It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Redskins say name 'respectful,' suggest Senate Dems don't have all the facts

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2014 @ 10:29 PM
link   
While you're at it:


Oklahoma (Pawnee: Uukuhuúwa, Cayuga: Gahnawiyoˀgeh) is a state located in the Southern United States. Oklahoma is the 20th most extensive and the 28th most populous of the 50 United States. The state's name is derived from the Choctaw words okla and humma, meaning "red people". It is also known informally by its nickname, The Sooner State, honoring the European settlers, and the Indian Appropriations Act of 1889 which opened the door for white settlement in America's Indian Territory. The name was settled upon statehood, Oklahoma Territory and Indian Territory were merged and Indian was dropped from the name. On November 16, 1907, Oklahoma became the 46th state to enter the union. Its residents are known as Oklahomans or, informally "Okies", and its capital and largest city is Oklahoma City. (Emphasis added)


#GetOurBallsBack (Courtesy of Mark Steyn)




posted on May, 24 2014 @ 10:33 PM
link   
A poster says Indians don't care and find it hilarious. I can see that. If I were Indian I wouldn't be offended at all by the Washington Redskins name or image. They present it respectfully. The Cleveland Indians logo though, eh eh, if I were Indian I'd be picketing outside their home and away games. That one is over the line, because the line has moved a lot since it was created and implemented.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 10:57 PM
link   
I wonder.

I'm pretty sure we could get millions of people to say that we're offended by the debt slavery imposed by the Federal Reserve Bank and the IRS. Would they put an end to it if enough people are offended? How about if enough people are offended by the NDAA or the Patriot Act? I know plenty of people are offended at being gouged by health insurance companies.

If we're going to try to change something by saying we are offended by it, let's pick something important.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 11:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
a reply to: Aleister



I guess these teams will be the next to go.


Hey now, I'm a big Jews fan, lets not be too hasty.



-

Ignoring the debate between the words original for a moment there is a definitively more respectful way the Redskins present their team and logo than that of the Indians. That said, perhaps it's just me, but although I can see the why of people being offended by those caricatures, I would hardly care if there were an "Atlanta Honkeys".

I also think both the Indians and Redskins would be far more offensive if the mascots were portrayed as drunks and or homeless - a common derogatory stereotype of the native/first nations/western indian peoples.

Regardless of all of our opinions, this is still more government legislating things they shouldn't.

You want to find out if it's offensive enough to change? Get a summit of natives from across America and have a vote.



Feel free to ignore me though, I might just be overly amused by the absurdity of the thought of the "Detroit N*s" and an entire stadium chanting "Let's go N*s" in cadence.
edit on 5/24/2014 by eNumbra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 05:26 AM
link   
As a full-blooded Ojibway Anishnabe from Canada, I DO find the term "Redskins" offensive. The team can keep the logo, but the name has to go. I have no problem with the logo because it looks regal. Racism knows no borders.

I have no problem for a Caucasian to speak on our behalf. Native People don't have a spokesperson like a celebrity, a person of power to speak for them. There aren't many role models for Native People to call our own. It's rare that you see a public person embrace their Native ancestry, some are shamed by it or they will omit it from their personal history.

This hurtful racism has got to stop. It's 2014 , not 1914. As each year goes by, we lose a little of our culture, language and self-esteem. Maybe in another 100 years, there will be probably no more aboriginal people on this continent. We might be thought of like remnants in a museums. What saddens me is that the term "Redskins" will live on and take on a positive meaning by mainstream society.

You want to know how offended I am by this team's nickname is that I choose to cheer for the Dallas Cowboys instead. Talk about irony.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: RossWellOldMexico
As a full-blooded Ojibway Anishnabe from Canada, I DO find the term "Redskins" offensive. The team can keep the logo, but the name has to go. I have no problem with the logo because it looks regal. Racism knows no borders.

I have no problem for a Caucasian to speak on our behalf. Native People don't have a spokesperson like a celebrity, a person of power to speak for them. There aren't many role models for Native People to call our own. It's rare that you see a public person embrace their Native ancestry, some are shamed by it or they will omit it from their personal history.

This hurtful racism has got to stop. It's 2014 , not 1914. As each year goes by, we lose a little of our culture, language and self-esteem. Maybe in another 100 years, there will be probably no more aboriginal people on this continent. We might be thought of like remnants in a museums. What saddens me is that the term "Redskins" will live on and take on a positive meaning by mainstream society.

You want to know how offended I am by this team's nickname is that I choose to cheer for the Dallas Cowboys instead. Talk about irony.


Good post but useless. In the United States it's still ok to be racist towards Native Americans you can see that with all the replies saying that Native Americans need somebody else to tell them when to be offended. These people apparently think that Native Americans are just too stupid to know anything.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 12:25 PM
link   
All this time I thought the football team was named after a certain kind of potato. I guess I've been out of the loop.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: RossWellOldMexico
As a full-blooded Ojibway Anishnabe from Canada, I DO find the term "Redskins" offensive. The team can keep the logo, but the name has to go. I have no problem with the logo because it looks regal. Racism knows no borders.

I have no problem for a Caucasian to speak on our behalf. Native People don't have a spokesperson like a celebrity, a person of power to speak for them. There aren't many role models for Native People to call our own. It's rare that you see a public person embrace their Native ancestry, some are shamed by it or they will omit it from their personal history.

This hurtful racism has got to stop. It's 2014 , not 1914. As each year goes by, we lose a little of our culture, language and self-esteem. Maybe in another 100 years, there will be probably no more aboriginal people on this continent. We might be thought of like remnants in a museums. What saddens me is that the term "Redskins" will live on and take on a positive meaning by mainstream society.

You want to know how offended I am by this team's nickname is that I choose to cheer for the Dallas Cowboys instead. Talk about irony.


Good post but useless. In the United States it's still ok to be racist towards Native Americans you can see that with all the replies saying that Native Americans need somebody else to tell them when to be offended. These people apparently think that Native Americans are just too stupid to know anything.
Thanks for the comment. But America will always have a racial divide no matter who is the target whether it's African-American, Muslims or Jewish faith. I try to be an optimist and see the good in all people. I hope the World will change for the better. It seems that I bought in the late Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech and John Lennon's song "Imagine". Both men died from a bullet. Be well in where you dwell, Buster 2010. You have a friend in me.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: RossWellOldMexico

I love how you left out white people and the Christian faith as targets as well. That's offensive as well.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere
I was reading 18th century sources awhile back, which referred to the Indians using
Bloodroot paint as a sign of friendship and nonhostile intentions.

I could look them up again, but I didn't note the reference at the time as I was researching
something else.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: TiedDestructor
a reply to: RossWellOldMexico

I love how you left out white people and the Christian faith as targets as well. That's offensive as well.


You are not supposed to figure that out.

You are supposed to bend over and take it.

Everybody is a victim (well except you know who).



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I'm no football fan, but this racism angle was tried down here in FL with the Florida Seminoles team. Here's an article from The Nation that refuses to listen to the tribe itself, and deems everything abut the team traditions racist. Even though the tribe does not.

I hate political correctness. These morons are actively trying to cram the victim card down the Seminoles' throat. It's not working.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: UMayBRite!
a reply to: whyamIhere
I was reading 18th century sources awhile back, which referred to the Indians using
Bloodroot paint as a sign of friendship and nonhostile intentions.

I could look them up again, but I didn't note the reference at the time as I was researching
something else.






What happened to the Native Americans was shameful and very sad.

My problem is: the people that perpetrated those acts have been dead over 100 years.

If we are every going to get over this "every white person is a racist" thing.

It going to take everybody to leave the past in the past.



posted on May, 25 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
When I first heard about this, it was a face palm moment.

The question that everyone should be asking, and yet no one happens to be asking.
The main question on my mind and it should hit home, is that with all of the problems going on in the country, with all of the scandals, the foreign affairs, the economic issues, does the congress of the United States of America, have nothing better to do, than to focus on major league sports?

How is major league sports, where the players make more in a year than most people, how is that going to impact the country? Is it so important that the federal government, which has shown time and time again that it can not handle money, let alone manage a country, feel that this one issue, the name of a major league sports team, is the single most important issue right now?

Those are the kinds of questions that we all should be asking the people who are hired to do a job, and not focus on a non-issue like say the name of a team that very few has objected to. And where does it end?



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 12:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: TiedDestructor
a reply to: RossWellOldMexico

I love how you left out white people and the Christian faith as targets as well. That's offensive as well.
I'm sorry that I offended you. Reverse discrimination is just as bad, but main stream society is ruled by the Caucasians. They write the Constitution, essentially the rules of Society. The U.S. Declaration of Independence does not include African-Americans and devalues their existence as a group. That was a recipe for racial discord that still affects both groups over 200 years after it was written. We must be all be tolerant towards each other and learn from our past mistakes.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
Just more PC nonsense.

Redefine speech, ban words.

Soon it'll be banning sentences and phrases.

Don't like the name?
Don't watch the game!


Are you saying people don't have the right to stand up and speak out against things they find offensive?

Just as you do - more often than not...

Is it only PC nonsense when it's not something you care about?

How do you feel about school prayer?

:-)



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

originally posted by: beezzer
Just more PC nonsense.

Redefine speech, ban words.

Soon it'll be banning sentences and phrases.

Don't like the name?
Don't watch the game!


Are you saying people don't have the right to stand up and speak out against things they find offensive?

Just as you do - more often than not...

Is it only PC nonsense when it's not something you care about?

How do you feel about school prayer?

:-)


Everyone has a right to speak out.

It is rude and insulting to even suggest that I would be against that.

But there is a difference in speaking out and denying freedoms.

Or are you for denying freedoms?

(See? Rather insulting, isn't it!)



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

But there is a difference in speaking out and denying freedoms.

Who has had their freedoms denied? We've been at this exact same point before - in another thread... It's a free country - isn't it? Demanding that someone stop using a bigoted name is a right we all have - not a law or an order

I think you're easily confused (depending on which side of an issue you're standing on) about what is and isn't freedom of speech

50 senators wrote the team a letter suggesting the name be changed - Bruce Allen responded with a letter of his own...who had their freedoms denied? This is a brilliant example of people speaking freely - it's a perfectly civilized attempt at working out their differences. For someone like yourself - who is such a staunch defender of freedom of speech, I'm surprised that you call foul and raise your anti-PC banner every single time people simply disagree

I'd be interested (not that you will humor me) in hearing your definition of free speech :-)


It is rude and insulting to even suggest that I would be against that.


Is it? I disagree - I think you flip flop quite often as it suits your needs at the moment. And - as this is my opinion - I'm entitled to it - and entitled to say it out loud in a public forum

No insult intended Beeze - just calling it as I see it. It's interesting to me that you think it's OK to offend people in the general and then be offended when people challenge you directly

You ask me if I'm for denying freedoms...

:-)

Nice deflection - and way to play the crowd

I wish for once you could just defend your thinking politely and directly - rather than tossing a bone and hoping the crowd chases it

If you feel insulted - well, I can't help that. You should learn to get a thicker skin - they're only words



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

You support an action that would result in a denial of freedom of speech.

Speaking out against an action that would result in a lessening of freedom, is NOT denying free speech.

You progressives love to hide behind freedom of speech while working to remove such freedoms of others.

I find it dishonest, disgusting, and an insult to those of us that would rather hear ugly speech than deny those the right to speak in any manner.

Keep you hate, your silence of others.

I thought better of you, but apparently you are for an ideology that would silence anything you find disagreeable.



posted on May, 26 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Nice try

:-)

But not what I was looking for

It's not freedom of speech if you don't allow for dissent

I'll ask again - who had their freedom denied?

Give me one name - just one







 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join