UINTAH BASIN STANDARD
Letters to the Editor
AUC's letter propaganda
02 Sept. 2008
This letter is in reply to Arlene Gardner’s letter to the editor titled “AUC responds to Felter group,” dated Aug. 26.
Ms. Gardner seems to have given the plaintiffs in the lawsuit titled Felter v. Kempthorne, and anyone who supports this case, more credit then they deserve. Felter v. Kempthorne is made up of separate, like mind, individual plaintiffs and that’s all.
The letter seemingly starts out with the intentions of addressing the petition currently being circulated titled, Repeal or Completion of Public Law 671, 83rd Congress. But in her second paragraph she regresses existentially back into the classical aesthetic raison d'etre mime espoused by the current leadership in regards to Felter v. Kempthorne.
It seems as if the AUC leadership has risen to the point where they’ve become Apotheoses. It makes me wonder if the AUC and the Ute Indian Tribe hasn’t established some kind of crypto alliance, with the intentions of denying those individuals who’ve signed or intend to sign the petition their Constitutional right to petition the government for a redress of grievances, guaranteed by the First Amendment, there by debilitating Felter v. Kempthorne.
The AUC claims complete authority over the lives of the 490 terminated mixed-bloods of the Ute Indian Tribe. One would think the mixed-blood is locked into a life of servitude to this organization, which is ambiguous to say the least.
Given AUC’s attitude and their dismal track record of the past it’s a wonder any terminated mixed-blood would still be or want to be involved with this inimical group. It doesn’t make sense to continually place trust in an organization whose dogmatic methods are repressive and discriminatory.
Ms. Gardner’s assertion that “Oranna Felter is misrepresenting herself by implying that she has some kind of authority to take action on behalf of the mixed-bloods and full-bloods” is nothing more than conjecture; wanton propaganda insidiously designed to establish a negative opinion towards Oranna and to marginalize the efforts she’s made and is making on behalf of all terminated mixed-bloods and their descendants.
The remaining statements in Ms. Gardner’s letter are nothing more than canards filled with verbiage. This is a good example of the Peter Principle.
Ms. Gardner’s effort at pontification ends on a condescending note. “She and her colleagues need to get over it and give it a rest.” This assertion implies that Felter and the others are unruly children throwing a temper tantrum and if they don’t behave, they’ll get a spanking!
But in reality, Ms. Gardner’s response is nothing more then a veiled effort to intimidate the terminated mixed-bloods and their descendants. No matter. For all their pious bile, they forget, overblown protest betrays them.
Taft, Calif. - Letter to Editor