1. #26
    Forum Member
    Raughammer1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    667

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by SapphyreBlues View Post

    I suggest you re-read my post. Slowly. And don't skip things, or read stuff that isn't there this time.
    Sir, you handled that well and with style: I applaud you.

  2. #27
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raughammer1 View Post
    Sir, you handled that well and with style: I applaud you.
    Well thank you

    And now just might be the appropriate time to let you know I'm a woman But that's ok. Believe me, I've been called a lot worse things than "sir"

  3. #28
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Here's a dumb question, especially since we are talking about Hispanic immigrants (I'm assuming). Are these people not Native Americans themselves? Decendants of the Aztecs, or Incas if they're from South America?

  4. #29
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Here's a dumb question, especially since we are talking about Hispanic immigrants (I'm assuming). Are these people not Native Americans themselves? Decendants of the Aztecs, or Incas if they're from South America?
    Even if they were straight up Aztec, they still couldn't become a Native American because their bloodline wouldn't trace back to the tribes we have here in the US. I mean, they could be "Native Americans" but their lineage traces back to a different part of the Americas.

    I hope that helps.

    And that's not a dumb question

  5. #30
    Forum Member
    Tooanfrom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    whangaparaoa peninsular, north island
    Posts
    488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the1141man View Post
    K, you just stepped in it with me. Bigtime.

    I have a "British" last name...how I ended up with it, I have no idea, it's possible that it was "converted" from the original to something more "phonetically palatable" to the government. Gee, that never happened at Ellis Island, did it????

    I am 1/4 Pawnee, 1/8th Cherokee, and 1/16th Kiowa... so doing the math, that makes me a full whopping 16th away from being half Native. Because of Pawnee Tribal law, I can only claim affiliation and be registered with them, or another Tribe, there is no "dual membership".
    As for "white blood" getting one disqualified, well that's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. After all, if they require someone be 1/8th degree of bloodline, what do they think the other 7/8ths are?!?!?!
    Of the remaining 9/16ths of me that isn't Native, a goodly chunk of that is Austrian... so if your British blood disqualifies you, I guess I ought to get the boot, too, huh?

    As for "suckin from the gov't teat" or "joining to get benefits", yeah, I see a check every year...want to know how much my annuity is from the Pawnee Nation? $12. Oh yeah, every year's like I won the lottery!!!
    About the only tangible benefit I derive from Tribal membership was if I applied for a BIA job...Indian Preference Act hiring. Then again, I don't really have much interest in any of the jobs they have, so that doesn't do much good either.

    I will say that I do see certain California Tribes running around with casinos, living in mansions and all driving Escalades and H2s, not every Tribe runs the show that way, and to stereotype all Natives in that way is just plain ignorant. I'm as ashamed of the people running around with 5 Escalades in their front lawn as you are angry about it.... but then again, people don't have to patronize those casinos if they don't want to.

    It just really irritates the living $#!T out of me that you so blithely assume that anyone who has or seeks Tribal membership does so because of a perceived monetary benefit. As a child and young adult, I attended many pow-wows throughout California and beyond, dressed and did Southern Dance, and even sang on a couple of Southern drums...time and monetary constraints have taken those things away from me as I've grown up, but to say the things you did really hit an angry nerve with me.
    My Irish uncle Shamus got killed at the Battle of the Little Big Horn--he was camping in the field next door--went over and complained about the noise!
    "If you thought it was hard getting into the job--wait until you have to hang the "fire gear"up and walk away!"
    Harry Lauder 1981.Me on the left!

  6. #31
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SapphyreBlues View Post
    Even if they were straight up Aztec, they still couldn't become a Native American because their bloodline wouldn't trace back to the tribes we have here in the US. I mean, they could be "Native Americans" but their lineage traces back to a different part of the Americas.

    I hope that helps.

    And that's not a dumb question
    Actually, I was being a smart *****

    I won't say that I'm pro-illegal, but I do find some irony that our society, a considerably amount of whose ancestors were immigrants (basically anyone who isn't 100% Native American), is so judgmental about Hispanics immigrating here. I do feel in this day an age, that they can take the steps to immigrate legally, but there are many of our ancestors who didn't.

    However, the majority of these people (the ones I'm familiar with in my area, at least) are coming here for a better life and are making an attempt to be productive. They work jobs no one else will, just to provide a better life for their families. This is a lot more than I can say for a number of the other citizens of our nation who sit on their tail collecting welfare or undeserved disability checks.

    And yes, I do feel for the ones getting scammed. This guy is making a profit lying to these people. Whether they are here legally or not, the SOB ought to have to be shipped off to a rat hole in Old Mexico to rot with the natives there.

  7. #32
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Actually, I was being a smart *****

    I won't say that I'm pro-illegal, but I do find some irony that our society, a considerably amount of whose ancestors were immigrants (basically anyone who isn't 100% Native American), is so judgmental about Hispanics immigrating here. I do feel in this day an age, that they can take the steps to immigrate legally, but there are many of our ancestors who didn't.

    However, the majority of these people (the ones I'm familiar with in my area, at least) are coming here for a better life and are making an attempt to be productive. They work jobs no one else will, just to provide a better life for their families. This is a lot more than I can say for a number of the other citizens of our nation who sit on their tail collecting welfare or undeserved disability checks.

    And yes, I do feel for the ones getting scammed. This guy is making a profit lying to these people. Whether they are here legally or not, the SOB ought to have to be shipped off to a rat hole in Old Mexico to rot with the natives there.
    Yeah, I guess I missed the tone of your post

    Anyways, I am not against immigration. The vast majority of my ancestors were boat people. And I'm not gonna sit here and say that all of them were legal. I don't know.

    If people are coming over here for a better life - hey, fine - and good luck to you. But if you're coming over here to lay on welfare - stay home. We've got more than plenty doing that.

    The migrant workers I have seen do just that - work. When I was in Michigan for the summer a couple years back, at the crack of dawn, they were across the street picking cucumbers out of a huge field. They got paid, went to the store and sent the money home. They minded their own business and weren't a burden on anybody.

    As for the ones getting scammed, they're illegal. That in no way makes it right though. And I agree with you as to what should happen to the people pulling it. But for the illegals to be going along with that in the first place, shows they are trying to become legal. So the gov't needs to show them some support and tell them how they can do it legally. And it also shows that they aren't some thugs who came here and are up to no good.

  8. #33
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Foggy California
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Sapphyre: Good job taking the "high" road...disavow, redirect, deny. You should go into politics, m'lady, you'd do wonderfully. Let me direct your attention to the post which I replied to, and look at one particular spot, I'll even highlight it so you don't miss it....

    But here's the thing. The Cherokee get $300 Million a year from the gov't. Not to mention what all they get off the casino's. And the members of the tribe get some of that money in the form of a check. At least that's to my understanding. So really what it comes down to is a bunch of peed off people who aren't gonna get a check anymore. Well boo hoo. Get a job.

    I have native ancestors. Some even died on the Trail of Tears. Yes that's terrible. But you will not ever see me exploiting my ancestors just so I can get a check. I am not a true native, so I in no way deserve to live off of them like a leech.

    And even if I did want to stoop that low, my last name is Trent. That is wayyy British. I mean, it doesn't get any more English than that. So I could just see me hauling my Anglo Saxon hind end to the tribal office to get registered.
    The reason I'm so ****ed, ma'am, is because for some people it isn't just about a damned CHECK. Like I said: $12. A year. Big f'in WHOOP.
    Your post, however, make it sound like you view even that as "exploiting a heritage" or something thereunto resembling, and that is what I resent.

    A lot of people, especially around here, where you can't drive more than an hour in any direction without seeing SOME "Indian Gaming Casino" sign somewhere, are angry that the Indians are making money hand over fist, living in mansions on their Res's, and have 4-car garages packed full of Escalades and H2s, with the Beemer and the Benz out in the driveway, too. Hell, I'm ashamed of it...a lot of Natives around here make it out that they deserve those nice homes, cars, etc, cause they're Native, and flaunt them at the middle-to-lower-class communities around them. That, to me, is a disgrace....both to themselves and to the rest of the Native community at large.
    People don't see Oto, Kiowa, Paiute, Blackfeet, Chukchansi, Pawnee, or Lakota...all they see is "This is how Indians act."
    It leads to stereotyping, and it leads to the degradation of the Native peoples all over the country in the eyes of others.

    Oh, and one last thing:
    Even if they were straight up Aztec, they still couldn't become a Native American because their bloodline wouldn't trace back to the tribes we have here in the US. I mean, they could be "Native Americans" but their lineage traces back to a different part of the Americas.
    Anthropologists studying Native Americans seem to believe that most actually came from either South America or the northeastern Asian continent via the Aleutian Islands, much as it's believed Alaskan Natives did...only they continued their journey further southeast than their cold-dwelling cousins. The Pawnee, for example, are believed by some to be an offshoot of a South American tribe that moved north some many thousands of years ago, who called themselves the Caddohaudachos. Anthropologists also believe that the Caddo Tribe (as listed in that "complete listing of BIA-recognized tribes") would be distaff cousins of the Pawnee. It also means that if you want to go to that level of "technicality", the Caddo and Pawnee at least, aren't "true" Natives either. Then again, a lot of other tribes would also be in the same "boat" (or moccasin)....

    As for "not helping what Pawnee laws require"... I've been on the Pawnee Rolls since I was 3. If you wanted to "help" in that respect, you're more than a quarter-century late on that score, sorry.
    My opinions might coincide with someone of importance's POV... I wouldn't know, since I never bothered to ask. My policy is: "Don't ask, don't care."

    IACOJ--West Coast PITA

  9. #34
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Actually, I was being a smart *****

    I won't say that I'm pro-illegal, but I do find some irony that our society, a considerably amount of whose ancestors were immigrants (basically anyone who isn't 100% Native American), is so judgmental about Hispanics immigrating here. I do feel in this day an age, that they can take the steps to immigrate legally, but there are many of our ancestors who didn't.

    However, the majority of these people (the ones I'm familiar with in my area, at least) are coming here for a better life and are making an attempt to be productive. They work jobs no one else will, just to provide a better life for their families. This is a lot more than I can say for a number of the other citizens of our nation who sit on their tail collecting welfare or undeserved disability checks.

    And yes, I do feel for the ones getting scammed. This guy is making a profit lying to these people. Whether they are here legally or not, the SOB ought to have to be shipped off to a rat hole in Old Mexico to rot with the natives there.
    The overwhelming majority of the European immigrants came here legally. The overwhelming majority of immigrants are coming here illegally. It matters not that they are coming here to make a better life for themselves. The European immigrants came here for the same reason.

    If they hold our country in such high regard, they should respect our laws as well.

    However, mass deportations, shooting them when they come over the border, putting them all in prison, etc. are stupid, low class responses to this problem. The number one priority is for our government to stop failing the citizens and secude that border. Once that happens, the illegal immigration problem can be addressed.

  10. #35
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    The overwhelming majority of the European immigrants came here legally. The overwhelming majority of immigrants are coming here illegally. It matters not that they are coming here to make a better life for themselves. The European immigrants came here for the same reason.

    If they hold our country in such high regard, they should respect our laws as well.

    However, mass deportations, shooting them when they come over the border, putting them all in prison, etc. are stupid, low class responses to this problem. The number one priority is for our government to stop failing the citizens and secude that border. Once that happens, the illegal immigration problem can be addressed.
    Gotta agree with you here.

    Now as for the borders. I have seen pics of nothing but miles of wire fencing that secures our borders. It doesn't take a mental giant looking at all the snipped holes to realize that isn't working. I believe it was Bush who suggested a block wall. Not entirely a bad idea, but that would be like building a mini wall of China. And any person desperate enough could dig under it, I suppose. So other than manning the borders some more, what can be done? And really, that's just like any other police force. They can't be everywhere, all the time. While it would slow the immigrants down some, it won't stop it.

    What they are doing now obviously isn't working. I have heard of some that have had to be deported multiple times. Shooting them? That's just wrong. I don't care if they are illegal. Prison? Sure. They have lots of room in there.

    Any thoughts about the border?

  11. #36
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    236

    Wink

    I believe that we have somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 troops in Iraq.

    If we take half of them and deploy them to the US/Mexico border while leaving the other half as replacements and rotate them out every 6 months or so, we could have an armed border guard every 137.36 feet. That is assuming that my Kentucky math is correct.

  12. #37
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SamuelFire View Post
    I believe that we have somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 troops in Iraq.

    If we take half of them and deploy them to the US/Mexico border while leaving the other half as replacements and rotate them out every 6 months or so, we could have an armed border guard every 137.36 feet. That is assuming that my Kentucky math is correct.
    Your Kentucky math may be correct, but your Kentucky logic is very screwed up.

  13. #38
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    236

    Default

    George,

    See the wink, I was being facetious.

    Your comprehension of the above statement is borderline hottrottish.

  14. #39
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mohegan Lake, NY
    Posts
    108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainGonzo View Post
    Mybe I should start my own tribe...

    The "Fakahwees"...
    Sounds like relatives of these folk -







    Andy
    When drilling and fighting get them down,
    They know their morale can't droop,
    As long as they all relax in town
    Before they resume, with a bang and a boom...F-Troop!
    Last edited by Murph64; 08-21-2007 at 04:55 PM.

  15. #40
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,439

    Default

    From The Oklahoman:

    TULSA — The controversial status of freedmen in the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma was characterized as the "most significant civil rights movement of this century” at a town hall meeting headed by a member of the California congressional delegation.

    Rep. Diane Watson, D-Calif., introduced a bill that would cut off federal funding — about $300 million a year — to the Cherokee Nation unless it restores citizenship to freedmen.

    In a March 3 special election, 77 percent of about 8,000 Cherokees who voted decided to strip the freedmen of citizenship.

    About 150 people attended the meeting in the Rudisill Regional Library, most to support the bill introduced by Watson.

    The Watson entourage included, by her request, at least three members of the U.S. Capitol police force, a congressional agency.

    Two uniformed Tulsa police officers also were at the meeting.

    When a member of the audience — later identified as Gail Ross — was reluctant to give up the microphone, they took it from her and guided her to the rear of the auditorium.


    Treaty violation?
    Watson said actions resulting from the March election were in violation of an 1866 treaty and for that reason, the United States should not be providing funds to the Cherokee Nation.
    "The law says we can't use U.S. dollars to violate the law,” Watson said. American money can't be used to "discriminate.”

    The California representative told the group the only way to resolve this issue is to "return to full status” the freedmen.


    In response
    Chad Smith, principal chief of the Cherokee Nation, said later in a telephone interview that the proper place to settle the issue is in the courts, where there are three lawsuits pending in federal courts and one in a Cherokee tribal court.
    Until those lawsuits are settled, the freedmen retain previous rights and benefits in the Cherokee Nation. Smith said if the lawsuits support the election, the Cherokee Nation will help the freedmen transfer to other health care providers and ongoing treatment will "absolutely” continue.

    Passage of the bill would eliminate 6,500 jobs at Cherokee casinos and other businesses with a payroll of more than $184 million.

    Federal funds are used for health, housing and education, Smith said.

    Income from tribal businesses is divided, with 70 percent going into reinvestment and 30 percent to augment social programs and also to fund community projects such as roads and water systems.

    Verdie Triplett of the Choctaw-Chickasaw freedmen association, said historically, the black congressional caucus has always supported tribes in getting federal money.

    "Congress is the only locomotive monster they respect,” Triplett said. It is not a freedman issue "but an American issue because all Americans pay taxes,” he said.

    David Cornsilk said the March vote was illegal and "should have never happened.”

    Watson was scheduled to hold a similar forum Monday night in Muskogee

  16. #41
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Foggy California
    Posts
    968

    Default

    I seem to recall a similar situation happening a few yrs ago in California.... one of the tribes in the Sierra...the Picayune, the Chukchansi, or the Mono tribe, I forget which, suddenly decided to "out" certain members who'd been in for 10, 20, 40 or more years. All of a sudden, they weren't "good enough" to be part of the tribe, and were unilaterally disenrolled by a vote of the Tribal Council...interestingly enough, this came about the same time the tribe's casino underwent major expansion and a "boom period".
    Coincidences that make you go "HMMMM"???? Absolutely.

    Another point arises from another tribal casino in CA, where a Tribal Police Officer (a caucasian) was laid off from his job after suffering a LOD injury, and refused medical care and disability benefits by the tribe. He turned around and sued the tribe for restitution, but they claimed "sovereign immunity" because they were a "separate Nation" and not subject to the jurisdiction of the US Court System... I believe the end result was that they settled for a pittance of what would've been coming had they been sued successfully, and the whole incident was pretty well swept under the rug.

    The verdict, in my mind? Casinos and the money they bring to the tribes corrupt the members with greed and self-importance. Their actions bring discredt upon their people and the Native populace as a whole, and dishonor and disgrace the memories of those who came before them. Used to be, the Natives were peoples of the land, now many are people of the flashing lights, ringing bells, and fistfuls of c-notes. It's an absolute shame.
    My opinions might coincide with someone of importance's POV... I wouldn't know, since I never bothered to ask. My policy is: "Don't ask, don't care."

    IACOJ--West Coast PITA

  17. #42
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    You know what's sad about that? Because while some are simply rolling in the money, there are some tribes whose kids go to schools that aren't up to code. In the winter, there isn't adequate heating. I saw that on the news some years back. Was it the Lakota, Dakota? Or are they the same? Anyways i remember Bill Gates and Bill Clinton visiting a tribe out there and giving them computers Well woo. Meanwhile I'm sure those kids needed food and clothes more. So yeah, I can certainly understand your anger at that. I'm not happy about it either.

    Is there any way for them to contact the BIA to get help? Or is there no help to be given?

    By the way...Chaticks-si-Chaticks? Mind if I ask what that means?

  18. #43
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Foggy California
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Sapphyre: They're the Lakota, not Dakota. You might also know them as "Sioux".

    Chaticks si chaticks... that one I don't know. I don't speak Pawnee... I used to know a smidge when I was a kid, but that has fallen by the wayside years ago. Sadly, this seems to be an increasing trend...Natives unable to speak or learn their own tribal language, especially those who don't live on or near their tribe's res.
    Obviously since I'm 3/4 of the country away from the Pawnee res, I fall into that category.
    My opinions might coincide with someone of importance's POV... I wouldn't know, since I never bothered to ask. My policy is: "Don't ask, don't care."

    IACOJ--West Coast PITA

  19. #44
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    I knew the Sioux was the same as one of them, but couldn't remember. But seeing as how the Dakota don't exist (other than states).... You'll have to excuse me, it's just been one of those days all month

    Ok, now this is gonna sound bad. But quite frankly I don't care. If there can be a black history month, why can't Indians have one as well? I mean, the Native American culture is slipping away. It needs to be preserved. And you can only do that by educating people. But who's teaching it? What little we are taught is biased, too. So much of the time, Natives were made out to be horrible people. Take the Dec. of Indep. for example. Thomas Jefferson said "all men were created equal." Yet he had slaves. And not only that, farther down he brought complaints against King George for not protecting the colonies from the "ruthless savages". Um, excuse me, but if you invade my back yard, give my family small pox, and do God only knows what else, yeah I'd be a bit miffed too Really, that's all you hear. The fighting between colonists and natives. The only time I ever did learn anything good about the Indians was in 7th grade TN History class. We learned about the tribes around here.

    Seriously though...is there any way to contact the BIA/Dept. of the Int. and see about getting a month set aside? Personally, I think that would be great. And truth be told, if they wouldn't do it for y'all, then they shouldn't let black people do it either. Fair is only fair, is it not? AND before someone thinks and says it...NO, I am not a racist.

    On a mostly unrelated note, I went through the Qualla Cherokee Reservation today. Nice place. They've had a revival of sorts in the Eastern Band, and they are trying to get people more involved with their native roots. They have an outdoor theater telling the stories of their people. They also have a pretty big museum devoted to Cherokee culture.

    As for speaking the language, I'd love to be able to learn Cherokee. Or any for that matter. That would be great. Ah-mah agua dooley. Of course that isn't how it's written in Cherokee, but that's how it's pronounced. If I happened to get seriously lost, I can't ask where I'm at, but I can ask for some water. And ask for it repeatedly because that's all I know how to say

  20. #45
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Foggy California
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Seriously though...is there any way to contact the BIA/Dept. of the Int. and see about getting a month set aside? Personally, I think that would be great. And truth be told, if they wouldn't do it for y'all, then they shouldn't let black people do it either. Fair is only fair, is it not? AND before someone thinks and says it...NO, I am not a racist.
    I don't think it's the BIA's say-so, honestly. If I recall correctly, it takes a Resolution of Congress or a special Presidential Declaration to "officially" effect such a thing. But then again, we have National Aviation Day (Aug 19), and National Mustard Day (Aug 4)...so I think if aviation and mustard (MUSTARD?!) can have a "National Day", National Native History Month wouldn't be such a far stretch.

    Of course, since most don't even know about or pay attention to the National XX Day/Week/Month thing, getting people to actually care would be a "good luck" proposition. Hell, I don't recall seeing much effort even put into Black History Month around here anymore. *shrug*

    I mean, the Native American culture is slipping away. It needs to be preserved. And you can only do that by educating people. But who's teaching it?
    Well, that should begin with the Tribes...the Elders and parents, teaching the children. Seems like the problem is that there're few left who actually know much about Tribal history (other than what's written in the few books one can find on particular tribes), and again, like I said--a lot of places the languages are quickly fading because there's simply so few left to speak them, and the emphasis is on English (as it should be)...but without a parallel education track in their Tribal language, well, it dies.
    My opinions might coincide with someone of importance's POV... I wouldn't know, since I never bothered to ask. My policy is: "Don't ask, don't care."

    IACOJ--West Coast PITA

  21. #46
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Well I would like to think that the Natives rate higher than mustard.

    But really, in light of how badly the history of the tribes is just passing away, something should be done. I know that the elders passed on traditions, histories, etc., orally. And if what they say isn't documented, by someone, whether of the tribe or not - then it will be lost. Yeah, I agree, it should begin within the tribe. But since it's not happening, someone needs to.

    How many of the elders are left that actually knew what it meant to be "people of the land", instead of what some are becoming? I'm sure the number is few. And it's really sad. I'm pretty sure the elders have forgotten more than the younger of the tribes will ever know. And without it being recorded, it's now lost to all future generations.

    Take herbal medicines for example. They were curing people with those for hundreds of years before people knew they existed. What did they use? I mean, who knows. Used in certain combinations, it's hard telling what it could cure. In the day we're living in, diseases are becoming very complex, and so is the synthetic medicine. And complex meds = horrid side effects. So if something natural could be used, that would be great. Have you seen the commercials lately? There is an arthritis pill that can give you cancer, or TB. A restless leg syndrome medication can give you addictions - gambling, sexual, etc. That's right. They said report it to your doctor right away if you experience gambling, sexual or other uncontrollable compulsions

    As for studying black history month...they might not do it where you're at, but they almost have to do it here. I have no problem with it. But I didn't like the reverse discrimination that - unfortunately - came along with it. Of course I'm only speaking about my area.

    *edited to add...*

    I don't know how the Pawnee do it, but on the Western Band Cherokee site (cherokee.org), they offer online language lessons. And often the classes are filled. Hopefully that's a good sign.
    Last edited by SapphyreBlues; 08-25-2007 at 10:02 PM.

  22. #47
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SapphyreBlues View Post
    I knew the Sioux was the same as one of them, but couldn't remember. But seeing as how the Dakota don't exist (other than states).... You'll have to excuse me, it's just been one of those days all month
    Actually, there are Dakota Souix, as well.

  23. #48
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Foggy California
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Actually, there are Dakota Souix, as well.
    The Dakota were a band that comprised part of the "Great Sioux Nation"...the other two bands being Lakota and Nakota (see a theme?). However, just as the Pawnee Nation is comprised of 4 bands: the Skidi, Chaui, Pitahawirata, and Kitkehahki, they're all still....Pawnee.
    I was taught as a child that "Sioux" means "enemy", and "Lakota" translates to "friend", thus it was more appropriate to address someone of that tribe as "Lakota". *shrug*
    My opinions might coincide with someone of importance's POV... I wouldn't know, since I never bothered to ask. My policy is: "Don't ask, don't care."

    IACOJ--West Coast PITA

  24. #49
    Forum Member
    SapphyreBlues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the1141man View Post
    The Dakota were a band that comprised part of the "Great Sioux Nation"...the other two bands being Lakota and Nakota (see a theme?). However, just as the Pawnee Nation is comprised of 4 bands: the Skidi, Chaui, Pitahawirata, and Kitkehahki, they're all still....Pawnee.
    I was taught as a child that "Sioux" means "enemy", and "Lakota" translates to "friend", thus it was more appropriate to address someone of that tribe as "Lakota". *shrug*
    The Pawnee Nation is actually 4 different tribes then? So it's like the Iroquois who are made up of Seneca, Onondaga, Oneida, Cayuga and Mohawks?

    Did the Pawnee not like the Sioux nation, and got along with just the Lakota band that was in it? Or was that just translations of the names?

  25. #50
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Foggy California
    Posts
    968

    Default

    Sapph: Not 4 tribes per se... a "band" is basically from what's been explained to me, like a city-state within the larger country. If that makes any sense... not 4 separate tribes...but like a country with 4 states. At least that's how it was explained to me. As for how the Lakota/Dakota/Nakota were, I don't know how their system worked.
    I also don't really know what the situation was as far as the Pawnee relationship (if any) with the Sioux Nation... I know that the Pawnee typically stuck to the Nebraska/Oklahoma area and didn't venture much farther north of there, so the likelihood that they would've met with the Sioux wasn't very great, much less on a regular basis. *shrug*

    ETA: As for the names, they're just direct translations, from what I understand. In their tongue, "Lakota" means "friend", "Sioux" is "enemy". Again, this's all based off of what I was told as a kid/teen, and I never really had much contact with Pawnee members back in those times. My family had friendships with members of the Oto and Ute tribes, and a few Blackfeet, but that was about it as far as who I remember having a lot of contact with in the Native "scene", as it were.
    Last edited by the1141man; 08-26-2007 at 01:15 AM.
    My opinions might coincide with someone of importance's POV... I wouldn't know, since I never bothered to ask. My policy is: "Don't ask, don't care."

    IACOJ--West Coast PITA

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Is it Illegal
    By TuxEMS in forum Illinois
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-01-2007, 12:57 AM
  2. Illegal backfiring endangered firefighters!
    By coldfront in forum Wildland Firefighting
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-05-2006, 05:03 PM
  3. Problem: The illegal opening of hydrants
    By NJFFSA16 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 06-11-2005, 07:03 PM
  4. You know you're from Massachusetts.............
    By DaSharkie in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-08-2004, 06:20 PM
  5. Florida Firefighter Arrested on Illegal Weapons Charge
    By captstanm1 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-13-2003, 08:31 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register