GrahamKracker Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Kracker, UND athletes and fans are not impersonating Native Americans. That is where I think the cultural disconect seems to be. You make this issue so much more than it is. UND has never tried to become Sioux Indians or impersonate them. UND named their athletic teams the Fighting Sioux about 70 years ago with permission from your ancestors. You should be educated enough to know that is all it was. No more and no less. I have tons of research/pictures that beg to differ on your opinion. As for my "ancestors" giving this name, you should really do your history on this issue. I haven't found ANY documentation of Natives setting foot on this campus until at least the 60's. As for where the name came from, when I have time I will fax some documents for you to look at. Do you really think that in 1930, only 5 years after Native Americans became citizens of this country, that UND would even have ANYTHING to do w/ the Sioux people? At that time in history, Indians were looked at as less than human, do your history. But the past is the past, we can't change that. But RIGHT NOW, in the PRESENT, the SIOUX NATION does not want UND to use the Sioux as its mascot/logo/moniker/nickname. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyMom Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Ya know how a yawn is contagious? *yawn* *yawns* Yes.....I do. How 'bout that young man that wears #7 on the back of his jersey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 How 'bout that young man that wears #7 on the back of his jersey? You mean the Minnesota Indian Education Association's male athlete of 2005? He's amazing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Force One Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 You mean the Minnesota Indian Education Association's male athlete of 2005? He's amazing! What team did he play high school hockey for? Oh yeah, the Warroad WARRIORS. Can you believe all this hostility and abusiveness in this region? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 I have tons of research/pictures that beg to differ on your opinion. As for my "ancestors" giving this name, you should really do your history on this issue. I haven't found ANY documentation of Natives setting foot on this campus until at least the 60's. As for where the name came from, when I have time I will fax some documents for you to look at. Do you really think that in 1930, only 5 years after Native Americans became citizens of this country, that UND would even have ANYTHING to do w/ the Sioux people? At that time in history, Indians were looked at as less than human, do your history. But the past is the past, we can't change that. But RIGHT NOW, in the PRESENT, the SIOUX NATION does not want UND to use the Sioux as its mascot/logo/moniker/nickname. Simple as that. Kracker, I have done my history. UND (in the 1930's) asked and received permission to use the name. Don't get all of your info from the Dakota Student archives. That is only one source. I have seen the microfiche documents from the Dakota student. My Dad was going to school here at that time. He did not look at Native Americans as less than human and neither did a lot of other people. He was a friend to your people years ago and supported them with jobs and financial help. There have been many people who have looked at your culture as no different than any one else and tried to help. Believe me it isn't always easy to help! I am not arguing at that time in history Native Americans were treated as equal citizens. The Fighting Sioux name did not solve the racial prejudice at the time. I believe it was a step in the right direction back then. I have reviewed documents that indicate UND received permission to use the name. In a recent column in the Herald, Doreen Yellowbird who is an opponent of the name, did admit UND asked and received permission to use the name. I saw old pictures of the celebration that took place at Ft. Yates around that time. OK, the past is past. I accept that today the representatives from the Sioux nation have stated they don't want us to use the name. I don't think it is as simple as that. I think it will cost too much money to change the name and I think we will lose an opportunity to use the name as a bridge between cultures and a building block to help kids on the reservation. My opinion is as simple as that but making it happen wouldn't be so simple. Do your leaders not understand how much good will they would get by trying to find a compromise on this issue? Now if you disagree, I don't think you are a coward, or hiding or ignorant or a dumb norwegian. I suspect you have a position of leadership within the UND Native American community and it may be worth your while if you are going to work to get the name changed to quit calling people names who disagree with you. At one time you had mentioned the posssibility of a compromise. Are you still willing to consider one? If not have a Merry Christmas and I hope your finals went well. I will try to look you up some day at the cultural center. Will they know who Graham Kracker is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 What team did he play high school hockey for? Oh yeah, the Warroad WARRIORS. Can you believe all this hostility and abusiveness in this region? The oppressed has risen and shines in glory on the ice!! WOO HOO!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigmrg74 Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 I'm beinging to wonder if GrahamKracker really cares that much about getting the name change or that he's just a troll, much like BCON on the www.D2football.com messageboards who just posts to get a rise out of people, and he just knows that this issue is the one that will do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyMom Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 I'm beinging to wonder if GrahamKracker really cares that much about getting the name change or that he's just a troll, much like BCON on the www.D2football.com messageboards who just posts to get a rise out of people, and he just knows that this issue is the one that will do it. Most if these people care more about getting their name in the paper and the attention that comes from crying wolf more than they care about the cause itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 I'm beinging to wonder if GrahamKracker really cares that much about getting the name change or that he's just a troll, much like BCON on the www.D2football.com messageboards who just posts to get a rise out of people, and he just knows that this issue is the one that will do it. Most of us think he is nothing more than a troll and is probably a Goofer fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 (edited) I'm beinging to wonder if GrahamKracker really cares that much about getting the name change or that he's just a troll, much like BCON on the www.D2football.com messageboards who just posts to get a rise out of people, and he just knows that this issue is the one that will do it. Hockeymom and Goon may be right, but here's my addition to it: I think GK has a 5 year old mentality. 5 year olds think very concretely. If they feel they've been wronged, even if they haven't, or even if they don't understand what is happening to them, they lash out in the same manner that they percieve they were approached. So, GK thinks we're all racists. Despite the fact that he can't prove that the nickname has produced the racist acts that occurred in upwards of 10-30 years ago, he thinks the best way to get his point across is to be racist towards us. The "If I'm as racist as I believe they are, then they'll take my side of the story because then they'll experience what I believe I (substitute in "my people") have gone through" mentality, so to speak. In harsher terms, it's like beating someone up so that they understand what pain is and how you feel about it. Empathy is great. Forced empathy ("Oppressed? I'll show you what it's like to be oppressed") NEVER EVER WORKS. Edited December 19, 2005 by redwing77 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted December 20, 2005 Share Posted December 20, 2005 Hockeymom and Goon may be right, but here's my addition to it: I think GK has a 5 year old mentality. 5 year olds think very concretely. If they feel they've been wronged, even if they haven't, or even if they don't understand what is happening to them, they lash out in the same manner that they percieve they were approached. So, GK thinks we're all racists. That is a good example of the childish behavior GK has displayed. If you don't agree with people's point of view and perspective you just villifiy them and call them racist and say they are a bunch of classless rubes. GK probably learned that tactic from his white college professors in the arts and sciences department. I notice they have been writing the op ed department of the Grand Forks Herald a lot lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamKracker Posted December 20, 2005 Share Posted December 20, 2005 Kracker, I have done my history. UND (in the 1930's) asked and received permission to use the name. Don't get all of your info from the Dakota Student archives. That is only one source. I have seen the microfiche documents from the Dakota student. My Dad was going to school here at that time. He did not look at Native Americans as less than human and neither did a lot of other people. He was a friend to your people years ago and supported them with jobs and financial help. There have been many people who have looked at your culture as no different than any one else and tried to help. Believe me it isn't always easy to help! I am not arguing at that time in history Native Americans were treated as equal citizens. The Fighting Sioux name did not solve the racial prejudice at the time. I believe it was a step in the right direction back then. I have reviewed documents that indicate UND received permission to use the name. In a recent column in the Herald, Doreen Yellowbird who is an opponent of the name, did admit UND asked and received permission to use the name. I saw old pictures of the celebration that took place at Ft. Yates around that time. OK, the past is past. I accept that today the representatives from the Sioux nation have stated they don't want us to use the name. I don't think it is as simple as that. I think it will cost too much money to change the name and I think we will lose an opportunity to use the name as a bridge between cultures and a building block to help kids on the reservation. My opinion is as simple as that but making it happen wouldn't be so simple. Do your leaders not understand how much good will they would get by trying to find a compromise on this issue? Now if you disagree, I don't think you are a coward, or hiding or ignorant or a dumb norwegian. I suspect you have a position of leadership within the UND Native American community and it may be worth your while if you are going to work to get the name changed to quit calling people names who disagree with you. At one time you had mentioned the posssibility of a compromise. Are you still willing to consider one? If not have a Merry Christmas and I hope your finals went well. I will try to look you up some day at the cultural center. Will they know who Graham Kracker is? Please bring your information/pics/articles stating your facts over to the NAPS because I have NEVER seen anything that has stated that UND was given this name in the 30's. I would much like to see these articles. If you don't have them, maybe you can tell me where I might find them. Back in the day, the black people didn't mind slavery. Women didn't mind not owning land or not being able to vote. That mindset has changed over the years, though. Just like this logo issue. At one point in history, yeah, it was okay to make a Nation into a logo. Not anymore. the SIOUX Nation has asked UND to stop using its name as their logo. Plain and simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted December 20, 2005 Share Posted December 20, 2005 Back in the day, the black people didn't mind slavery. Women didn't mind not owning land or not being able to vote. That mindset has changed over the years, though. Just like this logo issue. At one point in history, yeah, it was okay to make a Nation into a logo. Not anymore. the SIOUX Nation has asked UND to stop using its name as their logo. Plain and simple. Wha? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 Back in the day, the black people didn't mind slavery. Women didn't mind not owning land or not being able to vote. OH MY GAWD!!! Are you for real? It's true......., you can't fix stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 Kracker, UND athletes and fans are not impersonating Native Americans. That is where I think the cultural disconect seems to be. You make this issue so much more than it is. UND has never tried to become Sioux Indians or impersonate them. UND named their athletic teams the Fighting Sioux about 70 years ago with permission from your ancestors. You should be educated enough to know that is all it was. No more and no less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 Sioux-cia, The Underground Railroad wasn't about blacks trying to get freedom. It was actually Harriet Tubman's travel agency. Their advertisements were:"See the North and half of the agrarian culture in its most beautiful, nighttime splendor! Stay in the best of pantries, barn lofts, and sheds and sleep on only the freshest, finest hay and wool blankets! Do all this while avoiding the hoards of bounty hunters and pro-slavery opportunists! Rooms are guaranteed to be quiet. Warning: Not liable for loss of property, injury, or loss of life to any and all who participate." By the way, word on the street is that the Jews didn't mind the Nazis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 (edited) Sioux-cia, The Underground Railroad wasn't about blacks trying to get freedom. It was actually Harriet Tubman's travel agency. Their advertisements were:"See the North and half of the agrarian culture in its most beautiful, nighttime splendor! Stay in the best of pantries, barn lofts, and sheds and sleep on only the freshest, finest hay and wool blankets! Do all this while avoiding the hoards of bounty hunters and pro-slavery opportunists! Rooms are guaranteed to be quiet. Warning: Not liable for loss of property, injury, or loss of life to any and all who participate." By the way, word on the street is that the Jews didn't mind the Nazis. You're right, of course. I understand Harriet forcibly took hundreds of slaves on vacation trips to the North. The slaves didn't want to go. To African slaves who 'didn't mind' slavery, beatings, selling of their children, never seeing them again, rapes, working 18 hours a day for rags and scrapes was so appealing that Harriet had to hold guns to their heads and force them to go North for a little sabbatical. Hey, I also heard the Holocost was a media scam, how 'bout that!? Oh, and Susan B. Anthony isn't a real person, she's just a head on a coin. Edited December 21, 2005 by Sioux-cia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyMom Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 HockeyMom is laughing so hard right now, that she is crying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMD Posted December 22, 2005 Share Posted December 22, 2005 Speaking of Native Americans serving in the military... UND Center For Rural Health To Look At American Indian Veteran Health Merry Christmas! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted December 22, 2005 Share Posted December 22, 2005 Speaking of Native Americans serving in the military... UND Center For Rural Health To Look At American Indian Veteran Health Merry Christmas! Well, there you have it, another example of hostile and abusive behavior from UND as a result of it's use of the Sioux name and logo. DAMN THEM ALL TO H, E, double hockey sticks! Merry Christmas to all and to all a Happy New Year! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamKracker Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 Speaking of Native Americans serving in the military... UND Center For Rural Health To Look At American Indian Veteran Health Merry Christmas! Yeah, did you bother to ask Dr. McDonald "his" stance on the name? lol, HELL NO.....because if you did you'd find out most of the N/A Vets on this campus are against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crosby_87 Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 Wha? No kidding. I guess the civil war was fought just for something to do because blacks were happy and so were whites so it just got boring. Blacks loved being starved to death and beaten to death every time they did something wrong. It just wasn't a big deal back then. Slavery and the Logo Issue are the exact same thing. Until about 2 years ago, nobody even brought any of them up, and slavery and "abusive" logos were just around while nobody cared. Wow GrahamKracker please don't try to mix up slavery with your little logo issue.(End Sarcastic Rant, but still very Pissed about the comparison being made.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftyZL Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 Yeah, did you bother to ask Dr. McDonald "his" stance on the name? lol, HELL NO.....because if you did you'd find out most of the N/A Vets on this campus are against it. Do you have any proof that can be posted on here regarding the stance that the Native American Vets are taking on this logo issue? Because unless you can post something valid and with a little credibility attached to it, this quote has no validity whatsoever. Just like when other people on here post facts of information and you attack them about the validity of their information, until I see a survey or something significant that states the stance Native American Vets are taking on the logo, your quote has no more validity than anything anyone else posts on here. Happy Holidays Everyone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 (edited) Yeah, did you bother to ask Dr. McDonald "his" stance on the name? lol, HELL NO.....because if you did you'd find out most of the N/A Vets on this campus are against it. GK, please continue to run your mouth. You are doing a better job of discrediting the pro name change rationale than any of us that wish to keep the name could ever accomplish. Edited December 24, 2005 by DamStrait Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 (edited) No kidding. I guess the civil war was fought just for something to do because blacks were happy and so were whites so it just got boring. Blacks loved being starved to death and beaten to death every time they did something wrong. It just wasn't a big deal back then. Slavery and the Logo Issue are the exact same thing. Until about 2 years ago, nobody even brought any of them up, and slavery and "abusive" logos were just around while nobody cared. Wow GrahamKracker please don't try to mix up slavery with your little logo issue.(End Sarcastic Rant, but still very Pissed about the comparison being made.) Gk isn't going to go back to this stupid, stupid, stupid statement of his. I think someone smarter than he is, like his wife or kids, must have pointed out to him what a stupid, stupid, stupid contemptuous statement that was. His tactic is to ignore the easily proven, dispute the truth, forget about having made stupid statements about blacks, women, etc. and go on to something else in which to attempt to share his superior "knowledge of the facts". I try to read his posts with the same anticipation a ten year old must have waiting for Homer Simpson's next excapade and/or words of wisdon. But many times he comes up with something so igorant, racist, and chauvanistic, it's hard to laugh at him. Edited December 24, 2005 by Sioux-cia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.