Help
Add Reply
According to the news Spirit Lake is sick of the controversy. Jeanotte gave a statement saying the people have spoken and are against the use of the name.
Media Stories on the Sioux Name For reference / interest
Back to top
MultiQuote
#452
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:16 PM
Sioux-cia, on Sep 26 2005, 09:58 PM, said:
UND83, on Sep 26 2005, 07:35 PM, said:
Kupchella's meeting with Spirit Lake cancelled. Hmmm. The plot thickens.
http://www.grandfork...ks/12747751.htm
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
http://www.grandfork...ks/12747751.htm
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
KVLY 10:00P news promo just said, 'Find out why Spirit Lake isn't meeting with UND tomorrow.'
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Not a lot of info. Just Leigh Jeanotte (not an enrolled member of the Spirit Lake tribe) giving a quote.
Daron Selvig also quoted the Spirit Lake council's treasurer (forget name) as saying they are "sick of hearing about the issue."
So it doesn't appear that the tribe is willing to have any sort of discussion with UND.
#453
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:16 PM
Clayton Hoyt, on Sep 26 2005, 09:39 PM, said:
Maybe it's just me, but I've got to believe that you lose credibility as a writer when you don't even realize one of the people you are villifying for doing something today has been dead for nearly three years.
#454
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:27 PM
Diggler, on Sep 26 2005, 07:58 PM, said:
This seems to be turning into a railroading. UND isn't even being given an opportunity to tell their side of the story. 
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Bingo.
#455
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:38 PM
Clayton Hoyt, on Sep 26 2005, 10:16 PM, said:
Not a lot of info. Just Leigh Jeanotte (not an enrolled member of the Spirit Lake tribe) giving a quote. <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Very interesting. Who from the Spirit Lake tribe elected him to represent them? Who from UND gave him permission to interfere with a scheduled meeting between Kupchella and the tribal council?
I'm thinking that if I did something like that, I'd no longer have a job.
#456
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:38 PM
PCM, on Sep 26 2005, 10:27 PM, said:
Diggler, on Sep 26 2005, 07:58 PM, said:
This seems to be turning into a railroading. UND isn't even being given an opportunity to tell their side of the story.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Bingo.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm going to fax a copy of Jeanotte's article in the REA dedication program to the Herald, the Forum, the NCAA Online News and Indian Country Today. Do you think they'll print it since I'm not the author?
#457
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:52 PM
Clayton Hoyt, on Sep 26 2005, 09:12 PM, said:
Pay? I thought the Herald would send me a check!
#458
Posted 27 September 2005 - 03:26 AM
Every time I have read a Herald articleon this issue, it has had the line: Spirit Lake officials were unavailable for comment. I was wondering to myself when those at the Spirit Lake Tribe were going to get sick of the Herald, Forum, and every other news paper in the nation calling on a daily basis for a quote. It could be very possible that they are completely sick of the issue. But then why would you go as far to schedule a meeting with Kupchella just to cancle the night before??? I can't imagine that is the reasoning. Even if it was, how in the hell would Leigh Jenotte know? Unless he was on the phone all day begging every one of the council members to cancle the meeting.
As far as I can see, if the Spirit Lake Tribe decides not to make any moves on the issue, their previous resolution to support UND would then still be valid.
If not, Bennett Brien has alrady publically stated that his tribe would support UND taking it's name. At least we could keep the logo.
If nothing else...
As far as I can see, if the Spirit Lake Tribe decides not to make any moves on the issue, their previous resolution to support UND would then still be valid.
If not, Bennett Brien has alrady publically stated that his tribe would support UND taking it's name. At least we could keep the logo.
If nothing else...
Quote
Heeeeere comes yoooour Fighting Cavalry!!!!!!!
#459
Posted 27 September 2005 - 07:59 AM
Perhaps the Spirit Lake folks have more important matters to attend to, rather than worrying about UND's name/logo. Unlike some of their colleagues.
Precisely, but don't tell that to Jeanotte, Bellecourt, Herr Kracker, etc.
Quote
As far as I can see, if the Spirit Lake Tribe decides not to make any moves on the issue, their previous resolution to support UND would then still be valid.
Precisely, but don't tell that to Jeanotte, Bellecourt, Herr Kracker, etc.
#460
Posted 27 September 2005 - 08:07 AM
PCM, on Sep 26 2005, 10:38 PM, said:
I'm thinking that if I did something like that, I'd no longer have a job.
Where's the line between
"different opinion" (protected speech)
and
"insubordination" (grounds for termination, even for tenured faculty)?
#461
Posted 27 September 2005 - 08:07 AM
There's a letter to the editor today from UND alumnus Erik Longie asking Kupchella not to go to Spirit Lake.
Kupchella shouldn't visit Spirit Lake
Kupchella shouldn't visit Spirit Lake
Quote
The visit sounds like the old days when the army general showed up with "Indian Scouts" to trick us into giving up our land. Today, Kupchella wants to use students to trick us into giving up our name and self-respect.
#462
Posted 27 September 2005 - 08:09 AM
dakotadan, on Sep 27 2005, 03:26 AM, said:
Quote
Heeeeere comes yoooour Fighting Cavalry!!!!!!!
(sound "Charge!" bugle call here)
#463
Posted 27 September 2005 - 08:24 AM
dakotadan, on Sep 27 2005, 03:26 AM, said:
If not, Bennett Brien has alrady publically stated that his tribe would support UND taking it's name. At least we could keep the logo.
I say let's switch to the Fighting Chippewa. Keep the logo!!
#464
Posted 27 September 2005 - 08:44 AM
Quote
However, most supporters will change their minds once they are educated on how harmful logos are to Indian people.
ROTFLMAO!!! This guy must be related to Doreen YellowBird.
#465
Posted 27 September 2005 - 08:55 AM
PCM, on Sep 27 2005, 08:07 AM, said:
There's a letter to the editor today from UND alumnus Erik Longie asking Kupchella not to go to Spirit Lake.
Kupchella shouldn't visit Spirit Lake
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Kupchella shouldn't visit Spirit Lake
Quote
The visit sounds like the old days when the army general showed up with "Indian Scouts" to trick us into giving up our land. Today, Kupchella wants to use students to trick us into giving up our name and self-respect.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The only "trick" here is only hearing one side of the story and not giving UND a chance to speak.
Not really a wise decision, if you ask me.
#466
Posted 27 September 2005 - 09:12 AM
Erik Longie must be really old by now if he can remember the "old days." Because if he wasn't physically there for the "old days" everything he's heard has been be second, third and probably even fourth hand stories. I think we all remember doing that in school. One person is told something and by the time it gets to the last person in class it's not even the same story that was originally told.
#467
Posted 27 September 2005 - 09:27 AM
Quote
Right now, the discussions at Spirit Lake about the logo have been minimal and civil. The visit will cause a deeper division between tribal members on opposite sides of the issue.
• The visit will increase the disrespect already shown to Spirit Lake tribal members by other Sioux tribes for their seemingly ambiguous position on the logo.
• The visit will increase the disrespect already shown to Spirit Lake tribal members by other Sioux tribes for their seemingly ambiguous position on the logo.
Quote
Some will support it because they truly believe it "honors" us; others, because they have spent most of their lives on the reservation and never have experienced the racism caused by the logo.
#468
Posted 27 September 2005 - 09:33 AM
I just read Erik Longie's letter in the Herald. I can't believe what I just read. He says in his letter that he talked to a colleague (no name of course) and this is what she said about Kupchella bringing students to the meeting.
"Those poor students. All that they want is an education, and Kupchella will use them to further his own cause. But when the come back to the reservation to work someday, (this is the part that made me almost fall off my chair) there are going to be people who will use this against them. They are too young and naive about tribal politics to realize that what they are doing will hurt their future."
This is a flat out threat!!!
"Those poor students. All that they want is an education, and Kupchella will use them to further his own cause. But when the come back to the reservation to work someday, (this is the part that made me almost fall off my chair) there are going to be people who will use this against them. They are too young and naive about tribal politics to realize that what they are doing will hurt their future."
This is a flat out threat!!!
#470
Posted 27 September 2005 - 09:51 AM
Has Spirit Lake formally recinded their resolution giving UND 'permission' to use the Sioux name? If not, than the original stands as initially written. Aren't resolutions considered law by Indian Nations? I don't thint that the vote taken by the Tribal Council to oppose the name and logo can be said to be a resolution. Only a particular tribe can pass resolutions for itself; that's what we've been waiting for Spirit Lake to do, again. Since they haven't and they haven't recinded the old resolution as far as I can tell we're golden.
But as stated many times, the Lakota/Nakota/Dakota do not own the Sioux name. While UND has respectfully been looking for formal continued endorsement from Spirit Lake, that lack of cannot be used as a legal format by the NCAA. If they do not grant our appeal, it's off to court we go. And as previousily stated, there is no way that we are going to lose what is a First Amendment issue. Winning in court will protect us from going through all this cr@p imposed on us by the NC$$ in the future.
But as stated many times, the Lakota/Nakota/Dakota do not own the Sioux name. While UND has respectfully been looking for formal continued endorsement from Spirit Lake, that lack of cannot be used as a legal format by the NCAA. If they do not grant our appeal, it's off to court we go. And as previousily stated, there is no way that we are going to lose what is a First Amendment issue. Winning in court will protect us from going through all this cr@p imposed on us by the NC$$ in the future.
