Redskin Code Talkers?

Previously published in the December 4, 2013 issue of the Two Row Times

To avoid arguments in the White world it is said to avoid talking about religion or politics. We may not have the same taboos against these general topics in Native communities but, certainly, there are two other subjects that most regard as off limits for criticism — elders and veterans and, especially if they are both.

Well, so here I go.

In the midst of National Native American Heritage Month — or as I call it our “special month” — and the continuing debacle over Native mascots and team names, the worst being the Washington, D.C. NFL team, we all got to experience a collective moment of cringe. The NFL and D.C. team owner Dan Snyder decided that it was somehow appropriate to dig up a couple of elderly Navajo Code Talkers, fly them to D.C., wrap them up in “Redskins” jackets and parade them onto the football field as the “49ers” beat up on the “Redskins” (I might add there’s a little irony there, too).

The sleaziness of taking advantage of these much-heralded figures in American history and folklore was certainly not missed by anyone. In fact, I agree with all the criticisms lodged against this publicity stunt.

But here is where I am asking for trouble.

What about the Code Talkers? What were they thinking?

Unlike so many across our vast lands, I am not so prone to heap adulation on every Native who enlisted in military service to the U.S. or Canada. It’s ironic to me — and it should be to you, too — that at the dawn of the 20^th century it somehow became okay for our people to change sides. After a century of bloody conflicts, massacres, hangings, land theft, prisons and concentration camps/reservations, fraud and outright war, slipping into the uniforms of our enemies became fashionable. Today, it has been drummed into our heads that our enlistment rates are the highest per capita of any “ethnic” population and that we should be proud of this fact. Whether this is borne out of the residential/boarding school era, conversion to Christianity or a general “if you can beat them, join them” mentality or some desperate hope for acceptance…well, I’ll leave these theories for those with a whole lot of letters after their names to debate. But there is little question that throughout the 20^th century our people began to buy into American patriotism.

In addition to the irony of Natives serving in the U.S. military, there’s an even higher level of irony associated with the Code Talkers. Consider this — take a people who were having their languages and identities destroyed by active government policy at a level that meets the standard for genocide. Here come some military analysts struggling to develop secretive communications in WWII with a great idea — “Hey Joe, do you think we still have any of those savages running around speaking that gibberish we been trying to beat out of them for all these years?” How opportune to “find” a collection of sophisticated languages that no one else knows. The greatest irony lies in the fact that these languages were actively being destroyed and there was virtually no written record of them. What a great idea!

What developed was the Native Code Talker Program. Grab up or otherwise convince some “Injuns” who still speak their languages to put on a U.S. uniform, put some in the field with radios and never — and I repeat never — let them be captured alive. Bingo! The U.S. has an unbreakable code.

Now don’t for a second think that this interest in our languages or our people would change the U.S. or Canadian policies of trying to destroy them or us. No, this was an opportunistic exploitation and appropriation of something that was ours for their use. While many praise this and take pride that we had something they needed, I just shake my head and think, yeah, like our land, our resources and even that gold the real 49ers were chasing after.

I don’t begrudge Code Talkers or any of our people who enlist. I have many friends and relatives who not only enlisted but also served in active duty with honor and distinction. But they weren’t fighting or enlisting for me or for Native communities. Perhaps their personal choices to fight for the good ole U.S.A. did involve some sense of representing Native people as noble or as “freedom fighters” but these military complexes aren’t about freedom or democracy. They are about defending national interests and the corporations with a stake in them, even back in the 40's.

The use of these young men and our language may have served a greater good in the eyes of many but, nonetheless, it was an exploitation of very young men and our Native languages.

Those men are not so young now. In fact, most are gone. In recent years, the Code Talkers have been held up as “American Heroes” and have earned medals and honors along the way. In a twisted attempt to take advantage of our “special month,” the professional sports franchise at the center of the team name and mascot debate decided to “honor” four Navajo Code Talkers in a much-derided ceremony.

My question to these men and their families is why did they go? Why allow this exploitation? Perhaps the exploitation of these men when they were young, the very thing that made them famous, is justified but being used as young men is one thing. The actions of those with a lifetime behind them are quite another. We can’t simply cry foul about how they were used as if these guys were incapable of understanding the situation. We can’t cherish the wisdom of these elders on one hand and then on the other hand suggest that they were somehow oblivious to the message they were sending, especially when a few decided to offer their unsolicited support for the “Redskins,” suggesting as Dan Snyder has that it's some sort of term of endearment.

I wrestle with the whole idea of honoring Native veterans of U.S. and Canadian military service as “Warriors.” And whether these guys believe it’s okay or not, I refuse to honor them as “Redskins.”

http://tworowtimes.com/opinions/columns/lets-talk-native/redskin-code-talkers/

Our “Special Month” — Almost in the Bag

Originally published in the November 27, 2013 issue of the Two Row Times

So as we head into the final week of National Native American Heritage Month as proclaimed by the 44^th Rahnatakaias, or as I call it, our “special month,” we get to witness another misappropriation of our culture or, at the very least, another great falsehood of American history, the U.S. holiday of Thanksgiving. History books, Disney and other tellers of fairy tales continue to promote a feel good fantasy of happy little Pilgrims inviting equally happy little Indians to the “first” Thanksgiving feast in the “New World” and that is just wrong.

To me, there is double irony in the fact that our “special month” neglects who we are today and then, supposedly honoring our past, caps it off with a complete misrepresentation of historical events that proclaims this holiday as a uniquely “American” concept.

I don’t want to talk about the heinous actions of these “lovable” little Pilgrims with their cute hats and shoes so suffice it to say that 50 years of tension between the Wampanoag and these people, including the spread of the white man’s illnesses, bad trade and sketchy land dealings, culminated in the bloodiest clashes that Turtle Island has ever known. The Wampanoag would become witness to savagery never known to the people of their land, including the slaughter of women and children by these “happy little Pilgrims.” This is not quite the friends and family dinner party you were taught about in kindergarten.

The images of the real history, including the decapitation of Metacom and the mounting of his head on a pole are now merely props for diehard sports fans when their teams take on the “Redskins” or the “Blackhawks.” And this may be the real problem with our “special month.” You see, unlike the Pilgrims and Plymouth Colony, we are still here. And if the President of the United States is going to proclaim a month to honor our heritage while who we are today is not just ignored but trampled on every day by American law enforcement, judges, lawmakers, teachers and even cheerleaders, then, Mr. Obama, stuff your proclamation and our “special month” in your pardoned bird! And don’t get me started on who really needs a pardon.

Yeah, I know. Rahnatakaias invited 567 “federally recognized tribal leaders” to D.C. recently to shake his hand. A dozen of them even got to go to the White House. Of course, barely half of the “tribes” bothered to send anyone. Who could blame them? Why bother making a trip to D.C. to hear Ray Halbritter trying to become the “Redskins” killer and Barack Obama tell us how much he is doing to us — I mean, for us.

But let’s get back to the “Presidential Proclamation” for a moment. So how did the President’s call for “all Americans to commemorate this month with appropriate programs and activities” work out? Well, there was this…

Oh, come on! Of course they weren’t talking about us being sent on another “Trail of Tears” where a third of our population would be killed in a forced migration. That would just be wrong, especially during our “special month.” This high school was just using the event as a theme for their football game against the Pinson Valley High “Indians” in Alabama.

I’m pretty sure this wasn’t what Mr. Obama had in mind as an “appropriate activity,” but tell me how appropriate is a trademark for the Washington Redskins? Or the state and federal policies that pretend to have successfully “killed the Indian and saved the man,” creating a conformable compliant American where a “wild savage” once stood? 

It’s fine to suggest that “Trail of Tears” reference crosses a line, especially during our “special month,” but where exactly is that line? If a high school, college or professional sports team can dehumanize us by appropriating a name or image associated with us for their own pleasure, how far is the line moved when their opponents mock a historical event associated with us for their pleasure, too? 

When federal agents dismiss the sovereignty of our people and the integrity of our lands with their gun toting raids, criminalizing not only an activity but also our freedom to engage in such an activity on our own terms, it is the same as suggesting that we no longer exist as a distinct people. So let the “Indians” stand with the Tigers and Cubs. And let “Redskins” take the field with the Patriots or the Vikings. It’s not like “real” Indians or Redskins exist anymore, not for Americans.

Just remember America — your President is only calling on you to commemorate our “heritage” — but not to really acknowledge our presence. In doing as he asks, you can be relieved of any guilt by simply stating how much you love our culture without acknowledging that we still exist to own it. This is White privilege as promoted by the White House and the first Black Rahnatakaias.

http://tworowtimes.com/opinions/columns/lets-talk-native/special-month-almost-bag/

“It’s Not What You Say. It’s What You Do”

Previously published in the November 13, 2013 issue of the Two Row Times

Almost a year ago federal agents invaded the Kaniekeha community of Akwesasne, breaking into the Three Feathers Casino which had been closed for more than three months and charging members of the Men’s Council from the Kaianerehkowa Kanonhsesne (Longhouse). Rarahkwisere and Kaneratiio, duly appointed members of that Council, were arrested and taken into custody. Sakoietha, a third member of that Council, was charged but refused to be arraigned, opting to remain free and at-large so he could, at least covertly, tend to his child who has been battling cancer for several years.

Rarahkwisere was denied bail and only this week after more than 11 months of unlawful imprisonment did a federal judge finally release him on his own recognizance.

This commentary is not specifically about the Three Feathers Casino case or the trial concerning it that is currently under way. My thoughts this week concern the hypocrisy and the stark contrast of the image that the U.S. and Canada try so desperately to maintain set against the reality of the current circumstance that Native people find themselves in.

“Is Sorry Enough?,” Murray Porter’s powerful song questioning Canada’s “apology” (albeit not an admission) for the genocidal policy that was the residential schools, opens with the line, “It’s not what you say. It’s what you do.”

This is also my mantra this week. Apologies, congressional resolutions, proclamations, executive orders, U.N. declarations, treaties, speeches and invitations to the White House are just words. And these meaningless overtures made for public consumption are just adding insults to the injuries when measured against reality.

This week marks the middle of National Native American Heritage Month. Barack Obama proclaimed it so. “I call upon all Americans to commemorate this month with appropriate programs and activities,” the President said. Once again, it appears no one got the memo — unless in some twisted reality the prosecution of a Longhouse in federal court now qualifies as an “appropriate program or activity.”

The criminalizing and dehumanizing of Native peoples is so ingrained in the culture of colonization that the hypocrisy of “apologizing” for an act while continuing the very action is not even newsworthy.

In 2008, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper offered an “official” apology for the residential school system of Canada, which stripped Native children from their families to place them in the prisons of this national school system. Yet the process of stripping children from Native families continues, only now rather than being placed in a government institution they are adopted out to non-Native families.

In 1993, a U.S. Congress Joint Resolution “apologized” for the unlawful overthrow of the sovereign Kingdom of Hawaii. President Clinton signed it ­­– also during our “special month” – on November 23. However, in 2009 the U.S. Supreme Court codified into U.S. law just how pitifully meaningless these things are by ruling that such resolutions have “no binding legal effect.”

Beyond proclaiming our “special month,” the current Rahnatakaias has issued Executive Orders including a couple that demand executive departments and agencies developing policies with “tribal implications” to consult and collaborate with “tribal leaders.” The Treasury Department and the Department of Justice are both executive departments and unless indictments, subpoenas and tax assessments are considered consultation and collaboration then these orders either have no force or had no intent. Regardless of which, they have no effect.

The words, “recognizing tribal sovereignty” are spoken every day in Washington, D.C. and, I suspect, in Ottawa. Parades of senators, congressmen, department heads, appointees, advisers and representatives carve valuable time out of their terribly productive days to offer their patronizing blather while federal agents continue to assault our people and charge them with crimes against the U.S. for exercising that sovereignty that is not only more genuine than their own but also predates the existence of the U.S. and Canada.

Like Murray said: “It’s not what you say. It’s what you do.”

So Rarahkwisere is out of jail but he is hardly free and he will certainly never get those 11 months back. But at least he gets to spend his “special month” with his family. The federal judge who ordered his release had this much sense but can he show enough integrity to really “do” the right thing and toss out the whole case? Don’t be surprised to read that this federal court rules that the Longhouse is a criminal enterprise. They have been treating us as such for centuries.

It’s what they do.

http://tworowtimes.com/opinions/columns/lets-talk-native/its-not-what-you-say-its-what-you-do/

I Am Ready This Year!

Previously published in the November 6, 2013 issue of the Two Row Times

Okay, I admit it. Last year when our special month of November rolled around, National Native American Heritage Month, I purposely kept quiet about it until December. I sat silently all month long and sure enough — nothing. So on December 2nd of last year I wrote, “November was what? Our month? Really? Who knew?” for my blog. I won’t use this column to restate my thoughts from last year but by all means, check it out.

http://letstalknativepride.blogspot.com/2012/12/november-was-what-our-month-really-who.html

But I am not sitting back this year. No sir! As soon as Mr. Obama offered his Presidential Proclamation  , I copied the press release from the White House website, pasted it to emails and sent it to everyone. I even posted it on Facebook. Now no one will be able to say, “I didn’t know.”

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/10/31/presidential-proclamation-national-native-american-heritage-month-2013

So let the “honoring” begin!

One of the big days for the Haudenosaunee in this special month is November 11. 

Wait! This can’t be. That’s Veterans Day.

How can a U.S. military holiday be scheduled on our Canandaigua Treaty Day? This is our big chance to march through the village of Canandaigua arm-in-arm with state and federal dignitaries to mark the most famous treaty of the Six Nations. What self-respecting U.S. politician will pass up Veterans Day to keep this charade going?

This is where we pretend it is an actual “Six Nations” treaty even though no Kanienkehaka (Mohawks) signed or participated in it. We pretend that it isn’t violated everyday by the very ones we are holding hands with. We also pretend that the basis of the treaty, which was the United States recognition of our lands and the promise by them to “never claim the same” somehow can be ignored as long as $4500 worth of “treaty cloth” shows up once a year. 

How can we fake the significance of this crappy document if all the white guys are going to be tied up war mongering?

OK, let’s just move on. Oh no, the American Thanksgiving is in our month. Well, at least we don’t have to see all those cutesy “pilgrim” and “Indian” cardboard cut outs all over any more. But  we certainly do still have to hear all the lies about the “First Thanksgiving” as though they invented the concept. And, of course, watch football. Couldn’t they at least have scheduled the Washington football team for a bye week in November so we could simply have had one less day of hearing about the “Redskins” in our month?

So, let me get this straight — we get a month proclaimed for us and they get two holidays out of it? Oh, wait, we do get a day. I just found it at the bottom of the White House press release. The President calls upon all Americans to celebrate November 29 as Native American Heritage Day.

Hold on a second. That’s Black Friday. How can our day be Black Friday? You call on all Americans to celebrate our day on Black Friday? How? By trampling each other at Walmart? Well, unless someone is picking me up a 65-inch flat screen TV at some unheard of low price, what is there to celebrate?

All right, so no real holiday, nothing really special about the month as far as we are concerned. Can we at least get a moratorium on attacking our people for the month? Can you stop harassing our hunters? Can you stop cutting our trees? Can you stop using your anti-mob laws and anti-terrorism laws against our businesses? Can you stop your tax agents from trying to force your laws and regs on us? Can you stop trying to steal or destroy our land? Can you stop trying us in your courts? And can you stop trying to claim us as your citizens? Just for the month?

Instead of “honoring” our heritage, what about respecting us? Just for the month.

Maybe I’m not ready for National Native American Heritage Month this year but I really would be honored to receive that 65-inch flat screen television.

Take a Hard Look at What a State-Run Casino in Your Town Won’t do, Then Vote “No” on the Gaming Referendum

An edited version of this commentary was published in the Albany Times Union 11/1/13

First, let me state for the record that I am a Mohawk, my wife is Oneida and I live on the Seneca Territory of Cattaraugus south of Buffalo, New York. I receive no gaming proceeds from any Native gaming nor does my family.

While I am not a fan of gaming, I will always defend the right for Native communities to be a part of the industry. And although I am opposed to casinos being an economic development objective I’ll concede some value to it as a means to creating revenue for so other community goals can be realized.

Native casinos face many of the same challenges as other non-Native gaming enterprises. But several clear distinctions need to be made between what exists now and what the Governor has proposed.

The reason gaming works for small populations supported by Native gaming is obvious — gaming revenue comes from outside these communities from larger populations that ultimately creates revenue for smaller populations. If Seneca, Mohawk or Oneida gaming had to rely only on their own small populations for patronage they would still only be operating tiny bingo halls.

With the exception of Las Vegas and maybe Atlantic City, casinos draw 90 percent of their patronage from within a fifty-mile radius of the venue. New York State will never be Nevada or New Jersey. That means all the revenue projections the gaming hawks are throwing around is not new money coming into an area. It will be local income, which will be spent by local patrons without much disposable income with false hopes of big wins — which will never materialize.

Where will the money made by these new casinos go? Native gaming operators are local, as are their shareholders, so every dollar of profit from Native gaming is essentially funneled back into the local economies. And that includes government programs, services and any indirect or direct benefit to the Native people of those communities.

By contrast, the proposed state licensed casinos and current racetrack casinos will be operated by large gaming corporations with interests, financiers, investors and shareholders from across the globe. While the idea of outside investment coming into an area sounds nice, it is not so great when that giant sucking sound starts pulling all of that gaming revenue out of the area. And speaking of giant slurping sounds, consider this — a tax of more than 40 percent by Albany will also ensure that even more money flows freely out of the host communities. Only this carved out portion will go into the state coffer’s black hole. I know, the Governor promised that portions of that revenue would return to the communities that get a casino in their back yards. But, in reality, that will be a very small portion.

The promise of jobs is also overstated. The vast majority of gaming jobs pay at or about minimum wage. Tips may push some of the salaries up to a more attractive level but the funny thing about tips is that they fade away with the novelty of the venue. The first waves of gambling enthusiasts are quick to flash the cash but as gaming losses add up — and they certainly will — the tips quickly diminish. No one ever sought help for tipping addictions. 

And the big salaried jobs that have been dangled in front of us? Reality check — they will mostly be imports. The specialized skill of “player development” and maximizing gaming profits has no room for on-the-job training. These highly skilled jobs will get filled by shuffling the deck within these lucrative gaming corps chomping at the bit for a crack at New York.

So while gaming supporters claim that billions will be made off the backs of upstate local gaming patrons they fail to suggest where those patrons will materialize with billions to lose on “entertainment.” Who will lose business as pending habits shift and just what won't get purchased so gaming dollars can materialize will remain to be seen. It’s easy to suggest just “build it and they will come.” But where will they come from?

http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Casinos-overstated-potential-and-benefits-4947544.php

Two Row Time

Previously published in the October 30, 2013 issue of The Two Row Times

Much has been made of the Two Row Wampum lately. The “Two Row Wampum Renewal Campaign” and the launch of the “Two Row Times” are just two examples of the recent attention being given to it. Yet there seems to be something fundamentally missing from a meaningful conversation on the subject even as attention has spread.

Let’s be clear. The Two Row isn’t just about a ship and a canoe. It is about the paths of creation. This is important enough to repeat — the two rows symbolized in the Kaswentha are paths. They are not roads, highways, canals, pipelines, power lines, lines on a map, or a charted course on a body of water. A path yields to nature whether it is laid down by the feet of millions of our ancestors, a pair of chipmunks, or mighty glaciers. It widens, it narrows, it adjusts with time, and it provides the guidance for us in times of trouble or conflict.  

The message of the Kaswentha is respect, rights and responsibility. Respect of the paths for all of creation is what we remind ourselves of every time we say the Ohenton Karihwatehkwen — those words before all else. We respect not only those paths and our relationships to them but also the rights and responsibilities of those who travel those paths.

Our path, too, needs respect. Respecting that path shows not only respect to those who came before us but also a commitment to those who will follow us.

But this is the tough part. While we are quick to claim the rights we hold, we are not so prepared to uphold the responsibilities that come with them. And if we jump off our path or if one of those shiny objects from their vessel catches our eye, do we accept the responsibility for that pursuit?

We need to take a hard look at three specific examples of these shiny objects and how each one has affected us. Many seem to be oblivious to how far off our path they have strayed; yet, we all have been impacted.

Voting is one of those shiny objects dangled in front of us and  promoted on both sides of the imaginary line. Voting in non-Native elections is so clear an act of the assimilated that it is amazing to me it is even tolerated among our people; yet, in many places “tribal government” is so complicit that they actually assist in “Get out the Vote” campaigns for the non-Native elections. In my opinion, voting is a cop-out if not a sellout. It is simply  passing the buck for responsibility by giving your authority to someone else. By empowering an elected official you diminish your own rights and responsibilities.

Enlisting in the U.S. and Canadian armed forces is another shiny object, an act of indoctrination that began even while those same forces were barely done killing our own Onkweh Onweh brothers and sisters. Here’s an example. We ignored the attack and invasion of Hawaii when it was the U.S. doing the invading but rushed to sign up when the Japanese did the same.

Finally, we must avoid their courts. Now I realize that far too often we find ourselves as hostile participants in their judicial system and beyond our assertion of their lack of jurisdiction and our sovereignty, we do what we must to get out of it. But when we willingly enter their courts we wittingly or unwittingly give them authority over our lands, our environment and ourselves.

Land claims are prime examples of this. We do not have "Land Claims." It is they who have illegitimately claimed our land. Filing a claim for our own land is oxymoronic. And filing it in their courts is just plain moronic. The Onondaga Nation should agree with this, especially since their final attempt at even being heard in the U.S. court was dismissed a few weeks ago.

Their courts are not remedies for our conflicts with them. I would not give our authority to a court anywhere in the world. Conflicts between peoples are only "legal" issues only if there is an overarching set of laws that both sides acknowledge — and no such law exists. Otherwise the issues are political and require diplomacy; not litigation. One cannot just file papers to launch a diplomatic effort. The line must be drawn in the sand not by a "legal action" but with a real action.

So occupy your land, block an environmental crime, and stop an unlawful development! Win the battle in the court of public opinion if possible. Raise the cost of their actions. And find support for a cause to bolster a call for diplomacy.

Voting in their elections, enlisting in their armed forces and voluntarily submitting to their courts are not actions of a people who have survived the longest and most complicit act of genocide the world has ever known. These are acts of submission by its victims. It is important to remember that they have NO lawful act of subjugation over us. Those that continue to oppress us would love to suggest that these voluntary acts are evidence of the success of their "final solution" but we know better.

We must remain vigilant in many more areas to stay true to our path. We need to renew our commitment to the Kaswentha. And while our path must continue to yield to Nature we must fulfill our first and most solemn compact — the one with Creation.

We Are Not Alone

This is the unedited version of my column submitted for the October 23, 2013 issue of the Two Row Times

A few things need to be immediately taken away from the events of the past week. The first is that we are not alone.  The Mi’kmaq who are standing against fracking for natural gas in Elsipogtog do so not just with courage of their own convictions but also with support from places diverse in geography, culture and ethnicity.

Social media has made it much easier to reach across time and space connecting our Native relatives from the Mohawks to the Lakota but also to the Paiute, Ojibwe, Kumeyaay and hundreds of Native people familiar and unfamiliar to us all. We may not form an ever-ready unified military force at the drop of a hat but that is neither where our strength will ever be nor should ever be. Our strengths are in each of the territories or regions that we live. For some it is seizing the moment to take our own stand on a parallel issue that strengthens the fight for each. For many of us it is simply using whatever field of play that we find ourselves in to raise awareness, make a statement and build support.

As I wove the information on the raid at Elsipogtog into my previously arranged interviews in Albany, N.Y. on public radio and cable news, I was surprised at the interest that was piqued. And as I listened to public radio on my drive back across the state from Albany to Cattaraugus, I was moved by an interview with a local non-Native elected official in the area of the protest and raid who said, “God bless the First Nations.” This gentleman went on to describe how municipal leaders had voted almost unanimously for a moratorium against gas well exploration because of their concern over hydrofracking. He suggested that only the Native protesters were having success fighting this affront to land, water and the life of the region because his own federal government was working against the interests of the municipal governments. These local elected officials were standing with the Native protesters and quite literally so, as this man took a shot to the leg from one of the RCMP’s non-lethal weapons. While many enemies remain set against our fight for sovereignty, more and more non-Native activist are coming to the conclusion that Pamela Palmater once stated on my show, that we may be the last best hope for anyone interested in saving the planet.

Many of us hold some very specific iconic images from events of the past — the Warrior vs. soldier faceoff from Oka or Richard Nicolas standing rifle raised in his hand on a flipped over SQ van from the same conflict. But images these days come quicker than ever and travel the globe at lightning speed. There were immediate images from Elsipogtog of the conflict; among them some of the most compelling images of the last few decades. My good friend Gregg Deal may have helped immortalize one of them with his latest poster created for the “Honor the Treaties” project from the photo image of a woman holding an eagle feather kneeling in front of a line of heavily armed RCMP. Gregg, a Pyramid Lake Paiute, working from his home studio in the Washington D.C. area worked feverishly to get this new creation completed and posted on social media as soon as possible.

From Ottawa, Toronto and Montreal to the capitals of New York and the U.S. the work in various platforms of social activism have taken hold. As I sit here banging on my keyboard I see a picture show up on a Facebook post from Hollywood, California of actor Adam Sandler holding a sign that reads, “We Support Elsipogtog.” 

We don’t need to win everyone over but as more people from outside our Native communities come to realize they need us, we add both their support to us and our responsibility to them. We are not alone but in the words of Uncle Ben Parker “with great power comes great responsibility.”

There are still plenty of racist and condescending views held of our people. Those with solid control of the mainstream media are among them but social media gives us a fighting chance. If we play it right and refuse to let anyone hijack our message or misappropriate our power and responsibility we may yet see major shifts in policies.

The Mi’kmaq of Elsipogtog have made us all proud. And I for one feel stronger than ever when fighting for our land, water, women and children.

Change the Name or End the Genocide

From the October 16, 2013 issue of the Two Row Times

To suggest there are many and far more pressing issues facing Native people than being exploited and insulted by sports teams is an obvious understatement. Should the NFL franchise from the capital of one of the world’s superpowers change its name? Of course it should. As should all those high school, college and pro sports teams that appropriate their image of us as though we are a dead part of their history.

Personally, I have a major problem putting this issue out in front of the continued assault on our sovereignty, which continues to promote poverty, suicide, dependency and every other social ill known to man. The irony of the President of the United States suggesting he “would think about changing the name” of the Washington football team seems to be missed by almost everyone. Perhaps he should have “thought” about the 3,000 jobs killed on Native lands with the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act that he signed into law. Perhaps he should have “thought” about how his Executive Orders calling for consultation and collaboration with Native people are ignored by his departments and agencies as they stretch the interpretation of laws and send their enforcement agents into our lands. Or perhaps he should “think” about at least honoring the minimum standard for Indigenous rights as called out by the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The “Redskins” should not be a distraction to our life issues. And for people like the Oneida Indian Nation of New York’s pathetic Ray Halbritter to make it his centerpiece publicity stunt with statements, such as “We deserve to be treated as we are – Americans” and to actually think this change will “make America better” is the worst example of a self serving attempt to salvage his image from the sellout fraud that most know him to be. I know no Native people in the fight to defend Native sovereignty who would make such sycophantic statements. I am not an American and I am not particularly concerned with making America better while my people struggle everyday from American oppression.

This is not about bad words. It’s about racism, white privilege and the need for the realization for Americans that we are still here. When a rich man like Washington’s NFL team owner Dan Snyder can claim the use of a Native image and a derogatory word as his and his fan’s tradition, this is the definition of white privilege. The suggestion that the “Hail to the Redskins” team song is somehow honoring us isn’t just racist — it is simply a lie. They aren’t “hailing” to us or our history or even our appropriated image. They are hailing Snyder’s team. Snyder should not be forced to change the name; his shame should compel him to do it. In fact, America’s shame should compel the change.

The problem at the root of all this is the fact that racism is alive and well in the U.S. and Canada. Obama made the point that this discussion is a numbers game when he said, “If I were the owner of the team and I knew that the name of my team…was offending a sizable group of people I’d think about changing it.” So for America’s first black president, size matters. If a sizable group needs to be offended to affect change, let’s be clear — we are talking about non-Native people again. We are not a sizable group — not in DC, not in the Washington metropolitan area and, when compared to the rest of the population, not in this country. Forget about right and wrong, right and left, or even black and white — no one is more marginalized than the original inhabitants of this land. And every day politicians, law makers, law enforcement and judges yield to lobbyists, special interests and rich people like Dan Snyder to continue the forced assimilation and further marginalization of Native people.

Yeah, the name should change but don’t any of you dare check a box and say, “there, this one is for the ‘Indians.’” If anyone thinks throwing us a bone by changing the “Redskins” name solves anything for us then your delusional racism is safely intact.

I, for one, hope to point to the name of the U.S. capital’s multibillion dollar sports team for years to come as the perfect metaphor for the racist dominant culture — not just with their continued use of our misappropriated images but with everything else that serves to demean us — this land’s first peoples.

Not even the broadcasters have problems with these images

If  anyone can't see a problem with these images alone and on the face of them, then imagine being a Native person with your child at a game and having to explain this. If you still have no problem with this, and clearly the broadcasters are willing to televise these morons, then we should all be able to agree that we have a long way to go.

"Tewatahtawi” — "We carry ourselves"

Published in the October 9, 2013 issue of The Two Row Times

In 1776, when a group of 13 British colonies broke off from their empire, there was more than just a battle that needed to be fought. First, there needed to be a rationale or philosophy that the rest of the world (Europe, in particular) could embrace for such a revolt. The rationale was laid out in the Declaration of Independence, which formed the United States of America. The Declaration stated, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” 

However, for Europeans that truth was not so self-evident. Under the yoke of Europe's monarchies, all men were not regarded as equal and all rights came not from creation but from the thrones, the royal families. The “sovereignty” of the monarchs was derived from one of the biggest lies ever perpetrated by man: that “God” bestowed a “divine” and ultimate power upon chosen ones to rule over all others. The kings and queens of Europe ruled on the myth that they were chosen by God to wield ultimate and unlimited power over man and Earth. The vast majority, those not chosen by God, had no inherent right to liberty or the pursuit of happiness. All privilege came from the throne. Even life was a privilege dispensed or limited at the whim of these “rulers.”

Conversely, for thousands of years the Haudenosaunee had lived in a world where only nature and the natural order of things provided the paths for life. Sovereignty was inherent; it was a birthright; and it was inalienable.

Respect for the paths of all the elements of creation guided our own journey through the generations. The power and authority to carry ourselves was an individual right. It was our obligation. Our sovereignty was not a “collective right” but a right we defended collectively. Our people were not governed or led by a chosen few but, rather, were served by them. The consent of the people was essential for all major decisions. This was the original rationale adopted by this breakaway group of white men from Europe, which is now sold to the rest of the world as the "great experiment" that is the United States — at least in words.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence stated, as a matter of fact, that the “just powers” of a government derived those powers from the “consent of the governed.” The clear implication was that the power was from the people and any “authority” not derived from the consent of the people was not just. This concept came directly from the philosophy and path of the Haudenosaunee.

Those who were chosen for specific responsibilities were not elevated as leaders but rather placed in the service of their people; they were servants of the people. The young United States also made a commitment to adopt this concept.

But, as so often happens in the world of man, responsibilities are confused with authority, especially for those who lived for centuries under a hierarchy, male dominance and tremendous disparity. The influences of the European system, which were so engrained for centuries and, thus, so hard to entirely dismiss, not only corrupted the intentions of their children but, ultimately, also took its toll on our ways.

Make no mistake. Whether the citizens of the United States now look at their elected positions as "rulers" rather than "servants," whether they now accept their birthrights as extinguished and their rights and privileges as “grants” from those "rulers," the Haudenosaunee do not!  Whether elected by popular vote or selected through clans, those chosen by the people are SERVANTS. Those that sit in council for their people have no authority on their own. Resolutions, decisions and proposals can only be reached with and by the consent of the people.

Since Haudenosaunee sovereignty remains vested in the people, the debate over the authority of the people set against the assumed and exaggerated authority of “tribal leadership” must be settled. In fact, what some regard as the “Nation” is "the People." The “Nation” is not a council, a chief, a president, a chairman or a trustee. Again, these are servants of the people.

Before we appropriated words, such as “sovereignty,” the Haudenosaunee said, “Tewatahtawi” — “We carry ourselves.” Our livelihoods are the means for our survival. The right to carry ourselves is the assertion of our inherent right, our sovereignty. This we always knew.

The trade conducted within our territories and between our territories is the most vital and sustaining commerce we have. Our individual Native-to-Native trade is Nation-to-Nation trade. An act of aggression by a government or agency against an individual conducting a lawful act on Native land or between Native lands is an act of aggression against all our people. Violating the sovereignty of an individual violates the sovereignty of us all. Our commerce is a sovereign act in our free use and enjoyment of our lands and the right to “carry ourselves” without interference, whether that commerce is carried out by individuals or an agency or designee of the people.

http://tworowtimes.com/opinions/columns/lets-talk-native/tewatahtawi-carry-ourselves/

The Big Lie: The Doctrine of Christian Discovery

Previously published in the October 2, 2013 issue of The Two Row Times

Steven Newcomb is the author of “Pagans in the Promised Land: Decoding the Doctrine of Christian Discovery.” He is the foremost authority on the subject. Steven will be a featured speaker of the University at Buffalo’s Indigenous Survival Day Speaker Series on Monday, October 14, 6 to 8 p.m. at 120 Clemens Hall. He will be a guest on “Let’s Talk Native…with John Kane” on Sunday, October 13, 9 to 11 p.m. EDT on WWKB ESPN Sports Radio 1520AM. LTN streams live on the Native Pride blog and on the TuneIn app for PCs and smart phones. If you miss Steven Newcomb live on LTN or at UB, catch his appearance in studio on demand on my blog or look for links on my “Let’s Talk Native…” Facebook group page.

Despite where you stand on religion or Christianity specifically, a lie is a lie even if the church utters it. One of the greatest lies ever pulled off on people the world over is that “God” chose individual “families” to rule over the rest of humanity. Even though many, including Americans who should know better, are still enamored by the notion of “princes and princesses,” most of us now relegate this stupid fairytale to Disney cartoons and the mainstream media’s coverage of a meaningless “royal family.”

Today there is another monumental ancient big lie that simply won’t die. Well, at least the U.S. and Canada hope it won’t. The Doctrine of Christian Discovery is actually a bigger lie than even the monarchy ordained by “God” that no one buys anymore. This doctrine is based almost solely on a series of decrees by 15^th century popes. Simply stated, the Vatican ruled that when a Christian people came into the lands of pagans – or non-believers – Christians could claim their land, their possessions and reduce those pagans to perpetual slavery.

Of course, this sounds so preposterous that a reasonable person would assume such a practice and policy would have died with slavery. Certainly, it would have no place in a nation that claims to govern with a separation of church and state. But not only is this doctrine codified in U.S. law with court rulings and legislation built upon those rulings but it is the basis of all U.S. land title. It is also the eggshells that the house of cards that is “federal Indian law” is built upon. There is no event, no treaty, no surrender, no petition and no referendum that ever places us “pagans” under the authority of the United States or anyone else. There are only the words of dead popes and the dead judges who regurgitated them.

The United Nations even felt compelled to state, what should be obvious to all, in the third affirmation of the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP):

Affirming further that all doctrines, policies and practices based on

or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of

national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are

racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and

socially unjust.

So, surely, with the entire international community (some nations quite reluctantly) condemning religious based racism, issues including equating discovery with conquest and the exclusively European-based transferrable “discovery title” with legitimate land ownership must be revisited. After all, can the world sit by and ignore the theft of land, subjugation and genocide of an entire hemisphere of people based on religious dogma?

Yes, it can. And, it does.

The UNDRIP is just words on paper unless someone gives it force. The force required isn’t just to overcome the inertia of history. It has to overcome world powers posturing for control of water, oil, minerals, gas and all the other natural resources on the lands of us “pagans” — the land, too, for that matter. The force must be enough to overcome the strongest attraction known to man. That is the attraction between a rich man and his money.

The church is in no hurry to put this issue to rest. How much have they pillaged from the “New World” in five centuries? How much do they still pillage? And who else has benefited? Even the Jewish judge on the U.S. Supreme Court cited the Christian Discovery Doctrine in a rationale to dismiss a Native land claim a few years ago. Think about it: a Jewish woman citing 15^th century Papal Bulls. And this was in 2005. How ironic and absurd is that?

It is one thing for Chief Justice John Marshal to make racist rulings in 1823 when a black man still could be bought and sold, a woman was still regarded as a man’s possession, and an “Indian” was just a savage with way too much land. But even in an era of offering apologies while admitting no guilt, there must be movement on this.

I once asked at the U.N., “Who gives the UNDRIP force?” Who repudiates racist doctrines that continue to support unjust policies? The only answer I got was, “We do.”

Let’s do it then. But first let’s learn how their house of cards is built. Investigate their BS and don’t let it stand!

http://tworowtimes.com

No, Really! It’s OK to Watch Al Jazeera America

Previously published in the September 25, 2013 issue of The Two Row Times - By John Kane

I am amazed at the displaced loyalty to all things "American" that far too many Native people have. Whether it is getting all ”patriotic” every time 9-11 is mentioned or supporting American political candidates or voting in their elections or even enlisting in their armed forces. Have we forgotten that we are survivors of the most monstrous and prolonged act of genocide the world has ever known? Do we forget that for more than 100 years our children were stripped from our homes, stripped of their identities, languages, cultures and dignities while being abused and crippled physically and mentally? Do we fail to acknowledge that policies exist to this day designed to conform us and assimilate our people to their laws and customs? Can we not see that in 2013 we have become so marginalized in our own lands that the occupiers can actually get away with using our images for sports mascots as though we are not real people or no longer exist?

What's worse, I think, is that so many are fine with all of this.

The mere mention of a country or nation that the U.S. or Canada deems "unfriendly" sends far too many Native people scurrying to their oppressors’ teats. Venezuela, Iran, Palestine — countries whose people have never harmed our own invokes an – almost – involuntary response due entirely on the propaganda we have been fed.

No matter how many times ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX or CNN portray us as pitiful creatures incapable taking care of ourselves in the land of milk and honey, we still flock to them or to their affiliates for our basic windows to the world and what can only be described as funhouse mirrors to view ourselves.

When I mention a viable alternative to such blather, such as Al Jazeera or Al Jazeera America, it is actually comical to view the responses. Big eyes and "Whoa there, terrorist" are not just written on their faces but are actually uttered through the mouths of some people. Mention that I have done an interview for them and a step back has even been witnessed.

Dianne McNair, Bureau Coordinator/Assistant to the Bureau Chief, Al Jazeera Network, Washington, DC Bureau and Abderrahim Foukara, Al Jazeera Bureau Chief, Washington, DC and New York with a Unity Flag from yours truly. Al Jazeera network is committed to the voices of the voiceless. Sign me up! No buffalo speeches. Just the hard truth and how WE see things.
(Photo by L. Hill)

I am not suggesting that anyone gets our story entirely right. However, until there is an Aboriginal Peoples Television Network (APTN) in the U.S. market and perhaps, more importantly, in the international market, we need to examine more critically the ridiculous talking heads that currently dominate the mainstream media. For me, Al Jazeera is the only hope on the horizon.

With the launch of Al Jazeera America, this news channel has committed itself to giving a voice to the voiceless and therein lies our best opportunity to be heard. But we have to be willing to at least utter a few sounds first and stop running from those the U.S., Canada and the rednecks in both countries that would love to see us silenced. As we make noise in our own territories we need to help this new network stay true to its word by telling our stories and providing feedback. My conversations with the folks from Al Jazeera have stressed our plight in the context of many conflicts around the world and throughout history.

There is little point in waging war against the “Washington Redskins” if we are only suggesting that a name change “will make America better.” That is ridiculous! It won’t! Mascots are not the real issue here – racism and genocide are. If no other network ­– sports, news or talk — is willing to have a serious discussion on how the true heirs to this continent still battle everyday to survive, not just as individuals but as peoples, then I am all in for giving my new best friend “AJ” a shot.

Let’s get a conversation going on the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Let’s expose the Doctrine of Christian Discovery as the racist foundation the U.S. and Canada is built upon. Show the poverty, the suicides, the violence and corruption that exist on Native lands – but this time show why. Show the federal policies, state sponsored racism and crimes against humanity that continue to this day in the land of “truth, justice and the American way.”

I don’t mind for a minute telling our story from a studio devoid of fake patriotism, flag lapel pins and pro-America spin on every turn. Let’s give Al Jazeera America a chance. What the Hell! They even have “America” in their name – for all of you who need that sort of thing.

http://tworowtimes.com/opinions/columns/lets-talk-native/really-ok-watch-al-jazeera-america/

Rule of Law or Rule of Lawyers?

Previously published as the LTN Column by John Kane in the September 18, 2013 Two Row Times 

We often hear from the righteous voices of the U.S. and Canada when looking at countries and peoples they view as inferior, that “rule of law” must prevail in these “developing” nations. “Developing”…? Excuse me! Forget the fact the U.S. and Canada have no culture or even a language of their own and barely a history, for that matter, compared to other peoples of the world.

But what does “rule of law” even mean?

When the upstart British colonists became dissatisfied with their “mother country,” they set about trying to create something new and distinct from European monarchies — new to them anyway. There is much talk of democracy these days but male dominant aristocracies is a habit hard to break especially when it is all you've known for several centuries. In the view of the “founding fathers,” democracy would empower the ignorant and the uninformed. They believed everyone should have rights. However, there was an important caveat: that “power” needed to be in the hands of the “capable.”

The U.S. did not form a democracy. It was a republic. The distinction between the two comes down to two concepts. The first is where sovereignty is vested. In a republic sovereignty is a birthright. It is vested in the individual; and the sovereignty of a nation comes from the people collectively. In a democracy it is the state that is the sovereign although it is an authority held by the collective of the people. The second thing that separates a democracy from a republic is the notion that the foundation of law or a constitution for a republic is natural law. That is to say that certain rights are inherent and unalienable. In a true democracy all laws are subject to majority (mob) rule. Both these ideas incorporated in the concept of a republic came from the Haudenosaunee. Sovereignty as a birthright, the understanding that creation is the ultimate power, and that any and all constructs of man are bound to that power, is the essence of our opening address, the Ohentonkariwatehkwa.

So when the words, “rule of law” are uttered, I say: hell yeah, agreed, no problem — as long as we are talking laws of nature and not the laws of men imposed on others without consent.

Seemingly, the entire world has forgotten the distinction of natural law from man’s law. Laws do not solve conflict. Even nature’s laws don’t do this — ask the next dinosaur you see how that worked out for them. Law, by court or certainly by lawyers, cannot resolve conflict. No one has ever successfully challenged nature in court. They have used courts to defy it but nature, like us, does not recognize that jurisdiction. Man’s law, on the other hand, is supposed to be based on the establishment of legitimate authority at the foundation of every piece of legislation and should lay out everything from jurisdiction to the legislative intent to constitutionality and basic rightness. It fails on much of this.

Now the biggest problem with this concept of “rule of (man’s) law” is that, unlike nature, we abandon diplomacy and negotiation and basic harmony for court rulings — i.e. winners and losers. And again, unlike in nature, there are flaws in much of the foundation of man’s law.

As I sit here today striking these computer keys and pondering all of this, I insist that there still does not exist any proper legal foundation for the subjugation of Native people to U.S. or Canadian law. And I would imagine the same could be said for many other peoples oppressed by colonial powers. The reality is there was no transfer of our sovereignty, no surrender agreement, no “treaty” asking to join the “club,” no referendum, and certainly no consent to genocide or assimilation. The U.S. and Canada cannot legislate our sovereignty away and their courts and judges cannot just rule it away. By definition the sovereignty of one people is outside the jurisdiction of another.

While I do believe the United Nations should do more than approve a “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” I don’t believe the U.N. should be the final arbitrator of any justice. No individual or no organization should have this role — or this right.

We must return to an era of diplomacy and statesmanship. A civilized society needs to have honest and meaningful dialogue to resolve conflicts. It should not be based on might makes right but, rather, on right makes right. Statesmanship and compromise need to be held higher than court precedents and religious dogma. Lawyers and lobbyists playing word games with man-made laws to screw the less fortunate, the environment and future generations need to be thrown off the table and conflicts need to be looked at as things to resolve — not as contests to win.

http://tworowtimes.com/opinions/columns/lets-talk-native/rule-law-rule-lawyers/