Reflections
from the Ahnishinahbæótjibway (We, the People)
|
Amendments to
the Indian Freedom of
Religion Act are currently under consideration by the United States
Senate
Select Committee on Indian Affairs, in the U.S. Legislative Branch. In the Executive Branch, the Bureau of
Indian Affairs is putting a lot of lobbying pressure into passing this
unique
piece of legislation in a form under which protection of the practice
of Indian
Religion will be granted only to Federally Recognized Indians. So-called “Indian Religion” is an
Indo-European hierarchical cult based on Christianity.
Using apartheid legislation (euphemistically
referred to as “protection”) to abrogate Constitutional provisions of
Civil
Rights for Indians, and limiting the practice of so-called “Indian
Religion” to
Federally-defined “Indians,” entrenches the U.S.’ control over the
Indians they
created, and draws public attention away from the Aboriginal Indigenous
people
and religions—over whom the U.S.A. has absolutely no defensible
jurisdiction.
Real Chippewa
Indians are always
pestering me, either asking me some irrelevant detail about how to be
an
Indian, or telling me how to be a proper, Real Indian.
I am Ahnishinahbæótjibway. I
am not an Indian. I don’t care about
how to be an Indian, and I don’t want to be insulted by being
mis-categorized
as an Indian. (If Wanna-Be Indians have
questions about how to be a Real, Federally Recognized Indian, go ask
the White
men who created the Indians, and who are the self-appointed definers of
Indians—and, it’s a venerable American political tradition, the
God-given right
of the W.A.S.P.’s to make sport of such hapless Indians.)
So-called “Indians,” and the Ahnishinahbæótjibway,
are two entirely different groups of
people.
Indians
are, by their acceptance of definition as “Indians,”
citizens of the United States, so the question arises as to why the
ordinary
Constitutional guarantees purporting “freedom of religion” to all U.S.
citizens
do not provide freedom of religion for Indians. Even
the often-cited issue of sacramental use of peyote by Indian
subject people has legal precedent in the White Christian mainstream. During Prohibition, the U.S. Constitution
banned “beverage” alcohol. There was no
religious-use exception made in the 18th Amendment.
This was circumvented by tacit in-house agreement: sacramental
wine was produced by licensed wineries, for sale to approved religions. Why not license “Indian Medicine Men” and
other Indo-European Shamans, under this precedent?
(The Branch Davidians were licensed Christians.)
That established, presumably legal,
precedent is not being used, means that the issue is something other
than the
surface explanation. Could it be that,
under the joint provisions of the U.S. Declaration of Independence and
the U.S.
Constitution, “Indians” are categorized by the founding documents of
the United
States Government as P.O.W.’s, occupied peoples defined as enemies of
the
State, inherently without rights or representation? ... and, that these
subject
Indo-European peoples, the Indians, are in complicity with the White
Euro-Americans in masking the centuries of genocide of the Aboriginal
Indigenous people.
The
vast majority of the people who are Federally Recognized
as “Indians” by the United States Government, have European patrilines
(and
many have nearly pure Indo-European and African ancestry).
Most of the Federally Recognized Indians
have little or no connection to the Aboriginal Indigenous Peoples of
this
Continent (which is why Gerald Torres, counsel to the U.S. Attorney
General’s
Office, claims that Indians are not “classified as a racial group.”) Almost all Indians are European subject
peoples. As I was growing up in the
Boarding Schools, we were told quite forcibly that “Indians are the
Vanishing
Americans” and that “Indians must assimilate.”
It’s not clear what the White man wants his Indians to
assimilate into,
and the U.S. Congress keeps legislating roadblocks to keep the
“tainted-blood”
Indians out of the White mainstream.
The present U.S. Indian policy entrenches an apartheid system,
socially
engineering pseudo-ethnic “minorities” out of ordinary White Trash and
a few
Métis. Although the United States
Supreme Court determined, nearly forty years ago, that “separate but
equal” was
unconstitutional for Euro-African Americans who are not categorized as
Indians,
the U.S. is continuing to elaborate their institutional structure of
“separate
and less than equal” for those people classified as Federally
Recognized
Indians.
If
the U.S. Indian policy was really assimilation, why would
Indians need: a separate and inferior Civil Rights Bill (which does not
provide
actual civil rights); a separate health-care system which promotes
diabetes and
creates the lowest life-expectancy in the United States; and a separate
governmental system which is so corrupt it can only be described as
“unique.” This medieval legacy of
French fur-trade feudalism is entrenched by U.S. Government funding of
what the
U.S. Congress privately calls “Federal Instrumentalities,” labelled in
NewSpeak
as “Indian Self-Determination.” Why has
the United States created a White puppet government, patterned after
the worst
of the European-style governments, and claimed that the White Indians
who they
have empowered in this “Indian Tribal Government” are “Sovereign,”
meaning
“separate under apartheid.” Indians are
not Aboriginal Indigenous People, and Indians have no concept and no
inkling of
what We the People, our Dodem values and our traditional Midé
religious philosophy, are about. The
Euro-American “Indian” structures and mythologies have absolutely
nothing to do
with the Ahnishinahbæótjibway.
In
researching this column, I telephoned every major
Washington agency involved in the amendments to the Indian Freedom of
Religion
Act, from the White House to the Justice Department, trying to get some
sensible explanation about the U.S. policy reflected in this
legislation. There are not any “Honest
Injuns” in
Washington, D.C., although I was told some Lily-White lies. The most enlightening response I heard was
“no comment.” Since the dedicated
public servants I talked to did not want to be quoted (and some refused
to tell
me their names), something must be even more rotten than usual in D.C.
BAD,
BAD PRESS:
The
Minneapolis Star Tribune has deleted some sports-team
designations, including “Redskins,” “Chiefs” and “Indians,” from their
sports
pages. They have apparently decided
that these terms are potentially offensive, and will refrain from using
them
until the politically-correct climate shifts again.
If these words can no longer be printed in the paper, I don’t
know how—or if—the newspaper will report on White Indian militants’
protests of
sports mascots, or the Real Indians’ demonstrations against the use of
the term
“Washington Redskins,” etc. It’s a
strange kind of abstract wishful thinking, where not writing a word can
solve a
problem. The caricature “Indian
mascots” will still parade around at half-time, reflecting Western
European
Civilization’s foolish racist heritage, whether or not the Star Tribune
writes
about them. After all, one of the main
purposes of sporting events is to make “Big Bucks.”
How are the Federally Recognized Cherokees going to get their
“Indian Bucks” for Bingo and Gambling, if they can no longer
manufacture
Tomahawks for the Redskin fans?
THE
EIGHTH CAVALRY:
The
State of Minnesota Legislative House passed a bill to ban
Crazy Horse Malt Liquor, and any other alcohol named after Indians or
Wanna-Be’s. If Heileman Brewery wants
to sell booze so badly, why don’t they make a beer called Custer’s Malt
Liquor? The Brewery could even build a
bar,
and call it the “Little Big Horn Corral.”
If they put it across the river in Wisconsin, they could sell
Crazy
Horse Malt along with Custer’s.
Heileman’s could promote a new cocktail, mixing the two Malt
Liquors,
and instead of having a “Happy Hour,” they could have a “Treaty Hour.” The toast could be “as long as the grass
shall grow and the rivers shall flow—drink to broken promises,” and
everybody
could get “wiped out.” The last one
standing gets a prize: an arrow shirt; and the first one “out” gets a
Tomahawk
Chop and a one-way ticket to the ethnically appropriate Detox.
GASTRONOMIC
GOURMAND:
Linguistic
cleansing has not been limited to Minnesota. According
to Boston syndicated columnist
Ellen Goodman, the élite arbiters of culture are seeking
language purity. The French are exorcising
English
impurities, and the American W.A.S.P.’s are in quest of their Germanic
roots,
eliminating one French “loan-word” after another. The
latest is that the White House (French) “Chef” has been
replaced by another European food-handler, who Ms. Goodman calls “Le
Cook.”
Speaking
of gourmet cooking, a friend of mine was telling me
about his grandson’s favorite sandwich.
The recipe goes like this: spread a layer of potato chips on a
slice of
bread. Then, add a slice of baloney, a
second layer of potato chips, another slice of baloney, and then a
third layer
of potato chips. Finally, top it off
with a slice of bread. This is the
recipe I was given for the sandwich.
When I first heard about it, I said “yuck.”
But, curiosity got the best of me, so I bought bread, potato
chips and baloney, and made one of these renowned but unnamed
sandwiches. I was hungry from working all
day in the
sugarbush, so I don’t know if it just seemed like it tasted good, or is
it
terrible nutrition, masquerading as a delicious sandwich?
My
telephone number is (218) 679-2382 and my mailing address
is P.O. Box 484, Bemidji, MN 56601.
Wub-e-ke-niew
|
|
|