Listen: Let's Talk Native 'Native American Music Awards'

John Kane

By John Kane, Mohawk
Let's Talk Native

Censored News

Jan Lookingwolf
with
Lifetime Achievement Winner
Jim Boyd

It's all about the NAMMY's which takes place this Friday, November 14th at the Seneca Allegany Casino. Ellen Bello President of the Native American Music Awards joins us at the top and then a parade of NAMMY nominees join the show. Jimmy Wolf and Caren Knight-Pepper are up first. Joanne Shenandoah and Leah Shenandoah join me next.

Great interviews and music sampling run throughout the show. Gareth Laffely follows with alying. Terry Lee Whetstone and Randy McGinnis bring their sound and message to LTN next and followed by the charming Charly Lowry with her great vocals and story. We wrap up with Barry Lee from Red Kroz Bluez Band and John Mcleod. These guys are just a sampling of the great artists to be featured and honored at the Native American Music Awards.http://www.nativeamericanmusicawards.com/. A special thanks to Liz Hill for pulling this show together for "Let's Talk Native..."
great tune and his strong message about bul

http://media.espn1520.com/a/9…/let-s-talk-native11-9-hr2.htm

Mohawk John Kane 'Two Row Time'

Two Row Time

By John Kane, Mohawk

Censored News

http://bsnorrell.blogspot.com/2013/10/mohawk-john-kane-two-row-time.html

Much has been made of the Two Row Wampum lately. The “Two Row Wampum Renewal Campaign” and the launch of the “Two Row Times” are just two examples of the recent attention being given to it. Yet there seems to be something fundamentally missing from a meaningful conversation on the subject even as attention has spread.

Let’s be clear. The Two Row isn’t just about a ship and a canoe. It is about the paths of creation. This is important enough to repeat — the two rows symbolized in the Kaswentha are paths. They are not roads, highways, canals, pipelines, power lines, lines on a map, or a charted course on a body of water. A path yields to nature whether it is laid down by the feet of millions of our ancestors, a pair of chipmunks, or mighty glaciers. It widens, it narrows, it adjusts with time, and it provides the guidance for us in times of trouble or conflict.

The message of the Kaswentha is respect, rights and responsibility. Respect of the paths for all of creation is what we remind ourselves of every time we say the Ohenton Karihwatehkwen — those words before all else. We respect not only those paths and our relationships to them but also the rights and responsibilities of those who travel those paths.

Our path, too, needs respect. Respecting that path shows not only respect to those who came before us but also a commitment to those who will follow us.

But this is the tough part. While we are quick to claim the rights we hold, we are not so prepared to uphold the responsibilities that come with them. And if we jump off our path or if one of those shiny objects from their vessel catches our eye, do we accept the responsibility for that pursuit?

We need to take a hard look at three specific examples of these shiny objects and how each one has affected us. Many seem to be oblivious to how far off our path they have strayed; yet, we all have been impacted.

Voting is one of those shiny objects dangled in front of us and promoted on both sides of the imaginary line. Voting in non-Native elections is so clear an act of the assimilated that it is amazing to me it is even tolerated among our people; yet, in many places “tribal government” is so complicit that they actually assist in “Get out the Vote” campaigns for the non-Native elections. In my opinion, voting is a cop-out if not a sellout. It is simply passing the buck for responsibility by giving your authority to someone else. By empowering an elected official you diminish your own rights and responsibilities.

Enlisting in the U.S. and Canadian armed forces is another shiny object, an act of indoctrination that began even while those same forces were barely done killing our own Onkweh Onweh brothers and sisters. Here’s an example. We ignored the attack and invasion of Hawaii when it was the U.S. doing the invading but rushed to sign up when the Japanese did the same.

Finally, we must avoid their courts. Now I realize that far too often we find ourselves as hostile participants in their judicial system and beyond our assertion of their lack of jurisdiction and our sovereignty, we do what we must to get out of it. But when we willingly enter their courts we wittingly or unwittingly give them authority over our lands, our environment and ourselves.

Land claims are prime examples of this. We do not have "Land Claims." It is they who have illegitimately claimed our land. Filing a claim for our own land is oxymoronic. And filing it in their courts is just plain moronic. The Onondaga Nation should agree with this, especially since their final attempt at even being heard in the U.S. court was dismissed a few weeks ago.

Their courts are not remedies for our conflicts with them. I would not give our authority to a court anywhere in the world. Conflicts between peoples are only "legal" issues only if there is an overarching set of laws that both sides acknowledge — and no such law exists. Otherwise the issues are political and require diplomacy; not litigation. One cannot just file papers to launch a diplomatic effort. The line must be drawn in the sand not by a "legal action" but with a real action.

So occupy your land, block an environmental crime, and stop an unlawful development! Win the battle in the court of public opinion if possible. Raise the cost of their actions. And find support for a cause to bolster a call for diplomacy.

Voting in their elections, enlisting in their armed forces and voluntarily submitting to their courts are not actions of a people who have survived the longest and most complicit act of genocide the world has ever known. These are acts of submission by its victims. It is important to remember that they have NO lawful act of subjugation over us. Those that continue to oppress us would love to suggest that these voluntary acts are evidence of the success of their "final solution" but we know better.

We must remain vigilant in many more areas to stay true to our path. We need to renew our commitment to the Kaswentha. And while our path must continue to yield to Nature we must fulfill our first and most solemn compact — the one with Creation.

John Karhiio Kane, Mohawk, national commentator on Native American issues, hosts “Let’s Talk Native with John Kane,” ESPN-AM 1520 in Buffalo, Sundays, 9 --11 p.m. Kane is a frequent guest on WGRZ-TV’, NBC/Buffalo, “2 Sides” and “The Capitol Pressroom with Susan Arbetter” in Albany. John’s “Native Pride” blog can be found at www.letstalknativepride.blogspot.com . Kane also has a very active "Let's Talk Native with John Kane" group page on Facebook.

Thank you from Censored News to John Kane, and Two Row Times, which first published this article

http://tworowtimes.com/opinions/columns/lets-talk-native/two-row-time/


Please share this Censored News link: http://bsnorrell.blogspot.com/2013/10/mohawk-john-kane-two-row-time.html

Mohawk John Kane 'Rule of Law or Rule of Lawyers?'

Rule of Law or Rule of Lawyers?

By John Kane, Mohawk

Censored News 

We often hear from the righteous voices of the U.S. and Canada when looking at countries and peoples they view as inferior, that “rule of law” must prevail in these “developing” nations. “Developing”…? Excuse me! Forget the fact the U.S. and Canada have no culture or even a language of their own and barely a history, for that matter, compared to other peoples of the world.

But what does “rule of law” even mean?

When the upstart British colonists became dissatisfied with their “mother country,” they set about trying to create something new and distinct from European monarchies — new to them anyway. There is much talk of democracy these days but male dominant aristocracies is a habit hard to break especially when it is all you've known for several centuries. In the view of the “founding fathers,” democracy would empower the ignorant and the uninformed. They believed everyone should have rights. However, there was an important caveat: that “power” needed to be in the hands of the “capable.”

The U.S. did not form a democracy. It was a republic. The distinction between the two comes down to two concepts. The first is where sovereignty is vested. In a republic sovereignty is a birthright. It is vested in the individual; and the sovereignty of a nation comes from the people collectively. In a democracy it is the state that is the sovereign although it is an authority held by the collective of the people. The second thing that separates a democracy from a republic is the notion that the foundation of law or a constitution for a republic is natural law. That is to say that certain rights are inherent and unalienable. In a true democracy all laws are subject to majority (mob) rule. Both these ideas incorporated in the concept of a republic came from the Haudenosaunee. Sovereignty as a birthright, the understanding that creation is the ultimate power, and that any and all constructs of man are bound to that power, is the essence of our opening address, the Ohentonkariwatehkwa.

So when the words, “rule of law” are uttered, I say: hell yeah, agreed, no problem — as long as we are talking laws of nature and not the laws of men imposed on others without consent.

Seemingly, the entire world has forgotten the distinction of natural law from man’s law. Laws do not solve conflict. Even nature’s laws don’t do this — ask the next dinosaur you see how that worked out for them. Law, by court or certainly by lawyers, cannot resolve conflict. No one has ever successfully challenged nature in court. They have used courts to defy it but nature, like us, does not recognize that jurisdiction. Man’s law, on the other hand, is supposed to be based on the establishment of legitimate authority at the foundation of every piece of legislation and should lay out everything from jurisdiction to the legislative intent to constitutionality and basic rightness. It fails on much of this.

Now the biggest problem with this concept of “rule of (man’s) law” is that, unlike nature, we abandon diplomacy and negotiation and basic harmony for court rulings — i.e. winners and losers. And again, unlike in nature, there are flaws in much of the foundation of man’s law.

As I sit here today striking these computer keys and pondering all of this, I insist that there still does not exist any proper legal foundation for the subjugation of Native people to U.S. or Canadian law. And I would imagine the same could be said for many other peoples oppressed by colonial powers. The reality is there was no transfer of our sovereignty, no surrender agreement, no “treaty” asking to join the “club,” no referendum, and certainly no consent to genocide or assimilation. The U.S. and Canada cannot legislate our sovereignty away and their courts and judges cannot just rule it away. By definition the sovereignty of one people is outside the jurisdiction of another.

While I do believe the United Nations should do more than approve a “Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” I don’t believe the U.N. should be the final arbitrator of any justice. No individual or no organization should have this role — or this right.

We must return to an era of diplomacy and statesmanship. A civilized society needs to have honest and meaningful dialogue to resolve conflicts. It should not be based on might makes right but, rather, on right makes right. Statesmanship and compromise need to be held higher than court precedents and religious dogma. Lawyers and lobbyists playing word games with man-made laws to screw the less fortunate, the environment and future generations need to be thrown off the table and conflicts need to be looked at as things to resolve — not as contests to win.

Published previously in the Two Row Times and posted on the Native Pride blog.

John Kane
jmkane1220@aol.com

'Aroniawenrate Peter Blue Cloud' Sometimes the magic arrives in the mail

The Cry: Censoring Native authors By Brenda Norrell Censored Newshttp://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com Sometimes the magic arrives in the mail, as it did today. Inside a small brown envelope is a piece of paper and a book. There is a note written on a copy of an article, "Simon Ortiz: Shocked at banning of Native books in Arizona," which I had written. The note says, "This article was the initial impetus for publishing a new edition of Peter Blue Cloud's 'Back Then Tomorrow.' We originally published it in 1978. And here it is, speaking to us. We need to hear his voice, these voices." The note is signed, "Gary Lawless, Blackberry Books." In the little brown envelope from Maine, is a yellow book, with a drawing on the cover of Coyote Man with a walking stick. The book is Back Then Tomorrow by Peter Blue Cloud (Aroniawenrate) drawings by Bill Crosby. On the copy of the article, highlighted in yellow marker is the name of Peter Blue Cloud. Blue Cloud's name is in a quote by Simon Ortiz, Acoma Pueblo poet, author and professor. "I am very stunned and very shocked and very pissed off the Tucson Unified School District would ban Mexican American Studies and books like Rethinking Columbus," Ortiz said in the article. Ortiz named the names of Indigenous authors, including Peter Blue Cloud, in the book Rethinking Columbus, now banned by Tucson public schools, following Arizona's demand to forbid Mexican American Studies. Opening the yellow book, I read the first poem of Peter Blue Cloud, "The Cry." The poem ends with: When I begin to create the universe, I must remember to give the cry a very special place. Perhaps I'll call the cry Coyote Peter Blue Cloud, Aroniawenrate: I am Turtle, passed to the Spirit World on April 27, 2011. "The Indian occupation of Alcatraz island was an attempt of Indian people to awaken the nation and show the world that the Indian spirit would live for ever." --Peter Blue Cloud Alcatraz When's the Last Boat to Alcatraz? Oche Iron Bear Dawn Crazy Horse Monument Yellowjacket Sweet Corn Sand hills That None May Visit Crow's Flight Searching for Eagles Old Friends Biography on Wikipedia: He was born on the Caughnawaga Reserve in Kahnawake, Quebec, Canada and died in Montreal on April 27, 2011. He was previously associated with journal Akwesasne Notes and the journal Indian Magazine.[1] Blue Cloud was born in Kahnawake, Mohawk Territory (Quebec), where he attended school and was raised in the Mohawk language. The family moved to Buffalo, NY, for awhile before returning to Kahnawake. He was a lifelong avid reader and began writing poems as a teenager. He became an ironworker in his teens, working in various cities in the East. In the late 1950's, he traveled to California, where he was employed as an ironworker in the Bay Area. After quitting the iron, he worked as a logger with the Haida people in the Queen Charlotte Islands of British Columbia, as a ranch hand in the vicinity of Susanville, California, and doing archaeological field work with the Paiute people of Pyramid Lake, Nevada. He lived for some time at the Maidu Bear Dance grounds near Janesville, Ca, where he absorbed the stories and teachings of Maidu elders, and where some of his first creations as a carver and sculptor emerged. Moving back to the Bay Area, he discovered the Beat poetry and folk music scenes, and the social and political upheaval of the 60's. There he continued to develop his talents as a poet, sculptor, carver and painter, collaborated with other Native artists and writers, and participated in art exhibitions. While an artist in many genres, Blue Cloud is most known for his writing. He published several books of poetry and his poems appear in numerous anthologies and journals. He won the American Book Award for Back Then Tomorrow in 1981. He was noted for combining Native American mythology with contemporary issues, most especially the character of Coyote, the trickster who figured prominently in his stories and poems. In the city or country, Blue Cloud loved to walk, was a keen observer of events both natural and political, and incorporated them into his writings. As it did for so many Native people, the occupation of Alcatraz Island from 1969 to 1971 sparked his interest in the fight for the rights of Native Americans. He lived on the island for awhile, and supported the occupation and similar events in California and the Northwest by chronicling them in various publications. Blue Cloud moved to the Sierra Nevada foothills near Nevada City for several years in the 1970's-'80's, where he continued to write, carve and paint, while also working as a carpenter. There he met guitarist Rex Richardson, and toured across the U.S. in 1979 with Richardson, who set his poems to music. Several recordings were released as a result of the collaboration. Blue Cloud returned to the East Coast to work for the national Native journal Akwesasne Notes (Mohawk territory, Akwesasne/NewYork) as a writer/editor first in 1975-76, and again from 1983-1985. He returned to Kahnawake in 1986, where he briefly published his own newspaper, the Kariwakoroks, before writing a column for The Eastern Door Newspaper from 1992 to 2006. Blue Cloud was cremated immediately after his death as per his wishes and his ashes will be spread in Modoc country in Northern California where the Modoc warriors fought and died. . Literary biography:

Peter Blue Cloud / Aroniawenrate was born in 1935 to the Turtle Clan of the Mohawk on the Caughnawaga Reserve in Kahnawake, Quebec, Canada. He has worked as ironworker, logger, carpenter and woodcutter and was previously associated with journal Akwesasne Notes and the journal Indian Magazine.

In the late 1960s he began publishing his poems. With these he emphasized and introduced the traditional ways of thinking into contemporary American literature, describing man in nature and history, man and nature as one, as it was always perceived by the aboriginal people.

In 1981, he has received the American Book Award, Before Columbus Foundation. His books of fiction, non-fiction and poetry include "Alcatraz is not an island", 1972; "Back then tomorrow", 1978; "White corn sister", 1979; "Sketches in winter, with crows", 1984; "Elderberry flute song : contemporary coyote tales", 1989; " The other side of nowhere : contemporary coyote tales", 1990; "Clans of many nations : selected poems, 1969-1994", 1995.

Blue Cloud is noted for combining Native American myths with contemporary issues. He is especially noted for his use of the Coyote figure in his stories and poems.

'Back Then Tomorrow' can be ordered ($10 plus $2 mail) from Blackberry Books, 617 East Neck Road, Nobleboro, Maine 04555

Mohawk John Kane to UN Rapporteur: Process is a farce

As the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples begins in New York, some Native people living on the land say they are cancelling plans to attend due to this year's focus on rhetoric -- rather than the life-threatening issues facing Native people, from fracking, uranium mining and coal fired power plants, to deforestation, the militarization of homelands and theft of water rights.
John Kane, Mohawk and radio host of Lets Talk Native Pride, challenges the rhetoric and challenges countries of the world to trade directly with sovereign Indian Nations and honor their passports. Kane responds to the sessions of the United Nations Rapporteur for Indigenous Peoples James Anaya held across the US in April and May.
Kane said, "I know most Native people want to throw a 'love-fest' for the 'special' rapporteur. But suggesting ways for the US to make gestures to 'heal our wounds' is neither shocking or bold. Let's see Mr. Anaya say what everyone already knows: that the US is guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity or at very least should face the charges."
By John Kane, Mohawk
Censored News
French translation: http://www.chrisp.lautre.net/wpblog/?p=744
We are not matriarchal but rather matrilineal. In our ways men and women share evenly but distinctly in the affairs of our people.
Anaya does not recognize the people. He can't see a tree, only a forest. In fact he may not even see the forest but rather the maple or oak or the redwood as a species. What happens to the tree or the individual is not what is important to this guy. For him it is all about the "tribe" and the "tribal leaders."
This is why it is the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, not People. Informed consent from these guys checks the box.
The failure of the world, including the US and including Mr. Anaya to not understand that our sovereignty is a birthright, that we are BORN with the right to our freedom, is what makes this whole process a farce.
We were never an institutionalized people. Our idea of self governance was based on participation. We did not have a chief system but rather a clan system. We never divested ourselves of our birthright to empower a chief, a council, the state or the feds. We allowed people to carry our voices not speak for us. We allowed selected persons to communicate our will, not dictate it to us and others.
Anaya said in a statement, ‎"I heard almost universal calls from indigenous nations and tribes across the country that the Government respect tribal sovereignty."
The "Government" my ass!
It's about time other nations stepped up and asked the question: When did Native people stop being sovereign?
If the rest of the world would stop quaking in their boots every time the US says their "Indian Problem" is a domestic issue, then perhaps there could be progress.
Let one of you dare to trade with us. Let one of you fight to honor our passports. Let one of you establish formal diplomatic relations or provide financing, education or genuine humanitarian aid for our most impoverished communities.
John Kane
jmkane1220@aol.com
Listen online to Lets Talk Native Pride
http://letstalknativepride.blogspot.com/
Also see: Troubling questions for the UN Rapporteur, statement from Ofelia Rivas, O'odham:
Ofelia Rivas, O'odham representing traditional and ceremonial O'odham, responded to the UN Rapporteur's session in Tucson, Ariz., located on traditional O'odham homeland.
"Not only am I unable to pay for the parking space, but I don't have the gas money to bring the elders and the ceremonial people. These are the people that these institutions should be hearing from to truly understand the implications and true significance of this document. It is disheartening to find on the speakers list a non-O'odham with a non-profit organization using our most sacred figure of the O'odham way of life."
At the Tucson session, the traditional ceremonial O'odham were not on the invited speakers list.
Rivas said, "I am on the speakers list only by a 5 day 'extreme effort' by the Amnesty International people."
Read more:
http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com/2012/04/troubling-questions-for-un-rapporteur.html