Dave Seals is a Faux Indian
Sizzle Flambé
> > But his puff-piece in <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Seals>
> > says he's in _Genocide of the Mind: New Native American Writing_,
> > and of course his _The Powwow Highway_ was flacked as his being
> > a Native American (Huron) author... so if he's not enrolled, that
> > means by Betsy Ashby Guardian's definition he's "FAUX", right?
>
> > And *** he's actually _made_a_LOT_OF_MONEY_at_it_ too ***, Betsy!
>
> > < ... crickets ... gently chirping ... in the tall grass ... >
>
> <http://www.ipl.org/div/natam/bin/browse.pl/A461>
> |
> | Native American Authors Project
> | David Seals , 1947-
> | Huron
> | Davydd ap Saille (the spelling used by the author)
> | is a talented Huron novelist, publisher (Sky and Sage
> | Books), freelance journalist, playwright, and documentary
> | video producer. He currently resides in South Dakota.
>
> Yet he's consistently evasive about being *enrolled*. Hmmmmm.
>
> It's a *pity* there are no *real* Faux Indian hunters here!
But, hey, wait a minute, *this* says he's *Cheyenne* !!! -->
<http://www.ragbaby.com/magazine/19990618c.htm>
|
| The Peace Pipe in Powwow Highway
|
| "Based on the 1979 novel by David Seals, a member
| of the American Indian Movement (AIM) and the
| Cheyenne Nation,...."
The Amazing, Changing, Elusive, Evasive David Seals!
He's Irish! ("O'Brien") He's Welsh! ("Davydd ap Saille")
He's Huron! He's Cheyenne! No, he's, uh, Hurocheyenne!
But... is he enrolled? ("Are *you*?", he coyly retorts.)
Wow, he had no trouble stating LOUD and CLEAR that he was
Indian back in the 1970s and 1980s, and making *lots* of
money out of being a Big Name Native American Author then!
Then the decade rolled over, and suddenly all he was
*explicitly* saying about himself any more was that
he's an "American Poet" (see his Wikipedia entry) --
he's still in books of Native American authors, but he
avoids making the explicit claim, and evades a yes/no
answer to direct questions. Why do you suppose that is?
The Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 made it a federal
crime to sell any form of art or craft as "made by an
Indian" unless the person who made it was indeed an
enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe/nation.
Which David Seals isn't. And recall Betsy Ashby saying:
"Real Indians have Treaties with the US government ...
Faux Indians don't. It is just that simple!"
-- <http://www.pagan.com/FauxIndians/>
Dave Seals spits at *real* Indians like Joe Medicine Crow:
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.native/msg/428a14d22200409c>
What he did in Anna Mae Aquash's case, her daughter rebuked:
<http://indigenouswomenforjustice.org/seals.html>
He's a serial liar: <http://tinyurl.com/daveseals-disinfo>.
And he still *implies* that he's a Real Indian™, authorized
to Speak On Indian Issues, Which YOU Are Not; but watch him
dodge and dance away when pressed on his actual credentials.
Fake. Phony. Going all the way back to his first books as a
"Native American Author" (before that lie became a *crime*).
David "O'Brien" Seals has been a liar for *decades*. Believe
*anything* he says at your peril. Heck, his family biography
is about alien abductions *from* Roswell, try and top *that*!
Liar, conspiracy theorist, and serious nutcase: David Seals.
Monica
That is simply your opinion fizzle. Means nothing. Two Elk isn't
enrolled either. Are you going to report him to nafps? David's books
"Powwow Highways" and "Sweet Medicine" and the movie based on "Powwow
Highways" are liked by REAL INDIANS. Richard Two Elk isn't an enrolled
Indian in a federally recognized Tribe. Yet he sells arts and crafts
on his site. He takes money from public schools as an expert on Lakota
culture. Is that illegal according to the arts and crafts act? He
COULD be prosecuted for that. He misleads anyone who listens to him or
reads him. His interview with NAJA, his posts, his forward for
trimbach's book, are all misleading. His story of tying a white man to
a cross and beating him for 1 to six hours is full of contradictions.
In one account he beat that man for 1 hour. In his forward for
trimbach he beat him for 6 hours. In one account he left that man tied
to a cross for the marshalls to retrieve. In another account he turned
that man over to security. In another account he took him to the
clinic. By his own admission that man died. He accuses AIM of burying
that man in Wounded Knee. Yet no bodies have been found within the
occupation perimeter. FBI and two elves lies. Is Richard Two Elk a
faux Indian by your standards? Take it to nafps! By his own admission
he has murdered a man during the occupation of Wounded Knee. Why
didn't the fbi arrest HIM for murder? Why aren't you demanding just us
for your fellow white man?
Hope
[snip]
> Why aren't you demanding just us
> for your fellow white man?
Oh look. Suddenly monica has a LOT to say about an issue she said was
"none of her concern." I guess it was none of her business only as
long as the targets of betsy ashby's faux faux-Indian hunts were women
she didn't like.
Why didn't you demand justice for Wolfie? Why did you lie and tell
betsy that Donna and I were claiming to be Indians? You fed her names
like an informant and then shrugged and said you are not involved,
it's none of your concern.
Your words mean nothing, because you have proven over and over again
that you are willing to lie through your teeth whenever it suits your
agenda. You flip and flop like a landed fish, giving off the stench
of hypocrisy.
Hope
So what? Wolfie is liked by REAL INDIANS. That meant nothing to
you. You did not point that out to betsy ashby when Wolfie was being
hounded. Is the issue who has an enrollment card, or who is "popular"
with real Indians? See if you can pick a position and stay with it,
whether it relates to someone you don't like, or someone you do.
> Richard Two Elk isn't an enrolled
> Indian in a federally recognized Tribe. Yet he sells arts and crafts
> on his site. He takes money from public schools as an expert on Lakota
> culture. Is that illegal according to the arts and crafts act? He
> COULD be prosecuted for that.
Then why did you tell betsy ashby that "he is one of ours." ?? You
vouched for him, monica. Does your word mean anything, or not?
Monica
I like David and I trust my relatives and friends that vouch for him.
That's INDIAN princess.
Monica
>
> - Show quoted text -
Calm down. You're about to faint. ROTFLMAO!
Sizzle Flambé
> Calm down. You're about to faint. ROTFLMAO!
Monica laughs whenever she's caught lying. She laughs a lot here.
That's because honesty and her word of honor mean nothing to her.
They never did. How could they have? Look back at 1975-1976.
If she'd been an honest person, events would have been different.
Hope
Exactly.
and I trust my relatives and friends that vouch for him.
But they did not vouch that he is enrolled, did they? That's all
betsy cares about. If he's not enrolled, and therefore does not have
treaties with the US, then in betsy's book he's faux. Did you not
understand that when she explained her mission?
> That's INDIAN princess.
There no such thing as Indian princess. You confused. ;-p
Hope
>
> Calm down. You're about to faint. ROTFLMAO!
Why in the world would you think that? I might be about to faint from
the heat and humidity here from time to time, but I can't imagine ever
getting upset enough over *you* to swoon. Get over yourself.
You sure are doing a lot of ROTFLMAOing lately. Have you been into
the loco weed?
Monica
All of you white people are so funny. Didn't you read fizzle fizzling
on nafps? Even at debbie moran's invitation he got put in his place.
Of course whites wouldn't accept that from an Indian. The invader is
so invasive. They told him to leave but he won't. He's so stupid that
he doesn't even realize that they told him to his face that he isn't
wanted, they told him that he didn't present any evidence against me
or betsy. They don't like her but they wouldn't buy his sack of lies.
It's hilarious. Is this how I was supposed to be collatteral damage or
was this your whole plan princess? Debbie Moran thinks there are
Indian princesses. She tried to set herself up as one. She just
offended all the Elders. I told her not to do it, but she thought if
it was in print then she would be a real princess. The Suquamish Tribe
make fun of her. They call her S'Klallam royalty. That's
embarrassing....for her.
Sizzle Flambé
> They told him to leave but he won't.
One has to wonder how Monica imagines this works.
The organization, the website, NAFPS, told me to leave?
(Where? Link, please?) And I refused? And... then what?
Surely they just cancelled my logon and wiped my posts,
right? Right? Or, no, *I* wrestled them to the ground?
How is it *one* side is "he", and the *other* side is
supposed to represent the entire remaining 999+ members?
Who polled the lurkers?
Hope
> On Aug 18, 5:21 pm, Hope <holleratwal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 18, 3:10 pm, Monica <yano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Calm down. You're about to faint. ROTFLMAO!
>
> > Why in the world would you think that? I might be about to faint from
> > the heat and humidity here from time to time, but I can't imagine ever
> > getting upset enough over *you* to swoon. Get over yourself.
>
> > You sure are doing a lot of ROTFLMAOing lately. Have you been into
> > the loco weed?
>
> All of you white people are so funny. Didn't you read fizzle fizzling
> on nafps? Even at debbie moran's invitation he got put in his place.
> Of course whites wouldn't accept that from an Indian. The invader is
> so invasive. They told him to leave but he won't. He's so stupid that
> he doesn't even realize that they told him to his face that he isn't
> wanted, they told him that he didn't present any evidence against me
> or betsy. They don't like her but they wouldn't buy his sack of lies.
> It's hilarious. Is this how I was supposed to be collatteral damage or
> was this your whole plan princess?
In case you didn't notice, I am not on NAFPS. I did not attempt to
join and have no interest in doing so. So no, I did not read anything
there, and I did not have a "plan." We don't have midnight meetings
at the Pentagon and stick pins in war maps. I wish you could just get
this one thing through your head. We are not all FBI agents or
satanists or Jehova's Witnesses or any other group conspiring against
you for some nefarious purpose. We are all individuals, from
different places, who knew nothing of each other until a few months
ago. We simply share a dislike of you and betsy and your methods.
Why is that so far beyond the realm of possibility in your mind? Is
everyone who agrees with you part of some conspiracy, with a Top
Secret Plan, so you assume that's true for everyone?
> Debbie Moran thinks there are
> Indian princesses. She tried to set herself up as one. She just
> offended all the Elders. I told her not to do it, but she thought if
> it was in print then she would be a real princess. The Suquamish Tribe
> make fun of her. They call her S'Klallam royalty. That's
> embarrassing....for her.
I have no idea whether that's true or not. Since I know from
experience that you don't always tell the truth, and since she does
not post here and can't give her side of it, it's a non-issue to me.
Sizzle Flambé
> We don't have midnight meetings at the Pentagon and stick pins
> in war maps. I wish you could just get this one thing through
> your head. We are not all FBI agents or satanists or Jehovah's
> Witnesses or any other group conspiring against you for some
> nefarious purpose.
If you're not showing up tonight, can I have your pizza slices?
Monica
>
> - Show quoted text -
She has an account here. I don't lie. I'm not white.
Monica
Do they serve pizza at the temple of isis or set? ROTFLMAO!
Sizzle Flambé
> I don't lie.
s�r`ch�sm
>
>I don't lie. I'm not white.
>
Since numerous examples of your lies have been posted by you on alt.native,
(and in letters you allegedly initiated to tribal council chairpersons),
you're lying now. Your skin-tone having nothing to do with the fact that
you fabricate lies other than you using 'race' as a weapon to hide your own
bigotry behind. There is no assumption that monica's penchant for lying is
representative of NAs or her tribe/band.
s�r`ch�sm
> "Monica" <yano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
[snip]
> Why aren't you demanding just us
> for your fellow white man?
>
>betsy that Donna and I were claiming to be Indians?
>
*cricket chirping in the silence of monica's evading this question*
>
>You fed her [bettie] names
>like an informant and then shrugged and said you are not involved,
>it's none of your concern.
>
That was a cheap and weak trick to play on bettie, alright.
>
>Your [monica's] words mean nothing, because you have proven over and over
>again
>that you are willing to lie through your teeth whenever it suits your
>agenda. You flip and flop like a landed fish, giving off the stench
>of hypocrisy.
>
Indeed, monica's lies and fabrications negate her words. Even her own
tribal councilmembers will not support monica's hypocrisy after she lied to
them. Maybe even before she lied to them. Either way, monica's
reprehensible opinions remain her own to weakly clutch to herself and are
notgeerally representative, (unless someone, other than monica, in a
position to authorize monica to speak for them indicates otherwise).
Monica
LOL! You are a gnat. Did you really expect response? You are not that
important. Deal with it white boy.
s�r`ch�sm
> "s�r`ch�sm" <s�r`ch�s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Hope" <holleratwal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Monica" <yano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > Why aren't you demanding just us
> > for your fellow white man?
>
> >Why did you lie and tell
> >betsy that Donna and I were claiming to be Indians?
>
> *cricket chirping in the silence of monica's evading this question*
>
- [this space available since monica isn't using it to defend her lies]-
>
> >You fed her [bettie] names
> >like an informant and then shrugged and said you are not involved,
> >it's none of your concern.
>
> That was a cheap and weak trick to play on bettie, alright.
>
>
> >Your [monica's] words mean nothing, because you have proven over and over
> >again
> >that you are willing to lie through your teeth whenever it suits your
> >agenda. You flip and flop like a landed fish, giving off the stench
> >of hypocrisy.
>
> Indeed, monica's lies and fabrications negate her words. Even her own
> tribal councilmembers will not support monica's hypocrisy after she lied
> to
> them. Maybe even before she lied to them. Either way, monica's
> reprehensible opinions remain her own to weakly clutch to herself and are
> not generally representative, (unless someone, other than monica, in a
> position to authorize monica to speak for them indicates otherwise).
>
> "monica" evades:
>LOL! You are a gnat.
>
Your opinion has no merit, your words mean nothing.
>
>Did you really expect response?
>
An opportunity was available for a response, rather than assuming silence
meant one thing or another. Even now, it's not being assumed that your
fabrications represent the views of your tribe or band.
>
>You are not that important. Deal with it white boy.
>
Does someone have to be "important" enough or to ask whether or not your
racist opinions represent those of your tribe? Your use of the term "white
boy" shows your racism clearly enough; deal with that you bigoted racist.
Deal with your tribe and band Not supporting your prejudiced opinions as
representative. Deal with the offensive nature of you lying to them. You
won't - you'll stick with believing that your evasions go unnoticed and
unconsidered when considering the source; that being monica as an
established liar without honor.
Hope
An account here? What are you talking about? This isn't a bank. And
since you have lied about *me* I know you most certainly do lie. So
you just told another one.
Hope
What the heck does that have to do with your conspiracy theory? Are
you trying to be betsy's minime again? I can pick something out of
the air and try to get it to stick on you too. Watch.
How many blood sacrifices do you make when you do your bad work
against your enemies? What kind of blood is it?? Prove you do NOT
make blood sacrifices!!
You're constant ROTFLMAOing makes you look like a hyena. And your
actions are doing nothing to dispel that comparison.
s�r`ch�sm
>
> > [snip]
>
> > Your words mean nothing, because you have proven over and over again
> > that you are willing to lie through your teeth whenever it suits your
> > agenda. You flip and flop like a landed fish, giving off the stench
> > of hypocrisy.
>
> I like David
>Exactly.
>
This is exactly why monica imagines that she can ironically use bettie in
her racist vendetta 'against' other "whties" while selectively not
concurring with bettie's criteria if it's applied to someone she "likes".
That's the nature of monica's hypocrisy and that's why her deceptive words
do not carry the weight of validity nor are they representative of her
band/tribe.
>
> and I trust my relatives and friends that vouch for him.
>
>But they did not vouch that he is enrolled, did they? That's all
>betsy cares about. If he's not enrolled, and therefore does not have
>treaties with the US, then in betsy's book he's faux. Did you not
>understand that when she explained her mission?
>
All monica can do is evade, lie, dodge, fabricate ... anything but face her
own hypocrisy. In doing so, she only represents monica.
OldCrow
It is becoming more apparent by the day that both these racist women
(Monica and Ashby) are being seen by many for what they truly are,
Bigoted baffoons with severe personality disorders.
oldwifetale
>
> - Show quoted text -
What's really sad, Old Crow... is that most of these things are being
pointed out by ordinary people who have been brought into it from
various places and points of view. Yet, these same ordinary
individuals whose only commonality is a percentage of 'white blood'
are all speaking out about the same things: lies, hypocrisy, racism,
double-standards, libel, smear tactics, bigotry, harrassment,
stalking, threats, coercion, attempting to suppress free speech, etc.
And specifically in Monica's case, preventing *all* sides of native
issues from being presented and discussed on alt.native (in open
dialogue) without fear of being racially and verbally accosted with
personal attacks.
As i mentioned in an earlier post, i feel that racism is a 'secondary'
issue behind the motivations of Betsy and Monica. But Monica's anti-
white racism has only served to silence those of mixed blood, and now
few are speaking here as freely as they once did. It is a loss on many
levels, but one that Monica doesn't see or feel. That is sort of a by-
product, being able to conduct a 'white out' on alt.native. The real
issue in her case is to silence the 'dissenters' (anyone who
challenges her views). And because she... and Dave... and some others
are so paranoid - for whatever reasons - that those who speak out are
labeled fbi agents coming to discredit them because of the big murder
trials, as if ordinary individuals couldn't possibly see or 'figure
out' what kind of hypocrisy is going on here.
It is all so subtly manipulative. Sizzle and Sarchasm are right.
Neither Betsy or Monica are people of honor and integrity, and they
both see certain people as only 'meat' in their meatspace. Non-human
or objectified. Those two women may be 'strangers' to one another and
racially different, but they are birds of a feather, imo. Whether it's
because of personality disorders or simply that their moral compasses
have gone completely askew, i don't know, and may never.
twofeathers
>
> - Show quoted text -
how about telling me who your great grandpa was or even one of your
great grandparents. bet they were white! sure sounds like they were
as you talk like a white person. mike
Monica
>
> - Show quoted text -
Alt.native died of terminal whiteness.
Monica
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sizzle Flambé
> He's Huron! He's Cheyenne! No, he's, uh, Hurocheyenne!
Nice full beard, Dave! -->
oldwifetale
> > Indeed, monica's lies and fabrications negate her words. Even her own
> > tribal councilmembers will not support monica's hypocrisy after she lied to
> > them. Maybe even before she lied to them. Either way, monica's
> > reprehensible opinions remain her own to weakly clutch to herself and are
> > notgeerally representative, (unless someone, other than monica, in a
> > position to authorize monica to speak for them indicates otherwise).
>
> LOL! You are a gnat. Did you really expect response? You are not that
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's a pretty quick assumption. But thanks for slipping a bit and
letting your true racist colors show. I'd rather 'assume' that your
public online behavior is being "looked into" quietly right now (after
inquiries from *several* different people who live in various parts of
the country) to see the lies, accusations, racism and level of your
offensiveness. And to see if you are publically misrepresenting your
Tribe (especially since you've said the Indians on your rez share your
same views on hating white people). If any response does occur, i'd
'assume' it would ultimately be private, handled internally between
you and members of your own Tribe. The only 'signal' to anyone else
might be a sudden and inexplicable change in your reprehensible
behavior online. Then everyone will know, right? Deal with it, Monica.
Hope
Either that, or she will suddenly decide that it really *would* be
better to have a private site where only people she approves of can
post, as many people have suggested. Hey...
s�r`ch�sm
> "oldwifetale" <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "OldCrow" <awitchbur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Alt.native died of terminal whiteness.
>
More likely that monica's brain functions are diminshed by early onset of
senility and terminal racism. She presents her repetitious evasions to
exihibit symtoms of her condition instead of trying to refute her
fabrications and lies. alt.native remains active, in direct contraction to
monica's faux autopsy comments.
Monica
So says your whtie butt.
Monica
>
> - Show quoted text -
alt.native died of terminal whiteness. It is now alt.www
Monica
>
> - Show quoted text -
Whqt other Indians are posting here besides me. REAL Indians, not
wannabes.
Hope
She does, doesn't she? She uses LOTS of the same tactics and has lots
of the attitudes she claims to hate in the colonizers. She even wants
to colonize a public unmoderated site. Maybe if she were to learn to
speak her native language she would learn a kinder, gentler way of
speaking, more like traditional Elders and less like a bitter apple.
s�r`ch�sm
"Monica" <yan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6bd0b166-194b-4c2f...@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> > > position to authorize monica to speak for them indicates otherwise).
>
> > LOL! You are a gnat. Did you really expect response? You are not that
> > important. Deal with it white boy.
>
How would you know whether or not I'm Anazasi or "white"? Is gossip your
forte`? Do you evade inquiries from your own tribal councilmembers after
you've lied to them too?
>
> how about telling me who your great grandpa was or even one of your
> great grandparents. bet they were white! sure sounds like they were
> as you talk like a white person. mike
>
>
>alt.native died of terminal whiteness
>
Your evasions and deceptions are wearing thinner with each repetition,
monica. Soon, there'll be nothing left but your barren bitterness and the
lies you tell yourself.
Hope
Your refusal to accommodate my preferences is the very reason I am
taking my push pins and going home! How many times have I told you
that I don't like pepperoni?? *sniff*
oldwifetale
>
> - Show quoted text -
Interesting question, although i don't see any 'wannabes' here. Should
we do a Before and After count of *real* Indians posters based on the
year you started posting on a regular basis? As memory serves...
you've insulted and run off almost every person who's ever posted
here, and not only 'white'!
Hope
You're really asking that?? So no one else who posts here is a REAL
Indian? That will be news to a few people, I guess. And it bears
examination. I guess people could look back through the archives
since you've been posting here and see how many real Indians got
disgusted by your "ONLY my positions are allowed!" behavior and left.
The only time I personally witnessed that happen was when LL (a REAL
Indian) confronted you about it and gave up.
You don't get along with Wayne, rarebreed, and certainly not with
Richard. Actually you only get along with 2 or 3 occasional posters.
But like a true egomaniac, rather than looking at your own behavior
and thinking, "Hm...I don't seem to be able to discuss issues civilly
with the posters here. Maybe I need to find a different place," you
demand that everyone else either change, keep quiet, or leave. Good
luck with that. And good luck with your new private site!
oldwifetale
>
> - Show quoted text -
Um, no... my 'white butt' says nothing. What *i* (the whole person) am
saying however... is that i'm 'assuming' that your Tribal council
members have more honor and integrity than you do, and will do the
right things for all concerned - especially if it comes to public
misrepresentation of the Tribe. Even if that positive assumption is
sadly proven wrong, everyone will *know* it by your own future
actions.
Do you have a problem with that, Monica?
Of course i'm continuing to 'assume' that your own Tribe/Nation/Family
is your first and foremost priority... although you do often prove me
wrong on that.
YouPick
"OldCrow" <awitch...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:43e955df-973b-4b2b...@w41g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Key-rec-de-mondo..nd how many *others* are *here* making *us* suffer nd
become *INFECTED* with this INSIDIOUS DISEASE..!!!!!!!!!!!
GOOD GAWD...WHEN WILL I T E N D...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wayne george :-)
s�r`ch�sm
> > tribal councilmembers will not support monica's hypocrisy after she lied
> > to
> > them. Maybe even before she lied to them. Either way, monica's
> > reprehensible opinions remain her own to weakly clutch to herself and
> > are
> > position to authorize monica to speak for them indicates otherwise).
>
> LOL! You are a gnat. Did you really expect response? You are not that
> important. Deal with it white boy.
>
>
>That's a pretty quick assumption. But thanks for slipping a bit and
>letting your true racist colors show.
>
It's likely that those concerned were previously aware of monica's rabid
bigotry, even if they hadn't been reading her racist comments here.
>
>I'd rather 'assume' that your
>public online behavior is being "looked into" quietly right now (after
>inquiries from *several* different people who live in various parts of
>the country) to see the lies, accusations, racism and level of your
>offensiveness. And to see if you are publically misrepresenting your
>Tribe (especially since you've said the Indians on your rez share your
>same views on hating white people).
>
If anyone else has similar, (or other concerns), which would best be brought
to the attention of monica's tribal band chairwoman, the publically listed
e-mail address for Frances Charles is fgch...@elwha.nsn.us ... the same
person monica allegedly wrote, (and lied), to, even if at a different e-mail
address.
>
>If any response does occur, i'd
>'assume' it would ultimately be private, handled internally between
>you and members of your own Tribe. The only 'signal' to anyone else
>might be a sudden and inexplicable change in your reprehensible
>behavior online.
>
That's the most probable way they'd deal with it, although a publically
available response was requested when they were written to, (one letter,
cc'd to two tribal chairpersons of the S'Klallam and publically posted to
alt.native). No response has been received as of this date, however, the
intention to publically post of any such response was directly stated in the
letter, (which may be why they demured so far).
>
>Then everyone will know, right? Deal with it, Monica.
>
She isn't likely to change her entrenched racism, even if her tribe directly
indicates that monica does not speak for the tribe in that matter. After
all, monica is afforded certain 'rights' of free speech, (even hate speech),
by the government she holds in contempt - just as the S'Klallam are afforded
certain financial considerations by the same government whose hand monica
bites even as it helps feed her contemptuous mouth. If monica weren't such
a hypocrit lacking integrity, she'd refuse any and all such 'assistance'
from the "white" goverment her despises.
YouPick
"Hope" <hollera...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e2fad4cb-e1cc-41a9...@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
`
YES..nd may The Bird-wit-a pair-o-dice fly up Her nose..!!!
:-)
s�r`ch�sm
"s r`ch sm" <s r`ch s...@yahoo.com>
> "s r`ch sm" <s r`ch s...@yahoo.com>
>
Removing accented vowels to distort archive records won't help divert or
evade either, monica. Nice try though, for an idiot.
rare breed
> Whqt other Indians are posting here besides me. REAL Indians, not
> wannabes.
Me. YouPick. runningwolf. A few others.
And Guardian's the fauxest FauxIndian(tm) of them all.
Guardian
> Me.
ROFLMAO Trekkers and Goths and Methodists, Oh my!
> And Guardian's the fauxest FauxIndian(tm) of them all.
Alrighty then, you are just not real quick on the uptake are you? So
how many decades are you gong to be a "Medical student?" You are
pushing 30, time to get a job and start paying your mom some rent.
oldwifetale
> On Aug 19, 8:53 pm, rare breed <basenji...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Me.
>
> ROFLMAO Trekkers and Goths and Methodists, Oh my!
>
And Dave Seals? Nuthin' to say there, eh?
rare breed
> And Dave Seals? Nuthin' to say there, eh?
According to Guardian, Indians can't make pop culture jokes.
Sherman Alexie must be a FauxIndian(tm) too.
Oh noes, I just made another pop culture reference.
oldwifetale
You did! I saw it! 1 point for me, that makes up for the point i lost
on 'purim'. :)
Guardian
> And Dave Seals? Nuthin' to say there, eh?
OK...how about "Who is David Seals and why should I care?"
Please keep in mind that I have killfilled a couple of Trolls, so I do
not see their posts unless someone quotes them.
Guardian
> According to Guardian, Indians can't make pop culture jokes.
What? Now just where did you get that from? I said pop cultural
references can reveal someone's AGE and occasionally, their culture.
Are you intentionally twisting my words, or just smoking too much weed
to remember what I wrote?
> Sherman Alexie must be a FauxIndian(tm) too.
By the way, you can not Trademark "FauxIndian" as I created and issued
it as Open Licensed :-)
> Oh noes, I just made another pop culture reference.
You made an age specific, Indian, pop cultural reference. Wonder how
many Anglo Americans would know who "Sherman Alexie" is without having
to google?
oldwifetale
Gosh golly gee, Jolly White Giant... i guess you'll just have to
unkill your trolls and *read* alt.native like the rest of us common
folks posting here. Don't you have some special 'ability'? A super-
power? Can't you just sniff 'em out??? I mean... we already know you
can come down hard on elderly widows, sickly old men and middle-aged
moms, but...
What about your CRITERIA?
"Fe fi fo fum, i smell the blood of an englishman!"
Dave Seals! I just spotted him over there! Yeah, yeah... using the
name O'Brien... no wait... he's over there now... writing books...
making movies... speaking for Indians... THERE HE IS AGAIN!!!!
Faux! Faux!
Guardian
> Gosh golly gee, Jolly White Giant... i guess you'll just have to
> unkill your trolls and *read* alt.native like the rest of us common
> folks posting here.
Why? Essentially, you just said "You should waste your time reading
Trolls like the rest of us who are too ignorant to install a simple
ignore script"
Trolls lie and intentionally misquote others, hence any information
they provide is completely useless.
You asked me about this "David Seals" person. I asked you why I
should care about him. If you have evidence that he is a Predator,
post it or STFU
Hope
> On Aug 20, 1:58 pm, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Gosh golly gee, Jolly White Giant... i guess you'll just have to
> > unkill your trolls and *read* alt.native like the rest of us common
> > folks posting here.
>
> Why? Essentially, you just said "You should waste your time reading
> Trolls like the rest of us who are too ignorant to install a simple
> ignore script"
Nah, that's not what she said. Are you intentionally twisting her
words, or not taking your meds?
>
> Trolls lie and intentionally misquote others, hence any information
> they provide is completely useless.
Boy, you said a mouthful. ;-p
>
> You asked me about this "David Seals" person. I asked you why I
> should care about him. If you have evidence that he is a Predator,
> post it
What is your definition of "Predator" this week?
> or STFU
You're not the boss of her! Neener, neener!!
rare breed
> You did! I saw it! 1 point for me, that makes up for the point i lost
> on 'purim'. :)
Oh, nothing much, it was a reference to a medieval story about
Jews eating the blood of Christian babies in their bread.
Of course, to Bashby, I'm not a RealIndian(tm) unless I'm talking
about the great bear spirit or whatever.
Hope
Doesn't matter. monica is the only REAL Indian here. She done said
so. And she doesn't lie. ;-p
Guardian
On Aug 20, 2:25 pm, rare breed <basenji...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oh, nothing much, it was a reference to a medieval story about
> Jews eating the blood of Christian babies in their bread.
Well thank you for explaining! I have been sitting here trying to
figure out what a Jewish Holiday had to do with Kidneys.
I have not read the "blood of Christian babies in their bread"
story ...and I am not sure I want to :-/
> Of course, to Bashby, I'm not a RealIndian(tm) unless I'm talking
> about the great bear spirit or whatever.
Ahhhh yeah, most of the Indians I know are Christian, with a few Jews,
Muslims and Buddhists in the mix, but do not let that get in the way
of your stereotypical responses.
The important question is "Have you made your bed and cleaned your
room today like a good little boy?"
Guardian
> Doesn't matter. monica is the only REAL Indian here.
Monica is the only REAL Indian here who has chosen to introduce
herself using her REAL identity.
There may well be other REAL Indians behind some of the anonymous
screen names, but there is no way to know, hence the use of the word
"anonymous"
Melodious Thunk
> On Aug 20, 2:25 pm, rare breed <basenji...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Oh, nothing much, it was a reference to a medieval story about
> > Jews eating the blood of Christian babies in their bread.
>
> Well thank you for explaining! I have been sitting here trying to
> figure out what a Jewish Holiday had to do with Kidneys.
>
> I have not read the "blood of Christian babies in their bread"
> story ...and I am not sure I want to :-/
It's actually a very important reference, if you want to have a frame
of reference for the big European wars of the 20th century.
If you do a google search on Martin Luther Christian Baby Blood you'll
probably see what I mean.
>
> > Of course, to Bashby, I'm not a RealIndian(tm) unless I'm talking
> > about the great bear spirit or whatever.
>
> Ahhhh yeah, most of the Indians I know are Christian, with a few Jews,
> Muslims and Buddhists in the mix, but do not let that get in the way
> of your stereotypical responses.
That doesn't jibe with your claims to live within Qualla.
>
> The important question is "Have you made your bed and cleaned your
> room today like a good little boy?"
What is it you're trying to do here on alt.native? I cannot begin to
describe how rude you, and Donna and Kim and this Sizzle, come across
through your writings. Do you really think the work of David Seals is
irrelevant?
Hope
> On Aug 20, 2:45 pm, Hope <holleratwal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Doesn't matter. monica is the only REAL Indian here.
>
> Monica is the only REAL Indian here who has chosen to introduce
> herself using her REAL identity.
I'm curious, how can you be 100% sure that the person sitting at the
keyboard posting is the person identifying themselves by their "real"
identity? I mean, you can verify that a person exists and has a
computer, but you can't know for certain who is using it, can you?
Seems to me we still take a lot for granted.
>
> There may well be other REAL Indians behind some of the anonymous
> screen names, but there is no way to know, hence the use of the word
> "anonymous"
I think you might have misunderstood. When I said "she done said so,"
I was referring to monica. monica has declared she is the only Indian
posting here. And since she believes that only REAL Indians are
human, she also believes her opinion is the only one that matters.
oldwifetale
Look it up, you "ignorant anglo".
> If you have evidence that he is a Predator,
> post it or STFU
Oh are you here looking for predators? Because i'm talkin' to one
right now! Geez, one minute you're looking for 'predators' and the
next minute your trying to 'expose' assholes. What happened to your
'faux Indian' hunt?
Is that no longer part of your 'faux' world?
Gee... what a surprise.
Dave Seals: Is he or isn't he?
Don't wanna go there, eh?
Guardian
> It's actually a very important reference, if you want to have a frame
> of reference for the big European wars of the 20th century.
>
> If you do a google search on Martin Luther Christian Baby Blood you'll
> probably see what I mean.
I might do that, thanks. It sounded like some of the more recent Nazi
garbage.
> That doesn't jibe with your claims to live within Qualla.
I have never claimed to live "within Qualla" but that is not the
point. I do spend some time there and YES, the majority of the
members of the EBCI I know of are Christian...with a few Jews,
Muslims, Buddhists and Pagans as well. If I had to guess I would say
their Tribe is at least 75% Christian...or more?? Hard to say, but
there is practically a Church at every intersection and I suspect
their Christian population figures close to the national average?
> What is it you're trying to do here on alt.native?
Confront Faux Indians
> I cannot begin to describe how rude you, and Donna and Kim and this Sizzle, come
> across through your writings.
Oh I know how rude I come across through my writings because I am
intentionally being rude to rude people. It is the only language they
speak. "When in Rome" so to speak.
> Do you really think the work of David Seals is irrelevant?
I have no idea who David Seals is and I have not seen his "work,"
hence I have no opinion about him at all.
s�r`ch�sm
> > > "s�r`ch�sm" <s�r`ch�s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Monica" <yano...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "oldwifetale" <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "s�r`ch�sm" <s�r`ch�s...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> > > Indeed, monica's lies and fabrications negate her words. Even her own
> > > tribal councilmembers will not support monica's hypocrisy after she
> > > lied to
> > > them. Maybe even before she lied to them. Either way, monica's
> > > reprehensible opinions remain her own to weakly clutch to herself and
> > > are
> > > notgeerally representative, (unless someone, other than monica, in a
> > > position to authorize monica to speak for them indicates otherwise).
>
> LOL! You are a gnat. Did you really expect response? You are not that
> important. Deal with it white boy.
>
>
> > letting your true racist colors show. I'd rather 'assume' that your
> > public online behavior is being "looked into" quietly right now (after
> > inquiries from *several* different people who live in various parts of
> > the country) to see the lies, accusations, racism and level of your
> > offensiveness. And to see if you are publically misrepresenting your
> > Tribe (especially since you've said the Indians on your rez share your
> > same views on hating white people). If any response does occur, i'd
> > 'assume' it would ultimately be private, handled internally between
> > you and members of your own Tribe. The only 'signal' to anyone else
> > might be a sudden and inexplicable change in your reprehensible
> > behavior online. Then everyone will know, right? Deal with it, Monica.
>
> So says your whtie butt.
>
>Um, no... my 'white butt' says nothing. What *i* (the whole person) am
>saying however... is that i'm 'assuming' that your Tribal council
>members have more honor and integrity than you do, and will do the
>right things for all concerned - especially if it comes to public
>misrepresentation of the Tribe. Even if that positive assumption is
>sadly proven wrong, everyone will *know* it by your own future
>actions.
>Do you have a problem with that, Monica?
>Of course i'm continuing to 'assume' that your own Tribe/Nation/Family
>is your first and foremost priority... although you do often prove me
>wrong on that.
>
Her initial letters containing fabrications and outright lies to tribal
councilmembers indicate the level of esteem and priority monica holds them
in. It stands to reason that they can see much of that for themselves and
were merely unaware of monica's current misrepresentations until she,
herself, wrote of them. If it doesn't stand to reason yet, it may have
needed time to sit down and consider consequences.
Melodious Thunk
> On Aug 20, 3:30 pm, Melodious Thunk <thunk.melodi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It's actually a very important reference, if you want to have a frame
> > of reference for the big European wars of the 20th century.
>
> > If you do a google search on Martin Luther Christian Baby Blood you'll
> > probably see what I mean.
>
> I might do that, thanks. It sounded like some of the more recent Nazi
> garbage.
>
> > That doesn't jibe with your claims to live within Qualla.
>
> I have never claimed to live "within Qualla" but that is not the
> point. I do spend some time there and YES, the majority of the
> members of the EBCI I know of are Christian...with a few Jews,
> Muslims, Buddhists and Pagans as well. If I had to guess I would say
> their Tribe is at least 75% Christian...or more?? Hard to say, but
> there is practically a Church at every intersection and I suspect
> their Christian population figures close to the national average?
>
> > What is it you're trying to do here on alt.native?
>
> Confront Faux Indians
>
> > I cannot begin to describe how rude you, and Donna and Kim and this Sizzle, come
> > across through your writings.
>
> Oh I know how rude I come across through my writings because I am
> intentionally being rude to rude people. It is the only language they
> speak. "When in Rome" so to speak.
It is your confrontations with what you call "faux NDNs" that is so
offensive. I don't know how to explain it to you.
There are more than 3 million NDNs in the U.S. Less than 2 million are
enrolled (about 1.5 mil. in fact). Yet the IHS treats more than 1.9
million NDNs. So the govt itself acknowledges that not all NDNs are
enrolled. The statement "not all real NDNs are enrolled" is true per
the govt.
A statement like "the only real NDNs are those that are enrolled" is
true also, especially if you're an enrolled member of a Nation. One
thing people outside of NDN culture don't appreciate is that, from
inside, it doesn't look like the policy of extermination has run its
course. For example just this week an appellate court decided that an
Ohio tribe no longer had any fishing rights in their homeland,
*because they abandoned it!* Nevermind that they were forced at
gunpoint to abandon it. The western Shoshone, today, are fighting to
retain *anything*, because, having never agreed to any treaties with
the U.S., the govt has decided that the Shoshone have *nothing*.
So, as an enrolled member of any federal Tribe, one has every
incentive to fight to the death for your treaty rights, since the govt
has made it abundantly clear that Tribes are lucky to receive *any*
benefit from their treaties. If they don't, they run the very real
risk that their children will receive nothing at all, that all of the
dying will have been for nothing; and extermination will have finally
run its course. *All* Tribes and Nations have fought like crazy to
keep control of their own membership; and none but Tribes should be
able to determine who is a member or not. They all have to work within
the govt-approved framework; for example, the only NDNs that the
Civilized Tribes can choose among as members are those on the Dawes
rolls. No one else is eligible for a CDIB, and the CDIB is necessary
before one can even apply for Tribal membership. (That applies to the
Civilized Nations now in OK; different rules for different Nations,
but they all have govt rolls they are forced to refer to.)
Some people don't understand that NDNs are *not* automatically
enrolled at birth; a large number of NDNs treated by the IHS are
children of enrolled members, certainly NDNs themselves, but
apparently "faux" by your standards. I know of people who grew up
right there in the Talequah area (pretty hills) who have never
enrolled. Some people are turned off by the politics of the Tribe;
that is relevant to my own family.
> > Do you really think the work of David Seals is irrelevant?
>
> I have no idea who David Seals is and I have not seen his "work,"
> hence I have no opinion about him at all.
His books have been influential. You should know more about NDNs and
contemporary NDN culture, given your interests.
Guardian
> If it doesn't stand to reason yet, it may have
> needed time to sit down and consider consequences.
Or maybe they believe in the concept of "Free Speech" and just deleted
your cowardly schoolboy whining to teacher missive?
Hope
>
> > Guardian <guard...@OutoftheDark.com> wrote:
> > Oh I know how rude I come across through my writings because I am
> > intentionally being rude to rude people. It is the only language they
> > speak. "When in Rome" so to speak.
You are the one who brought this whole "faux Indian" issue here,
betsy. You came here to attack a regular poster and accuse her of not
being a "real Indian" because you did not like a couple of things she
had said. You carried that to the most offensive extreme possible.
Then you added the people who protested against that to your list,
never mind that we never even claimed to be Indians. It is dishonest
to claim that you are only being rude because people were rude to you
first. Did you expect flower petals put down in your path after you
announced your intention to "annihilate" people? You showed up here
on a hunt and said so. Do you consider that polite?
>
> It is your confrontations with what you call "faux NDNs" that is so
> offensive. I don't know how to explain it to you.
>
> There are more than 3 million NDNs in the U.S. Less than 2 million are
> enrolled (about 1.5 mil. in fact). Yet the IHS treats more than 1.9
> million NDNs. So the govt itself acknowledges that not all NDNs are
> enrolled. The statement "not all real NDNs are enrolled" is true per
> the govt.
EXCELLENT point.
>
> A statement like "the only real NDNs are those that are enrolled" is
> true also, especially if you're an enrolled member of a Nation. One
> thing people outside of NDN culture don't appreciate is that, from
> inside, it doesn't look like the policy of extermination has run its
> course. For example just this week an appellate court decided that an
> Ohio tribe no longer had any fishing rights in their homeland,
> *because they abandoned it!* Nevermind that they were forced at
> gunpoint to abandon it. The western Shoshone, today, are fighting to
> retain *anything*, because, having never agreed to any treaties with
> the U.S., the govt has decided that the Shoshone have *nothing*.
There is nothing that is right or justifiable about that. It is
shameful.
>
> So, as an enrolled member of any federal Tribe, one has every
> incentive to fight to the death for your treaty rights, since the govt
> has made it abundantly clear that Tribes are lucky to receive *any*
> benefit from their treaties. If they don't, they run the very real
> risk that their children will receive nothing at all, that all of the
> dying will have been for nothing; and extermination will have finally
> run its course. *All* Tribes and Nations have fought like crazy to
> keep control of their own membership; and none but Tribes should be
> able to determine who is a member or not.
I agree with these statements 100%. That is the point I keep trying
to make. It should not up to betsy ashby or me or anyone else but the
Tribes to decide who is Indian and who is not. And it is certainly
not okay to arbitrarily apply some white person's definition,
depending upon whether that person approves of your life or not.
People know in their hearts who and what they are. How can another
person who does not even know me say they have more right than my
ancestors and family and I to tell us what we are?
The sad fact is, people were not speaking out on this issue at all as
long as betsy was only going after Norah Runningwolf and then some
white women. The silence from those whose ancestors have been targets
of this same kind of insidious evil was DEAFENING. But once the SAME
QUESTIONS were applied to David Seals, suddenly people started having
an opinion and saying it wasn't right. Duh! IT IS NOT RIGHT, NO
MATTER WHO THE TARGET IS. It is not right whether it is being done to
Blacks, Indians, Whites, Mixed Bloods, Jews, Arabs, Asians, Catholics,
Atheists, Pagans, women, the disabled, the elderly, the poor, or
anyone else.
It should not matter whether the person is a well-known public figure
like Mr. Seals, or an ordinary citizen like Norah or me. There should
not be different standards, depending on your social position or
religion or politics or who you know. That kind of hypocrisy is what
is often identified as one of the evil attitudes of the colonizers.
But obviously it is not limited to one race or gender or historical
period.
>They all have to work within
> the govt-approved framework; for example, the only NDNs that the
> Civilized Tribes can choose among as members are those on the Dawes
> rolls. No one else is eligible for a CDIB, and the CDIB is necessary
> before one can even apply for Tribal membership. (That applies to the
> Civilized Nations now in OK; different rules for different Nations,
> but they all have govt rolls they are forced to refer to.)
>
> Some people don't understand that NDNs are *not* automatically
> enrolled at birth; a large number of NDNs treated by the IHS are
> children of enrolled members, certainly NDNs themselves, but
> apparently "faux" by your standards. I know of people who grew up
> right there in the Talequah area (pretty hills) who have never
> enrolled. Some people are turned off by the politics of the Tribe;
> that is relevant to my own family.
It was relevant in my own family too.
>
> > > Do you really think the work of David Seals is irrelevant?
>
> > I have no idea who David Seals is and I have not seen his "work,"
> > hence I have no opinion about him at all.
>
> His books have been influential. You should know more about NDNs and
> contemporary NDN culture, given your interests.
This is about a bit more than whether Mr. Seals wrote good books or
not. It is about who is qualified to judge what a person is and is
not, and whether it is ethical to pry into people's lives and "punish"
them because you don't approve of them and think you can get away with
it legally.
I am not judging his works as influential or irrelevant. That is
beside the point--or should be, IMO. I am trying to point out that
NONE of us are irrelevant just because one person decides we are not
even human beings, or another decides that we don't meet her personal
standards and so deserve to be become a trophy hide to nail up on the
side of the barn from now until everything rots away.
If that kind of behavior is not wrong today, then how can you say it
was wrong a hundred years ago, or five hundred? And if you are not
willing to speak out against it when it happens to someone else, how
can you complain when it is done to you and yours?
s�r`ch�sm
> "s�r`ch�sm" <s�r`ch�s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> If it doesn't stand to reason yet, it may have
> needed time to sit down and consider consequences.
>
>Or maybe they believe in the concept of "Free Speech" ...
>
Since it has already been previously indicated that the person who initiated
the "whining", (monica), retains the freedom to hold any
racist/bigoted/prejudiced opinions she cares to hold, their concern would
rest in whether or not such personal opinions are representative of the
tribe/band. The band/tribe can either permit monica to tacitly speak for
them, or not. This is their choice, not monica's, yours or mine.
>
>...and just deleted your ...
>
Deletion without consideration is a possibility, albeit inconsiderate.
>
>... cowardly schoolboy whining to teacher missive?
>
Your false characterizations, given that the letters and the appended
refutations were posted on alt.native and arw, reveal more about your
personal trolling agenda than others have. To reiterate the crux which you
are attempting to divert from; monica attempted to preempt others by
allegedly sending letters to two tribal/band chairpersons. These letters
were posted by her to alt.native and arw. These same letters were refuted
on arw and alt.native and those refutations werre appended to monica's
letters and sent to the same two chairpersons in order to request
clarification on whether or not monica's personal opinions represent those
of her tribe/band. If you are too poor to pay attention and lack the
ability to get a 'loan', that's due to your own deficient mental 'credit
score'.
oldwifetale
Thank you, Kim, i could not have said it nearly as well. Those are
exactly my feelings on it also, including the part about Dave Seals. I
am sure that MT realizes (or maybe will) that neither of us are
*enjoying* this battle with Betsy Ashby. Neither of us have threatened
her with anything, nor Monica or anyone else. First it was simply that
we were speaking out about what she was doing to Wolfie, and because
of that, we were next on Betsy's 'smear' list. If we are being
threatened *here*, there is nowhere to go but *here* to deal with it
until/unless she makes good on her threats. I am sorry to see we don't
have a little more support on this issue, but for us, at this point,
there is not a lot of choice but to stand up against certain bullies
on the internet. We have both come to that conclusion based on sound
reasoning.
MT is a poster i like and respect, even when we disagree on various
'points' sometimes - annoying people with rudeness is not something i
aspire to do, and i was hoping that *some* here would know me well
enough by now to see that it is 'circumstance' that requires us to be
more 'assertive' than usual. So... hopefully there will be *some*
understanding from MT and certain others... regarding this matter of
an unknown 'white woman' coming here to throw her weight around, and
to 'annihilate' people and tell alt.native posters who has the right
to voice an opinion and who doesn't - based on their blood quantum and
enrollment status. To say that she can't find anything to 'pin' on us
criminally, but she will wage an internet smear campaign simply
because we are "assholes" for defending Wolfie is beyond anything i
would call 'acceptable behavior' here... and we have to speak for
ourselves, and personally i will continue doing so as long as she
continues to make threats. Just because she's abusive does not mean we
have to sit still and take it as 'victims'. Hasn't she already left
enough victims in her wake?
Sizzle Flambé
> What is it you're trying to do here on alt.native? I cannot begin to
> describe how rude you, and Donna and Kim and this Sizzle, come across
> through your writings. Do you really think the work of David Seals is
> irrelevant?
So you're willing to speak up for David Seals. That's nice.
Did I blink and miss your speaking up for Norah RunningWolf?
Or do only Big Name Authors draw your concern?
Sizzle Flambé
> On Aug 20, 11:46 am, rare breed <basenji529 @ yahoo.com> wrote:
> ...
> > Sherman Alexie must be a FauxIndian(tm) too.
>
> By the way, you can not Trademark "FauxIndian"
> as I created and issued it as Open Licensed :-)
Basenji wasn't claiming to put *his* trademark on it.
"We coined the phrase 'Faux Indian' so we get to write
the definition too." <http://www.pagan.com/FauxIndians/>
Sizzle Flambé
> I have no idea who David Seals is ...
Look at the title of the thread you're posting in. DUHHHH.
Now go to the top of the thread. How hard was *that*?
Sizzle Flambé
> On Aug 20, 2:53 am, oldwifetale <oldwifetale @ yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > And Dave Seals? Nuthin' to say there, eh?
>
> OK...how about "Who is David Seals and why should I care?"
Aren't you the Great Faux Indian Hunter?
And what is the title of this thread?
Sizzle Flambé
> You asked me about this "David Seals" person.
> I asked you why I should care about him.
And what is the title of the post in which you asked?
twofeathers
> On Aug 19, 11:22 am, Monica <yano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 19, 10:54 am, oldwifetale <oldwifet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Indeed, monica's lies and fabrications negate her words. Even her own
> > > > > tribal councilmembers will not support monica's hypocrisy after she lied to
> > > > > them. Maybe even before she lied to them. Either way, monica's
> > > > > reprehensible opinions remain her own to weakly clutch to herself and are
> > > > > notgeerally representative, (unless someone, other than monica, in a
> > > > > position to authorize monica to speak for them indicates otherwise).
>
> > > > LOL! You are a gnat. Did you really expect response? You are not that
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > That's a pretty quick assumption. But thanks for slipping a bit and
> > > letting your true racist colors show. I'd rather 'assume' that your
> > > public online behavior is being "looked into" quietly right now (after
> > > inquiries from *several* different people who live in various parts of
> > > the country) to see the lies, accusations, racism and level of your
> > > offensiveness. And to see if you are publically misrepresenting your
> > > Tribe (especially since you've said the Indians on your rez share your
> > > same views on hating white people). If any response does occur, i'd
> > > 'assume' it would ultimately be private, handled internally between
> > > you and members of your own Tribe. The only 'signal' to anyone else
> > > might be a sudden and inexplicable change in your reprehensible
> > > behavior online. Then everyone will know, right? Deal with it, Monica.
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Um, no... my 'white butt' says nothing. What *i* (the whole person) am
> saying however... is that i'm 'assuming' that your Tribal council
> members have more honor and integrity than you do, and will do the
> right things for all concerned - especially if it comes to public
> misrepresentation of the Tribe. Even if that positive assumption is
> sadly proven wrong, everyone will *know* it by your own future
> actions.
>
> Do you have a problem with that, Monica?
>
> Of course i'm continuing to 'assume' that your own Tribe/Nation/Family
> is your first and foremost priority... although you do often prove me
>
> - Show quoted text -
i would question her even having a tribal council to talk to, unless
it is european or african. she might be one of those african indian
princess's, people hear of. mike
Guardian
> It is your confrontations with what you call "faux NDNs" that is so
> offensive. I don't know how to explain it to you.
I do not know how to explain to you that I am intentionally being
offensive in my confrontations with Faux Indians?
> For example just this week an appellate court decided that an
> Ohio tribe no longer had any fishing rights in their homeland,
> *because they abandoned it!*
I just read about that...SOOOOO NOT GOOD :-(
> Some people don't understand that NDNs are *not* automatically
> enrolled at birth; a large number of NDNs treated by the IHS are
> children of enrolled members, certainly NDNs themselves, but
> apparently "faux" by your standards.
I think you might have been reading the Trolls who like to quote me
out of context? I DO understand (as much as an outsider can) about
issues like descendants without sufficient blood quantum, forced
disenrollments, adoptions, etc. which is why I always ask "What
Indians claim you?" when no Tribe/Nation is forthcoming. Thus far, no
real Indian, or descendant, etc. has had a problem with this
question...only people who are lying through their teeth seem to get
irate.
> His books have been influential. You should know more about NDNs and
> contemporary NDN culture, given your interests.
I should probably know more about contemporary Anglo culture
too ...but I tend to lean towards the technical and/or scientific
stuff when I have a chance to read. I do not read non-fiction at all,
and I have almost no idea who "stars" in what on the TV like most of
my friends do :-/
I will give Mr. Seals work a look see since he seems to cause quite a
stir :-)
Sizzle Flambé
> i would question her even having a tribal council to talk to, unless
> it is european or african. she might be one of those african indian
> princess's, people hear of. mike
Are you suggesting the "Monica Charles" on this newsgroup
isn't the same "Monica Charles" of real-life Klallam Territory?
Guardian
> You are the one who brought this whole "faux Indian" issue here,
> betsy.
Correct.
> You came here to attack a regular poster and accuse her of not
> being a "real Indian" because you did not like a couple of things she
> had said.
Well if you equate confronting someone with their own words as an
"attack" ..then you are correct.
> You carried that to the most offensive extreme possible.
Incorrect. You really must have low standards when it comes to being
"offensive?"
> Then you added the people who protested
by insulting and flat out lying about me as opposed to addressing the
actual issue.
> against that to your list,
> never mind that we never even claimed to be Indians.
I never said you claimed to be Indian, I said you were an Anglo
asshole on an Indian forum. Still are.
> It is dishonest
> to claim that you are only being rude because people were rude to you
> first.
No it is NOT! You got "rude" because you gave "rude"
> Did you expect flower petals put down in your path after you
> announced your intention to "annihilate" people?
Do you understand the difference between an artificial CONSTRUCT and a
person?
> You showed up here
> on a hunt and said so. Do you consider that polite?
No, I consider that honest.
> It is about who is qualified to judge what a person is and is
> not,
If you are refering to the questions of who should decide who is
Indian and who is not...the answer is "Indians"
> and whether it is ethical to pry into people's lives and "punish"
> them because you don't approve of them
Exposing the Truth of what someone has posted ON-LINE is only
"punishment" when they are LYING ...when they are telling the truth,
it is called "free advertising"
> and think you can get away with it legally.
It costs about $150.00 an hour to find out :-)
Guardian
> their concern would
> rest in whether or not such personal opinions are representative of the
> tribe/band.
Why? She is not a member of her Tribal Government, or even work for
her tribe that I know of ...she is just a citizen with an opinion.
Should the Mayor of the Town you live in be concerned about what you
write on the Internet because you might make your town look bad?
You seem to think she should give up her right to Free Speech (and
thought) because she is an Enrolled Tribal Member. How racist can you
get?
> The band/tribe can either permit monica to tacitly speak for
> them, or not. This is their choice, not monica's, yours or mine.
Correct, if they want her to speak for them, "tacitly" or otherwise, I
am sure they will elect her to some position and give her a title and
an office with a nice view. Until then, she is just an ordinary
citizen of her Nation...with an opinion you do not like, so you went
running to government officials.
We have a name for weak little people like you where I come from ..
NARC NARC NARC
> Deletion without consideration is a possibility, albeit inconsiderate.
Deletion without consideration is highly likely, 'cause no one likes a
tattletale.
Guardian
inane drivel:
Are you the same "Mike TwoFeathers" I know who used to "organize" (if
you can call it that) Rainbow Gatherings?
Sizzle Flambé
> I do not read non-fiction at all....
This explains *everything*, doesn't it?
Sizzle Flambé
> On Aug 20, 5:15 pm, Hope <holleratwaller @ gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> > Did you expect flower petals put down in your path after
> > you announced your intention to "annihilate" people?
>
> Do you understand the difference between an artificial
> CONSTRUCT and a person?
Betsy Ashby Guardian feels no ethical nor moral restraint because
she really does not consider that she is attacking "real people".
Those she attacks are just "toys" to her (as she said to Zayton).
What clearer statement of a sociopathic worldview could one make?
s�r`ch�sm
> "s�r`ch�sm" <s�r`ch�s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> their concern would
> rest in whether or not such personal opinions are representative of the
> tribe/band.
>Why? She is not a member of her Tribal Government, or even work for
>her tribe that I know of ...she is just a citizen with an opinion.
>
There seems to be a question of whether or not she's an Elder or an elder.
If the former, she doesn't have to be a member of tribal government for her
'opinions' to 'speak for' the tribe. If the latter, her opinions do not
'speak for' her tribe. As stated in the part you snipped; since it has
already been previously indicated that the person who initiated the
"whining", (monica), retains the freedom to hold any
racist/bigoted/prejudiced opinions she cares to hold, their [her tribe's]
concern would rest in whether or not such personal opinions are
representative of the tribe/band.
>
>You seem to think she should give up her right to Free Speech (and
>thought) because she is an Enrolled Tribal Member.
>
As stated in the part of the context you snipped; since it has already been
previously indicated that the person who initiated the "whining", (monica),
retains the freedom to hold any
racist/bigoted/prejudiced opinions she cares to hold, their [her tribe's]
concern would rest in whether or not such personal opinions are
representative of the tribe/band.
>
>How racist can you get?
>
Since I don't "seem to think" what you've tried to insinuate, as shown by
restoring what I did actually write above, your racist accusation doesn't
follow. It's merely the same type of diversionary bullshit as monicaa tries
to unsucessfully pull. How stupid can you get, (and more importantly, is
there a limit to your stupidity or, does it just go on and on)?
>
> The band/tribe can either permit monica to tacitly speak for
> them, or not. This is their choice, not monica's, yours or mine.
>
>Correct, if they want her to speak for them, "tacitly" or otherwise, I am
>sure ...
>
If they want her as an Elder opinions to represent those of her tribe/band
then they'll remain silent, (as they have thusfar).
>
>Until then, she is just an ordinary citizen of her Nation...with an opinion
>you do not like,
>
If she is an ordinary elder, rather than an Elder, I've already stated that
she retains the freedom to hold any racist/bigoted/prejudiced opinions she
cares to hold and that it was not being assumed that those personal opinions
represented those of her tribe/band. Try to stay focussed on what was
stated, not what you're trying to fabricate.
>
>so you went running to government officials.
>
Here's one of your fabrications mentioned; no "running to government
officials" occurred except by monica, since _monica_ indicated that she
wrote to them FIRST. A reply refuting her false accusations and
fabrications was appended to those letters she claimed to have sent FIRST
and sent to the SAME two chairpersons she sent her original fabrications to.
Staying with the actual sequence of events so far or, are you still lost in
the fog of your own disinformation?
>
>We have a name for weak little people like you where I come from ...
>
Yeah, we have a name for people like you too; lying sacks of shit. It isn't
"weak" to request clarification on whether or not an alleged tribal
"Elder's" bigoted views represent those of her tribe. It is weak to support
someone who did go "running to government officials" to fabricate lies in
order to falsely "narc" on them. You're a hypocrit and demonstrably
mentally deficient insofar as the basic ability to reason goes.
>
>Deletion without consideration is highly likely, 'cause no one likes a
>tattletale.
>
Then her own council members, which monica initiated the fabricated
'tattling' to, must not like her - according to what passes for reasoning
for you. BTW, you've 'deleted' the part which 'annilates' your whole
diversion - restored for context:
Melodious Thunk
I will reply here to Kim and Donna also if you don't mind. Thank you
for the kind words, Donna.
I think that Seals (and Ms. Charles too) is unforgivably adversarial
with his public words. Reading both of them is sometimes indescribably
offensive to me. But like every topic I've seen on alt.native, this is
not a simple issue and there is no "good, bad, true, or false" about
it. There is *no* single Truth, Hope. (IMO of course.)
First, I spoke up at the characterization of Seals' writing as
irrelevant. I didn't speak up for the man, I know nothing of him. Men
make mistakes all the time; moreover, some facets of a man can be
clearly "good" and some facets clearly "other than good." Americans
forget how much Hitler was revered both here and throughout Europe
during the 1930s. He was the "Most Respected Man" among Princeton
freshmen for two years in a row, 1938 and 1939. (2nd place was
Einstein, who had just joined Princeton.) Jefferson is a revered
Founding Father, also a slave keeper and a man who instituted the
removal policies that dominated US-Indian relations for the next
hundred years. Crazy Horse is a revered Lakota leader, in a Nation
notable for its leadership, whose leadership skills are studied at
major business schools (possibly the most effective non-coercive
leader yet known); yet he also stole a man's wife, for which the
wronged warrior shot him in the face; and the Tribe stripped him of
his most respected title within the community. All people (like all
other beings) are complex, multifaceted entities. Hitler, Jefferson,
and Crazy Horse are not simply "evil" or "good" men. Seals and Charles
are not simply dehumanizing racists. And whatever they, neither Seals
nor Ms Charles are irrelevant. Seals books and other writing have been
influential both in the mainstream and among NDNs. Likewise, Ms
Charles was a participant in (IMO) the most influential "pan-NDN" acts
ever committed: AIM's occupation of Alcatraz and the BIA.
It is not that the "dehumanizing racism" isn't true (it is). It is
that many things are true, not just one. Let's start with the racism.
You can argue until you're blue in the face that whites *can* be
attacked racially, or discriminated against, but you should be aware
that many NDN children grow up with hatred for whites instilled into
them. NDN parents have 20 generations of proof for this; it is a
survival strategy. Several posts recently talked of Chief Joseph
Medicine Crow; I took great offense at the Medal of Honor being
described as the "cherry on top" of his life. He wrote a short
autobiography, "Counting Coup," where he talked of his life up through
World War 2; his life was defined by his (usually disastrous)
relationship with the whites around him. When Two Elks implies that he
and his "skins take no shit from anyone else, since they band together
for mutual support, he's reflecting that same teaching. Hatred and
fear of whites is the only reason there are any NDNs at all today
(this doesn't mean that NDNs and whites or anyone else cannot be
friends and family; those are more "truths"). When Ms Charles screams
her hatred of whites, she reflects the experience of the scant few
People where she lives. Read the history! Large populations were
reduce to dozens when not entirely eliminated. Whatever the woman is,
she is far less (genetically & culturally) than she is supposed to be.
So it is not wrong to instill fear (apprehension, wariness, distrust)
of whites into NDN children; it is how you assure survival "unto seven
generations." You may wish to point out that it is counterproductive
in the present day, but I've tried to articulate that not all NDNs
agree with that... and for good reason. It may not be
counterproductive tomorrow.
Let's talk about the *assertiveness* that Ms Charles demonstrates (if
Seals was raised NDN, this applies to him too). In American everyone
must aggressively assert their rights. That is a given, and people
like Kim and Donna do not hesitate to demonstrate it. Yet, aggression
is not conducive to harmonious societies; and NDNs, who live among
their own and have done so for thousands of years, do not naturally
come by this aggression. Ms. Cordova, the Apache philosopher,
identified this trait (this lack of assertiveness) as the biggest
obstacle to college for NDN youth. Ms Charles (and perhaps Seals) are
to be commended as role models: they are standing up firmly to
rudeness, and bullying; and have both had success in situations where
fighting for your rights and your opportunities are required. So both
of these are true: I am deeply offended by Ms Charles and Mr Seals,
*and* I hold them up as appropriate role models for today's (NDN)
youth. The fact that you hear those two articulate feeling that
probably the majority of NDNs have at least passingly shared, is
simply remarkable. Where else have you heard it?
Maybe you can understand this now without thinking I'm simply a
blatant racist: I'm at least a quarter white (maybe more) but this
assertiveness has been the bane of my whole work history; and it made
all the difference in the world when I married a white woman who knew
how to assert herself on my behalf. To this day she is the one who
deals with publishers and governments and health care... and my family
is far the better for it.
Now I've used NDN throughout this post and all NDNs have different
points of view, so I need to provide a frame of reference to talk
about Wolfie. NDN to me is my side of the family, and the urban People
of several Tribes whom I grew up around, and the many People I have
met of all Nations throughout my life. If there's one inter-tribal
truism, it is that NDNs tend to be people of firm opinions. Another is
that NDNs tend to understand that others not only may have differing
opinions, but that their truths, different from yours, *are also
truths* with equal weight to yours. Therefore a term like "Human
Being" or "Real People" doesn't dehumanize others so much as it simply
delineates shared traditions. You're not the "Real People" if you
don't share the story of Selu and Kana'Ti; but I might marry your
daughter, or she might marry my son. If either of those happens, *I*
or my son will no longer be of the "Real People"... perhaps then I
will be a "Human Being" or even a "White Man." And yet another
intertribal truism is that NDN means different things to different
NDNs... and they're *all* true.
So I was quite offended when Hope insisted that Monica affirm Hope's
viewpoint that someone else is an NDN.
Then I went on vacation. I have no opinion on Wolfie's Indian-ness; I
don't know the woman. I like reading her posts and have told her so.
She posts as a beautiful soul. If she has misrepresented herself, I am
completely tolerant of it, not because of any blind loyalty nor
chauvinism, but simply because I am knowledgeable of female
neurochemistry. (You don't ask women their age, race notwithstanding;
their chemistry precludes a rational answer, and changes with age.)
The loss of a life partner is the deepest I know. I expect Wolfie to
know that anyone who read of it shares her grief.
The treatment of Wolfie here on alt.native has been unforgivable both
before and after. I have told Guardian what I thought of it.
Hope, and some others, I do apologize for not replying to you even
when I've said I will. I have time & pain management issues. And I am
sorry to have spoken so long. I hope you each find something to make
the read worthwhile.
runningwolf
> On Aug 19, 10:59 am, "sâr`châsm" <sâr`châs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Hope" <holleratwal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "Monica" <yano...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > "Hope" <holleratwal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > [snip]
>
> > > > Your words mean nothing, because you have proven over and over again
> > > > that you are willing to lie through your teeth whenever it suits your
> > > > agenda. You flip and flop like a landed fish, giving off the stench
> > > > of hypocrisy.
>
> > > I like David
> > >Exactly.
>
> > This is exactly why monica imagines that she can ironically use bettie in
> > her racist vendetta 'against' other "whties" while selectively not
> > concurring with bettie's criteria if it's applied to someone she "likes".
> > That's the nature of monica's hypocrisy and that's why her deceptive words
> > do not carry the weight of validity nor are they representative of her
> > band/tribe.
>
> > > and I trust my relatives and friends that vouch for him.
>
> > >But they did not vouch that he is enrolled, did they? That's all
> > >betsy cares about. If he's not enrolled, and therefore does not have
> > >treaties with the US, then in betsy's book he's faux. Did you not
> > >understand that when she explained her mission?
>
> > All monica can do is evade, lie, dodge, fabricate ... anything but face her
> > own hypocrisy. In doing so, she only represents monica.
>
> > > That's INDIAN princess.
>
> > >There no such thing as Indian princess. You confused. ;-p
>
> It is becoming more apparent by the day that both these racist women
> (Monica and Ashby) are being seen by many for what they truly are,
> Bigoted baffoons with severe personality disorders.
however, both have made valuable contributions to this board.
Guardian
exceedingly long list of lame justifications trying to prove she is
not a NARC NARC NARC
Sizzle Flambé
wrote...
... a heartfelt and very deeply affecting reply. Thank you.
No further comments just now, as I'll be reflecting on it a while.
s�r`ch�sm
s�r`ch�sm
[context restored]
s�r`ch�sm
news:aaf1468f-ea2c-47fb...@k30g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
> "s�r`ch�sm" <s�r`ch�s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> an exceedingly long list of lame justifications trying to prove ...
>
Adaquately demonstrating that you dodge and evade like any common troll
isn't lame, it's just more obvious now that you dodge rather than refute.
>
>she is not a NARC NARC NARC
>
That would be monica; a reply refuting her false accusations and
Sizzle Flambé
wrote:
> > On Aug 20, 2:30 pm, Melodious Thunk <thunk.melodi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > What is it you're trying to do here on alt.native? I cannot begin to
> > > describe how rude you, and Donna and Kim and this Sizzle, come across
>
> I think that Seals (and Ms. Charles too) is unforgivably adversarial
> with his public words. Reading both of them is sometimes indescribably
> offensive to me.
Then were you as quick and outspoken with your objections to *them*?
There have been studies done about what happens at meetings when one
party begins making inappropriate, derogatory, or hostile remarks. If
they're *quickly* contradicted and rebuked, this can quash the bad
behavior at the start. If no-one speaks up, or worse, if the next
speaker encourages it, the bad behavior can get engrained and spread.
So there's a practical aspect of "silence gives consent".
What did you feed their bad behavior? A rebuke, in the hope of a quick
shut-down? Or a consenting silence?
Hope
> On Aug 20, 5:15 pm, Hope <holleratwal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You are the one who brought this whole "faux Indian" issue here,
> > betsy.
>
> Correct.
>
> > You came here to attack a regular poster and accuse her of not
> > being a "real Indian" because you did not like a couple of things she
> > had said.
>
> Well if you equate confronting someone with their own words as an
> "attack" ..then you are correct.
You just told MT that you are *intentionally offensive* to faux
Indians, which you labeled Wolfie. You did a bit more than simply
confront her with her own words. But if you don't want to own that,
that's fine too. It's still in the archives.
You just said that monica has a right to exercise free speech. "An
ordinary citizen with an opinion." Why was the same not true of
Wolfie? Why is it not true for the rest of us here? Is free speech
only a valid defense for people you approve of for one reason or
another? If they exercise free speech and it offends you in any way,
is that a good reason to launch a life-long public bitch about it?
That seems like a reasonable, balanced reaction to you? Come on now,
really?
> > You carried that to the most offensive extreme possible.
>
> Incorrect. You really must have low standards when it comes to being
> "offensive?"
I consider taunting someone who has just lost a loved one and is
grieving, declaring you don't believe he is really dead and demanding
that she get up off the floor and go fetch proof for you, as if you
had some kind of right to that, about as offensive as it gets. If you
are in the habit of doing *worse* than that, as you seem to imply,
then truthfully, I don't think *I* am the one with the "low standards"
issue.
>
> > Then you added the people who protested
>
> by insulting and flat out lying about me as opposed to addressing the
> actual issue.
What lies did I tell about you? You definitely told some about me.
So do we both need to apologize?
I considered the actual issue that you made a public declaration of
"hunting" someone you decided was a faux Indian BEFORE you had proof
of wrongdoing on her part, according to your own guidelines. You
decided she was guilty first and then went looking for evidence. You
STILL have provided no proof she did any of the things on your list of
faux Indian identifiers. Was the "actual issue" something else?
>
> > against that to your list,
> > never mind that we never even claimed to be Indians.
>
> I never said you claimed to be Indian, I said you were an Anglo
> asshole on an Indian forum. Still are.
*LOL* If you admit I never claimed to be an Indian, then how in the
world can I be a FAUX Indian?? Yes, I certainly can be a first-rate
asshole. So can you. I can also be quite nice, and so can you.
Being an asshole is not a crime. If it were, the vast majority of the
population would be in jail. And launching a life-long public
vendetta against people for being an asshole, when you are often one
yourself, seems almost a self-hating kind of behavior.
Do you have some kind of evidence that this public forum is for
Indians only, and that posting here without an enrollment number is a
punishable offense? You have done a lot of posting here yourself, so
you would have to include yourself in that. And as I said, I was
ready to stop posting here until you declared this your hunting
ground. Then I felt obligated to stay. Quite ironic.
It just seems weird to me. Since you yourself have stated that there
are literally thousands of real frauds (oxymoronic, ain't it?) out
there ripping gullible people off by pretending to be Indians, *this*
stuff is really what you're choosing to spend your time and resources
on? *This* is what you want recognition for? "Betsy Ashby, Asshole
Exposer" All righty then!
>
> > It is dishonest
> > to claim that you are only being rude because people were rude to you
> > first.
>
> No it is NOT! You got "rude" because you gave "rude"
Yes it is SO! Neener neener! See above and below. ;-p
> > Did you expect flower petals put down in your path after you
> > announced your intention to "annihilate" people?
>
> Do you understand the difference between an artificial CONSTRUCT and a
> person?
I understand that it is REAL HUMAN BEINGS you go after, and that what
you do affects REAL PEOPLE. Who creates these "constructs" of which
you speak, Pleiadians?
>
> > You showed up here
> > on a hunt and said so. Do you consider that polite?
>
> No, I consider that honest.
We considered it rude. Therefore we felt you were rude first and we
responded accordingly. You think it's fine and dandy for YOU to do
that, don't you? Well, that's what we felt we did. Why is it only
wrong when someone else does it?
>
> > It is about who is qualified to judge what a person is and is
> > not,
>
> If you are refering to the questions of who should decide who is
> Indian and who is not...the answer is "Indians"
But only if they are enrolled and have treaties with the government,
according to you, right? So is it really the Indians deciding, or the
white folks?
>
> > and whether it is ethical to pry into people's lives and "punish"
> > them because you don't approve of them
>
> Exposing the Truth of what someone has posted ON-LINE is only
> "punishment" when they are LYING ...when they are telling the truth,
> it is called "free advertising"
Well, it's true that "free advertising" would be great for the book I
am writing. It would be quite ironic if you actually helped me sell
it. *LOL*
But if you get it wrong, as you already have about others, you are not
"exposing the Truth (capital "T,") are you? You're just smearing the
with what you CLAIM is Truth. And you don't only post what the person
themselves has posted online, now do you? You post information about
them that *other* people have put online. And you use special tools
that law enforcement agencies use to dig stuff up about them. And you
go OFF-LINE with it, as you did calling the local sheriff to ask
questions about Ray's death, and ordering copies of Donna's
publications.
Is all that still justified just because it's your OPINION that
someone is an asshole? Isn't that just a bit of overkill? And you
say Wolfie has no life? We all have a life. The difference is what
you choose to invest that life *in.*
And you know, since I have experienced the fact that what you publish
as truth about what people are doing online is NOT always true, I am
dubious of your ability to judge online truths accurately. I don't
say that to be insulting, I say it because it's a fact. I'm really
actually glad you did that, because otherwise I might have had a lot
more doubt whether some of the things you've said about other people
were likely to be true.
Betsy, I really think that unless you can provide LEGAL PROOF of who
was actually sitting at a keyboard when things were typed, you need to
be very careful what you state as "FACT" about people on your public
site for identifying Faux-Indians and Predators. But do as you feel
best.
>
> > and think you can get away with it legally.
>
> It costs about $150.00 an hour to find out :-)
*LOL* Not for me, it wouldn't.
Yum, irony is so delicious. ;-)
Hope
[...]
>
> There seems to be a question of whether or not she's an Elder or an elder.
> If the former, she doesn't have to be a member of tribal government for her
> 'opinions' to 'speak for' the tribe. If the latter, her opinions do not
> 'speak for' her tribe. As stated in the part you snipped; since it has
> already been previously indicated that the person who initiated the
> "whining", (monica), retains the freedom to hold any
> racist/bigoted/prejudiced opinions she cares to hold, their [her tribe's]
> concern would rest in whether or not such personal opinions are
> representative of the tribe/band.
>
> >You seem to think she should give up her right to Free Speech (and
> >thought) because she is an Enrolled Tribal Member.
>
> As stated in the part of the context you snipped; since it has already been
> previously indicated that the person who initiated the "whining", (monica),
> retains the freedom to hold any
> racist/bigoted/prejudiced opinions she cares to hold, their [her tribe's]
> concern would rest in whether or not such personal opinions are
> representative of the tribe/band.
>
There is snippage going on, without the presence of ellipses?? I am
AGHAST!
>
> >How racist can you get?
>
> Since I don't "seem to think" what you've tried to insinuate, as shown by
> restoring what I did actually write above, your racist accusation doesn't
> follow. It's merely the same type of diversionary bullshit as monicaa tries
> to unsucessfully pull. How stupid can you get, (and more importantly, is
> there a limit to your stupidity or, does it just go on and on)?
>
More snippage chicanery?? What in the wide, wide world of sports is
this world coming to?
>
[...]
>
> >Until then, she is just an ordinary citizen of her Nation...with an opinion
> >you do not like,
Hey, much like we citizens who have opinions monica and betsy don't
like! It really does go both ways, even if some people only use one-
way mirrors.
>
> If she is an ordinary elder, rather than an Elder, I've already stated that
> she retains the freedom to hold any racist/bigoted/prejudiced opinions she
> cares to hold and that it was not being assumed that those personal opinions
> represented those of her tribe/band. Try to stay focussed on what was
> stated, not what you're trying to fabricate.
>
>
>
> >so you went running to government officials.
>
> Here's one of your fabrications mentioned; no "running to government
> officials" occurred except by monica, since _monica_ indicated that she
> wrote to them FIRST. A reply refuting her false accusations and
> fabrications was appended to those letters she claimed to have sent FIRST
> and sent to the SAME two chairpersons she sent her original fabrications to.
> Staying with the actual sequence of events so far or, are you still lost in
> the fog of your own disinformation?
What derogatory name is there for a person who preemptively goes
running to tattle that they think someone is going to tattle? I think
I missed school the day they learned that. I was sick a lot in first
grade.
>
>
>
> >We have a name for weak little people like you where I come from ...
>
> Yeah, we have a name for people like you too; lying sacks of shit. It isn't
> "weak" to request clarification on whether or not an alleged tribal
> "Elder's" bigoted views represent those of her tribe. It is weak to support
> someone who did go "running to government officials" to fabricate lies in
> order to falsely "narc" on them. You're a hypocrit and demonstrably
> mentally deficient insofar as the basic ability to reason goes.
>
>
>
> >Deletion without consideration is highly likely, 'cause no one likes a
> >tattletale.
Well, obviously that just isn't true. How many of the world's
government organizations (especially those with initials for names)
could do their thing without tattletales?
>
> Then her own council members, which monica initiated the fabricated
> 'tattling' to, must not like her - according to what passes for reasoning
> for you. BTW, you've 'deleted' the part which 'annilates' your whole
> diversion - restored for context:
> Your false characterizations, given that the letters and the appended
> refutations were posted on alt.native and arw, reveal more about your
> personal trolling agenda than others have. To reiterate the crux which you
> are attempting to divert from;
I try to divert from crux too! No, wait, that's *crud*. Never mind.
> monica attempted to preempt others by
> allegedly sending letters to two tribal/band chairpersons. These letters
> were posted by her to alt.native and arw. These same letters were refuted
> on arw and alt.native and those refutations werre appended to monica's
> letters and sent to the same two chairpersons in order to request
> clarification on whether or not monica's personal opinions represent those
> of her tribe/band. If you are too poor to pay attention and lack the
> ability to get a 'loan', that's due to your own deficient mental 'credit
> score'.
*LOL* You get a credit score for that too?? Ow, now I have a head
hurt.
Hope
[...]
> I will reply here to Kim and Donna also if you don't mind. Thank you
> for the kind words, Donna.
>
> I think that Seals (and Ms. Charles too) is unforgivably adversarial
> with his public words. Reading both of them is sometimes indescribably
> offensive to me. But like every topic I've seen on alt.native, this is
> not a simple issue and there is no "good, bad, true, or false" about
> it. There is *no* single Truth, Hope. (IMO of course.)
Yes, as I very recently said, "Truth is a funny thing. It presents a
different portion of itself to everyone, like the story of the blind
men exploring an elephant. We may know one part so thoroughly that we
[think we] are qualified to judge the whole thing. We may argue over
whether an elephant is like a snake (trunk) or a tree (leg) or a wall
(side) or a rope (tail.) Each of us can be convinced by our own
experience that we are right and the others have it wrong. But I
think it is a rare if not impossible
thing for any human being to
have the capacity to see the Big Picture." http://tinyurl.com/npenka
> First, I spoke up at the characterization of Seals' writing as
> irrelevant. I didn't speak up for the man, I know nothing of him. Men
> make mistakes all the time; moreover, some facets of a man can be
> clearly "good" and some facets clearly "other than good." Americans
> forget how much Hitler was revered both here and throughout Europe
> during the 1930s. He was the "Most Respected Man" among Princeton
> freshmen for two years in a row, 1938 and 1939.
It's interesting that you point this out. When I read your statement
that Mr. Seals' work was influential and relevant, my first thought
was, "Well, yes, but that does not say so much. So was Mein Kampf."
My second thought was, "Oh no, I just did the Godwin Hitler reference
thing! BAD HOPE!" *LOL*
(2nd place was
> Einstein, who had just joined Princeton.) Jefferson is a revered
> Founding Father, also a slave keeper and a man who instituted the
> removal policies that dominated US-Indian relations for the next
> hundred years. Crazy Horse is a revered Lakota leader, in a Nation
> notable for its leadership, whose leadership skills are studied at
> major business schools (possibly the most effective non-coercive
> leader yet known); yet he also stole a man's wife, for which the
> wronged warrior shot him in the face; and the Tribe stripped him of
> his most respected title within the community. All people (like all
> other beings) are complex, multifaceted entities. Hitler, Jefferson,
> and Crazy Horse are not simply "evil" or "good" men. Seals and Charles
> are not simply dehumanizing racists. And whatever they, neither Seals
> nor Ms Charles are irrelevant. Seals books and other writing have been
> influential both in the mainstream and among NDNs. Likewise, Ms
> Charles was a participant in (IMO) the most influential "pan-NDN" acts
> ever committed: AIM's occupation of Alcatraz and the BIA.
Very good points. Everyone IS complex. There is duality in
everything and everyone, yet we keep wanting to slap labels on people
and make them wear the “Good Guys” or “Bad Guys” hat.
And NO ONE is irrelevant, IMO. No one has to “prove” their relevancy
with notable deeds. We are born relevant and remain so. Every birth
and every death changes the entire universe. And so does everything
we do in between.
> It is not that the "dehumanizing racism" isn't true (it is). It is
> that many things are true, not just one. Let's start with the racism.
> You can argue until you're blue in the face that whites *can* be
> attacked racially, or discriminated against, but you should be aware
> that many NDN children grow up with hatred for whites instilled into
> them.
> NDN parents have 20 generations of proof for this; it is a
> survival strategy.
That is true. And the same was true for hatred of Blacks, or Indians,
“infidels,” or men, or any number of other groups. People who instill
that hatred in their children may very well all consider it a survival
strategy at the time. It's not a pleasant truth to look at.
MT, IMO, you cannot use the words “assertive” and “aggressive”
interchangeably. It is “assertive” to demand your rights, or to
protest a wrong. It is “aggressive” to call someone a hare-lipped
whore or a maggot or tell them they have no right to speak in public.
>Yet, aggression
> is not conducive to harmonious societies; and NDNs, who live among
> their own and have done so for thousands of years, do not naturally
> come by this aggression.
Yes, monica has stated that there aren’t even any curse words in the
language of her Tribe. It is a shame that Indians have to adopt the
negative elements of the colonizers in order to feel equal. I wish
things had gone the other way and more people had adopted Indian ways
of doing things and relating to people.
>Ms. Cordova, the Apache philosopher,
> identified this trait (this lack of assertiveness) as the biggest
> obstacle to college for NDN youth.
I have seen this many times and agree with it. They certainly have
just as much ability to succeed as anyone else. But so often it goes
against their nature and their upbringing to put themselves forward--
to market themselves, so to speak--as is expected.
> Ms Charles (and perhaps Seals) are
> to be commended as role models: they are standing up firmly to
> rudeness, and bullying; and have both had success in situations where
> fighting for your rights and your opportunities are required. So both
> of these are true: I am deeply offended by Ms Charles and Mr Seals,
> *and* I hold them up as appropriate role models for today's (NDN)
> youth. The fact that you hear those two articulate feeling that
> probably the majority of NDNs have at least passingly shared, is
> simply remarkable. Where else have you heard it?
Another of my wishes (and probably just as ineffectual) is that the
pendulum could ever find that middle ground, where we could learn to
stand up to rudeness and bullying without becoming the most rude and
bullying, and that people could defend without attacking—especially
without pre-emptive strikes. I despair of ever learning it as a
species, since we don’t seem to be able to even treat ourselves with
consistent kindness and objectivity.
>
> Maybe you can understand this now without thinking I'm simply a
> blatant racist: I'm at least a quarter white (maybe more) but this
> assertiveness has been the bane of my whole work history; and it made
> all the difference in the world when I married a white woman who knew
> how to assert herself on my behalf. To this day she is the one who
> deals with publishers and governments and health care... and my family
> is far the better for it.
I’m sure that is true. Another sad fact. I am curious, how do you
deal with those who look down on you for marrying a white woman? If
these questions are intrusive, I apologize, and I will understand if
you ignore them. I just wonder if you feel the need to defend your
choice, or if you are secure enough to simply ignore it. That is a
big issue for interracial couples here—not so much Indian/white, which
is quite common, as Black/white.
>
> Now I've used NDN throughout this post and all NDNs have different
> points of view, so I need to provide a frame of reference to talk
> about Wolfie. NDN to me is my side of the family, and the urban People
> of several Tribes whom I grew up around, and the many People I have
> met of all Nations throughout my life. If there's one inter-tribal
> truism, it is that NDNs tend to be people of firm opinions. Another is
> that NDNs tend to understand that others not only may have differing
> opinions, but that their truths, different from yours, *are also
> truths* with equal weight to yours. Therefore a term like "Human
> Being" or "Real People" doesn't dehumanize others so much as it simply
> delineates shared traditions. You're not the "Real People" if you
> don't share the story of Selu and Kana'Ti; but I might marry your
> daughter, or she might marry my son. If either of those happens, *I*
> or my son will no longer be of the "Real People"... perhaps then I
> will be a "Human Being" or even a "White Man." And yet another
> intertribal truism is that NDN means different things to different
> NDNs... and they're *all* true.
>
> So I was quite offended when Hope insisted that Monica affirm Hope's
> viewpoint that someone else is an NDN.
I am sorry that you were offended, and it has been explained to me
that it was a mistake. But it was a mistake I made from trying to
defend a person I care about from what I saw as an unwarranted attack
by someone judging her Indian status and making her a “predator”
because of it. I knew Wolfie had an Indian father and a white
mother. Because of how she was raised and how she presented herself,
I believed that Wolfie saw herself as Indian rather than white and
that her Indian family accepted her as such. I did not believe anyone
else had a right to tell her differently. My INTENT was not to
offend. But I realize that does not prevent offense from being taken.
I also believe not everyone means the same thing when declaring
someone to be “not human”—not even Indians. It is a bit difficult to
believe monica meant the same thing as you describe based on the way
she worded it. Declaring that only Indians are human beings and
whites are not (and not just Indians of her People, Indians in general)
…that only Indians are children of Mother Earth and whites are not…
saying that the Creator made a mistake by creating whites…those
statements interspersed with being called maggots and whores really
does not sound like the traditional Indian meaning of “Real People.”
But I understand that YOU feel that way and have that understanding of
the issue, and that for you that is true, while for me another thing
is JUST as true.
>
> Then I went on vacation. I have no opinion on Wolfie's Indian-ness; I
> don't know the woman. I like reading her posts and have told her so.
> She posts as a beautiful soul. If she has misrepresented herself, I am
> completely tolerant of it, not because of any blind loyalty nor
> chauvinism, but simply because I am knowledgeable of female
> neurochemistry. (You don't ask women their age, race notwithstanding;
> their chemistry precludes a rational answer, and changes with age.)
>
> The loss of a life partner is the deepest I know.
> I expect Wolfie to
> know that anyone who read of it shares her grief.
Alas, not everyone. I so wish that had been the truth.
>
> The treatment of Wolfie here on alt.native has been unforgivable both
> before and after. I have told Guardian what I thought of it.
>
> Hope, and some others, I do apologize for not replying to you even
> when I've said I will. I have time & pain management issues. And I am
> sorry to have spoken so long. I hope you each find something to make
> the read worthwhile.
MT, I have told you before that I value and respect your opinion. You
look at things holistically and with an eye for balance, and that is
rare. It was, I admit, a great disappointment that you never did get
around to discussing some of the things with me that you stated you
would. But I understand you have priorities when you are able to post
at length.
As I have said several times now, I was discouraged and ready to quit
posting on alt.native before this faux-Indian issue was brought here.
I had already told people that, and I had already left a couple of
other groups where the negatives were outweighing the positives, or
where I did not have a genuine interest in the topic.
I have not truly enjoyed posting here for some time now, and I am sad
to admit that. The interesting issues for discussion become personal
battlegrounds, or people are afraid to speak their opinion for fear it
might not be the “correct” one. For the most part, the posters I
really enjoyed getting into discussions with (and kept hoping for more
from) rarely post. People do not seem to be feeling comfortable
enough to just chat with one another and share stories and laughs. It
is like trying to find a comfortable seat on a cactus.
And yes, since I have been part of what has gone on here, I know I
share responsibility. I own my part in that. But I do not accept that
the ENTIRE problem is that a couple of white people are posting here
on a public site. I know that was not the case in times past.
And since white people are such a huge part of problems in indigenous
issues, I personally think it makes sense that white people should
take part in the discussions about those issues, perhaps even learn a
thing or two (!) and consider how to become part of a change. But
that is simply my opinion, and it obviously is not shared by some
here.
I said months ago that I hoped alt.native would be a positive learning
and growth experience for me and everyone else, but that if I felt
that was not the case, or that the *consensus* was that I was not
welcome, or that I was making things worse rather than helping make
things better, I would leave.
I really think that time is about here. Actually, it probably arrived
a long time ago, and I just didn’t want to see it. I should have seen
and acknowledged quite quickly that a certain dynamic here was
probably never going to change.
Anyway, the focus of my life is about to change, both online and off.
My time and energy online will be in a different arena, using
different resources and involving more than just myself. I will need
to devote more time to the offline part of the process as well, and I
won’t always be calling the shots on that. So even if things were
different in alt.native, I would simply not have the time to be here
as much as I have.
I am very sorry that you consider me as rude as betsy. Seeing that
was a great disappointment to me. Again, that was not my INTENT. I
did not come to this place where I now find myself because I wanted to
hurt someone. My intent in this was to stand up against what I
consider a grave injustice. It was personal in that it was aimed
against my friend, and it is even more personal now that I too have
been put on the list. But I do not regret taking a stand for what I
felt was right, and I would do it no matter who was involved. I feel
that is my obligation as a human being, and my obligation to Spirit.
And I am proud to say I am not alone in feeling that responsibility.
I can only stand up in the best way I know how, based on my personal
limitations, upbringing, culture, and all the rest of it. That means
I will do it in a way one person finds laudable, another is ambivalent
about, another finds silly, and another considers offensive. That is
the complexity of which you spoke.
Is that assertive, or aggressive? Does it mean I am a strong woman,
or just an asshole? Is it because I am white, or because I am an
individual? All and none, I suppose. The room is full of elephants.
Sizzle Flambé
> I can only stand up in the best way I know how, based on my personal
> limitations, upbringing, culture, and all the rest of it. That means
> I will do it in a way one person finds laudable, another is ambivalent
> about, another finds silly, and another considers offensive. That is
> the complexity of which you spoke.
>
> Is that assertive, or aggressive? Does it mean I am a strong woman,
> or just an asshole? Is it because I am white, or because I am an
> individual? All and none, I suppose. The room is full of elephants.
From my perspective, you have my unalloyed admiration for standing up
to bullies in defense of another, and drawing their fire yourself
instead of remaining silent because you (in Monica's words) "didn't
want to get involved". Moral outrage at the abuse of innocents, and
the moral courage to speak up, are nearly holy virtues to me -- my
personal saints are those who tried to stop pogroms and witch-hunts
and child-abuses and woman-beatings and Jew-baitings and black-
lynchings and every other such villainy, not being themselves targets
of the abuse but being willing to stand in the way. Assertive?
Certainly! But the *aggressors* were the ones they tried to stop!
Hope
> On Aug 20, 4:26 pm, Melodious Thunk <thunk.melodi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It is your confrontations with what you call "faux NDNs" that is so
> > offensive. I don't know how to explain it to you.
>
> I do not know how to explain to you that I am intentionally being
> offensive in my confrontations with Faux Indians?
>
> > For example just this week an appellate court decided that an
> > Ohio tribe no longer had any fishing rights in their homeland,
> > *because they abandoned it!*
>
> I just read about that...SOOOOO NOT GOOD :-(
>
> > Some people don't understand that NDNs are *not* automatically
> > enrolled at birth; a large number of NDNs treated by the IHS are
> > children of enrolled members, certainly NDNs themselves, but
> > apparently "faux" by your standards.
>
> I think you might have been reading the Trolls who like to quote me
> out of context? I DO understand (as much as an outsider can) about
> issues like descendants without sufficient blood quantum, forced
> disenrollments, adoptions, etc. which is why I always ask "What
> Indians claim you?" when no Tribe/Nation is forthcoming. Thus far, no
> real Indian, or descendant, etc. has had a problem with this
> question...only people who are lying through their teeth seem to get
> irate.
>
remember you asking Wolfie, "What Tribe claims you?" I do not
remember you ever asking what *Indians* claim her after that. I think
you said if she could not answer that, it proved she was a faux-
Indian. I remember you talking about calling enrollment clerks to
determine if a person was a real Indian or a faux. And I believe I
remember you telling her that unless she could provide proof that her
father was an enrolled Indian, it did not matter how much blood of
various Tribes she claimed to have, that did not make her an Indian.
But maybe my memory is faulty. I will have to go back and check
that. I don't remember reading anything about provisions for the
disenrolled or adopted in your definition of what constituted a faux
Indian on your site either. I'll give that another look as well. I
do not have a near-eidetic memory like you, so I have to rely on the
records. Tedious.
If you do NOT believe that a person has to be enrolled and have
treaties with the government in order to be a "real Indian," then on
what basis did you declare Wolfie a faux Indian? Do you have solid
evidence that she has profited illegally from claiming to be an
enrolled Indian? What has all this furor and pain been for?
Guardian
> Perhaps I missed some posts and came to the wrong conclusion. I
> remember you asking Wolfie, "What Tribe claims you?" I do not
> remember you ever asking what *Indians* claim her after that.
We never got to that point. When I asked her "What Tribe claims you"
she did not respond at all. Neither would she comment on why she was
publicly posted falsehoods regarding a Public Figure who IS an
Enrolled Tribal member or why she claimed she did not make, nor "knew
nothing about" a Dreamcatcher WITH HER NAME ON IT, being sold at
auction by her ex- sister-in-law.
Instead of any such exchange of information, "someone" using her
computer connection AND computer promptly began posting false
accusations that I have committed just about every crime known to
mankind....then all the meatpuppets and socks piled on, which I was
expecting by that point. Neither was I surprised to find that the
defaming posts designed to derail the initial, VERY reasonable
questions where coming from an account shared by a CONVICTED physical
predator.
I believe my response was, "You wanna Flame...we can Flame"
> I think you said if she could not answer that, it proved she was a faux-
> Indian.
In relation to the SELLING of items like "tacky dreamcatchers"
YES ...
Please tell me Kim, are you intentionally quoting me out of context
over and over again, or do you just have the memory of a chipmunk on
crack?
>I remember you talking about calling enrollment clerks to
> determine if a person was a real Indian or a faux.
Yes, and I encourage others to do the same when someone publicly
claims to belong to this Tribe or that.
> But maybe my memory is faulty.
Ahhhh, yeah...could be. You definitely seem to have a problem with
the order of events.
> I will have to go back and check
> that. I don't remember reading anything about provisions for the
> disenrolled or adopted in your definition of what constituted a faux
> Indian on your site either.
There are none when it comes to MONETARY ventures of some sort. You,
like MANY others, refuse to acknowledge the huge chasm of difference
between matters of commerce and matters of conscience.
You can do whatever the hell you want in the privacy of your own
space, but the rules change drastically whenever MONEY changes hands.
> What has all this furor and pain been for?
From my perspective? Educational purposes.
lizzy
This is a wonderful thoughtful post...I have reread it a few time this
morning. I will probably be reading it a few more times. Funny thing
is I am reading David Seals SWEET MEDICINE and last night I got to
the part where Storyteller and Whirlwind meet and a conversation about
Contrary Warriors ensue, I started laughing and I'm not sure if it
translates or is offensive across tribes or to women but Monica
Charles came to mind!!
I have been friends with Monica Charles and agree with much that you
say...some of the words make me cringe. But they are words and as any
minority can tell you there has never been a racial slur about white
people that has any real hurtful effect. I'm not sure that I have
heard all of the Indian ones but cracker and whitebread..white butt
mean nothing to me. However my mother is Portuguese and she is highly
offended by portagee or porkandcheese...portugoose. I find these terms
to be amusing because I have not had bad memories associated with
them just friends. I think the worst things that Monica has said are
the personal things like calling someone a harelip...way out of line,
as is brown idiots. What I think that men on alt.native miss or
underestimate is the viciousness of white women and our ability to
turn the screw...mental warfare...the ability to find a weakness and
pick pick pick pick pick. no racial slurs are used because we know
what is socially acceptable. Turn those screws just a little bit
harder and then. OMG!!! Monica has lost it. What a surprise! See? BAD
BAD MONICA! In my opinion Monica calling someone a white butt is no
where near as bad as a white person asking her if she speaks her
language...I don't care if they have dissed my Daddy whom I loved
dearly. You have to consider the broader aspect that white people came
over seized everything Indians held sacred the worst of it being their
children. And to then ask an Indian if they speak their tribal
language?? OY!!! Monica may very well speak her language. I wouldn't
ask her at this point. I will say that I have sometimes misinterpreted
Monica's silence as an affirmation of the questioner only to discover
that she didn't respond because it was beneath her.
In defense of white people I will say that many of us have lived the
pain that we have inflicted on Indians. I say that in the figurative
sense not that any individuals here have been the cause of abuse
towards Indians. We have economically benefited from the abuse and
colonization of Indians as whites we naturally reap the benefits but I
can assure you our lives are not much less abusive towards each other,
our economic class and advertising skills just put some window
dressings on it.
Many people here say Monica is using me but I look at our friendship
quite differently..I don't know the history of what has gone on
here...the reasons things have gone so far and for so long. She is
perfectly reasonable and downright funny, charming, and excited and
proud about all things native. I just looked at her facebook page and
she now has 108 friends of all colors and backgrounds. Some she has
known for years and years from her youth and boarding school others
are fairly new like myself. Your comment about how the Indians
survived by hating whites....this is so right and I understand it. It
confirmed a thought that I am pretty sure of...as much as Monica and
Richard fight and hurl insults across country... if Richard and I were
both drowning and Monica could only save one of us she would choose
Richard. Everyday that Monica wakes up she chooses Indians. I am not
offended or hurt by this thought. I am in awe of her sheer will and
her emotional toughness.
I travel a lot and can't read alt.native everyday...then there are
days that I need a break from the arguing. I was very happy to read
your well thought out post this morning. It reminds me that I need to
be more thoughtful myself. I wish I could express my thoughts and
positions in as diplomatic fashion as you have done so here.
I hope your pain subsides.
Guardian
> white butt
In my case, this is a very accurate description. I got a butt, and it
is quite white.
> she is highly offended by portagee
Wow, I will make a mental sticky note of that. I would never have
guessed "Portagee" might be considered offensive to someone. I was
under the mistaken impression that "Portagee" was just a slang plural
form of "Portuguese" ie: She is Portuguese. They are Portagee.
Learn something new on the Internet every day :-)
lizzy
not sure if the spelling is right...or why it is so offensive...time
to call my mother!