RobBob Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Hey, I was the first to say I think Bush was a stoop about skidoos in Yellowstone. "Everything in Moderation" is a pretty good rule for living, unless and until a resource is proven really finite (like oil). Study each issue before you shoot from the hip---and miss. That seems like a good approach to this Republican. Hell, let's go over to spray and debate global warming again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeclimb9 Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 This POS deal reminds me of the crap the Papago tried to pull off a few years ago in Arizona. They first got casinos, then got money, then tried to buy favors from representative Al Pastor. Pastor introduced a bill on their behalf that would allow a land swap so the Papago would have the whole of Baboquivari peak on their reservation. The arguement was that they'd have more religious freedom if they owned the rock the I'itoi lived under. Horseshit. The Wilderness designation did nothing to prevent the Papago from practicing their religion. I could also draw comparisons to what the Mormon church is trying to pull in Salt Lake City. Apparently, some people's dress offends the church, so they've asked the city to enforce a dress-code of their making. More horseshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Damn, you right-wingers are no fun when you don't stick to the script (like we left-wingers, ha ha)! Really, though, the argument about resource use was directed at Greg and Trask, and DFA assumed that those of you to whom it didn't apply would recognize that it didn't apply and ignore it. Anyway, Rob, global warming is bad and it's all George Bush's and Rush Limbaugh's fault. What's to discuss, really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Jeesus, people, I have an opinion on this too, you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Yeah, those dirty savages need to keep their political hands (and money) to themselves, like everyone else does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Inconceivable! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Y'all...seem to be all for unchecked consumption of resources; forests, oil, etc. and seem unconcerned that we'll ever run out of the shit, which may or may not be the case...Something tells DFA that if Exxon found oil there or if Bechtel was going to develop it for mining, you wouldn't give a shit about Cave Rock, as it's just a piece of shit sport crag and there's plenty of climbing around there. I don't have the time to explain why your capsulization of conservative thinkers is fully bullshit, but you're incorrect. You have never seen me say that I am for unchecked consumption (unless it was sarcastically to prove a point). I know you directed this post at myself, trask and a few others. There needs to be balance, moderation, and responsibility of use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Interesting post, Freeclimb. I've been wondering how the folks who are currently siding with the Indians on this one would react if it was the Mormons declaring that a cliff on public lands in Utah posessed special religious significance for them and launched a campaign to restrict the public's access to the site. Something tells me that if they applied the same logic, and made use of the very same arguments, most folks defending the Indians most vehemently in this case would be attacking the Mormons the most vigorously, and ringing the alarm bells the most loudly concerning the dangers that such a precedent would present for public access to natural features found on all public lands. I would love to believe that there's a race of people out there who dwell on a moral plateau perched so high above the rest of humanity that they would never stoop so low as to cynically manipulate the either the suffering in their past or their spiritual heritage to secure material gains in the present - but have yet to find any evidence suggesting that such a people exists. Most Indian tribes seem to know the sensibilities of the white population well enough to play them like a harp, and do so whenever it is in their avantage - just like anyone else in their shoes would if given the opportunity. What happened to the Indians is tragic, but it does not entitle them to the exclusive use of public lands, IMO. Wasn't Mt. Ranier a sacred landmark to just about every Indian tribe within sight of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Hey folks - I think this thread is long overdue. A couple of points to consider. 1. Indians do indeed have a unique right to certain lands. Like it or not we stole their stuff (in most cases). Those who vigorously defend property rights on the one hand and decry indian policy on the other are contradicting themselves or applying our sense of freedom inconsistently. 2. As a climbing community we make ourselves look like a bunch of assholes if we stand up and say screw the Indians. That approach certainly won't secure us greater access in the future and only makes us look more insensitive, which will provide those looking to close the areas with more ammo. If we want access, then we had better find some common ground with the other stakeholders, because we will lose the political influence war if we're battling tribes, ORV folks, environmentalists or just about any other organized interest. - Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 I can't comment on the specifics of Cave Rock, I just don't know anything about the facts. But the analogy of the Mormans is a stretch. The difference is that the US govenrnment has signed treaties with recognized Tribes that stipulate provisions for protection of sites of religious importance. I don't think we have any current treaty with the Mormans, though we did twist their arm about the multpile wife thing to let Utah in the Union. And I suspect there are times when the Tribes over-reach, as any political body tries to. Though I wouldn't lose sleep over the loss of access to another Euro-rap bolted outdoor climbing gym. As usual I suspect there is a balanced view of this floating around out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Here's a concept for the poor Indians. They get fancied up and hit the bricks to find a job like the rest of us. This country is so diversified ethnically now, that I don't want to hear, "Oh we can't get hired because we're not white." There are jobs out there folks, you just have to get off your lazy asses and go get them. Incidentally, if someone shows up for an interview with me with tongue and eyelid rings and wearing some fucking weird punk outfit, I'm going to show him the door. You want a job, dress, act and look like you mean it. If the Indians are working they can move off the reservations if they want. What's the big problem? Holy shit. Just read this one. Trask, no disrespect to you, but you're a racist pig. If you think Indians walk into an interview on a level playing field with whites, no matter what their dress, think again. Systemic and overt discrimination is real. Your comments higlight the problem in our country, because white people hold all the power and all the money, yet everyone still tries to convince themselves that everyone has the same opportunities despite their race. Don't fluff our egalitarian economy until you've walked in the shoes of everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Winter, you can't take advantage of opportunities or make opportunities for yourself if you don't seek them out. How do they know what is out there unless they try? Your whole racist thing is tired old bullshit. Racism has nothing to do with who has all the money; it has to do with what people think. Prove that you can perform and employers will look past skin color (or anything else). Sure there will be exceptions, but people aren't perfect. Just don't cry "white people have all the money"; fucking puh-leaze!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 If there are cave dwellings, remains, petroglyphs, pictograms and the like at a site I'm all for restricting access to those sites in a manner that will insure their preservation. Natural features of the landscape are different. If all that's required to restrict public acess to Federal lands is a local tribe's claim that it's sacred, what's to stop them from attempting to restrict access to Mt. Ranier in such a fashion? If water in the Puget Sound is sacred to them do we outlaw boating there? You clearly have to draw the line somewhere and the criteria I mentioned above seem to be a sensible way to do that in a way that everyone can live with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Assuming that "they" don't seek out opportunities or try is also racist. You just called an entire group of people lazy based on their race. And we're supposed to take your word that "racism has nothing to do with who has all the money"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sk Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 excelent point JayB If there are cave dwellings, remains, petroglyphs, pictograms and the like at a site I'm all for restricting access to those sites in a manner that will insure their preservation. I could live with that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Winter: FWIW I worked with two full-blood Indians in CO who grew up on their respective reservations (Navajo and Ojibwa) who would make comments about the way things were back on the 'Rez that are consistent with the comments that GregW and others have made. Were they racist too? I know Greg personally and the guy's no racist. He is not, however, someone that's capable of imbibing PC tripe that says the Indians have no responsibility whatsoever for their lives. I can't put words in their mouths, but from what I can recall the fellows I worked with didn't seem to appreciate condescending white paternalism any more than out and out racism. If someone came out and said that they flat-out just didn't like Indians, they'd never want to work with an Indian, or that they'd never hire an Indian no matter what kind of person he or she was, how talented they were, or how hard they would work for him than use of the term "racist" would be warranted. Calling someone a racist simply because they have a viewpoint that differs from your own isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Trying to keep on topic here, Trask, it's not true that Tribes can just point to any landscape feature and say - keep out the white guys. I work with Tribal interets in resource management planning. There is an internal Tribal process (usually) and an outside land management agency review. What bugs me esides some of the nasty rhetoric here, is the lack of knowledge about what really goes on in land management decisions like these. A little research and thought can be revealing. There are some good examples of cooperation, but there are closed-minded folk on both sides of the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sk Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 so Jim can you enlighten us as to how cave rock was chosen and what the exact reasons are that it is wrong for women in specific to climb this peice of rock>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 JayB - You're point is well taken. I'm not from the "condescending white paternalism" mode, and I shouldn't attack Greg W personally. I will say that accusing all Indians of being lazy is most definitely racist as are many of the comments on this thread. I'm not jumping on people for arguing that Indians shouldn't be able to exclude people from public land - a valid viewpoint. But comments like "they should at least try" is out of line, and I'm gonna call that shit out. - Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 No I can't. I don't know anything about this particular site, the Tribes down there, or the issues. On sites I've worked with in the PNW it usually involves land management agencies such as BLM, Forest Service, and Reclamation. On one project in Idaho a climbing area was closed down because of Tribal concerns. But they gave a little and agreed to what the local climbers thought was a reasonable compromise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sk Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 you have more access to this kind of information than do the rest of us... NETWORK MAN!!! bring us back real information!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted December 10, 2002 Share Posted December 10, 2002 what the exact reasons are that it is wrong for women in specific to climb this peice of rock>>> Maybe the dudes at Augusta should try the "Spiritual Heritage" angle out with the ladies from the N.O.W.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted December 10, 2002 Share Posted December 10, 2002 Good one, Jay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted December 10, 2002 Share Posted December 10, 2002 I'll ask around Muffer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexual_chocolate Posted December 10, 2002 Share Posted December 10, 2002 "Most Indian tribes seem to know the sensibilities of the white population well enough to play them like a harp". I'm sooooo sick of being played like a harp! All the Indians ever do is play us, man. We've been sooooo worked by them, and I'm personally tired tired tired. It's time to get the Indian off the white man's back! Don't you think so, JayB? 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.