By Faizool Deo
AMERINDIAN Affairs Minister Carolyn Rodrigues is refuting the claim by three Amerindian groups that the 2005 Amerindian Bill does not meet the needs of Amerindians in the country.
On the contrary, the minister feels the bill has come a far way from the Amerindian Act of 1951, and once implemented, will give Amerindians much more than they ever had.
At a press conference Tuesday at the Side Walk Café on Middle Street, Georgetown, members of the Amerindian Peoples Association (APA), The Amerindian Action Movement of Guyana (TAAMOG) and the Guyanese Organisation of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP) voiced their concerns about the Bill, which they dubbed ‘unacceptable’.
They charged that discrimination against the indigenous peoples remains entrenched and manifested in the bill, and their rights to lands, resources and to self determination are neither adequately recognised nor protected.
At a post-Cabinet press conference yesterday, Ms Rodrigues indicated that the bill is not a product of the government, but rather comprises recommendations of the Amerindian people, who were an integral part in the consultation period prior to the formulation of the legislation.
“Forty-six of the 76 recommendations which were made at the consultations we took into consideration,” she said. “One of the recommendations that we took is that the communities could lease land; before they could not. We were advised by the international consultant not to do that, but we did it still.”
The minister said that unlike other countries, Guyana is making it very easy for Amerindian people to acquire land, and the bill stipulates that Amerindians can make claims for lands after occupying them for 25 years.
The groups of Amerindians looking for changes to the bill argue that it gives the minister too much power.
They are quoted as saying in their documentation presented to the media on Tuesday that, in the bill, the minister is vested with “arbitrary and draconian powers” that are incompatible with indigenous peoples’ self determining status and the exercise and enjoyment of other rights and fundamental freedoms.
But Rodrigues said her ministry will only be called in to address situations that could not be dealt with at other levels.
“Every day in the ministry captains come to us with problems which they can resolve by themselves, and we will say to them you can do that by yourselves you do not need us. But there are cases when the council would come to us to make a decision, but this is always a last resort.”
Another issue she put to rest is that of the presumed procrastination on her ministry’s part in implementing the Indigenous Peoples Commission, which is to represent the Amerindian people.
She said her ministry would be happy for the commission to be put in place, but several factors are preventing this from happening.
But there is another grouse that worries the three Amerindian groups.
“What Guyana has done is to include in our national laws some international laws, so we have at least seven international covenants which have been included in our national laws. The Amerindian Act should be compatible with the laws. We are saying at present that it is not. So if it’s passed as it now reads, then we can challenge it in court, because it will be in contravention of the Constitution,” APA representative David James contended.
Rodrigues remarked that even if all the demands of the Amerindian groups opposing the bill are met, she still feels that they will go to court.
But she assured the indigenous people that the bill, once implemented, will enhance the well-being of the nation’s Amerindian population.
8/25/2005
Puerto Rico’s Biotech Harvest
by Carmelo Ruiz-Marrero
(Alternet, July 13, 2004) - If the American people are for the most part unaware of genetic engineering and food biotechnology issues, the people of Puerto Rico are blissfully in the dark – so far.
Puerto Rico, known for its pineapples and its world-renowned coffee crop, now has a new crop: the biotech harvest.
Much of the genetically engineered (GE) corn and soybean seed planted in the United States comes from this Caribbean island. Furthermore, Puerto Rico is also a preferred location for agricultural biotechnology experiments. According to data from the US Department of Agriculture
When one considers the vast difference in size (Illinois and Iowa have just over 50,000 sq. miles each, whereas Puerto Rico has less than 4,000 sq. miles) it becomes evident that Puerto Rico has more such experiments per square mile than any state, with the possible exception of Hawaii. Puerto Rico also tops California, with 1,709 experiments, although it is approximately 40 times larger than PR and has a vastly larger agricultural output.
These experiments are mostly aimed at the two most widely used GE traits: herbicide resistance (like Roundup Ready crops) and insect control (like the insecticidal Bt corn). But they also include research on biopharmaceutical crops – plants that produce pharmaceutical and industrial chemicals in their tissues – and has also included the controversial “Terminator” crops, which produce sterile seed.
Why Puerto Rico?
The island’s friendly tropical weather permits as many as four harvests per year, making it a favorite for seed breeders for agribusiness and biotechnology corporations like Dow, Syngenta, Pioneer and Monsanto, which got together in 1996 to form the PR Seed Research Association (AISPR).
But another reason for choosing Puerto Rico is its “good political climate.” Puerto Rico is not an independent country, nor is it a state of the American union. It is an “unincorporated territory.” Puerto Ricans are US citizens subject to US laws, yet they cannot vote in presidential elections and have no representation in Congress. There are no anti-biotech campaigns or protesters, not even the mildest criticism. If the American people are for the most part unaware of genetic engineering and food biotechnology issues, the people of Puerto Rico are blissfully in the dark.
Is agricultural biotechnology safe? The US government and the biotech industry argue vehemently that biotech crops and products are safe, are extremely well tested and regulated, and present no new risks to public health or the environment. But many scientists, farmers and environmental NGOs beg to differ.
Genetic Contamination
“The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not regulate GE foods,” stated the environmental group Friends of the Earth USA (FoE USA) in a report issued in 2003. Instead, says the report, the FDA has a “voluntary consultation” process that allows biotechnology companies to decide which, if any, safety tests to conduct and how they will be performed. “The company determines which data, if any, are shared with regulators. In fact, the company even determines whether it will consult with the FDA at all.”
Other groups, like the UK-based Institute of Science in Society and the US-based Center for Critical Genetics, claim that the scientific assumptions behind genetic engineering are plain wrong and obsolete.
One of the biotech critics’ main concerns is genetic contamination – the uncontrolled proliferation of GE crops through pollination, inventory errors and other means. In late 2002 I gave a presentation at a symposium on biotechnology organized by the Puerto Rico Agricultural Extension Service in which I warned that it is only a matter of time before a biopharmaceutical crop (for example one that produces a powerful pharmaceutical substance) accidentally ends up on supermarket shelves, causing a biological Chernobyl, a public health emergency of horrific and unprecedented nature.
After my talk, Dow corporation representative Victor Torres-Collazo, himself a former AISPR president, respectfully disagreed with me. He assured me that genetic contamination is not a problem because of very strict precautionary measures mandated by law.
But fears of GE contamination are indeed well founded. In 2000, over 300 US supermarket products were found to be tainted with Starlink, a variety of GE corn that the FDA had deemed unfit for human consumption. Some 140 million bushels were contaminated, food processors and grain traders spent around $1 billion over six months trying to locate it and get rid of it, and even today traces of Starlink keep showing up occasionally in American corn exports.
The following year GE corn was discovered growing in Mexico’s rural communities, a development whose long-term consequences for biodiversity, agriculture and human health remain uncertain.
In February 2004 the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) unveiled a pilot study that shows that breeders’ varieties of corn, soy, canola and cotton seed in the United States are contaminated with GE material. This means that farmers in the USA – and wherever American seed is exported – could be planting GE seed without knowing it.
“Seeds will be our only recourse if the prevailing belief in the safety of genetic engineering proves wrong,” warns UCS. “Heedlessly allowing the contamination of traditional plant varieties with genetically engineered sequences amounts to a huge wager on our ability to understand a complicated technology that manipulates life at the most elemental level.”
Uncontrolled Experiments
The aforementioned genetic experiments in Puerto Rico are not carried out in sealed greenhouses or fermentation vats. “These are outdoor, uncontrolled experiments,” said Bill Freese, of FoE USA. “These experimental GE traits are almost certainly contaminating conventional crops just as the commercialized GE traits are. And the experimental GE crops aren’t even subject to the cursory rubber-stamp ‘approval’ process that commercialized GE crops go through – so I think the high concentration of experimental GE crop trials in Puerto Rico is definitely cause for concern.”
I asked P.R. agriculture secretary Luis Rivero-Cubano if he thought GE crops were any reason for concern. He said that the GE fields here are “just experimental.” The agriculture secretary himself seemed unaware of the massive commercial production of GE seed right here in Puerto Rico.
I then spoke with P.R. Farm Bureau president Ramon Gonzalez, who told a somewhat different story. According to Gonzalez, there are no GE experiments in Puerto Rico; all biotech crops grown here are for commercial use.
Gonzalez himself grows GE corn and soy – for export to the USA as seed – in his farm in the town of Salinas. He claimed to be particularly happy with the soy, which is genetically engineered to be resistant to the Roundup herbicide. He said Roundup is “environmentally benign,” a claim disputed by environmentalists and organic farmers.
Next on my list was the USDA, which has to approve every open-air biotech crop field test. None of Department’s employees seemed to know anything about genetically engineered crops. After an exasperating and fruitless exchange, one of them provided me a USDA phone number in Washington, which turned out to be that of the Meat and Poultry Inspection Service.
The local office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proved no more helpful. Its spokesman Jose Font stated that agriculture does not concern the agency unless toxic pesticides are used.
Finally, I tried the P.R. Environmental Quality Board. No dice. A spokeswoman said that since Puerto Rico has no laws or regulations for GM crops, it has no mandate to intervene or investigate.
Civil society organizations? Forget it. Their leaders have no position on the issue, to the extent that any of them even know what biotech is.
A “good political climate,” indeed.
No protests, no opposition. Not yet, anyway.
Puerto Rican journalist Carmelo Ruiz-Marrero directs the Puerto Rico Project on Biosafety. He is also a Research Associate of the Institute for Social Ecology, a fellow of the Environmental Leadership Program, and a senior fellow of the Society of Environmental Journalists.
SEE RELATED ARTICLE AT:
http://www.checkbiotech.org/blocks/dsp_document.cfm?doc_id=4093
(Alternet, July 13, 2004) - If the American people are for the most part unaware of genetic engineering and food biotechnology issues, the people of Puerto Rico are blissfully in the dark – so far.
Puerto Rico, known for its pineapples and its world-renowned coffee crop, now has a new crop: the biotech harvest.
Much of the genetically engineered (GE) corn and soybean seed planted in the United States comes from this Caribbean island. Furthermore, Puerto Rico is also a preferred location for agricultural biotechnology experiments. According to data from the US Department of Agriculture
When one considers the vast difference in size (Illinois and Iowa have just over 50,000 sq. miles each, whereas Puerto Rico has less than 4,000 sq. miles) it becomes evident that Puerto Rico has more such experiments per square mile than any state, with the possible exception of Hawaii. Puerto Rico also tops California, with 1,709 experiments, although it is approximately 40 times larger than PR and has a vastly larger agricultural output.
These experiments are mostly aimed at the two most widely used GE traits: herbicide resistance (like Roundup Ready crops) and insect control (like the insecticidal Bt corn). But they also include research on biopharmaceutical crops – plants that produce pharmaceutical and industrial chemicals in their tissues – and has also included the controversial “Terminator” crops, which produce sterile seed.
Why Puerto Rico?
The island’s friendly tropical weather permits as many as four harvests per year, making it a favorite for seed breeders for agribusiness and biotechnology corporations like Dow, Syngenta, Pioneer and Monsanto, which got together in 1996 to form the PR Seed Research Association (AISPR).
But another reason for choosing Puerto Rico is its “good political climate.” Puerto Rico is not an independent country, nor is it a state of the American union. It is an “unincorporated territory.” Puerto Ricans are US citizens subject to US laws, yet they cannot vote in presidential elections and have no representation in Congress. There are no anti-biotech campaigns or protesters, not even the mildest criticism. If the American people are for the most part unaware of genetic engineering and food biotechnology issues, the people of Puerto Rico are blissfully in the dark.
Is agricultural biotechnology safe? The US government and the biotech industry argue vehemently that biotech crops and products are safe, are extremely well tested and regulated, and present no new risks to public health or the environment. But many scientists, farmers and environmental NGOs beg to differ.
Genetic Contamination
“The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not regulate GE foods,” stated the environmental group Friends of the Earth USA (FoE USA) in a report issued in 2003. Instead, says the report, the FDA has a “voluntary consultation” process that allows biotechnology companies to decide which, if any, safety tests to conduct and how they will be performed. “The company determines which data, if any, are shared with regulators. In fact, the company even determines whether it will consult with the FDA at all.”
Other groups, like the UK-based Institute of Science in Society and the US-based Center for Critical Genetics, claim that the scientific assumptions behind genetic engineering are plain wrong and obsolete.
One of the biotech critics’ main concerns is genetic contamination – the uncontrolled proliferation of GE crops through pollination, inventory errors and other means. In late 2002 I gave a presentation at a symposium on biotechnology organized by the Puerto Rico Agricultural Extension Service in which I warned that it is only a matter of time before a biopharmaceutical crop (for example one that produces a powerful pharmaceutical substance) accidentally ends up on supermarket shelves, causing a biological Chernobyl, a public health emergency of horrific and unprecedented nature.
After my talk, Dow corporation representative Victor Torres-Collazo, himself a former AISPR president, respectfully disagreed with me. He assured me that genetic contamination is not a problem because of very strict precautionary measures mandated by law.
But fears of GE contamination are indeed well founded. In 2000, over 300 US supermarket products were found to be tainted with Starlink, a variety of GE corn that the FDA had deemed unfit for human consumption. Some 140 million bushels were contaminated, food processors and grain traders spent around $1 billion over six months trying to locate it and get rid of it, and even today traces of Starlink keep showing up occasionally in American corn exports.
The following year GE corn was discovered growing in Mexico’s rural communities, a development whose long-term consequences for biodiversity, agriculture and human health remain uncertain.
In February 2004 the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) unveiled a pilot study that shows that breeders’ varieties of corn, soy, canola and cotton seed in the United States are contaminated with GE material. This means that farmers in the USA – and wherever American seed is exported – could be planting GE seed without knowing it.
“Seeds will be our only recourse if the prevailing belief in the safety of genetic engineering proves wrong,” warns UCS. “Heedlessly allowing the contamination of traditional plant varieties with genetically engineered sequences amounts to a huge wager on our ability to understand a complicated technology that manipulates life at the most elemental level.”
Uncontrolled Experiments
The aforementioned genetic experiments in Puerto Rico are not carried out in sealed greenhouses or fermentation vats. “These are outdoor, uncontrolled experiments,” said Bill Freese, of FoE USA. “These experimental GE traits are almost certainly contaminating conventional crops just as the commercialized GE traits are. And the experimental GE crops aren’t even subject to the cursory rubber-stamp ‘approval’ process that commercialized GE crops go through – so I think the high concentration of experimental GE crop trials in Puerto Rico is definitely cause for concern.”
I asked P.R. agriculture secretary Luis Rivero-Cubano if he thought GE crops were any reason for concern. He said that the GE fields here are “just experimental.” The agriculture secretary himself seemed unaware of the massive commercial production of GE seed right here in Puerto Rico.
I then spoke with P.R. Farm Bureau president Ramon Gonzalez, who told a somewhat different story. According to Gonzalez, there are no GE experiments in Puerto Rico; all biotech crops grown here are for commercial use.
Gonzalez himself grows GE corn and soy – for export to the USA as seed – in his farm in the town of Salinas. He claimed to be particularly happy with the soy, which is genetically engineered to be resistant to the Roundup herbicide. He said Roundup is “environmentally benign,” a claim disputed by environmentalists and organic farmers.
Next on my list was the USDA, which has to approve every open-air biotech crop field test. None of Department’s employees seemed to know anything about genetically engineered crops. After an exasperating and fruitless exchange, one of them provided me a USDA phone number in Washington, which turned out to be that of the Meat and Poultry Inspection Service.
The local office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proved no more helpful. Its spokesman Jose Font stated that agriculture does not concern the agency unless toxic pesticides are used.
Finally, I tried the P.R. Environmental Quality Board. No dice. A spokeswoman said that since Puerto Rico has no laws or regulations for GM crops, it has no mandate to intervene or investigate.
Civil society organizations? Forget it. Their leaders have no position on the issue, to the extent that any of them even know what biotech is.
A “good political climate,” indeed.
No protests, no opposition. Not yet, anyway.
Puerto Rican journalist Carmelo Ruiz-Marrero directs the Puerto Rico Project on Biosafety. He is also a Research Associate of the Institute for Social Ecology, a fellow of the Environmental Leadership Program, and a senior fellow of the Society of Environmental Journalists.
SEE RELATED ARTICLE AT:
http://www.checkbiotech.org/blocks/dsp_document.cfm?doc_id=4093
7/22/2005
Caribbean Native nations join U.N. Permanent Forum
A group of Caribbean indigenous nations gathered for special ceremonies and events in late May during the 4th United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, held in New York City. The indigenous movement in the Caribbean represents one of the lesser-known currents of Native cultural and political resurgence. This spring at the United Nations, the various delegations of Caribbean indigenous peoples coalesced in interesting and welcome ways.
For the first time in many years, Caribbean indigenous representatives were able to meet, share food and culture, and get down to the hard work of U.N. resolutions, interventions and document reaffirmation that marks much of international work. The Taino Nation of the Antilles, with primary bases in Puerto Rico and New York City, organized events for Caribbean delegates. It fund-raised the costs of one delegate from Dominica and coordinated presentations. Roberto Borrero, a Taino who serves on the NGO committee of the Indigenous Permanent Forum, also helped fund delegates to the event and has been active in hemispheric organizing. An Indigenous Peoples Caucus of the Greater Caribbean has been formed.
Carib cultural activist Prosper Paris, among others, joined the U.N. events. Prosper is from the Carib Territory in the north coast of the small Caribbean island of Dominica. He was one of several presenters on a panel on Indigenous Education and Cultural Survival organized by the Taino Nation. This writer chaired the panel, held at the customary indigenous gathering place in New York City: the United Nations Church Center at 777 United Nations Plaza, where several dozen Taino, Carib, Arawak, Guajiro and other indigenous peoples gathered.
The notable event, ably organized by Vanessa Pastrana, Inarunikia, among other volunteers from the Taino Nation, featured a dance presentation from young Taino people and recitations in the Taino language that are the product of a vigorous reconstruction and relearning of the insular Arawak language by members of that nation since the 1980s.
"From Cuba, in the mountains of the Sierra, from Dominican Republic, from our own Boriken [Puerto Rico], we have met relatives, holding on to our identity and retaking our indigenous roots,'' said Cacique Cibanakan, of the Taino Nation. ''Our hearts pound with excitement that our people are coming together."
Indigenous delegates from all over the world arrive in New York City every spring for the now-permanent U.N. forum on Indigenous peoples' issues. There are always dozens if not hundreds of important and fascinating stories - both positive and negative - on the conditions of tribal peoples and on the always tortuous and troubled trajectory in the world of highly exploitative industries, with their rapacious hunger for indigenous lands and natural resources.
In too many cases, the political contentions of land and resources are accompanied by attacks on Native leaders and political and social structures. Quechua and Aymara from Bolivia and Ecuador, Kuna from Panama, Maya from Guatemala, northern Canadian Cree leaders, Lakota treaty chiefs and Haudenosaunee traditionalists from the United States and Saami from Norway, among many others, sustained a necessary dialogue on human rights and development through the work of U.N. gatherings.
In New York representing the Arawak community at Joboshirima in Venezuela, Chief Reginaldo Fredericks found a not-so-distant relative in Daniel Rivera, Wakonax, one of the active leaders in the Taino movement in Puerto Rico and the diaspora. The Arawak chief, who is Onishido Clan and lives mostly in the rain forest, was very happy to meet Taino relatives.
Among the messages carried by Fredericks from his people is the need to preserve and restore indigenous language. He commended the Taino language recovery program, developed by the nation's elder language advocate, Jose Laboy, Boriquex, and offered to help bring together the Arawak (Lokono) peoples wherever possible. ''It is wonderful we are more and more recognizing each other; we have a lot to offer each other,'' Rivera, who made an intervention at the United Nations on behalf of Caribbean Indian peoples, responded.
Of the many currents of indigenous movement across the Western Hemisphere, the Caribbean is the most hidden and marginalized. As communities, clans and nations coalesce, however, encounters such as the one at the United Nations in New York, provide common ground for exchange and mutual education. The shared cultural history is fascinating.Fredericks narrated stories of his people to the Taino Nation elder, which tell of six original Lokono (later Arawak) nations, which the chief called ''clans.'' Of the six ''clans,'' three are unaccounted for while Taino is in the process of vigorous cultural and social recovery.
According to Fredericks, the ancient Lokono tribes or clans were called Oralido, Cariafudo, Onishido ''rain people,'' Gimragi, Way'u, and the ''good people'' from the great islands (Taino). Today, ''as far as we know,'' the chief reported, only Onishido and Way'u survive on the mainland. The chief was most intrigued that hundreds and perhaps thousands of Taino descendants from the islands of the Greater Antilles are reaffirming themselves. The chief pointed to his headdress, which shows six feathers, symbolizing the six tribes or clans of the Lokono. ''The good island people, the Taino, are one of the six feathers,'' Fredericks reminded the other Caribbean delegates.
From La Guajira, Colombia, Karmen Ramirez represented the Way'u Morerat ORJUWAT organization. She pointed out not only her Native Way'u nation, but also four tribes from Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta as Arawaks who originate with the Way'u of the Guajira Peninsula. It was another instance of people from common ancestors and linked contemporary identities meeting and recognizing each other as a result of an indigenous international movement. The Way'u, who also reside in neighboring Venezuela, are one of those peoples hurtfully divided by an international border.
Caribbean indigenous delegates, in the shadows for decades if not centuries, put their statements into the record at the annual U.N. event. The Caribbean indigenous caucus signaled the following major goal: ''That the collective rights of the indigenous peoples of the Greater Caribbean to lands, territories, resources, and traditional knowledge be enshrined in the Constitution of all Greater Caribbean countries and in other states where indigenous peoples exist.''
Author: Jose Barreiro
Source: Indian Country Today
Author: Jose Barreiro
Source: Indian Country Today
12/28/2004
Taino Elder Will Exhibit Paintings in Georgia
Mountain City, Georgia (UCTP Taino News) - The pastel and oil fine art portraits by Mildred "Mucara" Torres-Speeg (Taino), award winning, internationally recognized artist, will be on exhibit Dec.28, 2004 through Feb.27, 2005 in the Heritage Room Gallery of the Georgia Heritage Center for the Arts, Hwy. 441 N., Tallulah Falls, Georgia. The exhibit, "Power of Spirit" is free and open to the public. A "Meet the Artist" reception will be held on Jan. 1st from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. in the Georgia Heritage Center for the Arts.
A respected Taino community elder, Torres-Speeg will display a variety of paintings, including "Claudia – Taino Woman", which was featured at the United Nations ART EXHIBITION "IN CELEBRATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES" sponsored by the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues from May through August, 2004. If you missed the UN exhibit, you can now see "Claudia," in Tallulah Falls, GA., along aith "Winterhawk"; "Spirit of the Hurricane"; "The Shaman"; "Taino Warrior" and other paintings depicting the life and culture of the Indigenous Peoples of North, South and Central America.
"Mucara" Torres-Speeg is the United Confederation of the Taino People Liaison Officer for the State of Georgia, an active member of the NGAG and past president of the Albany Georgia Artists Guild. She has exhibited at the Georgia Council for the Arts, Albany Museum of Art, State Capital Gallery, Atlanta, Andrew College, Jimmy Carter Library, Georgia Southwestern State College, Atlanta Spirit of America-Native American and Wildlife Art Festival, private collections and numerous others. Her work can be viewed at http://www.worldsbestart.com/ and http://www.nighteaglestudio.com/.
For directions or information about the exhibition, please call 706-754-5989. The Art Gallery hours are Mon – Sat 10 – 5 and Sun 1-5.
A respected Taino community elder, Torres-Speeg will display a variety of paintings, including "Claudia – Taino Woman", which was featured at the United Nations ART EXHIBITION "IN CELEBRATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES" sponsored by the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues from May through August, 2004. If you missed the UN exhibit, you can now see "Claudia," in Tallulah Falls, GA., along aith "Winterhawk"; "Spirit of the Hurricane"; "The Shaman"; "Taino Warrior" and other paintings depicting the life and culture of the Indigenous Peoples of North, South and Central America.
"Mucara" Torres-Speeg is the United Confederation of the Taino People Liaison Officer for the State of Georgia, an active member of the NGAG and past president of the Albany Georgia Artists Guild. She has exhibited at the Georgia Council for the Arts, Albany Museum of Art, State Capital Gallery, Atlanta, Andrew College, Jimmy Carter Library, Georgia Southwestern State College, Atlanta Spirit of America-Native American and Wildlife Art Festival, private collections and numerous others. Her work can be viewed at http://www.worldsbestart.com/ and http://www.nighteaglestudio.com/.
For directions or information about the exhibition, please call 706-754-5989. The Art Gallery hours are Mon – Sat 10 – 5 and Sun 1-5.
12/20/2004
UCTP Representative in Germany
UCTP Taino News - Claudia Fox Tree, UCTP Massachusetts Liaison, was recently invited to participate in the Native American Indian Heritage Month observances held by the United States Army in Germany. Claudia's mother is German and father is Arawak, so this presented a unique opportunity to share her Native American culture in the country of her mother's birth.
Claudia spoke to more than 300 U.S. soldiers and 800 of their children over a four-day period at military bases in Kaiserslautern, Darmstadt, Hanau, and Landstuhl, Hanau is where Elvis Presley was stationed. Landstuhl is where the United States military hospital is located. She was there in the days immediately following Fallujah.
Claudia used drumming, song and dance to educate folks about the history and contributions of Native People in general, and Taino/Arawak specifically. She described the Taino/Arawak initial encounter with Columbus in 1492, as well as his second voyage in 1494 where he brought 17 ships, soldiers and horses for warfare, and chains to enslave. Claudia also explained words and inventions that were Arawak in origin, such as, hurricane, barbecue, cigar, hammock, and tobacco. All of her presentations included connections to present day Native culture, current conditions, community connections, and ways Native People honor and respect each other, animals, and the land.
In 1990, President George Bush approved a joint resolution designating November 1990 as "National American Indian Heritage Month" to celebrate and recognize intertribal cultures and to educate the public about the heritage, history, art, and traditions of Native Americans. The Equal Opportunity Leaders of the United States Military are charged with bringing cultural awareness programs to their assigned bases, as well as, educating military personnel about sexual harassment. About twelve percent of the army consists of women, and even a smaller percentage is made up of Native Americans. Virginia Ming, Equal Opportunity Advisor (coordinator of the EOLs) was given the Massachusetts Center for Native American Awareness (MCNAA) website, where Claudia is a board member, and from there, contacted Claudia.
On some of the days, Claudia shared the stage with Ella Garlits (Navajo) and Lt. Bigman (Objibway). Ms. Garlits lives in Germany and her husband is in the military. She shared Navajo history, traditions, and artifacts. She also made Fry Bread. Ms. Bigman is stationed in Germany and she shared her Nation's Jingle Dress Dancing. The event was well-received by military personnel. Claudia frequently had a long line of soldiers, teachers, and children waiting to shake her hand and say "Thank you" at the end of the performance.
Claudia spoke to more than 300 U.S. soldiers and 800 of their children over a four-day period at military bases in Kaiserslautern, Darmstadt, Hanau, and Landstuhl, Hanau is where Elvis Presley was stationed. Landstuhl is where the United States military hospital is located. She was there in the days immediately following Fallujah.
Claudia used drumming, song and dance to educate folks about the history and contributions of Native People in general, and Taino/Arawak specifically. She described the Taino/Arawak initial encounter with Columbus in 1492, as well as his second voyage in 1494 where he brought 17 ships, soldiers and horses for warfare, and chains to enslave. Claudia also explained words and inventions that were Arawak in origin, such as, hurricane, barbecue, cigar, hammock, and tobacco. All of her presentations included connections to present day Native culture, current conditions, community connections, and ways Native People honor and respect each other, animals, and the land.
In 1990, President George Bush approved a joint resolution designating November 1990 as "National American Indian Heritage Month" to celebrate and recognize intertribal cultures and to educate the public about the heritage, history, art, and traditions of Native Americans. The Equal Opportunity Leaders of the United States Military are charged with bringing cultural awareness programs to their assigned bases, as well as, educating military personnel about sexual harassment. About twelve percent of the army consists of women, and even a smaller percentage is made up of Native Americans. Virginia Ming, Equal Opportunity Advisor (coordinator of the EOLs) was given the Massachusetts Center for Native American Awareness (MCNAA) website, where Claudia is a board member, and from there, contacted Claudia.
On some of the days, Claudia shared the stage with Ella Garlits (Navajo) and Lt. Bigman (Objibway). Ms. Garlits lives in Germany and her husband is in the military. She shared Navajo history, traditions, and artifacts. She also made Fry Bread. Ms. Bigman is stationed in Germany and she shared her Nation's Jingle Dress Dancing. The event was well-received by military personnel. Claudia frequently had a long line of soldiers, teachers, and children waiting to shake her hand and say "Thank you" at the end of the performance.
UCTPTN 12.07.2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
