Found this on glossynews.com

Posted on April 29, 2010
Posted by P. Beckert


Navajo Nation – The Navajo, Hopi, all Apache Nations and all other Native Americans who presently reside in Arizona have joined forces in an effort to show the haughty Arizona residents just exactly who has every right to be in that State.

Said Chief Standing Wolf, “it is not those of European decent who should be making the laws of this state, but we, the tribal people, who have been suppressed for too long. Our ancestors have been here for thousands of years, while the white man only came a few hundred years ago. Yet, it is the white man who wants to make ridiculous laws and keep everything lily white. We can no longer stand by and let this happen.”

Short of declaring war on the Arizona government, Chief Standing Wolf instead issued a warning “reverse your laws entitling only English-speaking people to inhabit Arizona. Only then will we back down and allow peace to again grace Arizona, but if you deny our fellow red and brown men their rightful place in this state, there will be bloodshed.”

Of course, Chief Standing Wolf was speaking in his native tongue, so the lawmakers in the State weren’t exactly sure what the message was.

:evilgrin:

I watched the Daily Show once and saw a Florida congressman who was a devout Christians, but when one of the Daily Show's 'correspondents' asked him to name the ten commandments he could only remember a couple. It's ironic that those who are not religious seem to know more about the Bible than Christians do. I know I know more about the Bible than most Christians I've met. And right wing Christians seem to hate everything Jesus stood for, so why are they even claiming to be Christians?

:applause: Go, Navajo, Hopi, all Apache Nations and all other Native Americans!!

... than from the faux Americans calling themselves Tea Party patriots.

glossynews is a satire site

And, considering the overwhelming slaughter of and theft from the Native Americans have suffered at the hands of invading racist, theocratic terrorists from across the Atlantic, IF THEY DID mention bloodshed in return

--especially viewing "the Americans" bodycount vs. the 9-11 bodycount,
ya know, in our two continuing Middle East wars, neither including the counrty where the vast number of terrorists came from--

I can't really blame them too awfully much...

... that you missed you were in a satire store.

either.

I caught a small bit of some program on the box the other night which quoted Stephen Hawking regarding extra-terrestrial type aliens. He said we (terrestrials) should not be to anxious to contact the ET aliens because they would do to us what our ancestors did to the Native Americans.

from the small bit I heard on the program, Hawking doesn't doubt the existence of ETs, so perhaps we should all stop fighting our fellow terestrials and plan on how to hide from or deal with our technological superiors when they decide to come here.

Any ET's capable of traveling to our planet would have no material need to do so. The level of technology they would have makes pretty much any and every body in space a resource, and it's simply less of a hassle to strip an uninhabited world.

However, alien invasive species could prove a problem

"That especially includes you wide-stance, diaper-clad, rentboy-hiring Family-Values Republicon TeaBaggster Birfer Pharisees."

- The Firsties

So the Athapaskans will be returning to Canada?

After all, Spanish-speakers have been in Arizona since what, the mid-1500s? And the Athapaskans have only been there since after 1000. The Navajo and Apaches are Athapaskan speakers.

Granted, there might have been some intermarriage. But if the Apache policies from the 1600s and 1700s are ancient, then probably not. They were pretty much into genocide, or at least ethnic cleansing.

Now, the Uto-Aztecans, they've probably been there longer. But their immigration policy failed to keep out the Navajo and Apaches.

Although the OP is satire, there are plenty who forget that everybody's ancestors ultimately came from somewhere else.

:hi:

It seemed almost plausible!

.....no native Leader would go by the name 'chief standing wolf' or whatever...only wannabee's or those with maybe 1/164rth degree of native blood use names like that...on the other hand........(and only half-jokingly)....you're all illegal immigrants to us...and before anyone questions my bone fides...i'm 7/8 Mandan, Hidatsa, Arikara from ND...

I like to attend the local Pow Wows here in PA. They're run by our local Lenape. One of the organizations is announcing a new leader. His name is Chief Bob Quiet Wolf (Sakima Chitkwesi Teme). Are you saying he's a fraud? I'm I being taken for a ride here? Just curious.

you ask a very good question....let me see if I can explain it in this limited forum......the Lenape's have lost 90% of their culture and therefore those of lenape descent use what history books (written by non-indians) tell them lenape culture was...and this include naming their Leaders 'Chief' and incorporating many of our northern Plains ceremonies and traditions......'Chief' was a word coined by the whites to designate a person who could speak for the tribe as a whole...something useful while attempting to 'buy' land from the native people who had no concept of land ownership... not knowing that a 'Chief" had followers only as long as his idea's met approval with others...if not....they followed another who they felt had their best interests at heart...suffice it to say that up here in ND and in SD where i was raised...calling a traditional Leader a 'chief' would elicit laughter from not only the Man but from the people as a whole since we all know no one is better and that we all...even the least of us...have contributions we can make for the good of the whole...take another look at the powwows you've gone to in Pa...look at their regalia...most of it is probably 'Fancy' 'Traditional' or 'Grass' catagory...all northern plains.....Now.....i'm sure those of lenape descent will pile on me but remember this....Can you speak your native language? do you know your traditional Healing and/or Prayer Ceremonies? Do the Spirits manifest for your medicine People??? and I mean REALLY manifest by actually touching those being healed or speaking to the Group (and NOT through the ceremonial leader) ...and I mean LENAPE Healing and Prayer Ceremonies, not northern Plains sweats or vision-quests. We up on the northern Plains have a saying....You lose your language and you lose your culture...Do you still have yours?????????????????????????????????????

(and to the person who asked the question...if you are sincere and truly want to know more of native culture, PM me or find a 'Rez' near you, call their tribal headquarters and explain your interest...they'll be happy to accomodate you)


OK...now have at me.

I know they're just for fun. Hell, I'm Polish and I go to Polka Festivals. I don't sit there thinking "Wow, this is just like it used to be". How it used to be was probably way more dull.
My son and I will be camping at a Pow Wow over Memorial Day. I want to get there early to see if I can help put up a tipi. I know there were no tipis used around here. But tipis are cool. I wish I could afford one.

Knowledge is power. Google is your friend.

My opinion: some of these 'news' sites need to leave the satire to the professionals. It seems like most of them don't have a good grasp of the nuance of satire. Only 'The Onion' gets it right every time, from what I've seen. This article (in the OP) is chock-full of fail.

If you prefer Horatian satire I suppose so, but most of The Onion is just silly nowadays. Like this: Scientists Finally Prove What Area Dad Has Been Saying All Along and Scientists Successfully Teach Gorilla It Will Die. No point. Boring.

I prefer satire that tries to address the evils of society rather than the foibles of it.

Admittedly, I don't look at The Onion as often as I used to years ago, but I've read/watched it recently, and I don't recall EVER seeing anything quite as bad as the examples you linked. I guess I need to amend my statement to, "The Onion 'usually' gets it right." But I can still say that (in my experience) The Onion does not make the mistake MANY other satirical publications do: not projecting enough absurdity on important, debatable, or controversial topics. IOW, I see a lot of them that come off as odd, but still believable. Some topics necessitate obviousness in satire.

... that the Irish ought to sell their young for food.

Not sell their young into slavery to get food, but sell them for slaughter.

It's still one of the best pieces of satire ever written.

think....

There isn't one person who is indigenous to any area on earth. Hell, for all we know aliens inhabited this planet millions of years ago. So we all should leave. None of us belong here. Native Americans can only trace their roots back 2,000 years but humans have been on earth between 3.5 to 4 billion years ago. So that means native Americans are squatters too and must leave.

Don't you mean southern Africa?

Lucy!.... I'm home!

all the best...

But BILLION years?

Then we can deal with all those illegal immigrant asteroids...

I thought of that about two weeks ago. :D

There is a President of the Navajo Nation, and his name is Joe Shirley, and he didn't say anything like this.
Nor did Chairman Leroy Shingoitewa of the Hopi.


(On Edit)
I'm kind of insulted by the, "Cheif Standing Wolf" crap. Don't people realize that Native Americans are as much living in the modern world as you are? That we have given names and surnames just like everyone else?

Chief Standing Wolf my a**.

Besides...when do the Diné and Hopi ever agree on anything?


This post was written by P. Beckert

P. Beckert - who has written 158 posts on GlossyNews.com.

P. Beckert's is one voice vying for frequency room at the top of the opinion dial. Angered and bewildered by many of today’s events, P. Beckert uses humor as a tool to fight against an onslaught of stupidity and ignorance that seems to permeate the airwaves and pollute the sensitivities of a once brilliant nation. You can find more at ISaidLaughDammit.blogspot.com.

That we have given names and surnames just like everyone else?
-
Said Hippie Cowgirl

Get it right...

It might not be the *best* satire out there.... but not everyone can be Jonathan Swift.

Speaking of Jonathan Swift, one of my coworkers was discussing his reasons for disliking Mexican immigrants (legal or illegal) -- that they live in poverty and have large families as soon as they come into the country because most were Catholics.

I asked if he had any Irish ancestry, then sent him a link over instant messenger to "A Modest Proposal". It took him a minute to get the point of what I was trying to say.

For those who haven't read it, or would like to read it again: http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html

I think it's relevant to the discussion, for sure.

My indian name is Divides-By-Zero. See? Modern as can be. :D

All lines started somewhere else.

100% on this statement.

Only they can speak to Americans like that. They are our conscious. We should protect them and hold them dear. They tell us to live WITH the earth and not against it and that our neighbor is part of our family and our responsibility. We should listen.

:eyes:

The Noble Savage myth is just that, a myth.

They're human beings like you and me. Meaning the same good and bad parts. You're doing them any favors by romanticizing them.

this is good for the soul joining DU...stings a little but i'm being purged of all my errors, i suppose...

i guess in my eagerness to heal racial wounds i go too far

Militarily, socially, and culturally.

Of course we should listen, but each Native American deserves one vote, the same as everyone else.

I'm not too sure myself sometimes.

I don't get it

but then again who really has the right to expel or keep people out??

Might does not make right as most republicans think. They feel that if they have more power no matter what they do it is okay no matter how they hurt. That is why we are starting to get laws like this.

You're projecting white violence onto people of color --

Those who invaded, those who committed genocide, those who co-opted the rightful

owners were whites.

your stolen goods.

:thumbsup:

Teh stupid is the current MO of that backwards state.

English is a "Yurpeen" language.

English from the American bastardization of it. Or vice versa. I'm tired.

It looks like several people in here bit, too -- so perhaps my judgment that "not everyone can be Jonathan Swift" was incorrect. The measure of how good of a satire something is has always been, in my opinion, how many people actually believe it when they hear it.

Really?

If so... please tell me how? Seriously?

I am taking the article with a "grain of salt" which seems its intention --

which IMO is a REMINDER to us all that Columbus was not a "discoverer" but an

invader -- an invader who committed genocide vs the Native people upon authority

of Papal Bulls which called for their enslavement or murder -- same for the

African enslaved here.

I also agree with the comment made in the article that Arizona fears people of color

and losing their majority status.

Now -- it might be interesting to hear why you asked since what I said seemed quite clear???

Seriously?

Was what you said. By "this" I assumed you meant the article.

Satire is not always meant to be taken with a grain of salt. The best satire is designed to provoke a reaction, and hopefully make people think. "The Onion" is mostly Horatian satire, designed to poke gentle lighthearted fun at social vices. How often have you seen them tackle a real issue and make a decent point? The closest I've seen in a long damn time from them was this article:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/us-flag-recalled-after-causing-143-million-deaths,17248/

It, and this article, are examples of Juvenalian (not "juvenile") satire. It's not lighthearted humor that's designed to make people laugh. It's bittertasing and usually not "funny". It's designed to make a point. And the point is obviously NOT that this country should be all "lily-white".

In examining satire that does not just consist of making fun of people, one of the most essential parts to examine is the portion of the writing that should clue most people in to the fact that it is not describing actual events. In this particular article, it was this line:

"Of course, Chief Standing Wolf was speaking in his native tongue, so the lawmakers in the State weren’t exactly sure what the message was."

The point of the article was to address Anglocentrism and how utterly hypocritical it is. That if such a speech was given, no matter what language was used, the lawmakers would have ignored it anyway because it was spoken by someone who wasn't Anglo -- even though the group he was representing obviously had lengthy experience with having their country "overrun by immigrants" (and the fact the immigrants were our own ancestors just makes it even more ironic). How we as a country are so insular and prideful that we rarely ever learn another language other than English unless it's forced upon us in school -- instead we demand that everyone learn our own (and hasn't that come up more than once in the discussions about possible amnesty that one of the requirements for it should be that they would have to learn how to speak English?)

So no, I don't see how you would think that pointing out the hypocrisy of Anglocentrism could in any way be an effort to keep everything "lily-white"

And the point is obviously NOT that this country should be all "lily-white".



In the second paragraph, the sentence before the last, you will note this comment ...

Yet, it is the white man who wants to make ridiculous laws and keep everything lily white.

And, I'm agreeing with that comment -- the Arizona law and most of the T-bagging, IMO, has a

basis in racism. Would Arizona like a "lily white" state -- IMO, yes!

Unfortunately, then white people would have to do some work or watch their economy collapse!!

Hope you get it now!!??

Wow!



:eyes:

You said "This is an effort to keep everything lily-white". You used a pronoun. "This".

If you mean the law that Arizona passed, I agree with you entirely. But it looked like you were saying that the writers of the satirical article wrote it because they wanted to keep everything lily-white.

That's why when in my response, I said "The article?" As in, trying to find out if the pronoun "this" was referencing the article, which I did not understand at all.

Thank you, have a good day, and drive through!

"THIS" meaning the Arizona law --

You'll also remember that I said . . . "this is something for us all to think about" --

meaning the RACISM which is obvious to most of us --


Sometimes someone just needs to rant -- presume that was the case and I was handy!!

Good luck --

we're on the same side.

http://www.penandpage.com/EngMenu/gramref.htm

It helps.

Racism is a key component of Anglocentrism.

But if you recall, German and Irish immigrants were treated in very similar ways, and people had very similar prejudices against them as they do on Mexican immigrants now. They were "lily-white" too, but still hated. It isn't just about color, it's about not being able to tolerate differences, whether they be in color of skin, language, religion, or customs. The root of it all is the same -- a sense of cultural superiority.

that goes for the T-baggers, as well -- as can be clearly seen --

The rest of what you're talking about -- exploitation of humans according to various

myths of inferiority -- is simply what patriarchy, organized patriarchal religion and

its system of capitalism are based on . . . EXPLOITATION OF EVERYTHING!!

Male supremacy offers a war on women -- it isn't about color, either.

Does 1/4 native qualify me to stay?

Only for one season.

I'd pick spring or fall......

:fistbump:

My guess is no one would want us back!!!

on edit sorry for DP.

permanent settlement in what became the United State. On September 8, 1565, Padro Menendez de Aviles established the City of St. Augustine in northeast Florida. An earlier attempt (1559) by the Spanish to build a permanent base in Florida, in what is now Pensacola, failed in less than two years. (Native Americans and hurricanes destroyed their efforts.)

The Native American nations in Florida at that time were the Apalachee tribe, the Calusa tribe, the Tequesta, Jeaga and Ais tribes, the Timucua tribe.

There are not too many of any of these Nations left in Florida, and none at all of most of them in existance anywhere today. War with the Europeans killed off many of them, but diseases brought to the New World by the Europeans, for which the Native Americans had no immunities at all, decimated what was left.

The Spanish decision to establish a permanent presence in Florida was brought about by the attempt of French Huguenot to establish a colony in Florida at Fort Caroline (Jacksonville, Florida grew up around what was Fort Caroline). Because they were Protestants, Menendez, when he captured them, killed them all.

The Europeans fought among themselves just as much as they did against the Native Americans (albeit with less devatating effect).

But so did the Native Americans fight among themselves, too.

Refers to the fact that the natives helped the settlers survive in the new world. (then were screwed for their generosity). I am aware that the pilgrims were not the first. You can go back to the Norse or perhaps even the Irish (St. Brendan) for the original Europeans to establish colonies.

Just last week I visited native sites near the Grand Canyon (Tusayan) dating back to around 1185. Fascinating! It is said that only about 5% of the area around the canyon has been anthropologically surveyed and 4,500 sites have been found. Think how many more could be found and need to be studied and preserved?

Edit for minor spelling error.

They should carry guns and shoot any Americans without papers.

pair!!

They've only been here a few tens of thousands of years.

But seriously, how many generations does a group have to be somewhere before you can call them "natives"? How fine shall we split this hair? And if you want to go down that road, 95% of the European and Asian populations will have to move back where they came from...

that the OP is satire, not fact, to answer your question we'd have to acknowledge that the "illegals" resided in what is now Arizona before Europeans arrived.

Might still makes right, when it comes to deciding who gets to claim and control territory.

But it does raise valid questions.

what arrogant lilywhite assholes they are.

And the point is obviously NOT that this country should be all "lily-white".

In the second paragraph, the sentence before the last, you will note this comment --

Yet, it is the white man who wants to make ridiculous laws and keep everything lily white.

And, I'm agreeing with that comment -- the Arizona law and most of the T-bagging, IMO, has a

basis in racism. Would Arizona like a "lily white" state -- IMO, yes!

Unfortunately, then white people would have to do some work or watch their economy collapse!!

Hope you get it now!!??

Glad I asked, 'cause you really misunderstood the satire and my response . . .

those who actually more closely resemble the old-fashioned "Native Americans". It's not who gets here firstest, but who get here with the mostest! ;)