November 21, 2007


from the Bad Eagle blog

As if his blatant white supremacy “rants” weren’t enough, Yeagley has now taken to asking white society for Indian handouts. It’s not enough Indians had their lands actually stolen, and have been supremely abused even today. No, for Yeagley, he wants the Lakota people to play 'kiss-the-aggressors' with heaps full of thankful praise.

Thankfully, most Indians can see through Yeagley’s erroneous reasoning, and refuse to accept the US government's pitiful offer to compensate them for the Black Hills with an increasingly worthless monetary settlement (have you checked the falling dollar lately?).

The land is the real valuable part of Lakota life not some paper the privatized federal reserve banking system prints up at will, at the behest of the immoral shock-doctrine capitalists. The Lakota are right to stand their ground and refuse the handout, that Yeagley wants them to accept and simply “move along” like good little Indians.

Yeagley — “Superior beauty is in the white race...In the darker races, everything is always the same, dark brown and black a beastly bore” (2002) ... “There is a tremendous drive in many white women to experiment with the darkies (2004) ... “I'm beginning to think there's no such thing as racism. If there is, it is very rare” (2005) ... Slavery, properly understood, is not an evil at all... Slavery and indentured servitude are both perfectly legal--as punishment for crime. That's what the Constitution says (2006)”
Let’s take a closer look at this recent gem (below), posted prominently on Yeagley’s anathema blog:
Yeagley — “There's an important lesson here. I hope Indians see it. Indians feel no shame in poverty or living close to the earth. The modern standard of living is not particularly prized by the Indian. He for the most part isn't even interested in economic "improvement." He might not reject it, if it is handed to him, but, he certainly isn't motivated to work for it. Why should he be? Many, many Indians are simply not attracted to American culture, and have no desire to be part of it, much less to excel in it” (11-21-07).
First, we see the piano doctor wanting to give unsolicited advise, I mean who asked him? And if anyone did ask him, what in the world should they expect as a response but one of his white supremacist-tainted replies?
Yeagley — “There's an important lesson here. I hope Indians see it. Indians feel no shame in poverty or living close to the earth”
No shame is felt because the fault does not rest on the Indians, it rests on the US government and the non-Indian disaster capitalists who stole all the land. If any shame is to be felt, is rests squarely with the non-Indians.
Yeagley — “The modern standard of living is not particularly prized by the Indian”
Actually, Yeagley is 100% wrong on this point. Indians want good water, electricity, and proper sanitation. Most times, however, they are unable to secure these basic needs because of corporate theft and disaster capitalism that keeps them at a poverty level subsistence.
Yeagley — “He for the most part isn't even interested in economic ‘improvement’”
Wrong again. 100% wrong. Improvement is exactly what Indian people want, across the board, no matter what tribe you are from.
Yeagley — “He might not reject it, if it is handed to him, but, he certainly isn't motivated to work for it”
Indians are proud and work hard. What Yeagley is doing with this distasteful comment is making Indians out to be lazy rez-loafers, who should get off their duffs and accept that government handout already: accept paper for the Black Hills and be a good little Indian. The reason reservations are places with high unemployment and depression, is because reservations were setup as US detention camps. Duh.
Yeagley — “Why should he be? Many, many Indians are simply not attracted to American culture, and have no desire to be part of it, much less to excel in it”
Confusing American culture with economic benefit is Yeagley’s big mistake here. We do not even need to know whether Indians do or don’t accept American culture; I suspect that some do and some do not. But that “attraction,” as Yeagley mischaracterized it, is not the same thing as jobs, economic development and clean water. People of other cultures want clean water too, being an American is not a prerequisite for drinking good water. One does not need to be a white Christian "father" to be American; in fact, one can be an Iraqi Muslim woman and still be more Patriotic than David Yeagley himself. She deserves good water too, as do all American Indians on all reservations no matter what culture or cultures they desire.

In short, Yeagley has once again advocated for Indians to remain subservient to his “fighting whitey” image of America, rather than supporting the indigenous right to self-determination and true sovereignty. If Yeagley had his way, he’d have every Indian become a slave to “white superiors” asking for a few crumbs of sovereignty — as if sovereignty is something granted and not inherently inalienable.
Yeagley is the worst politician in Indian country, with a self-serving ambition that far outweighs his actual abilities laced with a white supremacy streak that falls like snowflake dandruff in hades.

The Comanche people were right to confront Yeagley outside the Committee House following his (in-a-word) weird nomination for tribal office, reported by several witnesses. It is not surprising that he was seen quickly slinking back inside the building, as the “heat” outside was something Yeagley could not weather. It is good to know that strong Indian people faced with such a toxic buffoon, stood up that day and compelled that merry-andrew to shrink away in cowardess.

Bravo Comanches!

November 18, 2007


from the Bad Eagle journal

The students killed at Virginia Tech — considered victims by most — were blasted as weak cowards by David Yeagley. If he had been there, he would have stood strong and triumphed, according to his own imagination. No sympathy from Yeagley, no sir. If you’re too weak, you deserve to die, according to him, with his inflated fake-warrior fantasy.

Yeagley — “The students at Virginia Tech were afraid to respond... Thus, they are totally weak... Students are afraid to defend themselves... They are docile lambs... I say resist. Kill the killer, immediately. Don't stand around and watch... Throw a book at them, and they'll be terrified... respond immediately--with violence! There were no heroic acts in the VA Tech incident, contrary to liberal media reports. Hiding behind a desk, or jumping out a window is not a heroic act! ... There is no honor in escaping... You don't stand around and watch... You don't barricade yourself in a room, or behind a desk... I'm sick of the weakness” (April 17, 2007).
So why is it no surprise, that Yeagley finds no common ground, from an American Indian standpoint, at the Horowitz white supremacy weekend in Florida? Expecting to hear grand old stories of proud and denigrating American Indian mascots being churned out by well-intentioned elephants, Yeagley is shocked that no one really talks about Indians at all. Why, it must be the fault of complainers like AIM, and those liberal commies, reasons Yeagley. In other words, Yeagley erroneously reasons that racism must be caused by complaints about it, so why don’t Indians just shut up already?!
Yeagley — I was never so aware of this [sic] deplorable conditions, and the curse of AIM, until this Restoration Weekend, sponsored by the David Horowitz Freedom Center... Conservatives don't want to talk about Indians. Indians mean trouble, protest, and unaswerable [sic] guit [sic] ... I see what AIM has done to the American Indian image, the profound prejudice it has created, and the near impossibility of doing anything about it... It is something conservative people shun. They would rather stay away from the topic. Why? Futility, negativity, regression, and generally unpleasant feelings” (11-18-07).
From Yeagley's twisted sentiment above, one would think Indians have no complaint whatsoever, and should praise and admire the death, torture, rendition, and exceedingly poor conditions forced upon them. How ungrateful can Indians be?, wonders Yeagley. Everything is respectable now, no racism, no inequality, no reason for complaints, and we have many fine stereotyped mascots to lead the way. So why go on and upset the white rulers sitting upon the ‘great white throne’ that is America?! "Oh, if only the poor, pitiful Indians would be nicer to the elephants, I could be more welcomed as a hero at the white supremacy camp in my pocahontas jammies," laments the piano doctor. Indians, if you're reading this, please donate a smile to the RNC on behalf of 'woe-is-me' David Yeagley, won't you?

Yeagley’s illiterate view of modern Indian life, coupled with his own fear of being shunned as a pseudo-Comanche, create the most interesting mix of self-loathing rhetoric and hate politics.
What everyone else would see as a legitimate and justified response to racism by American Indian victims — racism that remains alive and well in today’s America — Yeagley sees as simply out-of-touch with the stereotyped distortion he identifies as the "American Indian image" in America.

But Yeagley is yet again blaming the victim.
No matter what one thinks of the American Indian Movement (AIM), one cannot argue with the reason it was founded — racism against American Indians. But rather than identify racism as the culprit, Yeagley blames the ones fighting racism, he blames the victims. If you want to better understand racism in America, forget Yeagley’s knee-jerk "shoot-the-messenger" analysis, and check out this article from Indian Country Today instead.

Death by Holocaust — 100 million Indians,
28 million Blacks, and 6 million Jews.

Racism in Indian country

"Just as assimilation is the emotional issue in Indian country, racism and discrimination are the most avoided, the most ignored and the most covered-up issues. There is no book on racism against Indians, even though one is sorely needed.

The first time I went to South Dakota, in 1965, there were signs in the stores, bars and restaurants saying: ‘No dogs or Indians allowed.’ The next time I was in the state, in 1970, the signs were still up. Shortly after that, they started to come down. But the attitudes stayed up when the signs came down. It is still not a good idea to be an Indian in South Dakota. There is an excellent chance you will be discriminated against.

L. Frank Baum, author of ‘The Wizard of Oz,’ was also an anti-Indian journalist in South Dakota. In the 1890s he wrote the following editorial:

‘The PIONEER has before declared that our only safety depends upon the total extermination [sic] of the Indians. Having wronged them for centuries, we had better, in order to protect our civilization, follow it up by one more wrong and wipe these untamed and untamable creatures from the face of the earth. In this lies safety for our settlers and the soldiers who are under incompetent commands. Otherwise, we may expect future years to be as full of trouble with the redskins as those have been in the past.’
Murder is widespread in Indian country, and it is most often a case of non-Indians killing Indians. In the past decade, several series of murders of Indians have occurred in Lawrence, Kan.; in Rapid City, S.D.; and in Gallup, N.M. In most cases, the non-Indian murderer is not charged, not jailed, not tried and not convicted. In some cases, in what may be serial killings, police have still not developed a suspect or charged anyone.

In Chiloqin, Ore., the Klamath Indians have been under assault in recent years for their defense of the suckerfish, which to them is sacred. There have been drive-by shootings, intimidations and violence. The bumper sticker of the local hoodlums, who are ‘defending’ local farmers who want Klamath River water, is: ‘Save a farmer, fillet a sucker fish.’

Violence against the Makah Tribe and other tribes broke out after the Makahs decided to engage in a whale hunt. They had been denied this right for decades, but illegally and unfairly. When they landed a gray whale in 1999, some tribal members were attacked and one man ended up in a wheelchair.

Violence in the form of rape and sexual assault against Indian women is reported to be 3.5 times higher than the rate for the general population (source: National Sexual Violence Resource Center). The leading crime on the Navajo reservation is reported to be the rape of Navajo women. Much of the violence on this reservation happens in the border towns that draw much of their income from reservation spending. The NSVRC reports that 70 percent of the crime against Indians is committed by non-Indians.

State and county officials in many states have acted to prevent Indians from voting. In South Dakota, Montana, North Carolina, Arizona, New Mexico and other states, lawsuits have been filed seeking to have the right to vote conferred upon Indians. Some of these lawsuits go back to 1948, while others have been filed within the past decade. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a voting rights lawsuit in South Dakota as late as 2002.

Some 88 percent of Indian students now attend public schools on or near reservations. This is in accordance with the wishes of the federal government, which since 1890 has pursued a policy of forcing Indians to attend public schools instead of BIA federal schools.

The dropout rate, or more accurately the ‘push out rate,’ for Indians is 250 percent higher than it is for the general population. The United States as a whole still has a 20 percent dropout rate, but for Indian country, the dropout rate is 50 percent. The dropout rate for states such as South Dakota, which Indians call the ‘Mississippi of the North,’ is caused largely by racist practices in the schools, according to the STAR Web site. The four counties of southern California - Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura and San Diego - with dozens of small California tribes, have had a long-standing dropout rate of 90 percent, the highest in the nation.

Indian children are actually arrested and taken out of the classroom for minor infractions, according to the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. Indian students are regularly harassed and physically attacked by white students. When attacks occur, the Indian students (the victims) are arrested and punished while the white students (the attackers) are not cited or arrested.

In Red Rock, Okla., in 1992, an Indian student was arrested and placed into the school jail for chewing gum. (Yes, they have a jail!) At the same time, an Anglo student, the son of a teacher, who set an Indian student's hair on fire, was not punished at all!

Indian students have been arrested, jailed and fingerprinted for such minor offenses as refusing to sit where they are told or for making too much noise. They are systematically excluded from college preparatory classes, shunted into vocational and ''bonehead'' classes, not encouraged to be in school every day, and in general ignored in preparing them for higher learning and for life.

In Winner, S.D., near the Rosebud Reservation, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the school district, the superintendent and two principals in April 2006. When a white student pushed an Indian student against a locker and called him a ‘prairie nigger,’ the Indian student, a middle schooler, was arrested and jailed when he pushed back. Brian Naasz, the principal, had the police arrest the Indian student, but not the white student who instigated the fight. The ACLU documented that an Indian student was three times as likely as a white student to be arrested.

In Hayward, Wis., the white locals call the Indians ‘timber niggers.’ In my home state of North Carolina we are called ‘swamp niggers.’ In Arizona, the Indians are called ‘desert niggers.’

I am collecting data on these types of incidents, and would love to hear from you. It is time to stop sweeping this piece of dirt under the rug” (Dr. Dean Chavers, 11-07-07).

Dr. Dean Chavers is director of Catching the Dream, a national scholarship and school improvement program in Albuquerque, N.M. This is a condensed chapter from his book ''Modern American Indian Leaders,'' published in June 2007 by Mellen Press. Copyright (c) 2007. His address is The book can be ordered from

November 10, 2007


from the Bad Eagle blog

Before heading off for his second invite to the National Museum of the American Indian’s (NMAI) “Classical Native” music concerts, Yeagley posted a particularly vile piece of hate propaganda.

Yeagley — “Muslims have no rights... There is no place for such demonism in America... The Muslims don't care if they appear anti-American... Muslims knowingly provide camouflage for violent mass murderers in America... Islam is here to disrupt, to change, and to denigrate America... The Muslims are not moral beings... They are not worthy of hate. They simply need to be gotten rid of” (11-9-07).
The concerts are happening today, the performance of special significance to me is the tribute to our most experienced American Indian composer, Dr. Louis W. Ballard, who passed away earlier this year. The “Classical Native” concert series is a notable venue for contemporary Native composers and musicians, except for the choice to have Yeagley return for a second time (yes, they knew about Yeagley's negative activities last year too, and invited him back).

I, myself, was invited to attend the first year, but declined to do so in protest. I cannot speak for any other Native participants, the other Native composers and musicians in attendance today. I can only speak for myself, and it is important to me to make this one point, even if the Smithsonian does not “get it” or may not care about it one way or another, so long as they maintain the appearance of supporting Native people.

American Indian music is not a product. In fact, there is traditionally no such word for “music” in Native languages, because the narrow scope of that term is severely reductionist from a Native perspective. Music is printed, bought, sold and presented at Museum concerts, but American Indian music-ing (never a noun) is a process that involves much more than the westernized term “music.” For Indians, music-ing is tied to kinship, community, people’s voices, and has a long history embedded in every activity. Such a music-ing process can never be separated out leaving a leftover byproduct the West might call “music.”

Why is this ‘something-greater-than-music’ distinction important? Because, who creates the music-ing is speaking, using their own voices, telling a Native reality in a music-ing way. The music is not transferable nor performable expect by the originators themselves, traditionally. In other words, whoever are the creators of the music, it is their voices that are being birthed out in the music-ing process. To know the music-ing is to know the originators of that music-ing, the two cannot be separated for American Indian music-ing. One cannot experience music-ing without knowing the composers and performers, which is why I have actively boycotted the NMAI Classically Native series.

While I acknowledge the Smithsonian’s NMAI has every right to hire and present any artist they choose, it is painfully clear the NMAI has not taken a close look at Yeagley’s hate blog, and his negative influence on American Indian life. To present his music in the concert series is to promote Yeagley himself and endorse his hateful agenda. Yeagley and “his music” cannot be separated from an indigenous standpoint, and the NMAI’s continued endorsement of Yeagley’s particular voice, is disgusting and, in a word, anti-Indian. Until the NMAI changes its nonchalant attitude of endorsing hate politics, such as Yeagley’s Muslim bashing (and Mexican-Women-Black-Elder bashing), I will refuse to participate. Message: connect the creators to their creations please, and stop with the Westernized objectification of American Indian music at our nation's American Indian museum.

So there you have it, the NMAI and the First Nations Composer Initiative (FNCI), both endorsing the Yeagley voice. How disappointing. So while I wholeheartedly miss Louis Ballard, and do actively support the honoring of his memory, I cannot in good conscience endorse Yeagley’s NMAI countenance with my own tacit participation. I have composed music to honor Louis myself, and the music is receiving performances in other places, in other venues, but not at the NMAI.

As for Yeagley’s Muslim bashing above, Yeagley has failed once again to really think through the matter from multiple angles. Muslims are US citizens. They serve in the US military. Muslims are US patriots. Muslims have US national rights as well as international human rights. In fact, the US is actively recruiting Muslims into the military. Yeagley is calling for rights to be taken away from US citizens and military personnel, in his rush to propagate Muslim bashing and hatred. Yeagley, who never served, is clamoring that military men and women have their US rights taken away simply because they are Muslim?
WASHINGTON – As US troops battle Islamic extremists abroad, the Pentagon and the armed forces are reaching out to Muslims at home. An underlying goal is to interest more Muslims in the military, which needs officers and troops who can speak Arabic and other relevant languages and understand the culture of places like Iraq and Afghanistan. The effort is also part of a larger outreach. Pentagon officials say they are striving for mutual understanding with Muslims at home and abroad and to win their support for US war aims. Among the efforts to attract and retain Muslim cadets:
• West Point and the other service academies have opened Muslim prayer rooms, as have military installations.

• Imams serve full- and part-time as chaplains at the academies and some bases.

• Top non-Muslim officers and Pentagon officials have taken to celebrating religious events with Muslims overseas and here in the US.
"There is a message here, and that is that Muslims and the Islamic religion are totally compatible with Western values," says Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England in an interview.

November 7, 2007


from the Bad Eagle blog

It seems that Yeagley concocted himself into a nomination for the Comanche council? How interesting, considering his financial ties to anti-education fanatic David Horowitz, and with his wink-wink-nod-nod obeisance to the white supremacy group One Nation.

While the rest of Indian Country voices admiration for Native figures like Quanah Parker, Dr. Louis W. Ballard, or Vernon Bellecourt, Yeagley’s admiration is directed at his own personal heros like Adolf Hitler, Vlad III the Impaler, and the deposed dictator the Shah of Iran and his empress wife. No, we are not kidding.

In our struggles for Indian equality, education, and the natural environment we honor leaders like Winona LaDuke, Marge Anderson, and Wilma Mankiller. Who does Yeagley constantly rave about? In a word: Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, and his Mexican mother.

But how does Yeagley stack up on Indian cultural issues? In anticipation of the Comanche election, Bad Eagle has put together a point-by-point comparison gleaned from a detailed familiarity with Yeagley’s blogger efforts.

INDIGENOUS CULTURE . . . . . . . .

v e r s u s

. . . . . . . . LIFE IN YEAGLEYLAND

power in reciprocity
power in individualism
global warming very important concern
global warming is a hoax
inclusive of “others”
deport the “others”
other cultures welcomed
other cultures excluded
cultural & racial diversity is good
white supremacy rules (great white throne)
reservations are home
reservations are worthless
race based on ties to community
race based on blood (BIA-imposed)
racial makeup not too important
racial makeup very important
gender equality
male superiority and misogyny
life by social (group) consensus
life by paternal (father) figurehead
holistic approach
us-versus-them dualism
living in balance
living by control
existence & people mutually responsible
white men in control
flexibility toward change
rigid and draconian
oral tradition & stories grow
static doctrine etched in stone
diverse tribal lifeways
christian assimilation
community comes first
self comes first
supports the common good
craves personal attention
respectful of elders
maligns elders (including deceased)
values Indian education
calls educated Indians “commies”
community-based reality
media-perceived reality
against negative stereotyping
wants more stereotyped mascots
black indians as positive reality
wants the word “nigger” brought back
two-spirit people are welcomed
wants laws prohibiting gay rights
indians “are related”
indians are “warriors”
tribes are sovereign
tribes subservient to white control
the people come first
blind patriotism comes first