.
.
.
.
.
President Barack Obama and others gathered in the situation room Sunday. “We’ve ID’d Geronimo” Navy SEALs relayed during their operation that would result in the death of Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan. “Geronimo EKIA,” came next translating that the ‘e.nemy was k.illed i.n a.ction.’ Having a fugitive terrorist branded with the name of a heroic figure in Native American history didn’t sit well with indigenous peoples. Consider the points outlined in the following press release from the Onondaga Nation:
Onondaga Nation
Press Release
May 3, 2011“We’ve ID’d Geronimo” – 102 years after his death Geronimo is still being killed by U.S. Forces.
This is a sad commentary on the attitude of leaders of the U.S. military forces that continue to personify the original peoples of North America as enemies and savages. The use of the name Geronimo as a code name for Osama Bin Laden is reprehensible. Think of the outcry if they had used any other ethnic group’s hero. Geronimo bravely and heroically defended his homeland and his people, eventually surrendering and living out the rest of his days peacefully, if in captivity, passing away at Fort Sill, Oklahoma in 1909. To compare him to Osama Bin Laden is illogical and insulting. The name Geronimo is arguably the most recognized Native American name in the world, and this comparison only serves to perpetuate negative stereotypes about our peoples. The U.S. military leadership should have known better.
It all brings to mind the August 13, 2010 statement by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg advising then Governor Paterson to “get yourself a cowboy hat and a shotgun” to deal with Indian affairs. This kind of thinking indicates little progress in a mature social development of United States leadership.
The military record of American Indians is exemplary. We have more men and women per capita volunteering in U.S. military services than any other ethnic group. It was American Indian code talkers that used their native languages to carry and transmit messages that Japanese and German intelligence could not decode, saving thousands of American lives in WWII. Ironically these brave men and women were using languages that American and Canadian boarding schools were doing their best to stamp out. When can we expect respect for our human dignity and human rights?
– Onondaga Nation Council of Chiefs, on Behalf of the Haudenosaunee
The BBC and other news outlets tried their best to explain “Why Geronimo?” I found it more informative to turn to the voices of indigenous peoples themselves and their media outlets. One insightful article, “Bin Laden Code-name “Geronimo” Is a Bomb in Indian Country” is very insightful in this regard. President Obama should do better by his constituents. Native Americans provided a solid block in the polls back in 2008. Obama was even adopted by the Blackfoot tribe. They deserve better than this.
This is a great example of how to take something positive and try to spin it into a negative. For me and people I know the use of the name Geronimo was a celebratory signal of mission complete, a victory – far from an ethnic of cultural insult. Stop trying to turn this into something it wasn’t —-
“Stop trying to turn this into something it wasn’t”
I’m not. I’m simply stating what it was and what it meant to many Native peoples. I find myself in agreement with them.
Please define Native Peoples – then we can talk.
You really don’t know? Look at the ground from which you stand. It was somebody else’s home before you and I ever lived here.
You pompous fool. That is not a definition. The Anasazi were here thousands of years before any of the modern tribes were formed. There was migration/immigration probably across the Bering Straights, possibly from South Seas Islands and many points in between. These peoples fought, killed each other, shared the land and lived here for a long time, but there is no way to define “native” and certainly no way to argue a superior “right” to call this land home to anyone living here today.
I thought you Republicans were against “eminent domain?”
Well done Guy.
Well…we were living here before those Puritans from the Mayflower came over and said that their “God” told them that this was their land. If memory serves me correct from my talks with the elders, the Puritnas tried to claim this land as their own private property.
But if you say no one has superior claim on this land, does that also mean that you don’t believe in the concept of private property? That seems to contradict with the credo of the Republican Party that you affiliate yourself with
Not sure who the “we” in your statement is Guy, but unless we want to start hearing Greek claims about Roman rule, or Roman claims about the Vandals, or one tribes claims against another (and there were plenty of wars over the centuries between tribes here, many of who were wiped from the earth), then I think that we should stick to the present and the application of our laws today.
Instead of being rude like some of the commenters on this site and resort to name calling, I’ll be more than happy to let you know what I mean when I say “we.” When I say we, I am referring to the various indigenous tribes and nations that were on this continent long before the European settlers came abroad and brought their diseases, pollution and greed.
We had our own laws, our own culture and our own system of bartering and currency. Which was a hell of a lot more sustainable and stable than the Central Banking that the Europeans colonists brought over and subjected the rest of the population to. We didn’t have entitlement programs. We voluntarily took care of our own and had respect for our elders without resorting to coercion or theft or compelling others to conform to our will. Yes, these are the same things that Democrats and Republicans love to talk about ad nauseum. The big difference is that unlike the bipartisan rhetorical windbags, we have always put our words into action because that’s was the right thing to do. Or what you Republicans would call “traditional family values.”
But no, let’s stick with our current laws and system. Yes, the same system that has caused pollution, poverty, crappy schools, devalued currency, et al. And if it doesn’t work, let throw more money at it because money cures everything.
I’m sure the Iroquois would be hanging their head in shame at the mockery of their form of government.
Maybe instead of settling into the mindset that the Euro-centric way is the right and only way, you could learn more about our culture and our ways and try to incorporate these practices as good economic and environmental stewardship of our society and planet. We did teach the Euros how to farm this land and how to create about 6000 species of corn. But like the Romans, the Greeks, the Spanish and the British you refer to, remember that every empire is due to fall. And with the rate that this country is going, it may happen sooner than we think.
But the easier thing to do is to ignore us and let our people fester in the government reservations. Because the arrogant paternalistic attitude that most people of Euro descent have is that their ways are superior and we should just accept it for what it is. To me, that sounds like the epitome of arrogance.
We didn’t have a chance to accept your way. We were forced and coerced into accepting it at the barrel of a gun. And yet, the Euros have the gall to decry Islamic Sharia Law and the actions of Mao Tse Tung as terroristic and evil?
If that isn’t terrorism, I don’t know what is.
And you never answered my question about private property, Geoff.
“there is no way to define “native” and certainly no way to argue a superior “right” to call this land home to anyone living here today”
Ok, let’s grant immediate amnesty to all undocumented peoples living here right now then! haha
I agree. We didn’t believe in borders either. We roamed our land freely.
Finally, a post on Natives! You beat me to it, GSR.
As a member of the Mill Lacs Band of the Ojibwe Nation, I have very mixed feelings and reservations (no pun intedned) on this one. While Geronimo (Apache) was indeed a brave and noble warrior, the history between our government and Natives has been less than stellar to put it in civil terms. I also read the article on Yahoo News and someone in the comments section had the gall to say that the US soldier always had deep respect for Native Americans (I prefer the term American Indian as the term Indian originates from the term “En Dio” which means “Of God”). I guess the commenter never heard of the “Trail of Tears” and the 1890 massacre at Wounded Knee which made me very irate. I’m sure the soldiers were very “respectful” in those two little mentioned events.
The intentions may have been honorable, but what would the reaction be if the code name was “Uncle Tom” or “Cracker?” Too often people of all political persuasions say in these situations “why make a big deal?” while continuing to ignore the real life plight of the American Indian. I’m sure Obama will say his mea culpas and continue to let the legacy and liviehood of American Indian die on the government reservations. A long standing and shameful policy that is right up there with the apartheid era of South Africa.
Geoff, I would be more than happy to define the term Natives for you and tell you about our history if you have the time and patience.
Conspicuously missing from this discussion are Vern and anonster. Suppose it was GW Bush who made the same bone-headed and disrespectful comparison.
You could not pry Vern and anonster down from the ceiling – they would be going apoplectic over such a racially insensitive comparison.
Is the Obama Administration racist Vern and anonster?
yoo-hoo wake up there guys ……..
Junior. For some reason, I had visions of a very loud drum circle with the question that you posed. Must be Pow Wow season.
Gabriel. If you’re want an real modern day American Indian hero and radical, let me introduce you to the Lakota Sioux badass himself. Former AIM leader and the mastermind behind the 1973 Wounded Knee Siege, Dr. Russell Means
Read his book “Where White Men Fear to Tread.” It’s right up there with “The Autobiography of Malcolm X.” Not to say your knowledge of American Indians is incomplete and deficient, but you could learn a lot from listening to Brother Means. Even if he is Lakota Sioux.
http://www.amazon.com/Where-White-Fear-Tread-Autobiography/dp/0312147619
By the way, don’t a lot of Mexicans have Indian/indigenous roots prior to the Spanish occupation?
“By the way, don’t a lot of Mexicans have Indian/indigenous roots prior to the Spanish occupation?”
Yes, of course. My family history even has a trace back to Geronimo’s people, but I don’t claim any tribal lineage. I’m a Mestizo.
“…but I don’t claim any tribal lineage. I’m a Mestizo.”
If your family roots have a trace of Chiricahua Apache, you have tribal lineage. Don’t sell yourself short. Far too often, those of us who have roots in a Indian nation or tribe have no prior knowledge of the rich and fascinating culture, customs and history. If you went to US public schools, it is likely that you only had limited exposure to the customs and culture of the various Indian tribes. Take the time to go to a tribal Pow Wow or an All Nations Pow Wow (the latter is a lot more fun) and hook up with some of the tribal members who would be more than happy to take you on a fascinating educational journey that would make your head spin. You’ll learn stuff that you didn’t learn in the public schools. You’ll learn more about your Indian lineage and help keep a culture and way of life from dying.
To locate your tribes Pow Wow or an All Nations, visit http://www.powwows.com/
In the words of the Ojibwe Nation: “Gakina-Awiiya” (We are all related)
junior,
Sorry, but occasionally I have other things to do besides fact-checking the right-wing nut cakes on this blog, I’m sure the same is true for Vern.
My opinion on this subject;
I agree with GSR, using the name Geronimo is extremely insensitive, I don’t think that the US government has any business using native american people’s names for anything, we committed genocide against these people. This is insulting.
Who’s responsible? I doubt it was Obama, if it was or if it wasn’t, it was still in extremely poor taste and whoever was responsible should apologize.
Nah, you guys are so crazy when you think you find double standards with me. My mom always said “Geronimo!” It’s like a victorious battle cry. I probably won’t go around saying it myself if Indians are gonna take offense over it. Lotsa other things I could say, like maybe Banzai! or Mazeltov!
I’m a little confused, all the stories coming out of this operation are muddled. From what I understood they used “Geronimo” not to mean Osama, but to mean “We got Osama.” I think they CALLED Osama “Jackpot.”
And I would have been exactly as indifferent whether it was Bush’s people or Obama’s. Sorry…
“They indicated to commanders that they had found their target by using the code words “Geronimo EKIA.””
Navy SEALs blog: http://blog.usnavyseals.com/2011/05/%E2%80%9Cgeronimo%E2%80%9D-road-to-abbottabad.html
I wonder what the reaction would’ve been if OBL’s codename had been Ronald Reagan or MLK.
Also, Gabriel S-R, you refer in your writing to “indigenous peoples.” I don’t know where you studied, but in the public schools and universities I attended the message was that North American man migrated from Asia, most likely when there was no ocean water between what we know today as Alsask and Russia. So to use the term indigenous people with regard to North America inhabitants is a pretty transparent attempt to further your effort to turn this into a wedge issue. Go pick on the owner of the Dodgers – criticism directed in that direction would be harder to screw up.
who was here before?
“We’ve ID’d Geronimo”……. Hmmmmm
I would prefer “We’ve ID’d King”, it would be more like a call from a jungle.
Are we talking about Tarzan or Elvis?
And where does the death of Osama fit in the “spiral of life?”
Nether Tarzan or Elvis were assassinated!
And where does the death of Osama fit in the “spiral of life?”……. Hmmmm
The spin!
does not surprise me anoster agrees with with geranimo being a offensive word . it we called him rat o rmurderer she would be complain . she is too busy hating right wingers and wearing her stevie wonder glasses to see how stupid and silly this argument . whats next the bruins , bears , redskins , toads are offended . yes i tossed redskins in there . then again anonster cant see straight anyway .
Geoff Willis
Posted May 4, 2011 at 3:04 PM
Please define Native Peoples – then we can talk.
Reply gabriel san roman
Posted May 4, 2011 at 3:11 PM
You really don’t know? Look at the ground from which you stand. It was somebody else’s home before you and I ever lived here.
Reply Geoff Willis
Posted May 4, 2011 at 3:16 PM
You pompous fool. That is not a definition. The Anasazi were here thousands of years before any of the modern tribes were formed. There was migration/immigration probably across the Bering Straights, possibly from South Seas Islands and many points in between. These peoples fought, killed each other, shared the land and lived here for a long time, but there is no way to define “native” and certainly no way to argue a superior “right” to call this land home to anyone living here today.
GEOFF AND NO STRAW GRASPER, I HOPE THE INFORMATION BELOW HELPS YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF “NATIVE PEOPLE”
Indigenous peoples:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Indigenous peoples are ethnic groups who are native to a land or region, especially before the arrival and intrusion of a foreign and possibly dominating culture. They are a group of people whose members share a cultural identity that has been shaped by their geographical region. A variety of names are used in various countries to identify such groups of people, but they generally are regarded as the “original inhabitants” of a territory or region. Their right to self-determination may be materially affected by the later-arriving ethnic groups.
[Origins of phrase:
During the late twentieth century the term Indigenous peoples evolved into a political term that refers to ethnic groups with historical ties to groups that existed in a territory prior to colonization or formation of a nation state. These are usually distinct ethnic groups that have preserved a degree of cultural and political separation from the mainstream culture and political system that has grown to surround or dominate them economically, politically, culturally, or geographically. Used politically, the term defines these groups as particularly vulnerable to exploitation and oppression by nation states, and as a result a special set of political rights in accordance with international law have been set forth by international organizations such as the United Nations, the International Labour Organization and the World Bank.[1] The United Nations issued a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with the intent to protect the collective rights of indigenous peoples to their culture, identity, language, employment, health, education and natural resources.
However, the phrase is not applied consistently in all cultures. The notion of an indigenous group depends on context and other issues. The World Banks policy for indigenous people states:
Because of the varied and changing contexts in which Indigenous Peoples live and because there is no universally accepted definition of “Indigenous Peoples,” this policy does not define the term. Indigenous Peoples may be referred to in different countries by such terms as “indigenous ethnic minorities,” “aboriginals,” “hill tribes,” “minority nationalities,” “scheduled tribes,” or “tribal groups.”[2]
Different states designate the groups within their boundaries that are recognized as indigenous peoples according to international legislation by different terms. These include, for example “Native Americans” and “Pacific Islander” in the United States; “Inuit”, “Métis” and “First Nations” in Canada;[3] Aborigines in Australia; Hill tribes in South East Asia; indigenous ethnic minorities, Scheduled tribes or Adivasi in India; tribal groups, or autochthonous groups.[2]
The adjective indigenous has the common meaning of “from” or “of the original origin”. Therefore, in a purely adjectival sense any given people, ethnic group or community may be described as being indigenous in reference to some particular region or location.[6]
Key to a contemporary understanding of “indigenousness” is the political role a cultural group plays, for all other criteria usually taken to denote indigenous groups (territory, race, history, subsistence lifestyle, etc.) can, to a greater or lesser extent, also be applied to majority cultures.[7] Therefore, the distinction applied to indigenous groups can be formulated as “a politically underprivileged group, who share a similar… identity different to the nation in power”,[6] and who share territorial rights to a particular area governed by a colonial power. However, the specific term indigenous peoples has a more restrictive interpretation when it used in the more formalized, legalistic, and academic sense, associated with the collective rights of human populations.[6] In these contexts, the term is used to denote particular peoples and groups around the world who, as well as being native to or associated with some given territory,[7] meet certain other criteria (such as having reached a social and technological plateau thousands of years ago).
[edit] Criteria
Drawing on these, a contemporary working definition of “indigenous people” for certain purposes has criteria which would seek to include cultural groups (and their continuity or association with a given region, or parts of a region, and who formerly or currently inhabit the region) either:[7]
before or its subsequent colonisation or annexation; or
alongside other cultural groups during the formation and/or reign of a colony or nation-state; or
independently or largely isolated from the influence of the claimed governance by a nation-state,
and who furthermore:[6]
have maintained at least in part their distinct cultural, social/organisational, and/or linguistic characteristics, and in doing so remain differentiated in some degree from the surrounding populations and dominant culture of the nation-state.
To the above, a criterion is usually added to also include:[6]
peoples who are self-identified as indigenous, and/or those recognized as such by other groups.
Note that even if all the above criteria are fulfilled, some people may either not consider themselves as indigenous or may not be considered as indigenous by governments, organizations or scholars. The discourse of indigenous / non-indigenous may also be viewed within the context of postcolonialism and the evolution of post-colonial societies.
Indigenous societies range from those who have been significantly exposed to the colonizing or expansionary activities of other societies (such as the Maya peoples of Mexico and Central America) through to those who as yet remain in comparative isolation from any external influence (such as the Sentinelese and Jarawa of the Andaman Islands).
Precise estimates for the total population of the world’s Indigenous peoples are very difficult to compile, given the difficulties in identification and the variances and inadequacies of available census data. Recent source estimates range from 300 million[8] to 350 million[9] as of the start of the 21st century. This would equate to just fewer than 6% of the total world population. This includes at least 5000 distinct peoples[10] in over 72 countries.
Contemporary distinct indigenous groups survive in populations ranging from only a few dozen to hundreds of thousands and more. Many indigenous populations have undergone a dramatic decline and even extinction, and remain threatened in many parts of the world. Some have also been assimilated by other populations or have undergone many other changes. In other cases, indigenous populations are undergoing a recovery or expansion in numbers.
Certain indigenous societies survive even though they may no longer inhabit their “traditional” lands, owing to migration, relocation, forced resettlement or having been supplanted by other cultural groups. In many other respects, the transformation of culture of indigenous groups is ongoing, and includes permanent loss of language, loss of lands, encroachment on traditional territories, and disruption in traditional lifeways due to contamination and pollution of waters and lands.
Dr. Amalgam,
It looks like the affirmative action education uses Wikipedia as a source for the knowledge.
You have to yet quote some text which would shown that you have actually any degree.
Take example from Winships.
You can immediately tell from their writings that they are highly educated couple. (no affirmative education there)
Stan,
The source I posted is there to provide information by educated individuals for those with biased and or personal opinion based on ignorance.
This is of no use to you as you brain is ………………uhmmmmmmm, pathologically abnormal, in the negative sense.
Again you alleged superior brain can not do a simple task………..stay on topic How sad.
To point out that your opinion about the native people is a crapola is actually a stay on topic.
FYI the Wikipedia opinions are based on a personal ignorance.
.Stanislav Star
Posted May 7, 2011 at 6:00 PM
To point out that your opinion about the native people is a crapola is actually a stay on topic.
FYI the Wikipedia opinions are based on a personal ignorance.
For being a self professed superior intellect you show a high degree of stupidity as you lack reading comprehension.
What I posted is not my opinion. It is written information on a subject by educated individuals with references and bibliography so the reader can verify and do further research the subject.
In reality what you post are opinions based on ignorance not Wikipedia.
Your post above is the best you can do to counter what I post ????? This is best your alleged superior intellect can produce? You are no challenge at all. Take your medication and go to bed . You need the rest.
Your idea of staying on topic is to ignore the subject and attack the messenger? It is consistent with your defective pathological brain.
Discuss Geronimo…not Dr. Amalgam.
“Take your medication and go to bed . You need the rest.”…….. Hmmmm
That is what you tell your clients doc?….. after batched up extraction with snapped root?
FYI, my intelligence is so high that even I do not know how high it is.
After reading my posts here, the Mensa send me honorable membership. Look up the meaning “Mensa” in Wikipedia – the affirmative action reference source.
I bet that Mensa did not sent you one……. Huh?
“FYI, my intelligence is so high that even I do not know how high it is.”………..Hmmmmmmm
Did I not say for you to take your medication?
“After reading my posts here, the Mensa send me honorable membership. Look up the meaning “Mensa” in Wikipedia – the affirmative action reference source. ”
Vern,
Congratulations. Mensa monitors your Blog. You are so fortunate to have Stan’s posts here.
GO FIGURE!!!!!!!!!!
“Did I not say for you to take your medication?”………. Hmmmmm
You did, but you have forgot to call it to the Target Pharmacy.
I prefer the blue ones or medicinal ganja.
May be you have some extra cocaine for numbing the gums samples which you can share.