SAI BABA-SAI LIBERATORS
Posted by rezinate on July 12, 2012
Interesting link with video clips showing a master illusionist at work.
Sai Baba relied heavily on sleight of hand while our versions rely on sleight of words as well as staged events.
In particular I would direct the readers attention to the video purporting to show a talking photograph-there are various software programs capable of doing this-one in particular I am familiar with is Crazy Talk-and I invite all to do a net search for it-I believe they even offer a trail version.
As with all illusionists it is about misdirection, an attempt to distract the audience from reality in order to perform the “magic”. Kind of like the Peltier and WK2 thing.
We’ve seen a lot of this over the years-the lingrams offered are Sundances and ceremonies intended to grant an air of legitimacy, regurgitated “republics”, and an attempt to introduce the metaphysics of New Age doctrine into our own belief systems, not to mention the obligatory rhetoric to stir the faithful. BS is said to be transmutated into gold and presented as a “spiritual” provenance.
That green lame turban from Auntie Lupita days comes into focus now, as do concho laden headbands and that distant faraway look meant I assume to project that “spiritual” waters run deep whether they are tinged red with blood or not.
The recent CWS conference was apparently seen as opportunity to work the magic again- unfortunately for them it fell flat, as the verbal fingers necessary are no longer so nimble in the light of what has become known-they haven’t enough folds in the garments they wear to conceal the objects they will present.
A part of the stage show is to rely on the innocence of believers-their desire to believe, a history of poverty and abuse that in many ways compels them to-having secured that, the door is open to manipulation-it is a door that should be closed allowing these fakirs and snake charmers no entry.
Many things are wrong- we need to understand “somebody” is each of us.
In speaking of events like Sand Creek or Wounded Knee I make an effort to tell people that such things weren’t restricted to either the Cheyenne or Sioux, that it is a shared history among all the nations.
A lesser known, though no less heinous offense occurred among the Wintu and Nomsuu when they were invited in 1850 to a “friendship feast” and fed poison resulting in a hundred and forty five deaths.
The following year in what became known as the Bridge Gulch Massacre an additional one hundred and fifty innocent Wintu men, women, and children were killed in reprisal for the death of Col. John Anderson.
In saying we are all related it is the shared misery and suffering that has defined and bound us together.
Events and individuals have have always been focal points-something to rally behind to address larger more inclusive issues. Such was the case with Nadia in Iran last year, such has been the case with Wounded Knee, and that has been the case for such divergent groups as those who advocate for Annie Mae or Leonard Peltier-the wind who chases himself.
The events on the Rol discussion about Jesus are taking the expected turn-the common denial statements of why speak for Annie as she is only one person is the preferred, if not the only, defense that can be made. That accompanied by the predictable accusations and misdirection.
In that is the convenience of denial and ignoring that in speaking for her one speaks for all women-it fails to take into account that in any venue where you find such an advocacy you will also find multiple references to indigenous “women”-that is a plural, an inclusive position, a speaking for all victims.
If this dismissal of Annie being only one woman has any validity then why would any advocate for Peltier? And if any do how are they able to validate it by this standard? He’s only one man, and unlike Annie he is no victim. Stand on a the internet podium with a bullhorn for decades and support Peltier, and now Graham, but dismiss Annie as one woman, and in doing so dismiss all women.
Russell has travelled far and wide to speak, mostly for himself, but also for Peltier-has he done the same for Annie Mae, indigenous women, or the issues we speak of?
A completely ridiculous logic is offered for this in the discussion in stating that the real issues of alcohol, drugs, gangs, the rape and abuse of women and children and apparently any other pressing issue are taboo. Not to be spoken of-and it follows then not to be remediated.
Should this same logic be applied to the events of Wounded Knee? Should it be dismissed as only an event that involved a lesser number in comparison to the “hundred of thousands” of other indigenous people who suffered a similiar fate? Should the same question of “what is it you people want” be asked of those who use it as a focal point, a rallying call?
Should this contorted logic be applied to those who speak for Jancita Eagle Deer or Buddy Lamont? If this is the way of it by what right, and for what purpose did any march for John Wesley Bad Heart Bull at Custer-weren’t these all just one person?
I don’t think any would take that position, but those patriarchs secure in the bulwark of the RoL are singular in their dismissals, and all are the prime examples of patriarchy and the oppression of women.
There was a time when it was common to see what were referred to as cigar story Indians carved of wood and duly adorned with paint and feathers-wooden, rigid, with a fixed expression, and immovable.
Their sole purpose was to pander to a certain perception, a mental image of a real live noble redman- I submit the Rol is over run with it’s on version of these duly adorned cigar store Indians that are equally as rigid and fixed in their positions, and impervious to the elements that are in this instance truth and reality.
They like the wooden Indians can only see in the direction they are pointed, the one they face, and these wooden redmen who frequent the Rol nurture each other and the perpetuation of the status quo in their exchanges among themselves of being not only red, but noble in their positions, and above all else warriors.
If men want to complain about being blamed for creating the circumstances women face and being “insulted” for them they need to consider they are the very ones responsible for the creation, and allowing them to continue due to what they would refer to as the “taboo'” off limits nature in discussion, and the lack of taking a visible and communal stand -in the best possible light , and the least “insulting”, it can only be said that in doing so a tacit permission is given.
It isn’t the women who have created this environment and deserve to be insulted for it-it is the men, and they deserve every insult that can be directed at them, and doesn’t make a damn bit of difference what color they are, how much Indianese, Taiwanese, Americanese , or any other manner of speech they resort to.
One person stands in opposition to this RoL discussion and I would think an advocate for Annie Mae and indigenous women would offer some word of support there…. even if only in passing. One advocate, who if nothing else could gather a few statements by other advocates and post them jointly, something like lostwhitebrother has done . Question is, is he lost or abandoned?
It is an easy thing to be an advocate when surrounded by the comfort of like thinkers-another to go where you won’t receive a pat on the back and speak against the grain.
Interesting to follow the AIM money trail and the tactics employed-from Federal grants, individual churches, the World Council of Churches, Libya, and even communist organizations.
An accurate accounting will probably never be made but to look at conditions on the rez during their fifteen minutes it’s obvious little of it trickled down to the people who needed it.
And what makes a sham of so much of their high rhetoric is their absolute willingness to align themselves with repressive governments like Libya, Venezuela, and Russia-all the while beating their chests and gushing crocodile tears about oppression-anything for a buck.
Below is a link to an article-I would direct your attention to the lower left section at the bottom of the article that says Reference: Renegades, clicking on that will download a pdf containing a May 1973 article by Susan L.M. Huck, a contributing editor to The Review Of The News.
It makes for interesting reading and any questions raised by those who read should be addressed by making the effort to search on the net. For those who proclaim and look for a fed connection the details outlined in this article could be it-the problem is if it is so it would involve their heroes. The fact that too many won’t has been heavily relied upon
What should be kept in mind is that the article was written 38 years ago, some of what is known now was not then, likewise some of what was known then has been forgotten or obscured. And there has been an avalanche of propaganda.
I’m not comfortable with some of the terminology,or necessarily the authors
writing style- but then I haven’t been comfortable with some of the terminology others
employ-like land warrior for instance, or I was Annie Mae’s good “friend”, a “protector”,
so I look for what can be verified, or in the context of what is known is reasonable to
assign some credibility to.
I make no assertions that every word contained in this pdf is gospel, only that it is as much worth reading as anything else that has been presented these many decades, and if some measure of time is devoted to researching points that are made a few surprises may appear.
It is an injustice that those in AIM who have always been motivated for the right reasons have had to bear the shame of others whose priority was serving themselves, I hope people and history will remember that as they are the heart and soul of the nations-not the ones who have made a business of saying they are.
A lot of explanations and theories have been given about the motivation behind WK2, one among them that says it was an effort to secure the sacred canupa given by Pte Ska Win to secure their “authority” and legitimize themselves-and the reason they pillaged Wilbur Riegert’s museum and dwelling, why they burned his manuscript that described the lineage of the pipecarriers-why he was thrown into the street despite the fact that he was wheelchair bound,and why his museum, which was an homage to a people-the lakota-was burned.
He didn’t suffer such abuse or loss alone-the Gildersleeves did as well, and then were soundly renounced, neither did the dozens of others who lost their homes, had their property destroyed, vehicles commandeered, or were forced to flee from a group of of “liberators” whose majority numbers were neither from Pine Ridge or Lakota. That doesn’t even address those who were murdered there at the hands of the “liberators” like Ray Robinson. Warriors in the finest tradition who made war on invalids and old people? I don’t think so.
The name of Wilbur’s book is Quest For the Pipe of the Sioux and below you will find a link that provides a photo of the museum and Wilbur. Take a look at the photo and ask yourself if you as a liberator, a champion of the people, would force him out of his home and into the street. If you would destroy his personal items-not to mention ransack and destroy this humble museum? Does he look like an enemy, a physical threat?
There is a lot of dispute about who is the rightful pipecarrier, several factions and accusations hurled back and forth-it is a thing to address and resolve for the common welfare of the nation- the ability to do that rests with the people as it was given to and for them-not for individuals to squabble over, or for media figures, would be leaders and politicians, to decide.
1a : unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power b : something that oppresses especially in being an unjust or excessive exercise of power
2: a sense of being weighed down in body or mind :
There should be a designated blank space in this definition as presented in Webster’s labeled add name here-it would be a long and revealing list. Five hundred plus years of it, entire nations gone, languages lost, traditions and cermonies undergoing change, the ongoing theft of land.
Everyone is well aware of the familar antagonists-the government, the church, and hopefully an awareness of the new oppressors. Those who ransack and pillage communities like Wounded Knee and then flee the destruction while pointing the finger of blame everywhere but it’s righful place-themselves.
During one of Russell’s homilys about AIM, retirement, etc he made the statement he was proud of what AIM had “accomplished”, of his association with it. By extension that can only mean pride in the misery visited upon the Lakota people, pride in the suffering visited upon those of WK2 at his hands and those of AIM during that period.
That raises the question for me is there also pride in the abduction, beating, rape, and murder of Annie Mae? Is there a sense of pride for the murder of Ray Robinson and those who lie in unmarked graves? Was it pride that precluded attendance at Annie Mae’s burial and the ensuing decades of silence? What manner of pride motivated AIM to gather huge amounts of money in donations and what amounted to little more than coercion
in playing upon guilt and from which no real tangible results can be seen?
Is Dennis Banks proud of his association, his “service” as well? Is he proud of his silence on the issue of Annie Mae? Or his well known reputation for running when trouble comes? How about the children left behind, is that a source of pride, or the placing of women in harms way? Is he proud of the legacy of AIM, this entity he helped to create?
There is oppression and oppressors, both equally recognizable. In the desperation born of centuries of neglect and oppression trickster insinuated himself in the guise of those many self proclaimed heroes and did what he always does.The question is were the lessons learned?
AIM has never realized it’s potential and there is a great tragedy in that, not only for the people, but for the good hearts who labor anonymously within it’s ranks. When you find these good hearts among you offer them the praise and expressions of gratitude they so richly deserve, be supportive of them-for those others rebuke them and look away, close your ears to them and offer what they so richly deserve-nothing, save justice. As Joann Spotted Bear said-” to hell with Russell Means”, and I would add to hell with the entire bunch.
The definition of a warrior-I think it a universal one: in the noun form it has been described as “a brave or experienced soldier or fighter”.
A single word in this definition excludes Dennis Banks-that word is brave. Warriors don’t flee with their tail tucked between their legs as has been the legacy of Banks every time a woman was at risk and a warrior would have stood his ground.
There is a long an honorable history of warriors forfeiting their own life for the protection of women-not handing them a weapon and telling them to cover their ass while they make good their escape.
Banks is the true marathon man, the true Forrest Gump, who tirelessly runs the length and breadth of the continent, running and denial are in his blood. I like that line from Gump about stupid is as stupid does-in Gump’s defense though he had a good heart and was a man.
Banks has been quoted as saying “When you have a spiritual foundation, you look at poverty differently then.” I would ask where is this spiritual foundation that seals the mouth of any when it comes to Annie Mae, or those who lie in unmarked graves at WK2? Where is the spiritual foundation that provides the comforts of a warm house and three meals a day when so many others have so much less?
Gandhi led an entire nation to freedom and owned only what he wore, a few books, a cup and a bowl to eat to drink and eat from-that’s a spiritual foundation. He didn’t brand and market Leech Lake rice or maple syrup under his name for personal profit.
He didn’t run from rez to rez seeking sanctuary, flee his country, or ever leave a woman in distress. An Ojibwe warrior? maybe when pigs fly.
Was this spiritual foundation bestowed by the “Professor of the Universe” Crow Dog, who has reduced himself to a website featuring him doing his pantomime with cloned in hawks flitting about in the background and faux thunder and rain in yet another attempt by that bunch to attach themselves to the gravy train? Let’s not forget that it was Crow Dog who in a fit of anger when Annie confronted him about the presence of alcohol at ceremonies that threw her out of “paradise” and branded her a snitch. Maybe it’s just me but I fail to see a spiritual foundation that would include a “monetary gifts” option and offer dvds for sale with the appropriate button attached to it. Sounds a lot like those televangelists.
Leaders lead, they don’t abandon and run. Leaders protect, not join in cover ups, or undermine the search for justice. And more importantly fathers are exactly that.. a father, and one who honors the mother.
“In sworn testimony, both Nichols and John Trudell, a former AIM chairman, have testified that in late February of 1976 Banks personally told them that a body discovered in the ravine was that of Aquash. This is curious, since the FBI did not positively identify the body until March 3.”
“In recounting his numerous encounters with celebrity, Banks proves once again what a truly bizarre country we live in. At one point, when he’s on the run from the law, Marlon Brando–with Harry Belafonte by his side!–gives Banks $10,000 in cash and the keys to his motor home. That act perhaps undermines Banks’s rather melodramatic characterization of his predicament at that time: “Kamook and I had become fugitives with all hands raised against us.” All hands, that is, except for those handing over 10 grand and an RV.” Money-a common denominator in all of this, and almost from day one.
Banks story is a common one as spoken by the AIM leaders of that time-their hands are clean, they are victims of a fed conspiracy, everything they ever did was the with best interests of their people, and ultimately they are modern day warriors in the finest tradition. If you don’t believe that just ask them. The truth of it is all such claims share a another commonality-that being their credibility is suspect.
The problem with being an Ostrich and thinking if you stick your head in the ground no one will see you is that your ass is left exposed for all to see- that’s enough to make a person go blind, so on second thought maybe the Ostrich knows something I don’t.