BRIDGES update

[jimdahl]

http://www.grandforks.com/mld/grandforks/n...ews/4235254.htm

[Taz Boy]

This is done time and time again with little or no logical parallel to the UND Fighting Sioux name and logo. Perhaps a small case can be made for the goofy looking Cleveland Indian logo, or the big nosed "Blackhawk" logo, or the drunk ND Irish dude ready to partake in fisticuffs. But certainly not for the proud, fierce, majestic UND Sioux image.

taz wants to be UND's next logo

[mksioux]

BRIDGES is inviting Vernon Bellecourt back to campus to be part of a "forum" decrying the use of American Indian nicknames. The story in the Grand Forks Herald states that this event will take place on Nov. 25.

I really don't think this advances their cause much because I think most reasonable people realize that Bellecourt is nothing but an America-hater, as evidenced by his comment that the United States is the biggest terrorist government in the world.

The one thing that somewhat bothers me about this is the fact that BRIDGES and other similar groups are able to organize, mobilize, and bring speakers to campus in an attempt to advance their cause. There seems to be no interest among students on the other side of the issue to counter the anti-nickname sentiment on campus. I realize that many students believe the Fighting Sioux nickname is safe, but unless we counter leftist protestors like Bellecourt with intelligent and rational speakers like David Yeagley and others, we risk the other side gaining the upper hand once again.

[fightonsioux]

So, what do we do now? I went to the UND Republican website and Steve Symes was the contact person.

Does anyone know if the law school students have an organization?

We need to start a campaign to get Dr. David Yeagley to this campus to speak.

I'm tired of these "so called forums" put on by Bridges and other groups on campus that are a one-sided forum for changing the Sioux nickname.

In the Webster's New World College Dictionary a forum is described as "an assembly, place, radio program, ect. for the discussion of public matters or current questions, an opportunity for open discussion.

So, I ask, who will invited to this "so called forum" for keeping the name?

[mksioux]

As of a couple years ago, the law school did not have a politically conservative student group (they had/have a Christian legal society, but I don't think it was/is political).

I agree that it is joke to call this event a "forum." They want to make it appear that they are discussing the issue in an open fashion with a free exchange of ideas. In reality, all of the speakers will be against the nickname and anyone attending who speaks up in favor of the nickname will likely be shouted down, called names, and not be allowed to effectively communicate their point.

My hope is that a student at UND will call Mr. Symes and ask him whether the College Republicans are interested. I don't mean to imply that Dr. Yeagley has agreed to speak at UND, but he was kind enough to give a roadmap on how to start the process. Someone should at least explore the possibility. Young America's Foundation pays half of the fees, so there will be a cost to the organization that organizes the event. But other groups always seem to be able to come up with the expenses and I'm hoping groups on our side will be able to as well.

That's just my two cents. I'm no longer a student at UND, but it just seems to me like if someone like Dr. Yeagley has expressed an interest, someone at UND should at least look into the possibility.

[jimdahl]

Since the status quo is keeping the name, you don't see as much demonstration to that end.

In fact, it could be argued that continually debating with the name-change activists only additionally publicizes and legitimizes their arguments. When the rare flare-ups occur such that the University decides it's time to "study the name", then those in favor of keeping the name should organize and speak loud and clear. In the interim, though, I wonder if it doesn't do more harm than good? (Note that I'm not talking about the continual education process about the honor behind the name that UND currently has, I'm talking about active debate with BRIDGES).

It seems each time there's a new University president the activists step up the volume and bring about another official study. One step that proponents of the name should probably take is to make sure to engage in an active campaign to educate any future administrations about the history/honor of the name.

[ScottM]

BRIDGES and that ilk merely seem to be preaching to the choir. They bring in people of like mind and don't encourage a rational dialogue regarding the name, or anything else. I wonder when they're going to bring in somebody to talk about other issues in NA culture, e.g., crime, alcoholism, gangs, health issues, poverty, etc. Perhaps those issues just aren't "sexy" enough for the PC crowd.

[JBB]

In reality, all of the speakers will be against the nickname and anyone attending who speaks up in favor of the nickname will likely be shouted down, called names, and not be allowed to effectively communicate their point......

sounds just like what happens on this forum when someone speaks in favor of the name change.

I believe the Law school recommended the name be changed.

[mksioux]

Good point Jim. I'm sure many nickname proponents agree with your assessment. The anti-nickname advocates want to keep this issue alive. I agree that responding to their "forum" may actually help them in their goal to keep the issue alive.

However, I take a different view. Whether we like it or not, I think the issue is going to stay alive no matter how we respond. I realize there isn't a pressing need at this time, but I don't think that is a good reason to stop making our case and simply let the other side take control of the debate. Over time, if lefted unchecked, it is unavoidable that the anti-nickname activists on campus will have an impact on overall opinion. You have to remember, in five years there will be an almost completely different set of students at UND than there currently are today. I think by not actively engaging in the debate, we are unwittingly creating a "pressing need."

In a formal setting, students today are only getting one side of the debate. I think bringing in a speaker who talks about the importance of American Indian nicknames and mascots is part of the educational process that a University should provide. Such an event would not have to coincide with the BRIDGES event. In fact, I think it would be better if it did not.

[PCM]

sounds just like what happens on this forum when someone speaks in favor of the name change.

Sounds like JBB hasn't left the Twilight Zone yet.

I believe the Law school recommended the name be changed.

A certain law school dean who's no longer at UND managed to get some of the faculty to back his pet resoultion. The law school students made it clear that they strongly disagreed with his positon. I heard that some law school alumni let their feelings on the matter be known, too.

[mksioux]

The law school students were not consulted. My understanding is that a certain group of law professors spearheaded the effort and the Dean went along. I don't know the whole story behind it, but the end result was clear. I'm not saying that the Dean of the law school can't have a personal opinion against the nickname, but to allow the law school to formally go on record against the nickname without consulting the students is very unprofessional. I question the whole idea of "schools" going on record one way or another, but if you're going to do it, at a minimum there should be a student referendum.

And yes, the law school alumni did let their feelings be known about that.

[mksioux]

sounds just like what happens on this forum when someone speaks in favor of the name change.

JBB, need I remind you that the only time you're called names is when you make completely unsubstantiated claims that the entire UND community is racist. When you troll, someone is bound to respond (including me, against my better judgement). If you try to rationally articulate an argument why the name should be changed without resorting to blanket allegations of racism (and if you use proper capitilization of UND and Grand Forks), etc., I'm sure you will receive a civilized response.

[fightonsioux]

Ryan Cheshire, Sarah Benson, Kristi Schatz, Jodi Pariseau, Stephanie Stiel and 62 other students at the UND School of Law wrote a letter in the Grand Forks Herald on Wednesday, April 10, 2002:

"It is the feeling of many students at the UND School of Law that a Fargo Forum article of April 3 titled UND law school opposes moniker either deliberately or recklessly portrayed the law school's opinion on the Sioux name.

It should be stated that the only persons who voted for the resolution discussed in the Forum's article were the following tenured and tenure-track professors:

Professors Candace Zierdt, Barbara Vogelwede, Jim Grijalva, Kathrine Rand, Alan Romero, Thomas Lockney and law school Dean W. Jeremy Davis.

As the Forum states in its article, there are about 200 students at the UND School of Law. However, those 200 did not necessarily support the resolution. The student body and staff at the school purposely were left out of the resolution vote.

While some of the students may support the name change, many do not. Even those students who do support the change did not have a vote to back the resolution.

To state that the UND law school supports that change because seven tenured and tenure-track professors felt this way in unarguably inaccurate."

etc. etc.

[YaneA]

Dean Davis is not gone yet. His resignation takes effect at the end of the year.

And, yes, there was a whole lot of dissent regarding the faculty resolution (from the students; the tenured faculty vote, however, was unanimous) and even worse, there was appalling fallout from the letter the students wrote clarifying the situation. Some members of the faculty withdrew letters of recommendation they had previously written for some of the students who signed the letter to the editor or who were quoted in the paper as questioning the faculty's reluctance to cancel class when the Supreme Court visits while readily canceling class so the faculty can attend nickname conferences.

[PCM]

Dean Davis is not gone yet. His resignation takes effect at the end of the year.

I stand corrected. I should have said "almost gone."

[star2city]

It seems that there are key reference points that have not been used in educating the public or in dealing with BRIDGES with respect to the Sioux nickname. There is moral and intellectual high ground to be occupied, and no one at UND seems to take that ground (we need our own David Yeagly!).

From 1931 and current perspectives, the choice of the Fighting Sioux as a nickname for UND was significant in that it was and remains a form of identification repentance. The choice of Sioux as a nickname continues to show that UND faculty and students have an understanding of the betrayal and pain the government caused the Sioux Nation, are sorrowful because of it, admire the character and spirit of the Sioux through those sufferings, and desire to obtain those characteristics ourselves. Identification repentance, though a fully Christian concept, is used in liberal circles frequently and irresponsibly. As an example, liberals believe that Western Governments need to apply identification repentance to Third World poverty, because that poverty could only have been caused by sins of the rich. Just using the term 'identification repentance' sends shivers up the spine of BRIDGES members.

From a psychological standpoint, BRIDGES supporters almost unanimously reject the notion that human beings are part warrior and have a need, preferably through sports, to assert that warrior spirit. But yet they are acting as warriors by joining BRIDGES. BRIDGES supporters, by fundamentally denying the warrior part of themselves, dehumanize themselves. David Yeagly

[fightonsioux]

Story by Ian Swanson, Grand Forks Herald, March 10, 2000

STANDING ROCK ELDERS GROUP BACKS UND'S USE OF `SIOUX'

A group of elders at the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation has given its support to UND's use of the Fighting Sioux nickname.

In a letter to UND President Charles Kupchella, the Hunk- papa Treaty Council of Elders at Fort Yates, N.D., states its endorsement of the nickname.

Headsman Joseph Walker of the Oceti Sakowin Elders of Standing Rock wrote the letter, which states that the group endorses the nickname because it represents that the Sioux people have never given up, even when we faced overwhelming adversity in the forms of military power.

The group that wrote the letter is one of eight such groups on the Standing Rock reservation. All are covered under the Hunkpapa Treaty.

None of the groups are elected bodies. All are honorary groups joined by tribe members who are elderly, or who are considered elders because of their knowledge of tribal customs.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council is the elected governing body of the Standing Rock Reservation. It passed a resolution in 1992 urging that UND discontinue using the Fighting Sioux nickname and reaffirmed that resolution in 1998.

UND media relations coordinator Peter Johnson said the letter written by Walker would be included in a packet of information that will be given to members of a commission appointed by Kupchella to study the nickname issue.

The packet also includes the Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council resolution.

[fightonsioux]

Story by David Knutson, Grand Forks Herald, Dec. 22, 2000

SAME NAME, NEW LOGO

SPIRIT LAKE SENDS UND ITS SUPPORT

TRIBAL CHAIRMAN WANTS TO SEE `SOMETHING POSITIVE'

Spirit Lake Nation's Tribal Council sent a resolution to UND President Charles Kupchella offering support for the Fighting Sioux nickname.

Tribal Chairman Phillip Skip Longie said the resolution was an attempt to bring about an end to the nickname issue.

I'd like something positive to come out of this whole thing, Longie said. This is going to come up again and again and again. If the university doesn't do something to take a stand, to do something positive, it will keep coming up.

Longie wouldn't reveal what was included in the resolution, referring questions about it to Kupchella.

Kupchella said he can't comment about the resolution because he hasn't seen it. He said he doesn't know what is in it.

The president did say he talked with Longie about a week ago and Longie told him the resolution was positive.

Earlier this month the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen Association reaffirmed an earlier resolution asking UND to change the Fighting Sioux nickname. Some Sioux people find the name offensive.

Longie said he wasn't pleased by the action taken by the state Board of Higher Education in voting unanimously to retain the nickname.

How many Sioux are on that board, he replied when asked about the board's action Friday.

In fact, Longie said he thought Kupchella still had to make a decision over the name despite the board's vote.

He added that at a recent meeting with 184 elderly members of the tribe, the issue was split down the middle, as far as supporters and opponents of the Fighting Sioux nickname.

Longie also said he supported UND's recent events held to showcase Native American culture and tradition.

I think it is an excellent idea, he said, adding that more events would be beneficial.

DISSENSION

Not all tribal leaders in North Dakota were offering support for the nickname, though.

Jess Taken Alive, a tribal council member at Standing Rock Indian Reservation and former tribal chairman, said state officials have switched positions on who should decide the matter.

It's supposed to have been a local issue, said Taken Alive, who served as a member of UND's nickname commission. That was the response we got from the Legislature in 1999.

Tribal leaders asked the Legislature to drop the nickname, he said, but lawmakers argued the matter was one for UND's president to decide.

Taken Alive also said he wasn't surprised by the action taken. UND's investigation into the controversy was not sincere, he said.

It was just a way to placate us, he said of the nickname commission. You could see that from the beginning.

[The Sicatoka]

The article above makes reference to The Great Plains Tribal Chairmen's Association.

Interesting.

The following is from page 11 of the "Spring 2000" issue of "Native Directions," the publication of the UND Native Media Center:

Mark Ranfranz also gets inspiration from his father, the Tribal president of the Flandreau-Santee Sioux Tribe, Tom Ranfranz. The younger Ranfranz, was on the UND hockey team and hopes to rejoin the team during the 2002- 2003 season.

Mark ... says he has learned a lot from his father who is not only the tribal president but also the vice president of the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen

[fightonsioux]

I checked out the website for BRIDGES and find it very interesting that they would refer to their webmaster, Dana Williams, as a slave.

I'm wondering how it is ok for them to use such a derogatory and offensive term such as slave and at the same time say that using the Sioux nickname is derogatory and offensive.

Just something I observed that made me go hmmmm.

[Bad Eagle]

I saw pictures of the offensive and infamous T-Shirts that were so highly publicized a year ago. Indians (the department up there) made sure I saw them.

No one addressed the real issue. Why are there no obscenity laws in North Dakota? And why was this not brought out? And why do the people in charge not work for such laws, for that is the solution, not removing the name.

When I was on Hannity & Colmes last year with Russell Means, he lamented such behavior as the reason for removing mascots. This misses the issue. Indian warrior images are great lessons in courage and bravery, what we all need. That juvenile college freshmen behavior should be allowed to destroy such a mighty accomplishment of our Indian warrior image is truly racisim!

[Riverman]

BadEagle, I have been to alot of sports events at UND and a few at rival NDSU.

I would like to know where these people are sitting because I never see these t-shirts.

As for the (department) who are we to know they didn't make them up?Not saying they did.However they seem to be the only folks who

seem to "see" these t-shirts every where.

Not trying to be a smart arse but Define obscenity Vs free speech.

An example,Friday (IMHO)crazy people from KS were on UND's campus.

A direct quote Rev Phelps said: America loves fags,so God hates America!America is a filthy country.

The Rev on Old Glory: It's to windy to burn it,and to cold to take a crap or P on it. (GF Herald Nov. 2,02)

Free speech or obscene?

Go easy on me Bad Eagle I am from N Dakota.

[Bad Eagle]

Good Grief! I can't believe what you just quoted. I think it's obscenity, and not free speech. Here's why.

I used to be a social worker, in grimy old New Haven, Connecticut. This was after my Yale religion degree. I was a resident counselor in a residential treatment center for emotionally disturbed children. My group was kids ages 11-15. Tough group.

There was a language rule in all our residence units. No swearing, no four-letter words, no vulgarity, etc. There is a simple reason for this. It isn't about free speech in a youngster. It's about self-control.

These kids came to us out-of-control. One of the very first steps in regaining self-control is control over one's own words. This is a psychological law, believe me.

In other words, there is such a thing as obscenity, and foul speech. This is why people use it. It makes an impression. It is effective. It is a constant knocking over of the whol hierarchy of language values. A quick, nasty four letter word knocks over the whole tower of dignity, or self-control.

Obsecenity is an indulgence of somekind, basically. Free speech? Sounds like some of these people behave like my emotionally disturbed children.

Hope this makes sense. In the matter of the protests to the Fighting Sioux name, those that decry the obscenities it supposedly provokes should realize that the Fighting Sioux name has nothing to do with it. There's really a disconntect up there somewhere.

Help me put a finger on it. I'm not sure what exactly's going on.

[PCM]

Bad Eagle, while I agree with that some of the depictions of Sioux Indians should be considered obscene, not to mention racist, I'm constantly amazed at some of the T-shirts I see people walking around in. Common decency is becoming extinct and few seem to mind or care.

I was shocked and apalled to learn that one of the most derogatory Sioux T-shirts ever produced came from a Grand Forks business. I don't understand how anyone who lives in this community could possibly think that selling that article of clothing was a good idea.

The worst part is that when something like that happens, it's used to tar the entire community, as well as UND and North Dakota. Yet if you took a poll of Grand Forks residents and UND employees and students, I guarantee you that 95 percent of them or better would say that the T-shirt was obscene, racist and should never see the light of day.

The vast majority of people in Grand Forks and at UND respect the Sioux name and logo, use it in a dignified manner and recognize that it's intent is to honor and pay tribute to the Great Sioux Nation and it's warriors who once roamed the plains. It's the small percentage of idiots who ruin it.

[Bad Eagle]

Both of the Dakota states hold the last vestiges of American Romanticism. These states are a vortex of history, the closing history of the wild west, really. There is a mystique beyond computation. I don't know that you'll ever be other that, or that you should in any way want to be. The Dakotas, and Arizona are the big historical draws for the old West days. I speak of national imagery, in the American psyche as a whole.

Still, I wonder why there aren't any obscenity laws. Is this not true? It would only take a simple bill in the House, then the Senate could immediately ratify it. Simple process. I think this would squelch the public vulgarities quite quickly.