory upside down. Some 16% of serial killers in America are in fact black. That means, proportionately, the black male is more likely to be a serial killer than the white male, despite the fact that there are more white male serial killers.
Then there was the report on police Chief Moose and his own stereotyped notion of white male serial killers, which was the notion like mine. Then I received a full report on one of the first publicized black serial killers, Wayne Williams, of Atlanta. I’d mentioned that before, but as the only exception. How wrong I was.
Two days ago, Richard Poe blogged on the Wichita Massacre, which, although is not a story of black male serial killers, but is about black male murderers (of white people), and in this case, a perfect example of media cover-up, the kind of cover-up which left me, and most people, with the idea that the only serious killers in America are white males.
Well, my conversion to the truth is the benefit of having informed and intelligent readers, and their simple revelations of the truth.
I find my self trying to find good thoughts to think about black people. I frankly was quite happy to believe that the black male never got up on such a high horse as to set himself against society. He was too much of a groupie, a community man. Why, he wasn’t capable of such lofty notions as “me against the world.” He was no hero of justice. He was just a simple man.
But I was simply wrong. He is truly equal. He can imitate the very worst vices known to human nature. He can experience the most profound warps of the mind, and commit the basest acts. The only difference is, the media covers up for him.
I have avoided dealing with the subject directly, but it came up in my face recently. There is a side effect of using an Indian mascot for a sports team.
The University of Central Oklahoma (UCO) has a Division II football team with a mascot, "The Broncos." Fine. UCO plays Southeastern Oklahoma State, Durant, OK. Southeastern's mascot is "The Savages." Sounds like political hazard. The Broncos have to do something to the Savages. The Savages have to do something to the Broncos. How does one team razz the other? Shall this aspect of school sports be eliminated?
It was homecoming week for the Broncos. Thursday, November 7, UCO's student paper, The Vista, put an article on the frontpage: "Homecoming artwork spurs controversy on UCO campus," by Mark Schlachtenhaufen. (The article was not filed in the online Vista.) The problem? There was graffiti on the windows of two campus buildings.
On the Education Building, there was a cartoon horse (Bronco), saying, "You smell" to a cartoon Indian with an arrow through his head. The Indian said, "I hate being a savage," the Southeastern opponent.
Some students complained, but Dr. Kathryn Gage, vice president for Student Services shrugged it off, saying that there had been no obscenities and no hate speech on Campus Life-approved materials.
There was certainly nothing comparable to the kind of vularity that goes on up in Grand Forks, when the University of North Dakota's "Fighing Sioux" face opponents. Still, the use of an Indian mascot will draw the same kind of razz that any other mascot will draw from the opponent. It's not an expression of how people feel about Indians today so much as it is an attempt to razz the team that happens to have an Indian mascot. It's make-believe.
The drawings around campus were designed to promote school spirit, said UCOS Studend Association president J.P.Jordon. "I don't think there was any malicious intent."
Of course, intent is not necessarily the issue. The First American Student Association, the Indian club on campus, was concerned. Secretary Bobby Benton said what FASA wants is equal and fair treatment as a club. For example, they don't have a scholarship provided for their "princess," whereas the Asian, African, and other ethnic clubs do. Benton said they weren't so concerned about the graffiti as they were about their unequal treatment. What is the "intent" of UCO in this policy? Not malicious, of course. Just unequal.
Curiously, the Baptist Collegiate Ministry on UCO's campus had painted three-foot crosses on two windows of the Art Building. One of them had been partially rubbed out. In defense of the crosses, BCM director Charles Lillard said, "We certainly didn't mean to offend anyone." Again, no malicious intent!
What irony. What a combination of issues. Jordon said the art is considered free speech, and must be protected according to the constitution. Gage said, "We need to have a dialogue on campus."
Well, art is not speech. Art is art. Words and language and speech. I'm not sure where this will go, but, I do note one thing: the use an Indian mascot seems to occasion the expression of anti-Indian sentiment, if even in the realm of make-believe and sporting spirit. To not be able to display a cross, an issue which Edmond, OK (the city hosting UCO) has had before, seems unacceptably ironic in a Christian country. Perhaps America is not a Christian country. Yet, it was founded and developed by Christians.
Christians can find other ways to express themselves, like in their personal deportment and behavior. But how does a "school spirit" express itself when the opposing team is the Indians, the Savages, or the Braves?
Ulrike Meinhof was a terrorist in Germany in the 1970’s. She was a leader in the infamous, extreme-left Baader-Meinfog Gang, which waged war against the establishment. She was involved in killings, bombings, and kidnappings. She was imprisoned finally, and then in 1976 hung herself.
Her brain was removed by order of prosecutor/doctor Juergen Pfeiffer, to be examined at Tuebingen University for neurological abnormalities in the frontal lobe, the area believed responsible for emotion and judgment. It was believed that neurological damage might have caused her horrible behavior and “diminished” her responsibility.
We’ve heard this line before from psychologists. It’s “the devil made me do it” approach, advocated since the ‘60’s and before.
I’m curious. In an article I posted this summer, “Why Aren’t Priests Homosexuals,” I cited the research of Simon LeVay, a homosexual neuroscientist in the Salk Institute in La Jolla, California. By 1994 he was trying to say that there were actual brain differences in the male homosexual from that of the heterosexual (i.e., normal) male. The homosexual neurologists want to use “the devil made me do it” approach as well, but to justify, not to excuse, the questioned behavior.
Both the terrorist and the homosexual are being taught that they can blame their own brains. Their behavior is genetically or biologically destined, natural for them, and not to be criticized or condemned, but only managed.
This is professional narcissism on the part of scientists. This is solipsism. This is socially self-destructive as well. As for the terrorist or the homosexual, who cares what’s in their brains? Society simply has to make the decision as to what’s best for society, and act accordingly. The rest is inevitably inimical
Remember the first reports of the death toll after the 9-11 attacks on the WTC? They first reported the number of employees of the two towers. That was something like 55,000 people. But then they immediately noted that not everyone was working on any given day, so there couldn’t be that many people killed. From that point on, the numbers of persons killed or missing has steadily reduced.
After two weeks of desperate search, the death toll was estimated at 6,700. And soon aftre it was reported that more foreigners (3,061) were killed than Americans (2,589). Three months later, December 8, the total count was reduced to 3,000. As of October 8, 2002, the count was placed at 2,979.
There’s a clear pattern here. I think if we wait long enough, we’ll be told finally that no one was killed, and that it was all a media hoax. I expect soon to see Hillary Clinton declaring on national TV that it was all a right wing conspiracy.
Don’t laugh. They’re now taking seriously the old ‘60’s theory that we never landed men on the moon. It was all a media, photography hoax. It was actually a NASA conspiracy.
Since 9-11, Homeland Security has been a top priority. Americans have been willing to be subjected to ridicuous inconvenience in the name of security. The inconvenience almost seems like tyranny, especially at the airports.
This past August 6, NewsMax.com ran a story about a young mother who was ordered to drink three bottles of her own breast milk, which she had prepapred for her nursing 4-month-old. The security folk were following the idea that poisons or explosives could somehow be in the liquid. If owner drinks, then that's proof that all is well.
I've been stopped on a similar basis, made to drink a swallow or two of the water or orange juice I happened to be carrying in my hand.
But I'm male, and of a darker shade of appearance. This young woman was obviously female, very white, and completely American. She wore no robes, no veil. She was not a Muslim convert. If they checked even her name, Elizabeth McGanny, they would have known she wasn't married to a Muslim. Yet, she was treated like a dark, male, Arab Muslim. She was treated as though she were a threat. The complete suspicion of the security people was the sign of their dedication, their faithfulness, carefulness, and complete trustworthiness.
But this is not security. This is ridiculous, and borderline tyranny. American government is willing to do this, to our own beloved people, rather than deport any Arab male Muslim. We will torture our entire population with inconvenience and insult, rather than risk deporting one "innocent" male Arab Muslim.
Thus we continue to harbor the Arab Muslim terrorists in America, while at the same time we play some sick self-manipulation game with our own people. We screen the old white grandmothers; we screen the white females. We honor the "citizenship" of newly immigrated male Arab Muslims.
Enough said?
The Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC) offers an award to Republican polititians who vote as liberals. It's called the RINO award, for "Republican In Name Only." Under the leadership of president Charlie Meadows, OCPAC is fast developing political clout in Oklahoma politics through the RINO award.
The Oklahoma Republican senator or house representative who has the most liberal voting record receives the RINO award with much ado. There is so much ado, in fact, that this public award has been shown to have a notable and negative effect on the future of whatever politician receives it.
The truth is, Governor Keating himself is a candidate for the RINO award. For example, he signed a bill last June 4 to implement an alternate method of testing for drivers' license and road sign recognition for those who cannot read or undertand the English language. The legisation [SB966] was drawn up by Senator Bernest Cain (District 46) and Representative Michael Tyler (District 30). It passed the Oklahoma Senate 37-4, and the House 70-29 the month before. It is an added expense fot the Department of Transportation, of course.
Call it the Spanish Driver's License bill. And it also must surely provide for Vietnamese, Korean, and other non-English speaking immigrants. Oklahoma wants to keep up with the cutting edge liberal politics in the land.
I find it hard to understand. Governor Keating supported my idea of teaching patriotism in Oklahoma public schools. How can he also support the development of foreign population in Oklahma?
Oklahoma has a small population, and Keating has tried various schemes to increase it. But they've all been hazardous, and created great tax burdens. I'll talk about that in another journal entry.
My fundamental contention is over American citizenship. It must cost something. It must be made to be worth something. We give it away, for nothing. This has to be wrong. We encourage foreign people to take it, freely. This has to be even more wrong.
Let foreigners learn English before they come here. It is not our responsibility to provide their education, or to spend money to provide alternatives caused by their their lack of it, or to inconvenience ourselves because of their lack.
In a way, this is dumbing down. And we do it to ourselves, through legislation. America has developed an autolytic disease. With Liberal Communism and its magic word "equality," we are destroying ourselves, from within.
This morning, as of 9:30 a.m. CST (OKC, OK) Glenn Beck reported on radio that the South Dakota senate race between Thune (R) and Johnson (D) was too close to be called. There were only 188 votes difference between, with Johnson in the lead.
About that same time, CNN reported that Johnson is leading by 427 votes. Beck had previously announced that Johnson won, but Beck said a recount was likely.
Well, one thing is sure: the Indian vote, which was expectedly Democrat, really mattered this time. It mattered so much that there was Federal investigation of fraud as early as October 3. Indians had been hired, by Democrats, to go out and registered Indians, and to encourage them to vote. It turns out that a number of these registrations were considered fraudulent.
I predict that, if there is a question about the Democratic victory, the Indian vote will be a significant issue. If not, the Indians who were arrested and indicted for felony of voting fraud will suffer the consequences in the shadows. They were used. They served the purpose intended for them, but then the Democrats will move on.
Maybe Indians shouldn't vote. In the name of American patriotism, maybe we shouldn't vote. Certainly, we need to be more aware of national politics first.
Cnn says the U.S. military shot a "Hellfire" missile from a robot airplane and blew up a car full of al Qaeda members. This is incredible. I'd be terrified if I were a terrorist.
There they were, just driving along peacefully in their own neck of the woods, or I should say, their own path in the desert. And, boom!, they're gone. Think of the military intelligence, the precision, the power. It is as staggaring as the attack on 9-11, in a way.
The report says security forces of Yemen (a small contry bordering Saudi Arabia) have been cooperating on the war against terrorism. President Ali Abdullah Saleh has certainly cooperated.
Well, this makes the second case publicized in America where Arab muslims have turned over Arab muslim terrorists. The first was the case in Buffalo, New York, where, in the suburb of Lackawanna, the Muslim community turned over six muslims, American citizens, from Yemen.
Very interesting. Ye'omen from Yemen. Well, look out terrorists. I think we're on to you. Yes, we the people are sitting ducks for your murderous designs, but, don't think because you hide like cowards you are beyond the reach of justice, or of Hellfire missiles.
Yesterday, the Associate Press of London reported that Iran just turned over about 250 detainees suspected to have al Qaeda connections to authorities in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. This report was taken from the Financial Times website.
Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi, whom the press quotes, did not identify any of the detainess, though another, unnamed official said one of them was one of bin Laden's 23 children, a son.
So Iran turns them all over to the very country that breeded them and harbored them. A completely political move. Iran is trying to appear concerned, but also to remain neutral. Iran is called an Islamic Republic, and the terrorists are only manifesting extreme, orthodox Islam. Iran cannot completely deny that, nor work against it. Yet, Iran detained 250 suspects. That is apparently a fact also. Iran wants to appear humane to the rest of the world, and to condemn al-Qaeda.
But Iran has never quite fit into the rest of the Islamic world. Even though Iran kept Islamic culture going after the 13th century Arab decline, Iran is still unique in Islam. There are many reasons for this, such as race, culture, history, etc. The roots of Iran, Persia, are just too unique. The Persian mind is too large, the genes too complex, to suit Islam, in my published opinion.
My Iranian friends have always told me that the whole problem with Iran is the Arab leadership. "They've ruined our country," one of my friends said. "I'm sorry, but I don't like them."
I posted an article one month after 9-11, in which I suggested that American Iranians really represent the only hope for reforming Islam, or creating any Islam that is useful, helpful, and a blessing to the world. They have the intelligence, the heart, and the disposition.
I'm more and more convinced that this is true. American Iranians have succeeded where most "minorities," including American Indians, have failed. American Iranians keep their traditions, but love America, participate in America, contribute to America, and don't call public attention to their "differences." They are among the most valuable immigrants ever to set foot on these shores.
This 2002 election season is particularly exiting, for all sorts of reasons. In the fury of it all, perhaps we should remind ourselves why we are really voting, and what we are voting about.
I say, we vote about the United States Constitution. This is at the bottom of each and every election issue, in particular and as a whole. Here's an example.
Amendment IX says that you can't "construe" one right to "deny or disparage" another. The people's rights provided by one bill cannot be used to deny the people's'rights provided by anther bill.
Richard Poe's Seven Myths of Gun Control deals with this issue quite clearly, pp.149-151. It's a question of spelling out each and every right, versus the assumption that they all exist by nature. The people have a right to bear arms. Because America has a standing, professional army, by law, is not to be construed as a prohibition against the people's right to bear arms, even as a militia.
And Poe says, "Simply because the Bill of Rights does not mention a particular right, it should not be assumed that such right does not exist."
(By the way, for those anti-Semites that vehemently accuse Poe of being Jewish, the above statement is certainly the opposite nature of thought reflect in ancient rabbinical literature. There, absense is proscriptive, or prohibitive, generally. If it isn't written about in scripture, it wasn't supposed to exist. Many Jewish traditions were based on this manner of interpreting the Hebrew scriptures. Of course, such manner of thinking did not inhibit the Jewish culture from technological advancement. The Bible doesn't say anything about electricity, but Jews have used electricity ever since it was harnessed.)
Amendment IX (and X) have only recently come up for discussion, and it has been in connection with the gun control issue. However, this is quite a limited application. These amendments, particularly the 9th, were blurred and limited (if not wholly denied) during all the civil rights years, beginning in the '60's. American people as a whole no longer had the right to live where they wanted, hire whom they wanted, or go to school where they wanted. These rights were denied, so that black people could enjoy them.
I certainly feel regretful that a modern American Negro could only achieve "freedom" by having it denied to others. That should never have had to be. My black friend Dwight said, back when I did social work with him in Connecticut, "They had to make a law!" He just quietly shook his head in a sort of wistful dismay.
Nevertheless, the freedom of the American Negro, in a sense, cost the Constitution its 9th Amendment. It was a matter of historical chronology. Had there been no slavery, there would have been no need to use one law against another. But, that's over now. One law is often used against another. The 9th Amendment is virtually impossible to apply anymore.
We need to somehow remember the Constitution when we vote. What we really need is redefine the nature and privilege of American citizenship. It currently means nothing. We must make it mean something again.
Since the 19th century, says Daniel J. Goldhagen in his remarkable bestseller, Hitler's Willing Executioners (1996), Germany was obsessed with "the Judenfrage," p.63. He translates the word Judenfrage as "Jewish Problem," but Frage in German actually means "question." So, it's the Jewish question.
We all know what the German answer was. That obviously was the wrong answer. It clearly didn't work. And there was no state of Israel then, no homeland for Jews. Now that there is, and has been since 1948, one wonders why the Arab answer is so urgent, as if pushing Israel into the sea would work.
I think we should be asking a different Frage. It's not the Jewish question. It's the Gentile question. Die 'goyim' frage.
Since I expressed my Jewish views on FrontPageMagazine I have received basically two kinds of responses: 1) frustrated and vicious hatred of Jews, and 2) a Christian-based support of the state of Israel.
I think the goyimfrage is this: why is there predictable and perfect division over Jews? I have very good friends who can't stand Jews, and were appalled to read of my views. From these responses, and those of a lifetime, I have concluded that, for the goyim, the non-Jew, the presence of Jews in the world is simply a test of our character. Our attitude toward the Jews reveals something about our own values.
The Jews didn't design this. It is the voice of human conscience. I'm sure many Jews feel frustrated that they can't just be ordinary human beings, like everyone else, but, it looks like to me they were created for a higher calling, one that only a slaughtered Christian martyr can begin to grasp.
It seems to me that the rest of us should tread lightly. I know many, many people blame the Jews for all the problems of America and in the whole world. But I wonder if we might better see the problem as ourselves. Die Frage ist uns!
One thing is certain. The ancient Persian (Iranian) emperors were Zionists. They supported Israel. This was during the height of Persian power, the early Achaemenid period, 560 BC to 424. That is America's precedent for success.
We need to keep an objective view in this matter, and not get caught up or bogged down in the faults or failures we see in individual Jewish people. The Frage is on a much larger scale. And it surely includes the goyim. We need to examine our own faults and failures first.
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001