Header

Don't Mix Indigenous Fight With Palestinian Rights

Ryan Bellerose
1/11/14

The December 31, 2013 article “‘Redwashing’ Panel Follows Academic Associations’ Boycott of Israel” on IndianCountryTodayMediaNetwork.com is rife with inaccuracies and outright fallacies, from the opening paragraph where it speaks about "using native americans to cover up the ongoing illegal occupation of [Palestinian] lands."

The author clearly doesn't understand that in fact Judeah and Samaria are not "Palestinian" lands but the ancestral homeland of the Jewish nation. this is easily verified through archaeology and study of the region. The Jewish nation does not lose their ties to their land simply because it was occupied first by Rome and then by the Ottomans. To accept that would be to put our own claims in danger.

Its important for us to examine who these people are who are claiming to speak on behalf of Native americans, because they hide their bigotry underneath our banner.

Lets look first at the ringleader J. Kēhaulani Kauanui. She is not a Native American. She claims she is "part indigenous Hawaiian,” but her experiences are about as Native American as a native Australian's would be. I am not saying they don't have their own history of persecution and oppression, but its very different from ours and I am getting tired of reading this woman’s claims. She is doing nothing more than inciting bad feelings towards Israel and pushing her agenda of bigotry and racism.

Lets examine the claims we know she's made:

She claims that the Palestinians are indigenous, something that only a person with very little knowledge of the Middle East would make. Anyone capable of opening a history textbook knows that Arabs conquered the Middle East in the 7th century CE. The Palestinians self-identify as Arabs. Some may carry indigenous blood, but blood quantum is a white man's concept. They deny their indigenous culture and heritage and instead follow the culture and claim the heritage of the colonizer people. How is that indigenous? Indigenous status is a complex combination of things, but the most important is the genesis of culture and tradition in conjunction with ancestral lands, which would mean that the Jews of Israel are indigenous, and the Arabs of "Palestine" are not. They can claim indigenous status, but to the Arabian peninsula, which is not the Levant. Ask an Arab where his most holy place is, unless he is one of the tiny minority of Christian Arabs, he will tell you its Mecca, and he will tell you this in Arabic both of which track back to.... the Arabian peninsula. Ask a Jew where their holiest place is, and they will tell you, and they will do so in the language that developed in the holy land.

I don't think Kauanui understands that by her argument, Americans are now indigenous to Hawaii, because the first white people showed up in Hawaii in the 1700's about 1200 years after the first "Hawaiins" By using her own logic that conquerors can become Indiegnous through the passage of time, it means that Arabs showed up about 3 thousand years after the first Jews in the Levant, and became indigenous through conquer and time, it follows that 1200 years is really quite insignificant. I somehow doubt that Kauanui will enjoy the conclusion that her logic arrives at when followed in a straight line, these partially educated people rarely do. They do not consider the damage that this argument makes when one is arguing the validity of indigenous rights.

The article also speaks of "victories" for the "Palestinian based boycott" which is also quite misleading, first because its actually an Israel based boycott, the founder of BDS, Omar Barghouti, is a student at Tel Aviv University, which is in Israel. also it neglects to mention that dozens of  universities are withdrawing from the organizations who have expressed support for this ridiculous display of racism and bigotry. But dont take my word for it. Note that universities like Harvard, Yale and Princeton have condemned this boycott, while only a few community colleges and less well known schools support it. to infer otherwise is to ignore facts, something these people seem pretty skilled at.

This is not a victory, it has cost Native American scholars credibility, credibility for which we have fought hard. It also has had several setbacks as more and more people realize that this boycott is nothing more than bigotry. Now there is a movement to remove funding from universities who support this bigotry.

I am active in the indigenous rights movement, and I have been quite active in Idle No More since last December, I have been at both ends of the spectrum, I have organized events, participated in them and done everything in between, in my time with INM I have seen several groups try to coopt our struggle, to piggyback on our tragedies. I have written about this, because its offensive when people who have not gone through what we have gone through, are claiming solidarity with us, while ignoring the key aspects of our struggle. We are warrior peoples in the majority, we do not believe in targeting women and children and we revere life, how would we reconcile that with solidarity with people who actively target women and children and celebrate attacks that kill them?

Let me be very clear here, Indigenous rights are incredibly important, and when we attack the indigenous rights of any group who legitimately lay claim to them, we are in fact doing the colonists work for them. To attempt to grant indigenous rights to a group that has no right to them, even in an abstract sense is directly attacking our own rights because any inconsistency in our arguments will be picked up by our enemies.

I am also disgusted to see someone attacking Joy Harjo, who is an indigenous artist and activist, I actually watched on her page on Facebook as people threatened her, insulted her and lectured her on oppression, as if an Indian woman who has experienced oppression and marginalization needed some old white liberals to lecture her on oppression. you want to talk about scandalous? the fact that people are still attempting to smear her is ridiculous and disgusting. This woman followed her heart and her conscience and went to Israel, she has spoken about the things she doesn’t agree with about israel, but she went because her art heals rifts, it doesn’t create them.

I would also like to know who this "Ashtan" person is and what enables him to speak to this so called "solidarity" with Idle No More. As I said, I am heavily involved in INM, which is a grassroots organization. while we are grateful for support, we neither want nor accept support from those who would deny indigenous people their rights to a state on their ancestral lands. this attempt to coopt our struggle is ridiculous and frankly its unacceptable. I cannot claim to speak for every Indian, we are a multitude of peoples, but to try and suggest that we have anything more than surface similarities to the Palestinians is humorous and ridiculous. Because we are indigenous peoples, we have more in common with indigenous peoples than we do with colonizers who showed up in the seventh century, (and in point of fact, the majority of Palestinians showed up in the 20th century). Do not presume to lie to us and perpetuate false narratives.

More and more Native Americans are realizing that in the age of information, we no longer need to listen to these false narratives being spread by people who claim to speak for us. we are educated, intelligent and can speak for ourselves, people like Kauanui, Salaita, and Ashtan should learn to speak for their own people and not pretend to speak for us. I have spoken to many of my people after reading this, and while there are some who are Pro palestinians rights (as I am) we do not accept this Anti Israel propoganda being spread in our name, we can be pro Palestinians and still be pro Israel and pro indigenous statehood

I would suggest in the future, these people invite some actual indians who have the knowledge and the background to discuss these issues, but then we wouldnt be welcome in the sort of conference that is being attended, because we are able to speak for ourselves and not just parrot false narratives.

Ryan Bellerose is a Métis from Paddle Prairie Alberta. He founded Canadians for Accountability, a Native rights advocacy group, and is an Idle No More movement organizer. As an indigenous rights activist, He is also a founding member in the Calgary United with Israel (CUWI) organization and is a self-proclaimed Zionist."

 

You need to be logged in in order to post comments
Please use the log in option at the bottom of this page

44

POST A COMMENT

Comments

ktallbea's picture
I am surprised that Indian Country Today published something so analytically under-baked, not informed by multiple relevant literatures, and slanderous. It is also the first resort of the analytically weak to question someone's authenticity as indigenous in order to discredit their analyses related to indigenous issues. I wonder did Indian Country Today publish this particular piece in the interest of balance because they could not find a rigorous thinking indigenous intellectual to defend Zionist Israel? I challenge ICTMN to find such a writer and then maybe an informed and actually worthwhile discussion can ensue. Where are your standards? Kim TallBear
ktallbea
dinagw's picture
I see many problems with the reasoning and supposed facts upon which the author bases his opinion. First of all, attacking the indigenous identity of any scholar (Kauanui in this case) is a cheap and well-worn trick designed to deflect attention away from the real issues when there is a lack of any substantive logic to an argument. Primarily, however, the arguments are based on a complete overlooking of the real criticism of the BDS movement, which is the illegal encroachments of Israel into Palestinian territory and the wholesale denial of Palestinian rights. The BDS movement and its supporting institutions--especially the academic institutions--have made these arguments abundantly clear. Instead, he relies on the tried and true Zionist argument which suggests that any criticism against Israel is automatically a denial of Israel's right to exist. This tactic is evident in his attempt to justify post-1948 Jewish settlement in Palestine. Nowhere does he mention the ongoing problem of post 1967 settlements. In his seriously flawed criticism of the racial/ethnic make up of the Redwashing Panel the author also conveniently neglects to mention the participation of Robert Warrior, renown and highly respected Osage scholar. It turns out Professor Warrior was unable to make the trip to Beirut but his paper was still able to be presented, and was instead read by a brilliant Navajo Ph.d. student from the University of New Mexico, Melanie Yazzie. Contrary to Bellerose's assertions that the panel lacked sufficient indigenous representation, the facts tell a different story.
dinagw
stanleyheller's picture
It’s hard to respond to this piece as it’s more based on religious teachings rather than accepted history but I’ll try. Since Ryan Bellerose thinks pedigrees are all important let me say I’m non-Native American, and a Jewish-American. I have degrees in history from Yale and Southern Connecticut State University. Bellerose says, “Judeah and Samaria are not ‘Palestinian’ lands but the ancestral homeland of the Jewish nation.” Not so. There were kingdoms in the area whose religious practices were similar to classical Judaism, but the idea of “nation” is something thought up in the 18th century, not five centuries before Christ and Caesar. There were other kingdoms, empires and such before and after the Jewish ones. What, other than religious dogma, gives modern Jews eternal “ancestral” rights to the area? Bellerose says the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River because they are Arabs and Arabs merely conquered the area. Well according to Jewish tradition we conquered the area, too. Read about Joshua and Jericho. Arabs, often called Palestinians, lived in the area continuously since the seventh century even according to the Bellerose. Sounds indigenous to me. He’s wrong about holy places of Arabs, too. Not only Arab Christians, but Arab Muslims revere holy places in Jerusalem. You can look it up. Talking about the well-deserved boycott of Israeli colleges and universities he claims “universities like Harvard, Yale and Princeton have condemned this boycott” and only some community colleges are supporting it. No such institutions are taking any such stands. A large number of higher education "presidents" are opposing the ASA boycott resolution on their own say so. This compares to the ASA whose "membership" voted overwhelmingly for the resolution after months of deliberations. Finally he says “We are warrior peoples in the majority, we do not believe in targeting women and children and we revere life, how would we reconcile that with solidarity with people who actively target women and children and celebrate attacks that kill them?” He’s attacking the Palestinians here, but he’s got it all reversed. By coincidence I’m writing this during the fifth anniversary of the Israeli attack on Gaza that left 1400 Palestinians dead, over 300 who were youth under 18, sixty of whom were under six years old. The Israeli military even used white phosphorus on civilians. Ghada Abu Halima was gravely injured by the chemical. She died after a month of suffering. Ryan Bellerose, read the U.N. “Goldstone report” on what happened in Gaza and then talk about attacks on women and children.
stanleyheller
rainbow's picture
In the second millennium, Jerusalem was inhabited by the Jebusites. In the Bible the Jebusites are considered to be Canaanites. It was the Jebusites who first built the fortress Zion in the town. Zion is a Canaanite word which means "hill" or "height." .....In Judges: 19 it says: In those days when there was no king in Israel, a certain Levite set out on a journey to seek his concubine.... He had with him his servant. When they were near Jebus [i.e. Jerusalem] the day was far spent and the servant said to his master: "Come now let us turn aside to this city of the Jebusites and spend the night in it." [And his master said to him], "We will not turn aside to the city of foreigners who do not belong to the people of Israel 2E".... Bearing these facts about the origin of Jerusalem in mind, the Israeli writer Dan Almagor, writing in the Israeli paper Yediot Ahronot, 29 January 1993 scoffed at the intended celebrations of the founding of Jerusalem and stressed that David was the occupier, not the founder of Jerusalem. Almagor said, "Let us be careful about the rules of truth and reality in our publishing. Accordingly, we must say truthfully: No festivities for the 3000-year anniversary of the foundation of Jerusalem but for the occupation of Jerusalem."...As DeLacy O'Leary pointed out in Arabia Before Muhammad "The majority of the present Palestinian peasants are descendants of those who preceeded the Israelites.".... In The Golden Bough, the British anthropologist Sir James Frazer (1854-1941) stressed that, "the Arabic-speaking peasants of Palestine are the progeny of the tribes which settled in the country before the Israelite invasion. They are still adhering to the land. They never left it and were never uprooted from it."
rainbow
Jax479's picture
@stanleyheller -- I have no idea where to begin with all the drivel you posted in your last comment. Let me try anyway: (1) You're wrong about "the ASA membership voting overwhelmingly for the resolution after months of deliberations". Out of a membership of 5000, only a little over 1200 voted. Out of that 1200 figure, about 800 voted in favour of the boycott, while a little over 400 voted against it. (800/5000)*100=16% So basically, 16% of the ASA's membership voted in favour of the boycott. Hardly an "overwhelming vote", eh? (2) You're even more wrong when you say "No such institutions are taking any such stands. A large number of higher education "presidents" are opposing the ASA boycott resolution on their own say so" Over 92 American universities have not only denounced the boycott in an OFFICIAL CAPACITY (and not "on their own say so"), and have even threatened to withdraw from the ASA. Please read: http://www.jpost.com/International/92-universities-reject-academic-boycott-of-Israel-336771 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/06/us/backlash-against-israel-boycott-throws-academic-association-on-defensive.html?_r=0 A few universities have already withdrawn, and more and more are following suit: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.565245 Don't let facts in the way of what Electronic Intifada will tell you, though. (3) About Operation Cast Lead, did you forget about what prompted that intervention? Answer -- Months and months of brutal rocket fire onto Israeli civilians. Is defending your civilians against Jihadist warmongering not appropriate nowadays? (4) About the statistics of Cast Lead: Of the 1400 Palestinians killed, over 700 were militants and fighters. That's over 50% an accuracy rate. Can you name me a SINGLE country on this planet that has such an accuracy rate? Even the US couldn't manage that in Afghanistan and Iraq. Again, don't get let facts get in your way. And the 300 under 18 youth that were killed, I'd bet you my bottom dollar that the overwhelming majority of them would have been militants. (5) You brought up the seasoned Pallywood cliche about "Israel used White Phosphorus on civilians" canard. Israel used WP as an ILLUMINANT, to guide troop movement, and not as an incendiary weapon. Even the Red Cross openly stated that Israel's use of WP wasn't illegal was within the norms of conventional warfare. Read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/13/israels-use-of-white-phos_n_157648.html http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2009/0114/red-cross-no-evidence-israel-is-using-white-phosphorus-illegally Electronic Intifada didn't report that? Besides, the US used WP in Fallujah and other areas of Iraq and Afghanistan, the French used it recently in Mali, the Japanese used it in WW-II etc, but ONLY as an illuminant, just like Israel did during Cast Lead. Again, facts are your kryptonite, I know. (6) Which "Goldstone Report" are you asking Ryan to read? The one that Justice Goldstone himself withdrew? Read his own words in his Washington Post op-ed: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html And finally, we don't really need White folk like you speaking for us, telling us what to do and giving us marching orders. The days of Colonialism are over, and no White person can claim to speak for us. We speak for ourselves, THAT'S IT.
Jax479
Lgáa's picture
Mr Bellerose struck a sour chord. All three comments below read as a coordinated effort by the people he mentions in the article. It is analytically weak to expose a white person posing as indigenous? By that logic Ward Churchill should still have a job. Was it a cheap trick for white people to be angry that they had allowed themselves to be deceived for two decades, or just a rude awakening? Kauanui isn't one of us, and neither are some of the people who attacked Mr Bellerose. If you don't like Indians go home. We don't want you on our continent, and take your whining Arab loser friends with you.
Lgáa
Ryanbellerose's picture
Ok I will respond to the festival of stupidity here in the comments section because as usual we have a bunch of morons who think that if you tell a lie long enough it becomes the truth. The problem with that logic is that you will run into people who actually have the education to refute those lies with facts. so I will go in order. First lets refute "rainbow and her ridiculous notions of what makes a people indigenous and her citing of several white colonials who have a vested interest in the " conquerors can become indigenous without the genesis of culture" that is so damaging to indigenous rights." meme that is spread by palestinian supporters and white colonialists. quoting the golden bough? really? Indigenous status is not granted solely through longstanding presence, there MUST be a genesis of culture, not simply conquering indigenous people and subsuming them the way the arabs did. to argue anything else would delegitimise the rights of north american indians and I doubt that argument will be accepted here at INDIAN COUNTRY.
Ryanbellerose
Jax479's picture
@stanley heller -- You also said: "Arabs, often called Palestinians, lived in the area continuously since the seventh century even according to the Bellerose. Sounds indigenous to me." OK, I think you missed what Ryan wrote that decimate your argument. Here's the exact paragraph from his piece that you've missed, which addresses just that: "I don't think Kauanui understands that by her argument, Americans are now indigenous to Hawaii, because the first white people showed up in Hawaii in the 1700's about 1200 years after the first "Hawaiins" By using her own logic that conquerors can become Indiegnous through the passage of time, it means that Arabs showed up about 3 thousand years after the first Jews in the Levant, and became indigenous through conquer and time, it follows that 1200 years is really quite insignificant. I somehow doubt that Kauanui will enjoy the conclusion that her logic arrives at when followed in a straight line, these partially educated people rarely do. They do not consider the damage that this argument makes when one is arguing the validity of indigenous rights."
Jax479
BinyaminArazi's picture
Ktallbea, I notice that you haven't actually refuted any of Ryan's arguments. All you did was provide ad hominems and question ICT's motives for publishing it. [ Primarily, however, the arguments are based on a complete overlooking of the real criticism of the BDS movement, which is the illegal encroachments of Israel into Palestinian territory and the wholesale denial of Palestinian rights.] Well, given the full return of all 6 million Palestinian refugees is one of BDS's demands, this quote should say it all... “If the refugees were to return, you would not have a two-state solution, you’d have a Palestine next to a Palestine.” ~ Omar Barghouti, founder of the BDS movement The goal is not human rights, or the internationally recognized two state solution. It is the elimination of the Jewish state, which is contrary to international law, and BDS is well aware of this. [ Instead, he relies on the tried and true Zionist argument which suggests that any criticism against Israel is automatically a denial of Israel's right to exist.] Please quote the passage in which he says this. I don't see anything in the article which even remotely implies this. [ This tactic is evident in his attempt to justify post-1948 Jewish settlement in Palestine.] If you're referring to the West Bank/Judah+Shomron as Palestine, there were NO Jews living there after 1948. They were all expelled by the Jordanian army. If you're referring to Israel's green line borders as Palestine, the "settlement" is actually legal immigration to an internationally recognized state. In both cases, Jews had migrated there legally. There was no war until the Arab colonists (most of whom were recent immigrants brought in as hired labor by the British) attacked the Jewish communities and attempted to drive them into the sea, including those who had lived there for centuries. And as Ryan says, Jews are an aboriginal people. The rights of the colonizer (Arabs) do not trump, under any circumstances, the rights of the indigenous (Jews). The fact that the latter were displaced for a prolonged period does not change that. [ There were kingdoms in the area whose religious practices were similar to classical Judaism, but the idea of “nation” is something thought up in the 18th century, not five centuries before Christ and Caesar. There were other kingdoms, empires and such before and after the Jewish ones. What, other than religious dogma, gives modern Jews eternal “ancestral” rights to the area? ] The Jews became a people in the Levant. Their culture, identity, language, traditions, alphabet, etc were forged in that region, hence they are indigenous to it. [Bellerose says the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River because they are Arabs and Arabs merely conquered the area. Well according to Jewish tradition we conquered the area, too. Read about Joshua and Jericho.] No serious archaeologist or historian supports this narrative. Rather, the Israelites grew out of the indigenous Canaanites. The Hebrew language is itself a Canaanite language, and the Israelites even worshiped Canaanite gods initially. [ Arabs, often called Palestinians, lived in the area continuously since the seventh century even according to the Bellerose. Sounds indigenous to me.] Not so. A conquering people (Arabs) can never become indigenous, no matter how long they live there. Indigenous is the genesis of an identity and culture in conjunction with a traditional homeland. Palestinians self-identify as Arabs (i.e. Arabian), speak Arabic, and revere Mecca and Medina as even more holy than the lands they claim they are indigenous to. To call them indigenous people is both absurd and insulting. [ He’s wrong about holy places of Arabs, too. Not only Arab Christians, but Arab Muslims revere holy places in Jerusalem. You can look it up.] That's because Muslims revere ANY land they conquer as holy, although none are more holy than the aforementioned Mecca and Medina. [ He’s attacking the Palestinians here, but he’s got it all reversed. By coincidence I’m writing this during the fifth anniversary of the Israeli attack on Gaza that left 1400 Palestinians dead, over 300 who were youth under 18, sixty of whom were under six years old.] First, what do you think those Gaza attacks were in response to? Second, Hamas bases themselves in and launches rockets from hospitals, kindergartens, and other sensitive civilian areas because they know any response from the IDF would result in dead children, which they can trot out for the media to cast Israel as the villain. This is fairly well documented. [ The Israeli military even used white phosphorus on civilians.] The Red Cross cleared Israel of white phosphorus use. Nice try.
BinyaminArazi
Ryanbellerose's picture
I see the typical festival of idiocy is coming out to play. this is the typical reaction of pro palestinians when faced with facts, I will start with rainbow first and refute the idiots in order, and yes I use the word idiot when dealing with people of this ilk. Rainbow, rights of longstanding presence do not equate with indigenous status, they are a small component of what makes a people indigenous, far more important are the genesis of language and culture. clearly you didnt read the article, I would suggest you do so, take some time to think, and then respond. Stanley, another person who seems to have some trouble with rational though. perhaps if you didnt hide behind your jewishness in order to make points in this discussion you would have talen the time to educate yourself about your own history, people like you are the problem because you give these idiots a token jew. the worst thing is that you don't even know your own history. My argument has no religious drive behind it, thats simply your way to try to dismiss an argument that you have no refutation for, but I will break down your stupidity for you in the hopes that somewhere in your dim brain you have some conscience about throwing your own people under the bus. first the appeal to authority is hilarious, does having a piece of paper from south conneticut state make you any more educated than anyone else? I highly doubt your degree of history came from yale, you probably did your undergrad degree there or something, because nobody who is yale educated would use an appeal to authority argument in an argument regarding indigenous status with an actual indigenous person. lets start with your assertion that there was no Jewish nation, that alone suggests to me that if you are in fact jewish (which I begin to strongly doubt) that you are jewish by blood only, because EVERY jewish person I know, strongly identifies with their jewish heritage and considers the jewish people themselves to be the jewish nation. this is normal from a people who spent centuries in exile but maintained their culture and traditions in the face of great persecution. so right away you are losing credibility by arguing that there was no jewish nation. and I have not even started to refute the idiocy that there were "There were kingdoms in the area whose religious practices were similar to classical Judaism" thats just stupid, there were JEWISH kingdoms, the history and archaelogical evidence alone refutes the idiocy of your assertion. you ask what gives the jewish people the rights to claim the land as their ancestral lands because there were " kingdoms there before and after" and that shows that you simply dont understand indigenous status, indigenous status is about several things, I suggest you reread the article, you might also want to read the article I wrote for Israellycool where I explain why the jewish people are indigenous, because its clear that you dont understand what being indigenous means. heres a link http://www.israellycool.com/2014/01/09/israel-palestine-whos-indigenous/" as for your propoganda about gaza, first off Israel uses white phosphorous in smoke creating munitions, and was cleared by the international red cross of using it illegally, second off more gaza children are killed because of the brave hamas "freedom fighters " launching rockets from behind civilian shields than are killed as collateral damage. you fail to ask why Gaza was attacked in the first place. and quoting Goldstone after he refuted his own report is almost funny. now we have the fun one, Dinagw first of all questioning the indigenous status of someone who is claiming to represent indigenous people as ONE OF US is not a cheap trick at all * cough Ward churchhil* cough. when someone claims to represent me they had better have iron clad credentials, not nebulous ones. frankly the commonality of experience between myself ( a reserve raised north american indian) and Princess poipoi is almost nil, the commonality between myself and salaita and ashtan are almost nil. They have no business telling anyone the represent me or my people. hence my refutation that they in any way speak for indigenous people. BDS is a movement that has been criticised by people like Norman Finklestein who admitted it is nothing more than a " cult designed to delegitimise and eventually destroy Israel." Its founder Omar barghouti (who himself is a student at an ISRAELI university) has openly spoken about how there will be no jews allowed in Palestine, and he defines Palestine as " from the river to the sea" which means Israel as well. so you tell me what that means. People like Robert Warrior are problematic, because they should know better, but he is nothing more than a useful idiot for these people, its actually quite sad that one of our own people is still following the false narrative that has been so roundly debunked by many scholars now, I have no idea who Melanie Yazzie is but I can only assume she is yet another kid who has fallen victim to the idiocy of those who deny indigenous rights while pretending to defend them. she is a phd student though, so hopefully she will figure it out. and the facts actually show that one indian didnt go , and one person of dubious claims to even being indigenous was the ringleader, one phd student went and presented someone elses work (which was probably a blessing as Robert warrior isnt much of a public speaker anyway.) I noticed you didnt condemn the way the bdsholes attacked Joy Harjo who actually is a respected native north american artist, so I assume you think its ok to attack native american women. last but not least we have ktallbear first I answered why I am questioning someones indigenous status when they claim to represent me and my people, if thats the sum total of your criticism then I suggest you sit down and shut up while the adults are speaking.
Ryanbellerose

Pages