POLITICS - Lakota Indians Withdraw from Treaties w/US

Welcome to the Leverguns.Com Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here ... politely.

Moderators: AmBraCol, Hobie

Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.

Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
User avatar
J Miller
Member Emeritus
Posts: 14880
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:46 pm
Location: Not in IL no more ... :)

POLITICS - Lakota Indians Withdraw from Treaties w/US

Post by J Miller »

Very interesting. I wonder what, if anything, will come of this.
Joe



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html

FOXNews.com
Lakota Indians Withdraw Treaties Signed With U.S. 150 Years Ago

Thursday , December 20, 2007

WASHINGTON —
The Lakota Indians, who gave the world legendary warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties with the United States.

"We are no longer citizens of the United States of America and all those who live in the five-state area that encompasses our country are free to join us,'' long-time Indian rights activist Russell Means said.

A delegation of Lakota leaders has delivered a message to the State Department, and said they were unilaterally withdrawing from treaties they signed with the federal government of the U.S., some of them more than 150 years old.

The group also visited the Bolivian, Chilean, South African and Venezuelan embassies, and would continue on their diplomatic mission and take it overseas in the coming weeks and months.

Lakota country includes parts of the states of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming.

The new country would issue its own passports and driving licences, and living there would be tax-free - provided residents renounce their U.S. citizenship, Mr Means said.

The treaties signed with the U.S. were merely "worthless words on worthless paper," the Lakota freedom activists said.

Withdrawing from the treaties was entirely legal, Means said.

"This is according to the laws of the United States, specifically article six of the constitution,'' which states that treaties are the supreme law of the land, he said.

"It is also within the laws on treaties passed at the Vienna Convention and put into effect by the US and the rest of the international community in 1980. We are legally within our rights to be free and independent,'' said Means.

The Lakota relaunched their journey to freedom in 1974, when they drafted a declaration of continuing independence — an overt play on the title of the United States' Declaration of Independence from England.

Thirty-three years have elapsed since then because "it takes critical mass to combat colonialism and we wanted to make sure that all our ducks were in a row,'' Means said.

One duck moved into place in September, when the United Nations adopted a non-binding declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples — despite opposition from the United States, which said it clashed with its own laws.

"We have 33 treaties with the United States that they have not lived by. They continue to take our land, our water, our children,'' Phyllis Young, who helped organize the first international conference on indigenous rights in Geneva in 1977, told the news conference.

The U.S. "annexation'' of native American land has resulted in once proud tribes such as the Lakota becoming mere "facsimiles of white people,'' said Means.

Oppression at the hands of the U.S. government has taken its toll on the Lakota, whose men have one of the shortest life expectancies - less than 44 years - in the world.

Lakota teen suicides are 150 per cent above the norm for the U.S.; infant mortality is five times higher than the U.S. average; and unemployment is rife, according to the Lakota freedom movement's website.
***Be sneaky, get closer, bust the cap on him when you can put the ball where it counts ;) .***
rjohns94
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 10820
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:02 pm
Location: York, PA

very interesting. thanks for the post

Post by rjohns94 »

:o
Mike Johnson,

"Only those who will risk going too far, can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Eliot
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Post by Blaine »

Where's John Wayne when you need him. I can hardly wait till they try evicting those old boys that live in them parts..... :lol: :lol:
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
bluesman423
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 112
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:26 pm
Location: NE Oklahoma

Post by bluesman423 »

The federal gov will never let it happen. To do so would set a precedent that would likely dissolve the US as we know it because too many others would follow.

My guess is that if the Lakotas don't stop that their leaders will either disappear or end up imprisoned on not necessarily true charges.
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Post by Blaine »

Maybe old Hugo Chavez will send up his Air Force for ground support....
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
User avatar
Ysabel Kid
Moderator
Posts: 27790
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
Location: South Carolina, USA
Contact:

Post by Ysabel Kid »

Very interesting indeed.

Russell Means was the actor who played Chincachook (I know I misspelled it) in "The Last of the Mohicans" (the version with Daniel Day Lewis). I knew he was active in tribal politics.

It will be interesting in this day and age to see how the US responds. On the one had, it could follow the precedent on how we interact with the Amish, who, if I recall, still are exempt from the Social Security system. This would be a bit more agressive - since they want their land back. I can't see the government repressing them - would be too much of an international outcry. Then again, allowing it to stand would possibly start a whole bunch of other tribes on the same path. Heck, I'll form my own tribe if I can shuck the welfare state and every insult to the Constitution the politicians have hit us with for the last 70 years!

The dirty little secret is that American Indians are the poorest of the poor in this country. I support a couple charities aimed at this group, including a Christian school for the Lakota Sioux. Can't see where they could do any worse than what they are experiencing now.

Joe, I like your new tag line!!! Thanks for the post!
Image
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

Might makes right.









If it doesn't, then the U.S. is gonna lose because it doesn't have a moral or legal (U.S. or International) leg to stand on.










But don't worry, because might does make right. We will continue doing what we've done since the Fort Laramie Treaty.
Last edited by James Riley on Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dirty Dan
Levergunner 1.0
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:52 pm
Location: Navasota, Texas

Post by Dirty Dan »

Extremely interesting. Texas retains the right of secession, but this is somewhat different. More like suing the govt for breach of contract, without the court action, ...yet.
Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you. - John Steinbeck
joachim slim
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:32 am
Location: missouri

indians

Post by joachim slim »

will they give up all the aid they get from the govt.? maybe they should start looking harder for jobs? that helped me when i was unemployed. im a so called descendant of a "native americans". i think of my self more as a U.S. citizen that served my country in the military. also i didnt sit on my butt complaining about how it was everyone elses fault and how i was supposedly owed something. its the 21st century get on with your life.
engravertom
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:00 pm
Location: Western NY

Post by engravertom »

Heck, I'll form my own tribe if I can shuck the welfare state and every insult to the Constitution the politicians have hit us with for the last 70 years!
let me know when you do, OK?

Tom
pharmseller
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1005
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Willamette Valley, OR, USA

Post by pharmseller »

Vae Victis

(who can translate?)

Quinn
We are determined that before the sun sets on this terrible struggle, our flag will be recognized throughout the world as a symbol of freedom on the one hand, of overwhelming power on the other.

General George C. Marshall, 1942
gregg
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:17 am
Location: south dakota

Re: indians

Post by gregg »

Been here on the Dakotas my whole life. Those places run on pure US money. They don't need plates on there cars along as they stay in the res.. They are nations of there own run with US money.
Our boy Russell been playing this game 30 40 years. :roll:
Last edited by gregg on Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

pharmseller wrote:Vae Victis

(who can translate?)

Quinn
Doesn't apply. When we were losing the war to them, we sued them for peace and they accepted the treaty. We then breached it. We are in violation of our own laws and Constitution.

More like pacta sunt servanda, rebus sic stantibus.
Buffboy
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 701
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:13 am
Location: Gann Valley, SD

Post by Buffboy »

Russell Means is a flake, aways was a flake and always will be a flake. He is just a 70s hippie trying to stay relevant.
"People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically 'right.' Guns ended that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work."

- L. Neil Smith
gregg
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:17 am
Location: south dakota

Post by gregg »

James Riley wrote:
pharmseller wrote:Vae Victis

(who can translate?)

Quinn
Doesn't apply. When we were losing the war to them, we sued them for peace and they accepted the treaty. We then breached it. We are in violation of our own laws and Constitution.

More like pacta sunt servanda, rebus sic stantibus.
I'm not sure we lost any war to them?? :?: We wore them down with
winter campains. They just could not move and fight in the winter. This is big country and there was not that many of them. This country will not support that many people doing the hunter thing.
One thing I have never read or heard said is this. If you think about it the indians got there but kicked right out of the stone age to 1800 tech. One guy I work with said one day back when we had all the Lewis and Clark stuff going on he was darn tied of it. I told him if anyone should be happy for L&C it should be him . I told him I never knew anyone that enjoyed hot showers and new pickups and house with AC as much as him. He agreed. Banks and Russell done more to hurt the indian people than help them. How many times have Banks own people shot him? Twice I can think of. It was them that nutted him.
Last edited by gregg on Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

gregg wrote:
James Riley wrote:
pharmseller wrote:Vae Victis

(who can translate?)

Quinn
Doesn't apply. When we were losing the war to them, we sued them for peace and they accepted the treaty. We then breached it. We are in violation of our own laws and Constitution.

More like pacta sunt servanda, rebus sic stantibus.
I'm not sure we lost any war to them?? :?: We wore them down with
winter campains. They just could not move and fight in the winter. This is big country and there was not that many of them. This country will not support that many people doing the hunter thing.
Not "lost", but "losing." Prior to the Fort Laramie Treaty they were winning. We sued for peace. They accepted based upon the treaty. We then breached it.
gregg
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:17 am
Location: south dakota

Post by gregg »

James Riley wrote:
gregg wrote:
James Riley wrote:
pharmseller wrote:Vae Victis

(who can translate?)

Quinn
Doesn't apply. When we were losing the war to them, we sued them for peace and they accepted the treaty. We then breached it. We are in violation of our own laws and Constitution.

More like pacta sunt servanda, rebus sic stantibus.
I'm not sure we lost any war to them?? :?: We wore them down with
winter campains. They just could not move and fight in the winter. This is big country and there was not that many of them. This country will not support that many people doing the hunter thing.
Not "lost", but "losing." Prior to the Fort Laramie Treaty they were winning. We sued for peace. They accepted based upon the treaty. We then breached it.
Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868) Good point. Just out of the CW and no money not many troopers on the ground. was not till after big horn eyes got open and things started to change in a big way.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

gregg wrote:
James Riley wrote:
gregg wrote:
James Riley wrote: Doesn't apply. When we were losing the war to them, we sued them for peace and they accepted the treaty. We then breached it. We are in violation of our own laws and Constitution.

More like pacta sunt servanda, rebus sic stantibus.
I'm not sure we lost any war to them?? :?: We wore them down with
winter campains. They just could not move and fight in the winter. This is big country and there was not that many of them. This country will not support that many people doing the hunter thing.
Not "lost", but "losing." Prior to the Fort Laramie Treaty they were winning. We sued for peace. They accepted based upon the treaty. We then breached it.
Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868) Good point. Just out of the CW and no money not many troopers on the ground. was not till after big horn eyes got open and things started to change in a big way.
There was another one before that, the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851. Some folks like to say the Indians won a U.S. Supreme Court victory in the 1980s, awarding them $17 mil value of the land in 1877 prices, plus interest. But they were seeking specific performance (enforcement of the Treaty/Supreme Law of the Land), not money. Last I heard they have refused to touch a dime of it. But I could be wrong.

What the Supreme Court did was like one guy stealing another guy's family heirloom and the court awarding money instead of giving the heirloom back.
Last edited by James Riley on Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Post by Blaine »

I don't know what Great, Great, Great Granddad did or didn't do, but I'm stretched thin enough as it is....I'm darn tired of paying out to people so they can can sit on their butt on my dime.......There's plenty of BLM land that is in the same shape as it was when the treaties were formed/broken or whatever......they "won" raw land, give them some back......It's as simple as that....when they try to "export" their wares, show 'em what being a separate country is all about.....Dang :evil:
That forty acres and a mule thing? You bet..same deal....40 BLM acres, one mule and get the hell out of my pocket :evil:
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

BlaineG wrote:I don't know what Great, Great, Great Granddad did or didn't do, but I'm stretched thin enough as it is....I'm darn tired of paying out to people so they can can sit on their butt on my dime.......There's plenty of BLM land that is in the same shape as it was when the treaties were formed/broken or whatever......they "won" raw land, give them some back......It's as simple as that....when they try to "export" their wares, show 'em what being a separate country is all about.....Dang :evil:
That forty acres and a mule thing? You bet..same deal....40 BLM acres, one mule and get the hell out of my pocket :evil:
All they want is for the U.S. to honor it's word: The Constitution. The treaties and the parties thereto (soveriegns) are still alive and kicking. It's just like a contract between two people, only one has no honor.

If we pulled up stakes and got off the 1851 treaty land they would do just fine without us. Better, in fact. They'd like us to get out of their pocket.
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Post by Blaine »

James Riley wrote:
BlaineG wrote:I don't know what Great, Great, Great Granddad did or didn't do, but I'm stretched thin enough as it is....I'm darn tired of paying out to people so they can can sit on their butt on my dime.......There's plenty of BLM land that is in the same shape as it was when the treaties were formed/broken or whatever......they "won" raw land, give them some back......It's as simple as that....when they try to "export" their wares, show 'em what being a separate country is all about.....Dang :evil:
That forty acres and a mule thing? You bet..same deal....40 BLM acres, one mule and get the hell out of my pocket :evil:
All they want is for the U.S. to honor it's word: The Constitution. The treaties and the parties thereto (soveriegns) are still alive and kicking. It's just like a contract between two people, only one has no honor.

If we pulled up stakes and got off the 1851 treaty land they would do just fine without us. Better, in fact. They'd like us to get out of their pocket.
There was plenty of wrong doing on both sides of the fence: ARTICLE 4. The aforesaid Indian nations do hereby agree and bind themselves to make restitution or satisfaction for any wrongs committed, after the ratification of this treaty, by any band or individual of their people, on the people of the United States, whilst lawfully residing in or passing through their respective territories.

Just that one could have and should have and probably did revoke the treaty terms....... don't make us out the sole bad guys...don't drink the Indian Kool Aid.....
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
gregg
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:17 am
Location: south dakota

Post by gregg »

[/quote]

All they want is for the U.S. to honor it's word: The Constitution. The treaties and the parties thereto (soveriegns) are still alive and kicking. It's just like a contract between two people, only one has no honor.

If we pulled up stakes and got off the 1851 treaty land they would do just fine without us. Better, in fact. They'd like us to get out of their pocket.[/quote]
WHAT! :shock: James got to ask where you live and where did you grow up at?? :?: I would get better understanding of where you are coming from.
Jeeps
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 597
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:27 pm
Location: New York :-(

Post by Jeeps »

If it works all ya have to do is call I.C.E. on 'em :shock:
Jeeps

Image

Semper Fidelis

Pay attention to YOUR Bill of Rights, in this day and age it is all we have.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

BlaineG wrote:
James Riley wrote:
BlaineG wrote:I don't know what Great, Great, Great Granddad did or didn't do, but I'm stretched thin enough as it is....I'm darn tired of paying out to people so they can can sit on their butt on my dime.......There's plenty of BLM land that is in the same shape as it was when the treaties were formed/broken or whatever......they "won" raw land, give them some back......It's as simple as that....when they try to "export" their wares, show 'em what being a separate country is all about.....Dang :evil:
That forty acres and a mule thing? You bet..same deal....40 BLM acres, one mule and get the hell out of my pocket :evil:
All they want is for the U.S. to honor it's word: The Constitution. The treaties and the parties thereto (soveriegns) are still alive and kicking. It's just like a contract between two people, only one has no honor.

If we pulled up stakes and got off the 1851 treaty land they would do just fine without us. Better, in fact. They'd like us to get out of their pocket.
There was plenty of wrong doing on both sides of the fence: ARTICLE 4. The aforesaid Indian nations do hereby agree and bind themselves to make restitution or satisfaction for any wrongs committed, after the ratification of this treaty, by any band or individual of their people, on the people of the United States, whilst lawfully residing in or passing through their respective territories.

Just that one could have and should have and probably did revoke the treaty terms....... don't make us out the sole bad guys...don't drink the Indian Kool Aid.....
I can make us out to be the sole bad guys because we were. We violated the treaty first and depradations were executed after the fact due to our failure to control our own people. Don't drink the U.S. Kool Aid.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

gregg wrote: WHAT! :shock: James got to ask where you live and where did you grow up at?? :?: I would get better understanding of where you are coming from.
I am irrellevent. It's the truth of the matter asserted that counts. But I will digress into a completely irrelevent topic that has absolutely nothing to do with any of this and say that I was born and raised in the Rocky Mountain West and spent ten years practicing law, some of which involved representation of Indian Tribes (none were party to the subject treaties). But very little of that influence my opinion that I think you are driving at.

Some folks get mad about modern movies being “PCâ€
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Post by Blaine »

Well.......I guess I'll back out of this one, James, you seem to have your mind made up. I'll stick with the United States against another government each and every time. My country right or wrong and all that goofy, knee jerk and red neck stuff :P Good luck with that white guilt thing.... :roll:
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
505stevec
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 5:55 pm
Location: New Mexico

Post by 505stevec »

The sad thing is that there are many wrongs done by the U.S. concerning Indian Country. But the cold hard fact is they were made U.S. citizens in the 1920's and should thus intigrate with the rest of the country. The Pine Ridge Indian reservation is the poorest county in the Nation. There is 80% unemployment. Alcohol is illegal but right off the reservation there are a number of bars waiting to exploit these people. The Daw's act was horendous against the Native American People. There is now no way to reverse this without changing the face of our nation. Thus it is an impossibility. I am 100% in sympathy with their plight, however the fact remains if the U.S. were to pull its welfare and let them be their own nation they would starve. they have no resources in that area and their people would become like the Mexicans crossing the boarder at an alarming rate. Maybe none of this makes sence but they should reconsider. YOu know??? Most every nation that is filled with poverty is filled with corruption. THeir Nation is no different. I have several friends that are Lakota and they all agree that the problem is that the Tribal leaders are corrupt and keep the money for themselves. This is why the unemployment rate, they cannot bring indutry onto their land. :cry: :cry:
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

BlaineG wrote:Well.......I guess I'll back out of this one, James, you seem to have your mind made up. I'll stick with the United States against another government each and every time. My country right or wrong and all that goofy, knee jerk and red neck stuff :P Good luck with that white guilt thing.... :roll:
I too am 100% behind the U.S. I just want to protect my country's honor.
"No payment can make up for those lost years. So what is important in this bill has less to do with property than with honor, for here, we admit a wrong. Here we reaffirm our commitment as a nation to equal justice under the law." Ronald Regan: re: Japanese American reparations for internment.
Last edited by James Riley on Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

505stevec wrote:The sad thing is that there are many wrongs done by the U.S. concerning Indian Country. But the cold hard fact is they were made U.S. citizens in the 1920's and should thus intigrate with the rest of the country. The Pine Ridge Indian reservation is the poorest county in the Nation. There is 80% unemployment. Alcohol is illegal but right off the reservation there are a number of bars waiting to exploit these people. The Daw's act was horendous against the Native American People. There is now no way to reverse this without changing the face of our nation. Thus it is an impossibility. I am 100% in sympathy with their plight, however the fact remains if the U.S. were to pull its welfare and let them be their own nation they would starve. they have no resources in that area and their people would become like the Mexicans crossing the boarder at an alarming rate. Maybe none of this makes sence but they should reconsider. YOu know??? Most every nation that is filled with poverty is filled with corruption. THeir Nation is no different. I have several friends that are Lakota and they all agree that the problem is that the Tribal leaders are corrupt and keep the money for themselves. This is why the unemployment rate, they cannot bring indutry onto their land. :cry: :cry:
You are correct about the Tribal Leaders. But that too (the form of government) was another thing foisted upon them by us so that we could assuage our conscience when dealing with "one" representative of an entire people that were never so represented. We also do a lot to maintain the discord and keep them off balance in their internal affairs. It helps us pursue our agenda when they fight among themselves.

As to stopping the welfare, I can say this: If we cut it off entirely, but at the same time honored the Treaty in full, they would be more than just fine. They's be like those casino Indians that are raking it in. Hell, they might even let us stay, only all those people would be paying mortgages to the Indians instead of the banks and the pay-back on Black Hills gold alone, well . . .
Bogie35
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1416
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: South Carolina

Post by Bogie35 »

Go Lakota!!!!!!!!

It's about time someone has the balls to actually stand up to the U.S. government and call them on their bullspit! The government has never had a moral leg to stand on with regards to their dealings with Native Americans. That is why I was the only kid on my block who wanted to be "the indian" in "cowboys and indians".

If I were Native American, I wouldn't be very enthusiastic about adapting to the "American Way" either. When you cage an animal or person, they lose their spirit...they lose their soul.

The government did a lot worse to them than what the Church Of England did to our forefathers! That's hypocrisy in it's purest form.

Again, hooray for the Lakota!

Sincerely,
bogie
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

BlaineG wrote: Good luck with that white guilt thing.... :roll:
You make it sound like guilt is a vice. You'd think any conservative beliefs regarding the raising of kids with a conscience and personal moral direction would laud a feeling of guilt when benefiting from the wrongs of another. Indeed, to sit in the window and not call the cops when the women is raped on the street below is bad enough, but to not feel guilty about it is truly in line with this thinking.

However, this "guilty liberal" tripe is right wing spin used to deflect conservative feelings of guilt from the proponent. In fact, guilt rarely if ever manifests itself in honest self-critiques like those I've been engaging in. Rather, guilt almost invariably comes through in defensive behavior. Note how many conservatives are found lurking around groups like this in defense of themselves, attacking affirmative action, defendant’s rights, the ADA, minorities, etc. and defending "conservative" and "traditional American values" of personal responsibility, rugged individualism and other myths. This defensive behavior is the mark of a guilty person. But-for the feelings of guilt, why the defensive actions, especially when coming from a position of strength like us "conservative" whites?

It is also the mark of the greedy "I've got mine, and I'll be darned if I let any cripple/minority/impoverished/etc. person or legislator get his hands on any of it" attitude. Guilt abounds in the heart of any man who abides injustice and that is why so many people feel so put-upon by liberal programs. It has nothing to do with liberal guilt. It is conservative guilt manifesting itself in defensive, circle-the-wagons, hysteria.

So, as to being a guilty liberal, forget it. These issues are NOT about guilt or blame. Rather, they are about personal honor, integrity, respect and dignity and the pursuit of these traits in the actions of the government that represents us.

Now, just for the sake of argument, let’s say I am some guilty white liberal. There would be a basis in fact for such feelings since we have all been enriched by the injustices committed by our forefathers against Indians and we continue to be so enriched so long as existing, valid treaties rest in breach. So, if you want to trot out the guilty liberal argument, then I ask you: What is worse, feeling guilty when you benefit from the wrong of another, or not feeling guilty about it at all? If you choose the former, then I ask you, where is the so-called reality of a nation founded on personal responsibility?

My motivations in speaking out are not based in guilt. Rather, they are based in my personal sense of honor, integrity, dignity and respect. Join me. All it takes for injustice to prevail is for good men to do nothing. (I forgot who said that). What makes it worse is when good men speak out and their motives are challenged by morally bankrupt, weak, defensive, guilt ridden men.

Whenever a word is breached, there is not merely one victim. The person or nation that breaches its own word happens to wrong his/her/it's self also. Forget about the Indians; seek your nation's redress of wrongs for YOUR own sake and for the sake of YOUR nation's honor.

You see, doing the honorable thing is not merely about how you treat those you deal with; IT IS ABOUT YOU! YOUR OWN HEART!

Too often the conservative movement chocks this all up to some kind of liberal guilt complex. However, using the concept of guilt in such a disparaging way seems ironic coming from the organization of family values and religion, the very cornerstones of which are morality and obedience to your conscience. Your conscience is SUPPOSED to inspire guilt and if it does so, and if it prevents you from acting badly or if it moves you toward redress of wrongs, then would that not be a good thing?

Seems to me the folks who point this finger of liberal guilt are most often those who act defensively. Defensive behavior by one who feels he is under attack when he is not under attack has, in my experience, always been the hallmark of a guilty conscience; "conservative guilt," if you will. Limbaugh would be a poster boy for this. They huff and puff and pretend they feel no guilt, but, if so, why all the huffing and puffing? Do they feel some liberal is trying to take something they own? Forgetting for the moment that a strong man would gladly give it up; what makes them think they own it? They think they worked hard for it? If any part of what they have is the fruit of the ill-gotten gains of their forefathers, then they have been unjustly enriched and should hold no truck with those who seek redress. If your daddy stole a t.v. set from X and gave it to you, do you think X is not entitled to have it back just because you, personally, did not steal it? That is not the law IN these United States (at least among individuals). Thought it does appear to be what the United States itself does in relations with other nations.

Before the courts can decide such an issue, first we must find an independent court (tribunal) and the U.S. and the tribes must waive their sovereign immunity before that court. So far, the U.S. refuses to do so.

Legal principles are the foundation for compensation. I think, rather, that conservative collective guilt has compelled some to see a non-existent bogy man implied in this thread. I also think that if you take the road of integrity and pursue your nation's honor, rather than worrying about the motives of others or your own pocket book, then you will stand tall and strong; not in false bravado and defiance, but in your own heart.

Also, notice how I am not saying anything about any tribe that we just went to war with (without treaty) and won. That's just tough for them and the way life is. So it's not like we have to give the whole country back.

I am ONLY talking about OUR word of honor and OUR Constitution and OUR laws. I think we should abide them like men. But I would be drinking Kool Aid if I actually thought we would.
Junior
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 11:19 am
Location: North Louisiana
Contact:

Post by Junior »

James Riley wrote:
BlaineG wrote:Well.......I guess I'll back out of this one, James, you seem to have your mind made up. I'll stick with the United States against another government each and every time. My country right or wrong and all that goofy, knee jerk and red neck stuff :P Good luck with that white guilt thing.... :roll:
I too am 100% behind the U.S. I just want to protect my country's honor.
"No payment can make up for those lost years. So what is important in this bill has less to do with property than with honor, for here, we admit a wrong. Here we reaffirm our commitment as a nation to equal justice under the law." Ronald Regan: re: Japanese American reparations for internment.
James, welcome to the forum!
Mich Hunter
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:42 am

Post by Mich Hunter »

I live and hunt in South Dakota. I spend alot of time down by the Pine Ridge reservation. I do understand that alot of these poeple are poor and were screwed over by the whites as they call it. The Black Hills and other lands were taken from them. But here are some facts!!!

They still get federal add each 1st and 15th of the month from Uncle Sam. I don't go near Walmart on those days due to this.

FEMA trailers left over from Katrina were brought up and given to the reservations for free.

Left over GSA government vehicles are given to them for free.

They received a fee education and free money for college.

In the 1990's, the Supreme courts stated that the Black Hills were taken from them illegally and they had a right to them. Since they could not just give it back, they were awarded $600,000,000 for the land. They clain they are too proud to accept that money and will only accept the land back. This is complete BS.

They will not accept the money because they all know that the minute they do, all federal aid is cut off!!!! That is a fact. The was written into Treaty.

Even if they got the Blackhills and other lands back, they would still fail. Most of them sit down on their butt on the reservation waiting for another handout. I have plenty of friends down there that are native and completly agree with my last statements.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

Junior wrote:
James Riley wrote:
BlaineG wrote:
James, welcome to the forum!
Why, thank you!

I posted more on the old forum (I started posting pictures of my Winchesters) but then they closed it down so I came back here. I am new, though. I promised myself I wouldn't get into these non-lever gun discussions when I joined up, but I guess I just done went and did to myself like I was an Indian. :roll: :D I swear, if I can get out of this one, I promise . . . :?
Rebel1972
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 168
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 12:29 pm
Location: Sparta ,Tennessee

Post by Rebel1972 »

I don't know about you fellers but I am native American.Skin color not withstanding ,I was born here and so was my family for several generations back.Think about it , Who did they take the land from before white men came ?That means they owe somebody else something doesn't it?
User avatar
kimwcook
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 7978
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: Soap Lake, WA., U.S.A.

Post by kimwcook »

Good to see strong opinions. It means people are willing to make a stand, right or wrong. That tells me we still have the will to stand up for things we believe in and not waffle.

We all know what happened to the Native Americans. I just hope some day it's made right.

Oh, and I have lived on a reservation for more than a couple of months.
Old Law Dawg
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

Rebel1972 wrote: Who did they take the land from before white men came ?That means they owe somebody else something doesn't it?
Only if they took it in violation of their own laws, principles and honor.
longhair1957
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:36 pm
Location: Sunny, Arizona

Post by longhair1957 »

I dont have have big long thing to ad here, I am part Cherokee and Chickasaw (like many other of you I am sure). And there are times that I wish I could just live in the wilderness ala old time indian. But I have never understood why we ever even gave them treaties and reservations!
As far as I am concerned the were a conquered people and if they wish to survive they should have been expected to assimilate into OUR culture just like an immigrant. I dont want to hear that we were the immigrants as we fought and WON this country from the Indians AND then the English.

I KNOW that they are a proud people.... but you know what? THEY LOST!!!


(stumble as I step off my soap box) :)
Bogie35
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1416
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: South Carolina

Post by Bogie35 »

Mich hunter wrote:I live and hunt in South Dakota. I spend alot of time down by the Pine Ridge reservation. I do understand that alot of these poeple are poor and were screwed over by the whites as they call it. The Black Hills and other lands were taken from them. But here are some facts!!!

They still get federal add each 1st and 15th of the month from Uncle Sam. I don't go near Walmart on those days due to this.

FEMA trailers left over from Katrina were brought up and given to the reservations for free.

Left over GSA government vehicles are given to them for free.

They received a fee education and free money for college.

In the 1990's, the Supreme courts stated that the Black Hills were taken from them illegally and they had a right to them. Since they could not just give it back, they were awarded $600,000,000 for the land. They clain they are too proud to accept that money and will only accept the land back. This is complete BS.

They will not accept the money because they all know that the minute they do, all federal aid is cut off!!!! That is a fact. The was written into Treaty.

Even if they got the Blackhills and other lands back, they would still fail. Most of them sit down on their butt on the reservation waiting for another handout. I have plenty of friends down there that are native and completly agree with my last statements.
That's so lame! You've obviously never had your freedom taken away! What if the government made you live in a place you didn't want to live and follow a lifestyle you didn't want to follow? Would all those "giveaways" make it worth it? It's funny how Native Americans were never considered "lazy" before the government stripped them of their dignity and forced a totally new way of life on them!

Let's hit home a little. What if the government said you no longer have the right to own a gun, but it will give you this freebie and that freebie? WOULD YOU BE GRATEFUL?

Our government spends trillions to free a bunch of Iraqis who couldn't give a stuff about anything American, and yet it chooses to repress a nation of people who have never wanted anything from it other than what was theirs to begin with!
It's not about guilt. It's about doing what's right. I don't feel the least bit guilty about what the government did to the Native Americans. But, I will certainly support a movement that would, in even a small way, right the wrong.

Besides, the Lakota don't want freebies for the government...they want to BE FREE from a government that has dishonored treaty after treaty. And by the way, a government that does that is, in itself, unamerican!! So, don't give me that "patriotic" bullspit! The most unpatriotic thing we can do is to support a government that does not uphold the virtues of we Americans.

Sincerely,
bogie
GANJIRO

Post by GANJIRO »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cloud's_War

"The war, which ended with the Treaty of Fort Laramie, resulted in a complete victory for the Sioux and the temporary preservation of their control of the Powder River country."

Red Cloud became the only Indian leader to win a major war against the United States. But he was more than merely a great war leader - when the inevitable happened, and the limitless numbers and technology of the United States overwhelmed the Sioux, Red Cloud adapted to fighting the Indian Bureau for fair treatment for his people. His famous statement about treaties best sums up his attitude towards the word of the people negotiating with him: "I have listened patiently to the promises of the Great Father, but his memory is short. I am now done with him. This is all I have to say."
Last edited by GANJIRO on Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Eric M.
Levergunner 1.0
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Forest Lake, Minnesota

Post by Eric M. »

If this will get me more realistic hunting licenses from North and South Dakota, I'm with them.
Maybe if the Native Americans ran those States, I would like heading west to hunt a little more than I do now.

Eric
God Bless Our Troops!!!
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

longhair1957 wrote:I dont have have big long thing to ad here, I am part Cherokee and Chickasaw (like many other of you I am sure). And there are times that I wish I could just live in the wilderness ala old time indian. But I have never understood why we ever even gave them treaties and reservations!
As far as I am concerned the were a conquered people and if they wish to survive they should have been expected to assimilate into OUR culture just like an immigrant. I dont want to hear that we were the immigrants as we fought and WON this country from the Indians AND then the English.

I KNOW that they are a proud people.... but you know what? THEY LOST!!!


(stumble as I step off my soap box) :)
1. I agree with you as those Indians that we never treated with. But *some* tribes were actually winning and *we* sued *them* for peace.
2. With those tribes, we did not *give* them anything. They gave *us* something, and we renegged. Now, if we throw violation of our own word, Constitution and principles in with just another tactic in warfare, then I guess you are right. There was a war and we won. We lied and wiped our collective butts with our own honor, but we won.

As I said at the beginning of the thread, might makes right.
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Post by Blaine »

The Res is the exact same think as the urban ghetto.......I'm not that good at spinning a tale so I'll just say about the ghetto that welfare and our gubment built that it didn't work . It's time to kill all the treaties, disband the Res, get everyone an education and a sense of pride and be done with it. No one will ever prosper on welfare.
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
45-70-
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 127
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:46 pm

Post by 45-70- »

Having been born and raised in Oklahoma (Indian Territory) I have studied a lot of the history surrounding all this. There were wrongs on both sides but by far our "white" government was the worst. I am following this story to see where it goes, hopefully the Lakota's will get what they want.

Our great honorable government was still forcibly removing native American kids from their families to attend "white" schools in the 1940's in Alaska. Research it and you will be shocked to learn what our government was doing up there where no one knew about it.
I am a salty, old, retired Chief Petty Officer who is not impressed by much.

"We're surrounded, that simplifies our situation." Chesty Puller

Member of Marlin Firearms forum '02-'04
Member of Marlin Talk forum '04-?
Member of original Leverguns forum '04-'07
Member of new Leverguns forum '07-?
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

Mich hunter wrote: Even if they got the Blackhills and other lands back, they would still fail. Most of them sit down on their butt on the reservation waiting for another handout. I have plenty of friends down there that are native and completly agree with my last statements.
I disagree that they would fail, but I know you are 100% correct that many Indians feel they would fail and they agree with you. I guess our policies are working.
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

BlaineG wrote:The Res is the exact same think as the urban ghetto.......I'm not that good at spinning a tale so I'll just say about the ghetto that welfare and our gubment built that it didn't work . It's time to kill all the treaties, disband the Res, get everyone an education and a sense of pride and be done with it. No one will ever prosper on welfare.
Or, we could just drop all the welfare, man-up and honor our word.
Bogie35
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1416
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: South Carolina

Post by Bogie35 »

For those "patriots", please understand that the "U.S. Government" and "America" have become two VERY different things. I choose to stand for America and all her true virtue and moral ideology.

Sincerely,
bogie
User avatar
Blaine
Posting leader...
Posts: 30495
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Still Deciding

Post by Blaine »

James Riley wrote:
BlaineG wrote:The Res is the exact same think as the urban ghetto.......I'm not that good at spinning a tale so I'll just say about the ghetto that welfare and our gubment built that it didn't work . It's time to kill all the treaties, disband the Res, get everyone an education and a sense of pride and be done with it. No one will ever prosper on welfare.
Or, we could just drop all the welfare, man-up and honor our word.
That would not work for a varity of reasons and you know it.....The Indians out here got a bunch of casinos, but a big non-indian corp. has to run it. Imagine telling LA, for example, Ok y'all....this half is yours, have at it...oh, yeah....not one more dime, you're on your own......That's not "man up"...it's a sure ticket to anarchy.
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First

Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
James Riley
Levergunner
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:52 pm

Post by James Riley »

BlaineG wrote:
James Riley wrote:
BlaineG wrote:The Res is the exact same think as the urban ghetto.......I'm not that good at spinning a tale so I'll just say about the ghetto that welfare and our gubment built that it didn't work . It's time to kill all the treaties, disband the Res, get everyone an education and a sense of pride and be done with it. No one will ever prosper on welfare.
Or, we could just drop all the welfare, man-up and honor our word.
That would not work for a varity of reasons and you know it.....The Indians out here got a bunch of casinos, but a big non-indian corp. has to run it. Imagine telling LA, for example, Ok y'all....this half is yours, have at it...oh, yeah....not one more dime, you're on your own......That's not "man up"...it's a sure ticket to anarchy.
The only reason it won't work is because we don't have the honor to do it. There are many, many Indians who are more than capable of handling the situation. They did for thousands of years. There is only one common denominator that stands in the way: us.

Further, unlike the LA example, the transition need no occur over night. A better example than non-Indian gaming corporations would be the Indian corporations in Alaska (only better). Those corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to increase profits and, as usual, culture be darned. But that is just a white imposition to ensure our access to their resources. There is nothing stopping a corporation from having the profit motive as only one motive among many.
Mich Hunter
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:42 am

Post by Mich Hunter »

Bogie35,

Get real. The fact is I sure as hell didn't cause their social problems and either did you. You can be anti government all day long and it still won't change a thing. I don't agree with everything the governemnt does, but its what we have.
They play the blame game just like many blacks do now. Remember the "Back to Africa" movement??? Look how far that went. It shouldn't take 120 years to get you act together. Treaty or no treay, there were conqured people. Were they treated unfairly???? They sure were. Was my family treated like Irish scum when they came across??? Sure as hell were. Did my family sit on their butts for the last 120 years complaining about it??? No, they went and got a job!!! Nothing is free.

Even if the the treaties were honored, where would they be after that. Do you honestly think these people want to live like they did in 1880?? Thats stuff. How many Lakota's have you talked to in South Carolina?? Would their honor be restored??? Sure. Would they still have the problem they do now.??? You bet!!!

Fact is the reservations do need to be done away with. Make them assimilate and sustain themselves. Otherwise, they will still be in the same place now in another 100 years.

Both sides are guilty.
Post Reply