Native Americans Criticize Bush's Silence

[Itsthetruth]

Native Americans Criticize Bush's Silence
By Ceci Connolly

Washington Post
Friday, March 25, 2005

MINNEAPOLIS, March 24 -- Native Americans across the country -- including tribal leaders, academics and rank-and-file tribe members -- voiced anger and frustration Thursday that President Bush has responded to the second-deadliest school shooting in U.S. history with silence.

Three days after 16-year-old Jeff Weise killed nine members of his Red Lake tribe before taking his own life, grief-stricken American Indians complained that the White House has offered little in the way of sympathy for the tribe situated in the uppermost region of Minnesota.

"From all over the world we are getting letters of condolence, the Red Cross has come, but the so-called Great White Father in Washington hasn't said or done a thing," said Clyde Bellecourt, a Chippewa Indian who is the founder and national director of the American Indian Movement here. "When people's children are murdered and others are in the hospital hanging on to life, he should be the first one to offer his condolences. . . . If this was a white community, I don't think he'd have any problem doing that."

"I hope that he would say something," said Victoria Graves, a cultural educator at Red Lake Elementary School on the reservation. "It's important that there's acknowledgment of the tragedy. It's important he sees the tribes are out here. We need help."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64317-2005Mar24.html

 

[Trinity]

Just a few quote that the e-tard forgot to add from the same article!

Why am I not surprised!

 

[Itsthetruth]

Just a few quote that the e-tard forgot to add from the same article!

Do you mind if I post the entire article? I'd prefer to do that.

 

[Gem]

Its not about posting the whole article or not, ITF, its about the fact that this article listed a problem, angry Native Americans, and then ANSWERED their issues, Bush's spokesperson's statement AND the fact that Bush plans to discuss the issue in his weekly radio address. But, for some unknown reason you choose NOT to include that VITAL information when you created a thread that, the way you posted it, shows Bush to be insensitive to these peoples plight.

If you had posted the responses from the Bush Administration, it would have appeared intellectually honest. Now, whether you intended to or not, it just looks like you wanted to bash Bush and in doing so posted only the sections of the article that interested you, rather than posting the lines that Sir Evil brought forward and most people found...exposing that your thread is nonsense...Bush did address and will address the school shooting in MN.

The Native Americans were upset with the "lack of Bush response," but the Bush Administration addressed the issue and will continue to...thats what this article states. So whats the problem? Where's the story? Why was this worthy of a thread?

What I find hysterical about your carefully chosen sections is the fact that if Bush had gone on television, made a statement, offerred a prayer for the families of the students and the students themselves, liberals everywhere would scream that he was exploiting the pain of the people for a publicity stunt while still others would be screaming that by highlighting these incidents in the national news, by Bush giving it so much time it just incites other troubled children to try similar actions in order to get attention...once again, Bush can't win for losing.

 

[jimnyc]

Do you mind if I post the entire article? I'd prefer to do that.

That lame excuse would fly if you had not completely skipped a relevant paragraph. Why did you purposely skip paragraph 5 when posting the partial article and then paste paragraph 6 instead? Seems to me like you thought it would look nicer to omit a portion hoping nobody would follow your link.

Either way the point is worthless as the title of the article itself is answered within the article.

 

[Itsthetruth]

That lame excuse would fly if you had not completely skipped a relevant paragraph. Seems to me like you thought it would look nicer to omit a portion hoping nobody would follow your link.

That's a pretty lame response! I posted the link and I'm sure from the response here that most people followed that link and read the entire article. Now are you demanding the "right" to "edit" any article I post in the future and would you like me to carefully "edit" any article you and others post in future? Quit whining!

 

[Itsthetruth]

Bush decries school rampage; critics question delay
By Adam Entous

26 Mar 2005
CRAWFORD, Texas, March 26 (Reuters)

U.S. President George W. Bush broke his public silence on Saturday about the deadliest U.S. school shooting in six years, touting the government's response "at this tragic time" after some American Indian leaders complained he paid little attention to the rampage.

Bush's delayed public reaction to the shooting stood in contrast to his swift and high-profile intervention this week to prolong the life of Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged woman in Florida whose feeding tube was removed.

"We are doing everything we can to meet the needs of the community at this tragic time," Bush said in his weekly radio address one day after calling Floyd Jourdain, chairman of the Red Lake Chippewa tribe, to offer his condolences to the shooting victims and their families.

Clyde Bellecourt, a Chippewa Indian who is the founder and national director of the American Indian Movement in Red Lake, said Bush's response came too late. "He should have been the first one to reach out to the Red Lake Indian community," he said.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N25629433.htm

 

[OCA]

That's a pretty lame response! I posted the link and I'm sure from the response here that most people followed that link and read the entire article. Now are you demanding the "right" to "edit" any article I post in the future and would you like me to carefully "edit" any article you and others post in future? Quit whining!

Truth you got caught picking and choosing, man up and admit that you picked out the few paragraphs that support your Bush hating agenda, don't be a pussy.

Most here, if in their article is an opposing viewpoint or two add that to the ones they show in their post.

But what should we expect? Your nothing but an intellectual fraud anyway. Your time is growing short here.

 

[OCA]

Bush decries school rampage; critics question delay
By Adam Entous

26 Mar 2005
CRAWFORD, Texas, March 26 (Reuters)

U.S. President George W. Bush broke his public silence on Saturday about the deadliest U.S. school shooting in six years, touting the government's response "at this tragic time" after some American Indian leaders complained he paid little attention to the rampage.

Bush's delayed public reaction to the shooting stood in contrast to his swift and high-profile intervention this week to prolong the life of Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged woman in Florida whose feeding tube was removed.

"We are doing everything we can to meet the needs of the community at this tragic time," Bush said in his weekly radio address one day after calling Floyd Jourdain, chairman of the Red Lake Chippewa tribe, to offer his condolences to the shooting victims and their families.

Clyde Bellecourt, a Chippewa Indian who is the founder and national director of the American Indian Movement in Red Lake, said Bush's response came too late. "He should have been the first one to reach out to the Red Lake Indian community," he said.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N25629433.htm

Nothing but Injuns begging. What would they like Bush to do, give them each 100,000 dollars for pain and suffering?

Hey here is a better idea, do what alot of injuns are doing these days, putting down the whiskey bottle and opening up a casino.

 

[pegwinn]

Nothing but Injuns begging. What would they like Bush to do, give them each 100,000 dollars for pain and suffering?

Hey here is a better idea, do what alot of injuns are doing these days, putting down the whiskey bottle and opening up a casino.

Just like 911 families want $$ and the OKC bombing victims are looking to $$ as well. It was a tradgedy but not of national significance. It would be more appropriate for the Governor to address it. Or since Indians purport to be a series of nations within a nation, the tribal chief.

 

[Gem]

As I said before, if Bush had made a huge spectacle of addressing the shooting then critics like ItsTheTruth would be screeching about Bush politicizing the school shooting in an attempt to difuse from the Terri Shiavo incident, the rising gas prices, the war in Iraq, or whatever issue he decided to pick on...he dealt with it exactly as he should...addressing it quietly and respectfully...but not making a production over it.

 

[OCA]

Truth you are getting the shit kicked out of you on this board, why don't you do the honorable thing and get the hell out while you still have some semblance of pride left?

 

[Itsthetruth]

Truth you got caught picking and choosing, man up and admit that you picked out the few paragraphs that support your Bush hating agenda, don't be a pussy.

Most here, if in their article is an opposing viewpoint or two add that to the ones they show in their post.

But what should we expect? Your nothing but an intellectual fraud anyway. Your time is growing short here.

The article points out that Bush DID NOT comment at all on the event. That is absolutely true and has not been refuted by anyone! And only today did Bush finally make any public comment on this tragedy. Guess he was just too busy trying to read "stuff" or whatever he does during his infrequent visits to the White House.

 

[dilloduck]

The article points out that Bush DID NOT comment at all on the event. That is absolutely true and has not been refuted by anyone! And only today did Bush finally make any public comment on this tragedy. Guess he was just too busy trying to read "stuff" or whatever he does during his infrequent visits to the White House.

Tries to fix social security---oh ya the dems say nothing is wrong with it.

you've been busted--admit it

 

[OCA]

The article points out that Bush DID NOT comment at all on the event. That is absolutely true and has not been refuted by anyone! And only today did Bush finally make any public comment on this tragedy. Guess he was just too busy trying to read "stuff" or whatever he does during his infrequent visits to the White House.

"Infrequent visits to the White House"...ok Mike Moore(btw all that shit in Farenheit is a lie, you know that but you swallow it like a carp eating cheese).

Face it had he reacted right away you would've found something else to bag on, you're just a Bush Hater, even if he found the cure for cancer you'd hate him, shows that you are a MAJOR partisan and therefore all your views are viewed with suspicion.

I guess you are jealous of all his successes, heh?

 

[jimnyc]

That's a pretty lame response! I posted the link and I'm sure from the response here that most people followed that link and read the entire article. Now are you demanding the "right" to "edit" any article I post in the future and would you like me to carefully "edit" any article you and others post in future? Quit whining!

My response wasn't lame, it was factual. You completely removed a paragraph from what you copied and then continued with the next paragraph. Now that's lame, not someone being insulted.

And who said anything about editing your articles? I don't believe I said such a thing, I merely pointed out your posting tactics.

Lastly, please don't tell me what to do. Post properly if you don't want my criticism. Argue with me over facts. Continue bashing Bush. But don't even think about telling me what to do as you post on the board I am paying for.

I claimed your posting technique was lame, and have been nothing but cordial and polite with you since the beginning. I've assisted you several times with your complaints. Please don't piss me off.

 

[Merlin1047]

That's a pretty lame response! I posted the link and I'm sure from the response here that most people followed that link and read the entire article. Now are you demanding the "right" to "edit" any article I post in the future and would you like me to carefully "edit" any article you and others post in future? Quit whining!

Woweee!!!

A minus 293 rating, caught red-handed taking an article out of context, you tell the board owner to "quit whining" AND you manage to continue to cling to your bankrupt, self-delusional leftist dumbass philosophies.

I'm impressed.

Saaaaaalute!

 

[Annie]

Woweee!!!

A minus 293 rating, caught red-handed taking an article out of context, you tell the board owner to "quit whining" AND you manage to continue to cling to your bankrupt, self-delusional leftist dumbass philosophies.

I'm impressed.

Saaaaaalute!

Told you congratulations were in order for ITT!


:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[Itsthetruth]

Woweee!!!

A minus 293 rating, caught red-handed taking an article out of context,

Out of context???!!!! Hardly. The actual news article was headlined: "Native Americans Criticize Bush's Silence".

Did the paragpahs I posted convey a different impression? Hardly. Bush in fact remained publicly silent on this matter until yesterday!

I removed 11 paragraphs in order to stay within the suggested 4 paragaph limit. And none of the 11 removed paragraphs indicated that Bush had actually spoken out on this matter. That's because he didn't. So I don't think the posting was deceptive at all, especially since everyone on the board can, and apparently did, click on the link to read the entire article.

Now if I really wanted to "deceive people" I could used the tried and proven method used by so many posters. I could have submitted an "original" post, without links, selectively quoting an American Indian leader condeming Bush for not speaking out publicly, and left it at that. Now that's how you can spin a news article. Just quote parts of it without links to the actual article!

I noticed that method is frequently practiced on internet discussion boards, but I don't do that because such a method can in fact be deceptive.

And I might add that I have noticed other posters carefully editing their news stories in a simliar fashion. However, that's OK if they are conservatives and not liberals.

So why do some conservatives and right-wingers whine and cry so much about nothing? I guess they just find it difficult, if not impossible, to deal with a different point of view and they lack debating skills plus hard facts to defend their positions. Does anyone have a more reasonable explanation for their constant whining? I thought they were suppose to be tough.

 

[dilloduck]

Out of context???!!!! Hardly. The actual news article was headlined: "Native Americans Criticize Bush's Silence".

Did the paragpahs I posted convey a different impression? Hardly. Bush in fact remained publicly silent on this matter until yesterday!

I removed 11 paragraphs in order to stay within the suggested 4 paragaph limit. And none of the 11 removed paragraphs indicated that Bush had actually spoken out on this matter. That's because he didn't. So I don't think the posting was deceptive at all, especially since everyone on the board can, and apparently did, click on the link to read the entire article.

Now if I really wanted to "deceive people" I could used the tried and proven method used by so many posters. I could have submitted an "original" post, without links, selectively quoting an American Indian leader condeming Bush for not speaking out publicly, and left it at that. Now that's how you can spin a news article. Just quote parts of it without links to the actual article!

I noticed that method is frequently practiced on internet discussion boards, but I don't do that because such a method can in fact be deceptive.

And I might add that I have noticed other posters carefully editing their news stories in a simliar fashion. However, that's OK if they are conservatives and not liberals.

So why do some conservatives and right-wingers whine and cry so much about nothing? I guess they just find it difficult, if not impossible, to deal with a different point of view and they lack debating skills plus hard facts to defend their positions. Does anyone have a more reasonable explanation for their constant whining? I thought they were suppose to be tough.

Happy Easter !