Urgent: week of September 3

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Stand : One Thread

Messages which absolutely need to be seen today due to time constraints or breaking news. Remember to check the"new answers" link for the most active topics. This topic will run for a week, and then we will start a new dated "urgent" file.

-- Anonymous, September 03, 2000


Thanks to Charles and Dennis, and I'm so glad Freddie was able to get in such a good presentation too. We may want to spread out rebuttals in the Woodstock Times letters page.

Lot of pros and cons presented, the other side scored some points. I thought it was brilliant of Glenda to bring in the Joseph Campbell archetypes, and to have done the St. Regis road trip. I would have liked to have been able to remind listeners that all Indians are not noble, that there have been problems with cigarette smuggling with NY State Indians, and that St. Regis, is, I believe, a base for some of them. Likewise that it hasn't been brought up in this whole local issue before, but we were just a couple of years ago working hard in Olive to keep out a band of noble "living lightly on the earth" Indians who were trying to put a casino in, because the local environment couldn't have taken it.

The Fighting Irish of Notre Dame come every time, we must not let that come up without immediately reminding listeners or readers that Notre Dame is a private Catholic University and can call themselves anything they want, unlike a public high school. (They could even call themselves The Fighting Nuns out of respect for their teachers...gee, why didn't they?)

Glenda also cleverly snatched the "wannabe" label first before you guys could, and that was damaging. It is the wannabee cheerleaders and football players that we're concerned with here. Did I see a sign on the scoreboard on the eastern end of the Onteora football field saying "Go Indians"? (I'm not sure on that, can someone double check?) when it says "Go Indians" that is not Indians as school "symbol", it is kids calling themselves Indians.

Glenda's a smart cookie, don't _ever_ underestimate her. But I was pleased to see her lose it over Chief Reclining Skunk. Who is her famous poet relative? If you are going to drop names, DROP them , for heavens sake.

Here's a question: who was yearbook advisor that year (of Reclining Skunk), and all the others? I know that with my HS yearbook it was the same teacher for years. Is that teacher still on staff? Has anyone ever mined the school newspaper?

Can somebody copy a tape of the show if it isn't immediately up in the WAMC archives? I didn't hear the tape click off to turn it over. I was having to multitask with a rather hideous domestic drama at the same time, so I missed some parts. An annotated transcript would go rather nicely on the website.

Anyone want to tally how many calls were for our side, how many for theirs?

Five Native American ancestry children in the district -- what do the other families think?

Gawd, I wish we'd had my beloved Susan Arbetter moderating. Lisa just isn't that experienced or quick on her feet.

Carol (who has Irish-theme art by an Irish revolutionary artist on HER mantelpiece, to honor some facets of her ethnic heritage)

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2000

The station is sending me a tape of the program, I will send it to whomever wants to hang onto it when it arrives. Glenda is very bright, Joe Doan is not, I can not imagine Glenda carrying the balance of their side was by chance, I had hoped it would be the other way around, and given Doan's macho attitude I am somewhat surprised he did not try to assert himself over her when she was speaking. I had an opportunity to check up on some of Glenda's prior statements and she did go to St. Regis, and everything she relates about her trip is accurate, however I doubt it was explained the depictions were for use in a mascot scenario. Of more importance Glenda has distanced herself from C.A.R.E.

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2000

A few comments on the show...I felt that our points were made in a very concise and logical manner which, oddly enough, I'm finding that people locally, who were opposed to us, are finally starting to understand. The distressing news of the day were the comments prior to the show, on the 1pm news show, in which Tom Dunn from the NYS Dept. of Ed. and a spokeswoman (Pres.?) from the NYS School Board Association both expressed similar points of view, in that, local rule should dominate this issue. That is the straight-line conservative platform on all issues which usually necessitate federal goverment intrusion. It's precisely where Joe Doan comes from. Now Glennda...that's another story. You may feel she is bright but I think her logic is all over the place. She constructs an argument like building a house on quicksand. Constantly trying to build up one area while another sinks low. Her train of thought just doesn't stop at all the stations. No one understands what she is talking about half the time because she seems to have no consistancy in her ideas. I think she may scare the folks at CARE. But I am curious as to why or how, as Charles suggests, that she is distancing herself from CARE. Now that's news for us on which to work. Look for any divisiveness within the group and create a chasm. By the way, my tally of the calls is that all were in favor of the elimination of the mascot. My particular fav was the Indian (re: India) from Kingston who suggested, if I recall correctly, that using any race was offensive to all people of color. There was a point in time when I half-jokingly suggested organizing Indians (from India) to protest the misuse of their name. Hey, maybe I wasn't too far off.

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2000

I agree, Glendzilla is not logical, but she is canny about appropriating the right concepts and using them well.She's not appealling to people who are thinking this through, she is appealling to people who have not been showing any grasp of this other than the emotional. There was that one magnificent performance at the Board meeting at Woodstock this spring where she used the occasion to sashay up to the Board and gave them the full anniversary of D-Day or whatever song and dance she did. Totally irrelevant, but it won their hearts and her fan club lapped it up. As I say, she was smart enough to rip off lots of our concepts, and I also thought the bit about collecting signatures in support of Leonard Peltier was a wonderful gambit. Wonder when we are going to see a cross-stitched sampler of the Onteora Indian that someone's granny did in support of the team?(Can you tell I'm one of those soccer mom who doesn't care what the score is, I love to see kids on BOTH teams play good soccer).

Maybe I need to go mana-a-mana with Glenda, we could have it as a WWF special. Since I'm the witch on our team, we could bill it as "Glinda vs Glenda," though I insist on entering the ring floating down in a transparent bubble wearing a blue taffeta gown of the appropriate cliche'.

One of my favorite letters to the Woodstock Times had been the one that suggested that we continue to call ourselves the Indians, but have a picture of Gandhi instead.

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2000

Cultural question from the Anglo here (I loved going to New Mexico and seeing those who share my Greek heritage referred to as Anglos there!) -- not knowing the broader Mohawk cultural values, nor the micro-cultural habits of the St. Regis area.

Aside from her probably not presenting the mascot issue in the way we would, might the positive response to Glenda also be a cultural one of polite respect to strangers, where you don't want to argue with them?

I don't want to make any assumptions, but would that indeed be any part of the dynamic?

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2000

For the record, I will try to reconstruct the "compromise" suggested by AAG, Tanya Washington. My understanding of her suggested compromise is that the 'Indian' name stays, an Native American educational cirriculum guided by a nuetral party be implemented, the images be looked at by a committee of Native Americans within our district inorder to eliminate offensive images, and that a moratorium be installed which forbids the issue from arising (before the board?) for 2-3 years. Am I getting this right?? The point of these measures, at least according to Tanya, is that this course of action may be more effective in the long run than lawsuits. This is an intersting point of which I feel we should all, at the very least, consider. If the resolution gets rescinded and lawsuits occur, it could easily affect the outcome of BOE for years to come with candidates running solely on the mascot issue. Unfortunately, we already know the results of this battle. But if this issue is dealt with in a way which enables us to move on to other issues (ie:drug sniffing dogs) and we don't have the stigma of being involved in a devisive lawsuit, perhaps this is a more effective way in creating long-term change for our community. I feel it is worth carefully considering the implications of either actions, ie: lawsuit or compromise. Perhaps the approach could be that the members of STAND compromise and let COLOR be the bad guys by initiating a suit. This may be a way of approaching a compromise solution. I'm not sure who exactly are the the binding parties to such a compromise agreement with the AG. I also think that if we feel this 'compromise' approach is acceptable then we need have input as to the terms of the compromise. Until this meeting, did we have any input as to any terms of a possible compromise? Why not suggest that the Indian name be phased out over time? The CARE website suggests that the rescinding of the mascot by the BOE will be the end of this issue 'once and for all'! If we can get them to agree to phase it out, then we won't feel defeated. As the compromise stands now, I feel defeated, but let's find out if we can negociate a better deal in the compromise solution for our side of the issue. If there is no room for negociation on the compromise then I would probably support a lawsuit. I'm very interested in other ideas or observations from the group. Thanks.

-- Anonymous, September 07, 2000

I think the guidelines for who might best determine whatever images are harmful are really dangerous.

Tanya was talking only full-blooded Native Americans from this area. While I suspect that number is very small, the concept itself is a bit wacky, like suggesting that Prince Charles is suitable as a potential ruler because he is a genetic Windsor and nothing else matters.

Would all these people be parents who understand the psychological affects of early imprinting of symbolic language on children? Would there be some method of ensuring that they were even culturally literate about their own historical Native American culture, let alone contemporary thinking and perspectives? Would they be individuals who can talk knowledgeably about Native American art?

And if they cannot discuss the symbols in these terms, why would it be in the least bit appropriate to have them make decisions _strictly_ because of their genetic heritage? Give me a break.

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

So we are all on the same page we need to remember, while there are many issues present in the communities making up the district, the sole issues in this matter are native. Only native issues and concerns are on our table, any other issues and concerns, regardless of how valid, or how they may or may not tie in with the mascot, name and/or depictions they can not be considered or become part of the scope of our immediate concern because they are outside the scope of this native matter.

If this matter is litigated it can easily take 3-5 years, and it is not at all inconceivable that it will take more than 10 years to run its course. During the period of time this matter is in court the mascot, name and images will remain and each year a new class of students will arrive and be effected and/or indoctrinated by the foregoing. In this respect a solution that avoids this problem is an alternative worth discussing. If the mascot matter is litigated it will effect the outcome of elections for years, and there will be no winners-politically. If we lose, the loss will be set in stone, if we win, it will only be a win against the district, not against individuals and if we have created a group of hostile pro mascot supporters, for spite the pro mascot supporters, as individuals can sport the mascot on everything from hats to shoes and they will be protected by the First Amendment.

So everyone understands litigation is not our threat alone, if any pro-mascot supporter took the time to take this matter to court, raise First Amendment issues of speech or association, etc..., and in case everyone is not aware the services of an attorney were volunteered to do exactly this by a Rev. McManus. Consider: a pro mascot parent files suit to keep the name, mascot and depictions arguing the depictions represent an asset of the district, and their removal is an unauthorized destruction of cultural, or other art items, that the removal of the name, mascot and depictions represents an unconstitutional infringement on the ability of mascot supporters to participate in district events, and the restrictions are a limitation on the exercise of free speech. Does anyone care to guess the outcome of the board being sued for agreeing to remove the name, mascot and depictions?

Litigating matters is not a delightful experience, and people who think otherwise are rare. We need to keep in mind in rural communities, the person filing suit against local schools, especially schools in financial trouble, (our first effort would be to remove the insurance company from the picture putting the entire cost on the district as a tactical matter thus putting the district in even greater financial trouble) will face the ire of the public, this is true more so for those from people born in the area, and true to a lesser extent from new-comers. Without being offensive to anyone, it is a statistical fact that people from urban areas are significantly more litigious than those from rural areas.

It is also important to understand that people from urban areas see little if any dishonor in litigating matters, even between neighbors, this is the exact opposite in rural areas. People from urban areas moving to rural areas that sue neighbors, and other people, are as a rule, thought of poorly, and this is often a hurdle the person will never overcome because the newcomer has violated a basic tenant of rural society: your neighbor is your neighbor and dragging them into court is not the neighborly thing to do. The foregoing is especially true if the newcomer is young, and the neighbor is elderly, because that violates another rule: honor your elders. Litigating matters in rural areas takes on a multiple lives of its own and the litigation itself is often as or more important that the matter being litigated.

When it comes to litigation we need to understand litigation is a process not unlike a maze. We start with who is allowed to litigate. It is well established that the matter first must be a matter in controversy and the person advancing the matter must have standing. Standing is the key that allows the door to the courthouse to open. In this matter the controversy is the creation of a hostile racial environment, the victim are NATIVE children, their parents, and potentially their tribe (if a hybrid case is advanced under I.C.W.A.). Those without standing would be all other persons. Native children are part of a specially protected class, as such their standing is assured in matters concerning and/or regarding members of the class.

The question is often asked, could a native based mascot controversy be advanced by a non-native, the short answer is No. The same question has been asked regarding advancing the matter by a person of color, other than a native, the short answer again is No, as the matter can only be advanced by the person to whom the racially hostile environment is aimed, if the mascot, depictions and or names are offensive to Native Americans only Native Americans can advance a claim.

The question has been asked who is considered native. A native is best described as a person with Native American heritage, the easiest plaintiff would be a person with a B.I.A. tribal enrollment card, or a "quantum card" natives. The clear definition of native is it must be someone with heritage from a recognized tribe from within the United States, other than the easily identifiable class would be people accepted or identified in their communities as native. Natives from other areas, except the crossing tribes, are not included. For example: a native from the Amazon Region of Brazil if considered an Indian/Native in Brazil would still lack standing to advance a claim based a native based claim regarding a hostile racial environment in a U.S. court because they are not statutorily classified as natives. The definition of native is specific, the better name would be North American Indian. Being native alone does not give standing, the native must be effected by the creation of the racially hostile environment. Example: A 70+ year old member of the Mohawk Nation would probably not have standing, while he is native, has a card, he is 70+ and unless he has children, or is the legal guardian of children, attending a school with a racially hostile environment he would lack standing. However a 100+ year old Italian who is guardian to a 14 year old native child who is effected by a racially hostile environment would have standing.

The compromise that has been advanced is the removal of offensive depictions, moratorium on litigation, and the creation of an independent native education program. What this gives us is an opportunity to heal the community, it is important to understand this entire matter is about the community and healing the community. If we can heal what is most offensive within the district, build a bridge between us, and the other members of the community, and spend the next two to three years working on educating the children we have accomplished much. If the board goes on its own, removes the offensive depictions, mascot, etc..., retains the name there is no grounds whatsoever for litigation, and we have shut the door on future dialog.

As a final note: I am an attorney, more importantly I am a native attorney, and in this native controversy this must be handled and advanced in a native manner. If anyone is unfamiliar with how we handle matters I will explain. The following will be accomplished before litigation is even a remote option. The way we do this is to meet in a civil manner with the leaders of those who are on the opposite side of the issues, this is already being done, we meet to understand the other side of the issue, we seek to develop an understanding and look through their eyes, without knowing how the other side sees the issues working together is virtually impossible. When I say seeing how the other side sees the issues I mean really see the issues, this is not to be confused with how we believe those on the other side see the issues.

When meeting all public statements, posturing, name calling and saber rattling are left at the door and we talk as friends, lets be realistic, it will be tough, there is a lot of bad blood at this moment, but we will talk as friends. We will try to find or develop common ground, and seek their help in resolving the issues before us, this is exactly how this is done, we seek their help to resolve the issues.

Without knowing where anyone was raised, humor me, from experience, when using horses to haul anything I assure you it is much easier to lead a willing horse, than push a stubborn horse, the same is as, or more true, in dealing with people. In this regard we seek to develop a relationship and a common solution to our common problem so we can walk the path together, side by side. In this regard I have spoken to members of CARE, and there are many more members of CARE who may support bridge building than we have previously thought. We need to temper all public statements, actions, etc... pointing out the word "racist" should be eliminated from here on because we will not engage in destructive behavior with those who we seek to engage in developing a solution, and with whom we will work together to heal the wounds of the community.

Charles Yow

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

What if any criteria should be used to select representatives to determine what images are offensive?

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

Be aware that the Onteora BOE will meet on Monday night at the Bennett School and has added to its agenda (surprise!) the motion to have the Mascot related policy removed. Yes, it was scheduled for the 25th, but has been added in another stealth action.

Be there to witness! Tobe

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

It is my understanding at this point that "standing" as a native is indeed an important aspect of litigation in this case. However, in a merely mediated situation, would it be so relevant a consideration? I just don't want to see anything that happens if the images are triaged to be overseen by someone who is ignorant and unwilling to listen to other ideas.

Charles, I think part of what led to the hardening of our attitudes was the feeling that there weren't any bridgebuilders in CARE, that they weren't at all interested in mediation. I don't think we'd seen any public or private evidence that they considered that an option. I publicly pushed for mediation months ago, for both sides to sit down with someone adept in conflict resolution, but there seemed to be a chorus of "we don't want outsiders to settle this". Neither side here has sufficient conflict resolution skills as a group to try to do that on our own.

If CARE members have also had damage to tires, perhaps they might go in with us for a reward for information leading to the conviction of anyone found vandalising our cars? (Though we haven't come to any decision on that ourselves.) It is not beyond the realms of possibility that that could have been done by individuals who sought purely to inflame tensions on both sides.

Should we see what we can do with Josh and Sadie? Do the students know about the damage to the tires? Would that change their dynamic?

In some ways, what is beginning to eclipse the mascot issue is hearing that there may be hate groups manipulating the situation. Before this kind of talk continues any further, I'd like to see some documentation and background, please. What are our sources for information that the National Alliance groups in Centerville and Marlborough (?) are fighting over Ulster County? What are our sources for suggesting that they are influencing CARE?

And Donna, if there are things that you need to not discuss for a couple of weeks for obvious reasons, I guess we can wait for _that_ particular tidbit that you dropped with a Cheshire Cat grin at the meeting with Tanya. ;)

If I was sounding a little irascible before, consider this: as I type this I am sitting here with a pink shower cap on my head and a ratty t-shirt. Under this is piled my hair, which is saturated with mayonnaise. It is an anecdotal remedy, given to me by my friend who has what she refers to as a "black belt in head lice." Suki has brought home the first case we've had to deal with in 20 years. I was also up all last night with Suki, who has some sort of viral illness that made her wake up coughing every half hour last night, thus already missing the second day of school. As I was talking to the public health nurse in the county health department today about the article on the area's whooping cough outbreak, to make sure I was counted as a probable case and discuss inaccuracies in the article that could lead to missed diagnoses of this serious disease, Suki was throwing up on the living room carpet. I am hogging more than my share of learning experiences at the moment, if you know anyone who is needing some reality checks we have many to share.

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

Tobe, did you or anyone else find out anything more about what was supposed to have gone down on Wednesday at the school that was suppposed to be important?

If the images went immediately and the name had an absolutely guaranteed departure in 3 years, would that be easier on some of the CARE parents who have kids in high school now? It would give us time to contact other schools which have successfully retired Indian mascots and get their best strategies for making the changeover as positive as possible. That's one thing I'd love to have on a website, firsthand experiences from other school districts that would help others make the change more gracefully.

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

In a mediated resolution nothing is mandatory, everything is up to the parties.

What happens in some situations is as tensions become inflamed talking stops, or it never starts. For this I place considerable blame on the existing board, in particular Marty Millman as the recognized head of the board.

I have not heard about damage to CARE member's tires, I have heard about lug nuts and "keying", obviously the results are the same, it is property damage. I am not sure what students are aware of, I have not asked, and if it is not common knowledge it is best left as such. Josh and Sadie?

I heard about any supremacist groups was from e-mails, and conversations with STAND members and another person, I assume this information came from Ulster county. The S.P.L.C. had information that seemed to back it up, I have not verified any of the allegations as they are not important. Are Centerville and Marlborough in Ulster County? Does anyone have any hard information in this regard? If so the S.P.L.C. would appreciate anything we could share.

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

What I understand regarding the students is a series of now starting discussions, started by the students themselves regarding the propriety of the name, the discussions were started by a former mascot supporting child. This discussion about questioning the propriety of the name and depictions was also a theme in Tanya's recent meeting with students.

-- Anonymous, September 08, 2000

Searching Google under the combination of "Ulster County" and "hate groups," the only useful news is that of the prison guard displaying the swastika a while ago. There is also a suggestion that the ADL might have useful information regarding upstate hate groups.

If the SPLC had information useful for us, I was not able to find it on their website, and their search engine is flawed for getting more recent material.

Josh and Sadie are Josh Telson and Sadie Finkle, student leaders. Joah has always been on our side, it was my recollection that Sadie originally spoke more for the mainstream students who favored keeping the Indian, but someone correct me if I'm wrong.

"I have not heard about damage to CARE member's tires, I have heard about lug nuts and "keying", obviously the results are the same, it is property damage. I am not sure what students are aware of, I have not asked, and if it is not common knowledge it is best left as such." I referred to the CARE member's lug nuts as tire damage, though of a different m.o. than ours. We are still needing guidance as to the best way of handling or releasing the tire information. Should we go public, should we keep silent, what are the pros and cons? Anyone have any further contact with the State Police on how to proceed? Why do you think it would not be a good idea to let the students know, Charles?

Centerville and Marlboro (sorry, I reflexively used the English spelling before) are in Ulster County, Centerville just outside of Onteora on the way to Saugerties and Marlboro south of us, nearer the prison in Ellenville, FWIW. I have no personal knowledge of these groups other than what has been mentioned here or by others at STAND meetings.

To complicate things, there is now a new local activist group called OliveCARES (the Olive Community Association for Responsible Environmental Solutions), devoted to making sure a cell tower is not put on the site of the former Olive dump. I'll be emailing them to suggest to them that they may want to change their name, if they don't want to turn off some local residents.

-- Anonymous, September 09, 2000

First I have to say this. I would rather read Carol's e-mail addresses than the cartoons.

I am constantly surprised with supremacist groups in New York, I expect to run into these clowns in other places, but in New York really tests my imagination.

I do not have any hard reason on why I would or would not tell children about the damage to cars, just my opinion, may be right or wrong? I tend to feel some matters are best kept from children, in this regard I feels so because I would prefer if children are talking they do not accuse each other of wrong doing in matters the children are guiltless (I hope).

I thought the State Police had been contacted, am I wrong? I also think we should gather the information and push for the FBI if it becomes necessary. At this point I am not sure what benefit there is to going public, that is if we can get the negotiations back on track. One of the two top issues from the CARE side is the rhetoric and a person/group not associated with STAND, everything else falls in line after these.

I still believe we should pursue all vandalism, regardless the source. People damaging tires place the lives of those in the cars in jeopardy. We should take the same position toward prosecuting anyone vandalizing any property, regardless whose property, this separates us from the vandal. Having said this, once the matter is resolved if there is vandalism outstanding (no one has been arrested, etc...) I would drop the unresolved incidents, this is similar to vandalism in strike situations.

I remember who Josh and Sadie are now. Sadie told Tanya she personally is in favor or removing the name, mascot and depictions, but as a student leader she feels obligated to act as the students desire-reminds me of the Millman-Doan Crew, makes me wonder who explained democratic and republican (not parties) and the role of elected officials to the kids.

The information from SPLC is provided to civil rights attorneys from their Intelligence Project database, so far all information I have been given has proved true in the long run-I have questioned some initially but so far, in my experience, their data has always been correct.

I have never asked the ADL for information, I have never thought about it, might be a good idea.

-- Anonymous, September 09, 2000

As far as participating in any sort of negotiated talks, I think STAND has right to ask that all pro-Indian mascot participants have been willing to read various educational materials that we would supply as background beforehand. If they are not willing to even read a few articles, I can't see that they are making a good-faith effort to understand our positions at all.

-- Anonymous, September 09, 2000

If we go into discussions/negotiations demanding those on the other side read material supporting our positions seems to me we could be required to do the same and I am not sure we would be well served in that regard. If we did make the request, what would your propose.

-- Anonymous, September 09, 2000

I'm sure we can pull together some homework for them. In turn, we'll be glad to read whatever statements they can muster from national churches, organizations and Native American groups etc that Indian mascots are OK. We've been willing all along to acknowledge their emotional need for the mascot, but if we're going to talk we have to know that they are hearing and understanding what we have to say too.

If we need some common ground, I'll be the first to agree with any of them that the Budweiser ferret commercials are incredibly cute. Gotta start somewhere.

-- Anonymous, September 09, 2000

Meg has asked me to say that as a Board member she will address the issue of searching for "common ground" during the discussion that will come up after the "2nd reading" of the policy change. She has said to me that she understands the importance of seeking community common ground and will always be willing to listen to proposals that work towards that end. At the same time, she has said she is under no illusions as to the desire of some members of the board and some parts of the community to bull their way through with what they believe is a "mandate" from the voters. So, if you hear her speaking about seeking common ground please understand what she means.

I believe it is in our interest to continue to show good faith in the effort to find common ground. I also believe that the devil is in the details. So, when a concrete proposal is made (if there were ever to be one emerging from the present board-initiated chaos) I for one will consider it in a serious manner. At the same time, it would take some convincing for me to believe that the board majority would uphold ANY agreement that they sign or verbally agree to. To date they have shown ONLY that they are untrustworthy, and I will not put myself in a position to be fooled by them.

-- Anonymous, September 09, 2000

Yes, I attended Olive Day and got a wet copy of 'Smoke Signals' from CARE. It is mainly a propaganda fluff piece to promote their interpration of events, in particular the budget. It doesn't mention the Indian mascot issue except briefly when referring to the budget defeat. Although there is an caricature image of an Indian making smoke signals with a blanket over a fire. Even though the CARE newsletter doesn't discuss the mascot issue, they still remain insensitive to the offensiveness of stereotype caricature and continue to flaunt it. Another point of the "newsletter" is that CARE plainly states to be a not for profit organization and they thank Marty Milman for sponsering a CARE car wash at his pharmacy on May 27, 2000 for CARE graduation scholarships. A seperate info insert of 'Smoke Signals' tries to accurately present their interpretation of the budget process in light of the local newspapers "lack of accuracy". They blame Hal Rowe for manipulating the numbers and trying to punish the students (by removing sports...)after the budget defeat but that the present board saved the students and quality education by raiding the unexpended funds. Heros...

-- Anonymous, September 09, 2000

Jim, you were on the cc list to get the following email on the 7th from Charles, didn't it make it to you?

"Did you know there has been vandalism of CARE supporters vehicles, etc...,including removing the lug nuts from more than one of the CARE members cars? And there is more! It is my understanding this was reported to the FBI about two months ago, they have taken no action to date due to lack of jurisdiction."

-- Anonymous, September 10, 2000

Moderation questions? read the FAQ