Talk:Upstate Citizens for Equality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


This organization has been spending all of its time editing Native Nation pages and linking these pages to this one in a not so veiled attempt to spread hate and racism.

This page should be listed under the American "hate groups" category like similar organizations like the Klu Klux Klan and the Neo Nazi Party.

The statement (read disclaimer) that notes the nature of this organization in relation to other Native Nations is 100% factually true ( . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scuggy (talkcontribs) 20:15, 13 November 2006

Upstate Citizens for Equality leadership have been defending this organization from being labeled as racist and an anti-Indian hate group since its formation. They have failed not because they lack reason or the ability to present an argument, but because this accusation is 100% true.

The source you point to is not neutral, and, in IMHO, does not qualify as a reliable source. You will help your case by toning down the rhetoric and providing more sources that support your position. Note that Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy means that everyone editing this article must work toward a balanced presentation of facts and opinions in the article. -- Donald Albury 13:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Dalbury thank you for locking this page. I am the chairman of the Niagara Frontier Chapter of UCE and I purposely kept my edits to this page as a statement of fact. Our point of view is where it should be located on our website. I have been very careful to post only verifiable and substantiated facts in all of my edits on this subject. The aspersions being cast by some contributors are simply based on their POV and denial of recent events as can be demonstrated on the Seneca Nation page. I would like to call your attention the statement about us being anti-indian. We are not anti-Indian. We oppose the current state of federal indian policy and its encroachment on all of our fundamental rights as citizens. This is a politcal position not racial or ethnic. The reason is that it is not racial is that the Congress and the Courts have sculpted federal indian policy as such and not on racial or ethnic lines. For if they did draw it on racial or ethnic lines it would run afoul of the fourteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I would welcom your review of all of my edits and your constructive criticism. --Dtwarren 23:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I did not protect (lock) the page, and I doubt I will have time in the next few days to pay much attention to it. Pleading your case to me won't really help you. -- Donald Albury 23:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Dalbury

I would like to discuss you removal of the line: The Oneida Nation is well known for mixing racial issues with political issues to bully reporters and tarnish the reputation of those who oppose its despotic leader and his goals[1]. The article speaks directly on Mr. Halbritter's tactics of using the charge of racism to silence his opponents and the press. How is it not related to his charge of racism in his newspaper against this organization?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtwarren (talkcontribs) 07:33, 22 November 2006

Your comment was a very negative point of view, and I did not see anything in the cited source to support it. This article is currently a battleground between POVs, and that is not how Wikipedia works. -- Donald Albury 19:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

In the cited article it states "They knew they were on the right trail when Halbritter began to use his PR machine to hurl accusations of racism against them. Any critic faced the same charge including the media. The result was an extreme reluctance by the media to investigate Halbritter and his enterprises. This was exactly what he wanted." What if I rephrase it as: "The Oneida Nation has been known to make accusations of racism in order to stifle the voice of those who oppose its policies[2]. " --Dtwarren 20:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I have placed my revised edit on the page and replaced the request for factual information by referring to the matter presently before the U.S. Supreme Court noted earlier in the text.--Dtwarren 16:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Can we flag this for neutrality?[edit]

This article needs to be disputed on the grounds of neutrality. It is blatantly pro-UCE, written by UCE supporters, and not only ignores the validity of the statement that UCE is anti-Native American but offers a counter argument similar to that of any other hate group being accused of racism. Can someone please find and post the picture of the billboard featuring a man brandishing a shot gun with the phrase 'Mr. Halbritter, come get your rent!'. It was located on a road near the Verona-Durhamville border. 12:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)dcw

It was not entirely written by UCE supporters as one can tell from the history. Both point of views are represented.--Dtwarren 02:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The article is no longer so blatantly pro-UCE, but it suffers from weasel words in favor of UCE. The evidence that UCE is anti-Native-American, already cited in the article, is pretty much conclusive. UCE could also be described as a group which denies the existence of Native American sovereignty or the validity of treaties with Native Americans. Since both New York State and the United States have always recognized Native American sovereignty, this is a position similar to denying UK sovereignty or the validity of treaties with the UK, or denying the sovereignty of the state of New York.

Regardless of the definition of racism, a group such as UCE whose sole purpose is to advocate for the abrogation of the legal rights of Native Americans without compensation is pretty clearly anti-Native American. (Just as a group which advocated for the abrogation of legal rights of Exxon without compensation would be fairly called anti-Exxon.) 06:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

June 22, 2008 edits[edit]

As mentioned on the Oneida Indian Nation and Turning Stone Resort & Casino pages, I'm just copying and pasting the Criticism section of the OIN page to this page and the TS page to make them harmonious, rather than going through and individually re-doing all the changes that were made on the OIN page. If anyone has a problem, feel free to correct it and let me know where I went wrong. Neutralman1024 (talk) 15:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)