Bin Laden Raid Use Of "Geronimo" Inappropriate?

[Themightytom]

I'm with Bakustra on this one. It's not our place to deem whether or not people taking offense to something is justified. Check your fucking privilege, suck it up, and apologize.

Um, how about no. Seriously, a computer at the Pentagon picked the word out of an electronic hat.

There's no harm in apologizing for a computer error. We'd probably have to say something if a mission in Israel got designated "Operation Jew" or a mission to Kenya was designated "Operation Spearpoint"

Obviously that first is a terrible example, and the military has probably removed the word "Jew" from the operational word bank the computer uses but you never know what'll pop up

Failing to acknowledge what appears to be a silly accident, as such, in response to a request for an apology can be just as racially insensitive as expecting a black president to oversee racial sensitivity because presumably as an African American, he must obviously be a descendant of slaves and the civil rights movement and have a unique insight here, as opposed to being... just dark skinned...

[Bakustra]

That's not really ironic, since I was fully aware that you have contempt for any discussion that doesn't fall into your personal bounds of what is important or not. I, meanwhile, am not in awe at all, because I guess I should have expected you to firmly ignore anything I posted.

Could you be any more of a pompous ass, Bakustra? Seriously, crank it till you hit eleven, man.

What's odd (well, not really, I expected it to be honest, this is pretty much how any discussion of institutional discrimination or unintentional offense goes) is that you've started discussing something so "worthless", acting exactly like how I pointed out people were acting, refusing to acknowledge or even dispute connotations or context.

Yeah, that usually happens when I see someone being a socksniffing retard about something. What clued me onto that was the guy agreed with you, which automatically means he's probably not that bright as far as this thread's concerned. No matter, I'm sure you'll go back to making tl;dr posts full of fresh stupid for other to latch onto.

So sorry that two whole paragraphs is too long for you to read, Coffee. But apparently not too long for you to write. How do you manage without being able to read your own posts, Coffee? Also, I like that you're going "You're an idiot and wrong but I certainly will never explain why I think that". Really convincing!

I think that privilege means that comparisons to Washington and other American traditional heroes don't really work all that well.

DIPSHIT, Get this through your head. Just because Geronimo was used as a codeword doesn't mean that it was using him as a comparison to Bin Laden. And as many people pointed out, if you didn't fucking comprehend what you were reading, those of us "tradional americans" have had no problem had they used "Washington" or "Jefferson" or "Kennedy" or "Britney Spears" to denote the success of the mission.

That was not meant for you, because it was meant for people who understand what the word "privilege" means in this context. Hint: It explains why most Americans don't have a problem with American heroes being substituted but the Apache did have a problem with Geronimo being substituted.

Nah, I still say "Fuck that". When people take offense over bullshit like this it cheapens those times when real offense is intended.

Sure maybe it would be the easy thing to do to just be like "Ok we're sorry!". But I'm a big believer in keeping apologies for when they are truly warranted. Maybe we could do a back handed apology like "We're sorry for anyone who is overly sensitive and took offense to this".

So you think that statements are only ever offensive if it is intended to be offensive? That's a real actionable standard there.

Not to mention that you're essentially dictating to the Apache what they can and cannot be offended by. I wonder if that sends the message you're going for?

What I AM saying is that apologizing for things LIKE this cheapens apologies for REAL offenses.

If someone is out to find something to be offended about, chances are they will succeed. Although, I also find it highly likely that most of them are only offended because they were told that they "should be offended" by morons such as yourself.

So according to you, the Apache are literally children who can't decide whether or not to be offended, and have to be told so by white people. That is what your post implies, and it speaks for itself.

Yeah this is a pretty ridiculous topic, it's not like sociologists would use this as a case study for how minority voices get neglected or anything. I mean, what we have here is Geronimo being used in a military operation, against a man who has fought the US and ran from them for years on end, much like the actual Geronimo, so in the context, it seems to be associating probably the most hated man in America with Geronimo, who is not, and should not, be considered similarly to how Bin Laden is today. So the Apache said that, seeing as Geronimo is a pretty heroic figure for at least some people, and at the very least remembered better, they feel that this was inappropriate.

No one in the government drew comparisons between Geronimo to Bin Laden. No one in the media drew comparions between Geronimo and Bin Laden. And as has been pointed out, "Geronimo" wasn't the code word for Bin Laden - It was the code word for success. This is entirely a manufactured situation done to drum up media attention.

Perhaps you should read what I said carefully. You see, by putting words close to one another, you create associations between them. That's a well-recognized phenomenon in psychology, well enough for it to be used clinically as the word-association test. In this case, the Apache feel that associating a complex, semi-heroic figure with a purely villainous individual such as Bin Laden is inappropriate. That does not mean that direct comparisons were made, oddly enough. I'm sure that this is all about the Apache (or the white liberal overlords you apparently believe in), conspiring to grab airtime, and because you're not offended, nobody could ever be offended.

The general response has been that this is too sensitive of a reaction, and they chose it randomly so it can't be racist, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, first, it's pretty cool that people can dictate what the Apache are not allowed to be offended by. Secondly, even if it wasn't deliberate, somebody should have noticed it and changed the name. The problem with making analogies about this is that there are no freedom fighters that can really be slotted into Geronimo's place. Most of them don't have a lot of fans in the US if they fought the US, or they're not as well-known. So I'll use a slightly broader one. Imagine if the US was sending airborne troops to try and relieve, say, a surrounded force, and called it "Operation Dien Bien Phu". Or called airdropping disaster relief "Arclight". These wouldn't have to be deliberate to be inappropriate, though not necessarily on the same level as Geronimo was.

You know what? I could again point out numerous examples of how code words have nothing whatsoever to do with the object to which they are assigned. But you'd just ignore them, so I'll just finish by saying "You're an idiot" and move on.

You know what? You suck at quoting, and you don't even comprehend my argument! That's worse than Coffee, who's just stuck in a douchey but uncollapsed waveform where he won't admit to reading my posts! Go to the foot of the class, sir.

[Norade]

With the amount of butthurt over something so small I say the White House should apologize to them via a message sewn into large knitted blankets just so they have something worth being fucking offended over. To the average person hearing the term it's something you use when leaping into the unknown or as a battle cry, to a subset of an already statistically insignificant native band it meant a historical figure and to an even smaller subset it meant being offended that a historical figure was being used to represent victory. How many people would have been offended by this if the head of 'get Natives noticed' hadn't made a fucking deal out of this? Besides the overly PC Bakustra who, given his frankly retarded stance on everything to do with this operation, might have.

I mean it seems to me that when your culture is going away faster than you can save it and hardly anybody speaks your language; let alone gives a shit about your historical figures; that you'd be glad you're even getting any mention at all. Even worse when it's something that they shouldn't be offended over and doubly so when the military has been using natives words and names for as long as they have with no complaints. You can't just pick and chose which minor honors you're going to take as insults and expect people to give a shit.

[Losonti Tokash]

Norade, did you really just say that we should just be grateful for whatever bones the government throws us? I'm not particularly upset by the use of "Geronimo" (and thought it was pretty neat, actually) but I'm also not an Apache. Even so, the shit that's been said in this thread boggles the fucking mind.

PS, the joke about the blankets was good, since the first thing that popped into my head was the smallpox blankets. Faaaantastic.

[Thanas]

A general warning: If any more of this idiotic and borderline racist stuff continues, I'll be cracking some heads.

That especially goes for posters like you, Norade, who are on thin ice already.


EDIT: This is not to stifle discussion, but goddamnit people, have some civility and class.

[TheHammer]

I think that privilege means that comparisons to Washington and other American traditional heroes don't really work all that well.

DIPSHIT, Get this through your head. Just because Geronimo was used as a codeword doesn't mean that it was using him as a comparison to Bin Laden. And as many people pointed out, if you didn't fucking comprehend what you were reading, those of us "tradional americans" have had no problem had they used "Washington" or "Jefferson" or "Kennedy" or "Britney Spears" to denote the success of the mission.

That was not meant for you, because it was meant for people who understand what the word "privilege" means in this context. Hint: It explains why most Americans don't have a problem with American heroes being substituted but the Apache did have a problem with Geronimo being substituted.

Ah yes, since Geronimo (not his real name) represents an "oppressed minority" we can't use his name for anything. I see the level of bullshit rising.

What I AM saying is that apologizing for things LIKE this cheapens apologies for REAL offenses.

If someone is out to find something to be offended about, chances are they will succeed. Although, I also find it highly likely that most of them are only offended because they were told that they "should be offended" by morons such as yourself.

So according to you, the Apache are literally children who can't decide whether or not to be offended, and have to be told so by white people. That is what your post implies, and it speaks for itself.

I was actually referring to smug politically correct jagoffs. News flash buddy - there are people just like you from all ethnic groups.

Perhaps you should read what I said carefully. You see, by putting words close to one another, you create associations between them. That's a well-recognized phenomenon in psychology, well enough for it to be used clinically as the word-association test. In this case, the Apache feel that associating a complex, semi-heroic figure with a purely villainous individual such as Bin Laden is inappropriate. That does not mean that direct comparisons were made, oddly enough. I'm sure that this is all about the Apache (or the white liberal overlords you apparently believe in), conspiring to grab airtime, and because you're not offended, nobody could ever be offended.

The correct response is to educate people that code-words are not meant to imply any similarity between that which they identify. They are simply used for distinctiveness and clarity in communication, not as part of some secret plot to desicrate the object they are describing. If they were, then Casino's and Lottery officials should be all up in arms over referring to Bin Laden as "Jackpot".

The general response has been that this is too sensitive of a reaction, and they chose it randomly so it can't be racist, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, first, it's pretty cool that people can dictate what the Apache are not allowed to be offended by. Secondly, even if it wasn't deliberate, somebody should have noticed it and changed the name. The problem with making analogies about this is that there are no freedom fighters that can really be slotted into Geronimo's place. Most of them don't have a lot of fans in the US if they fought the US, or they're not as well-known. So I'll use a slightly broader one. Imagine if the US was sending airborne troops to try and relieve, say, a surrounded force, and called it "Operation Dien Bien Phu". Or called airdropping disaster relief "Arclight". These wouldn't have to be deliberate to be inappropriate, though not necessarily on the same level as Geronimo was.

You know what? I could again point out numerous examples of how code words have nothing whatsoever to do with the object to which they are assigned. But you'd just ignore them, so I'll just finish by saying "You're an idiot" and move on.

You know what? You suck at quoting, and you don't even comprehend my argument! That's worse than Coffee, who's just stuck in a douchey but uncollapsed waveform where he won't admit to reading my posts! Go to the foot of the class, sir.

I'm sure if the guy who assigned it had it to do all over again he'd probably have used a different name because trying to explain to people like you who just like to stir up shit, that there is no corresponding link between code words and the objects they are assigned to. And to expect that he could forsee that the Apache might be offended that we used the word "Geronimo" to denote success is asinine 20/20 hindsight bullshit.

[Norade]

I know the joke was offensive, but now people actually have something to bitch about instead of complaining about a name that was used to signal a victory. I wonder what the percentage of people screeching about this know about military code in the first place? Did they even know what the code word was for when they started complaining? If not, how could they possibly be justified?

This isn't even to mention that everybody will always find their own special little things to be offended by if they think they stand to gain from it. You don't take out things like code words because people mighty be offended by them on the off chance they're used in a major operation and people hear about them. You especially don't remove words that are already in use by the military and that nobody complains about.

[Bakustra]

DIPSHIT, Get this through your head. Just because Geronimo was used as a codeword doesn't mean that it was using him as a comparison to Bin Laden. And as many people pointed out, if you didn't fucking comprehend what you were reading, those of us "tradional americans" have had no problem had they used "Washington" or "Jefferson" or "Kennedy" or "Britney Spears" to denote the success of the mission.

That was not meant for you, because it was meant for people who understand what the word "privilege" means in this context. Hint: It explains why most Americans don't have a problem with American heroes being substituted but the Apache did have a problem with Geronimo being substituted.

Ah yes, since Geronimo (not his real name) represents an "oppressed minority" we can't use his name for anything. I see the level of bullshit rising.

Wrong. That's a misrepresentation of my post. I realize that this is how any racial discussion goes- rewriting people's arguments into grotesque parodies to avoid confronting what they actually say. But what privilege means is that you, being part of an unoppressed group, do not have the same factors that contribute to the reasons why the Apache would be offended by the use of Geronimo's name. In other words, you have certain privileges that the Apache do not. This does not mean that people cannot use Geronimo's name, or whatever comes out of your overheating cerebral cortex.

So according to you, the Apache are literally children who can't decide whether or not to be offended, and have to be told so by white people. That is what your post implies, and it speaks for itself.

I was actually referring to smug politically correct jagoffs. News flash buddy - there are people just like you from all ethnic groups.

News flash for you- it's spelled "jackoff" or "jack-off". Also, substituting "have to be told so by a ethnically mixed Illuminati" for "have to be told so by white people" does not improve your position all that much.

Perhaps you should read what I said carefully. You see, by putting words close to one another, you create associations between them. That's a well-recognized phenomenon in psychology, well enough for it to be used clinically as the word-association test. In this case, the Apache feel that associating a complex, semi-heroic figure with a purely villainous individual such as Bin Laden is inappropriate. That does not mean that direct comparisons were made, oddly enough. I'm sure that this is all about the Apache (or the white liberal overlords you apparently believe in), conspiring to grab airtime, and because you're not offended, nobody could ever be offended.

The correct response is to educate people that code-words are not meant to imply any similarity between that which they identify. They are simply used for distinctiveness and clarity in communication, not as part of some secret plot to desicrate the object they are describing. If they were, then Casino's and Lottery officials should be all up in arms over referring to Bin Laden as "Jackpot".

That's not what the Apache are offended by. It's like you aren't even bothering to read my posts- I could probably replace you with a Perl script at this point and nobody'd ever notice.

You know what? I could again point out numerous examples of how code words have nothing whatsoever to do with the object to which they are assigned. But you'd just ignore them, so I'll just finish by saying "You're an idiot" and move on.

You know what? You suck at quoting, and you don't even comprehend my argument! That's worse than Coffee, who's just stuck in a douchey but uncollapsed waveform where he won't admit to reading my posts! Go to the foot of the class, sir.

I'm sure if the guy who assigned it had it to do all over again he'd probably have used a different name because trying to explain to people like you who just like to stir up shit, that there is no corresponding link between code words and the objects they are assigned to. And to expect that he could forsee that the Apache might be offended that we used the word "Geronimo" to denote success is asinine 20/20 hindsight bullshit.

Yeah dude, if something makes you uncomfortable or offends you, just don't talk about it. Can't be stirring up the shit! And if people start raging about the Apache and dipping into quasi-racist statements, why, then, you just let it go! Don't want to make a fuss! Words to truly live your life by.

So maybe the US government could apologize for an accidental offense, then? I mean, if it wouldn't somehow cost us too much.

[Bakustra]

I know the joke was offensive, but now people actually have something to bitch about instead of complaining about a name that was used to signal a victory. I wonder what the percentage of people screeching about this know about military code in the first place? Did they even know what the code word was for when they started complaining? If not, how could they possibly be justified?

This isn't even to mention that everybody will always find their own special little things to be offended by if they think they stand to gain from it. You don't take out things like code words because people mighty be offended by them on the off chance they're used in a major operation and people hear about them. You especially don't remove words that are already in use by the military and that nobody complains about.

What exactly went into your head that being racist was considered the appropriate response?

In addition, what exactly do you think is being gained here? The Apache just would like an apology, not a billion dollars in economic relief to try and relieve their crushing poverty and severe malnutrition problems.

Finally, the whole point is that of association, which I just explained in my posts directed at TheHammer, so I'll just quote myself:

I mean, what we have here is Geronimo being used in a military operation, against a man who has fought the US and ran from them for years on end, much like the actual Geronimo, so in the context, it seems to be associating probably the most hated man in America with Geronimo, who is not, and should not, be considered similarly to how Bin Laden is today. So the Apache said that, seeing as Geronimo is a pretty heroic figure for at least some people, and at the very least remembered better, they feel that this was inappropriate.

and

Perhaps you should read what I said carefully. You see, by putting words close to one another, you create associations between them. That's a well-recognized phenomenon in psychology, well enough for it to be used clinically as the word-association test. In this case, the Apache feel that associating a complex, semi-heroic figure with a purely villainous individual such as Bin Laden is inappropriate. That does not mean that direct comparisons were made, oddly enough. I'm sure that this is all about the Apache (or the white liberal overlords you apparently believe in), conspiring to grab airtime, and because you're not offended, nobody could ever be offended.

You should, I hope, unlike Mr. Coffee, be able to read two paragraphs without suffering dire consequences for it.

[Akhlut]

With the amount of butthurt over something so small I say the White House should apologize to them via a message sewn into large knitted blankets just so they have something worth being fucking offended over. To the average person hearing the term it's something you use when leaping into the unknown or as a battle cry, to a subset of an already statistically insignificant native band it meant a historical figure and to an even smaller subset it meant being offended that a historical figure was being used to represent victory. How many people would have been offended by this if the head of 'get Natives noticed' hadn't made a fucking deal out of this? Besides the overly PC Bakustra who, given his frankly retarded stance on everything to do with this operation, might have.

I mean it seems to me that when your culture is going away faster than you can save it and hardly anybody speaks your language; let alone gives a shit about your historical figures; that you'd be glad you're even getting any mention at all. Even worse when it's something that they shouldn't be offended over and doubly so when the military has been using natives words and names for as long as they have with no complaints. You can't just pick and chose which minor honors you're going to take as insults and expect people to give a shit.

Is there an argument in there or are you just trying to be inflammatory for the sake of it?

Anyway, they're are some very pertinant reasons for wanting to dissociate one's cultural heritage from potential demonization (especially the Apache, who have had a long history of being demonized by white people), such as wanting to retain their own cultural identity distinct from that association, as well as trying to get Geronimo recognized as someone, not just a word you yell when you hop out of an airplane.

Further, the Apache are more numerous than they were in the past (approximately 6000 in 1910 versus approximately 56,000 now), and though having to deal with problems common on reservations and struggling to maintain a separate culture, they are not doing too bad, all told.

Then, of course, there's always the humor in other people taking offense at other people taking offense; it reminds me of the Asian congressmen getting death threats after asking Rush Limbaugh to apologize for being a racist on his show; there are, of course, some differences (ST6 wasn't being overtly racist, you're not threatening anyone with death), but you're still getting pissy that someone has the temerity to find something offensive. Especially, of all people, an American Indian tribe that has traditionally had a very thorny relationship with the federal government and would be inclined to viewing their actions in a dim light because the US government generally shits on them all the time anyway! Ooh, how terrible of them, trying to distance the name of their most famous son from the man most hated by everyone in the United States!

[Akhlut]

I'm sure if the guy who assigned it had it to do all over again he'd probably have used a different name because trying to explain to people like you who just like to stir up shit, that there is no corresponding link between code words and the objects they are assigned to. And to expect that he could forsee that the Apache might be offended that we used the word "Geronimo" to denote success is asinine 20/20 hindsight bullshit.

They could always just remove words that could cause problems from the selections in the first place or discard them when they come up if they don't want to scour the database for them. If an operation is likely to be famous (such as capturing/killing someone like bin Laden, perhaps), then remove any words that pop up that could be a problem. No one's hurt by using more carefully chosen language and it's not creating much extra work. And, fuck it, why not just stay away from using famous personal names altogether? Again, doesn't hurt anyone.

[Broomstick]

It could be just that the Apache don't want to be associated with this operation regardless of what word is used, or how. I haven't seen a detailed explanation of why they find it offensive, just that they do and would like an apology and for the military not to use the name again in that manner.

OH, horrors!

Other cultures have different views on the proper use of names. Another Native group, the Dine (a.k.a. Navajo) have a cultural taboo on using the name of a deceased person for ANY reason, positive or negative. I'm not sure how long after death that taboo remains, but in their culture naming a scholarship fund after someone deceased would be offensive no matter that we find it a way to honor the dead and remember them.

Now, why did the Apache get offended? Fuck if I know. Does it matter? No, not really. Like I said, how much does it really cost the US to say "Sorry, we didn't me to offend you but we apologize if we did and we won't use that word again." There, is it that hard to do? Did anyone's dick shrivel up and drop off with that? No? See - not a problem.

In case anyone was wondering - his given name was (depending on how you render it in Latin characters) Goyathlay or Goyahkla. Geronimo was allegedly a corruption of St. Jerome, which saint some Mexicans Geronimo was stabbing with a knife appealed to for help as Geronimo didn't seem at all intimidated or slowed down by the bullets they were shooting at him. (He apparently employed that tactic several times, charging directly at someone firing at him and stabbing/grappling at close range.) On the other hand, I've never heard of him having any objection to being referred to by that name and it's not like the man was ever hesitant to speak his mind while he was alive. So it really doesn't matter what his real name was, he's known as Geronimo pretty much world-wide.

[Chi'Tak]

As a 1/4 blood Cherokee and a 1/4 blood Blackfeet, it does not bother me being called an American Indian, not 1 iota, because of a mistake made by a stupid explorer, any more than it offends me to be called an American because of the explorer Amerigo Vespucci from where the name for the Continents came from. Technically a Native American is someone who was born here, no more no less, an American Indian is a member of one or more of the indigenous tribes who were here prior to the European invasion.

Should we all be upset because our continents and country were named after an Italian Explorer? I get more upset at the lost of the knowledge and ways of my ancestors - ALL OF THEM.

[Zed]

any more than it offends me to be called an American because of the explorer Amerigo Vespucci from where the name for the Continents came from.

This is disputed.

[Covenant]

Well, and Apache isn't the name those people chose for themselves either.

As much as I think it's entirely inconsistent to be okay with using the names Apache, Commanche and Geronimo with regard to Helicopters and war-cries out of helicopters but not used to denote success over a hated foe... whatever. This is one of those situations where people don't seem to want to agree on what's consistent or not, so you're better off giving a "sorry for offending you" apology even if there was actually no wrong-doing or even accidental racism involved. Here's a statement:

"Our understanding is that bin Laden's actual code name was 'Jackpot' and the operation name was 'Geronimo,' " [But] "to associate a Native warrior with bin Laden is not an accurate reflection of history and it undermines the military service of Native people. It's critical that military leaders and operational standards honor the service of those who protect our freedom."

At this point, there's really nothing you can say because people won't not be offended without a mostly pointless apology. You can argue that it wasn't associating him with bin Ladin, and it wasn't, but people have been stirred up by someone who went off half-cocked before he got the operational name right. We may have blundered into sensitive territory by misinterpreting how broadly the name of Geronimo is okay to use in military badassedry.

I really don't want to offend any of the native peoples, so it's not like I want to brush off offense--but it seems so out-of-nowhere that it makes you scratch your head. Like I said, it's not like we never use Geronimo in other situations.

[TheHammer]

So according to you, the Apache are literally children who can't decide whether or not to be offended, and have to be told so by white people. That is what your post implies, and it speaks for itself.

I was actually referring to smug politically correct jagoffs. News flash buddy - there are people just like you from all ethnic groups.

News flash for you- it's spelled "jackoff" or "jack-off". Also, substituting "have to be told so by a ethnically mixed Illuminati" for "have to be told so by white people" does not improve your position all that much.

Wow you're actually going to try and correct me on a slang term? And for your information "Jagoff" is also an accepted way to spell it or use it - Google it.

Your pathetic attempt to spin this show that I'm somehow describing the Apache as sheep is laughable. The fact is, there are plenty of sheep to be found among all ethnic groups. If it had been Sean Hannity stirring a bunch of white people up if "Washington" had been used my opinion would be the same.

The correct response is to educate people that code-words are not meant to imply any similarity between that which they identify. They are simply used for distinctiveness and clarity in communication, not as part of some secret plot to desicrate the object they are describing. If they were, then Casino's and Lottery officials should be all up in arms over referring to Bin Laden as "Jackpot".

That's not what the Apache are offended by. It's like you aren't even bothering to read my posts- I could probably replace you with a Perl script at this point and nobody'd ever notice.

They are offended because they don't like the notion that "Bin Laden" is linked with "Geronimo". Yeah I got that. But they should understand, that is NOT what took place.

Yeah dude, if something makes you uncomfortable or offends you, just don't talk about it. Can't be stirring up the shit! And if people start raging about the Apache and dipping into quasi-racist statements, why, then, you just let it go! Don't want to make a fuss! Words to truly live your life by.

So maybe the US government could apologize for an accidental offense, then? I mean, if it wouldn't somehow cost us too much.

If you apologize for incidents where no real offense took place, then you cheapen apologies given at times when that apology was warranted. If your default stance is just to "Apologize whether they really deserve it or not just to make them shut up", then what fucking good is the apology in the first place? It becomes absolutely meaningless.

And stirring up controversy where there is none only serves to draw disdain from the "priveleged" class as you call it. Eventually legitimate concerns get lumped in with the same level of attention as illegitimate concerns. Then you have the Rush Limbaughs saying "See they are at it again, these people will never be satisified". Things that should be drawn attention to, instead are lost in the noise.

[Chi'Tak]

any more than it offends me to be called an American because of the explorer Amerigo Vespucci from where the name for the Continents came from.

This is disputed.

By whom? Kindly provide something other than a source titled Snopes or factcheck org as a random 5th Grade grade school Class is actually more accurate and unbiased.

I am a 60 yo Constitutional, Early American and Military Historian (among my other vices) so the use of Opinion or Anecdotes as proof means absolutely nothing. It is usually a good laugh to read of someone tiring to post opinion as proof of something other than someone has an opinion.

[Zed]

I was thinking of Richard Ameryk, one of the sponsors of a naval expedition, but some further digging into scholarly sources reveals that that position has been discredited.

[Mr. Coffee]

There's no harm in apologizing for a computer error. We'd probably have to say something if a mission in Israel got designated "Operation Jew" or a mission to Kenya was designated "Operation Spearpoint"

See, I could understand if they were offended by the use of "Geronimo" as a codeword for Osama, since that seems to be what their original complaint was. Here's the thing, we used it as a code word signaling operational success, and given the Apache's love of constantly reminding anyone that will listen about their proud warrior heritage how the fuck they can be offended by Geronimo's name being used to signal that we had finally killed one of the biggest terrorists in world history is fucking beyond goddamn comprehension. Again, apologizing would imply that we had done something wrong, but since we haven't then no apologies are owed and the Apache Tribal Council or whoever can enjoy their 15min of attention while the rest of us politely ignore their attention whoring over nothing.

You and that flaming fucking dumbshit Bakustra can wonk on about it all you want, but there's nothing here to apologize for.

[Inkanta]

Greetings,

I'd been reading Noam Chomsky's reaction to Bin Laden, and to the usage of “Geronimo” (http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/2652/no ... ion_to_os/). I became curious about the Apache reaction and found this forum in the mix. Hi, all! Here is what Jeff Houser, the Apache tribal chair, said: http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.c ... nimo-name/. Using Native names is a very thorny issue. Sure, a huge number of US place-names and words have come from various Native languages and I don’t think anyone is advocating renaming everything; however, imho going forward we can be more sensitive about using Native names (and those of other ethnicities, as well). There are some educational sites that can help deepen one's understanding of Native culture and issues, including the Native American Home Pages and Oyate (http://www.nativeculturelinks.com/indians.html and http://www.oyate.org). Both sites are run by educators.

Cheers,

Inkanta

[FSTargetDrone]

Since it was alluded to, has there ever been any similar objection (in the unreasonable-to-clump-together-but-generalizing-for-the-sake-of-time) Native American "community" towards the use of various tribe names with respect to US Army helicopters?

[Chi'Tak]

Greetings,

I'd been reading Noam Chomsky's reaction to Bin Laden, and to the usage of “Geronimo” (http://www.guernicamag.com/blog/2652/no ... ion_to_os/). I became curious about the Apache reaction and found this forum in the mix. Hi, all! Here is what Jeff Houser, the Apache tribal chair, said: http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.c ... nimo-name/. Using Native names is a very thorny issue. Sure, a huge number of US place-names and words have come from various Native languages and I don’t think anyone is advocating renaming everything; however, imho going forward we can be more sensitive about using Native names (and those of other ethnicities, as well). There are some educational sites that can help deepen one's understanding of Native culture and issues, including the Native American Home Pages and Oyate (http://www.nativeculturelinks.com/indians.html and http://www.oyate.org). Both sites are run by educators.

Cheers,

Inkanta

Being run by "educators" does not in any amount indicate automatic truth or confidence that the information contained will be truth and not opinion. Unless one reads the original documents what is provided is opinion of what is written. Basing ones beliefs and politics on opinion is laughable and deserving of ridicule. As a 60 year old Early American, Constitutional, and Military Historian I see the "history" that is taught is mainly the opinion of what the writer has read and not fact, it is called revisionist history, and some of what is printed is better than a night at a comedy club, esp when one compares the original document to what some writers insist it says.

Once again a Native American is simply one who has been born here. Native American does not necessarily mean indigenous people, on the other hand American Indian does mean indigenous people, and as one of those indigenous people the idea that I am less of a person because I identify myself as an American Indian is ludicrous and is patiently laughable. PC turns a normal human being into a driveling politician and that is bullshit.

[DudeGuyMan]

Guys I have a confession to make: A minority is offended over some meaningless attention-whoring thing, and I don't care. I know this makes me Hitler, but there it is.

[Broomstick]

:::::

Please, it doesn't make you Hitler, at most, it might make you insensitive. If the Apaches have their panties in a twist over this it's simple enough to say, alright, in the future we won't use Geronimo as a code word. My god, it's not like anyone's nuts are going to fall off if we do that. There are lots of other words and names we could use instead.

[SCRawl]

Once again a Native American is simply one who has been born here. Native American does not necessarily mean indigenous people, on the other hand American Indian does mean indigenous people, and as one of those indigenous people the idea that I am less of a person because I identify myself as an American Indian is ludicrous and is patiently laughable. PC turns a normal human being into a driveling politician and that is bullshit.

"Native American" is used extensively to mean an aboriginal person. Yes, if you want to tease out the proper meaning of that expression it would include any person born an American citizen, but that just isn't how it's used for the most part.