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The Lakota Indians, who gave the world legendary warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties with the United States.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.
__________________
Everyone is finally equal. No one is smarter than anyone else. No one is stronger than anyone else. No one is better. Everyone is worse.
well how'bout that . . . i'm curious as to how this story will unfold. it's about time the American government publicly admit that it repeatedly broke treaty terms with the Indians.
and don't give me this, "well they got casinos now and are taking everybody's money" b.s. that's an event that's only 10 to 15 years old (tops), that does not make up for all the broken promises or slaughter of America's indigenous.
my question is: how are they going to enforce their new Secession? and will the U.N. act as middleman?
the more I think about it, the more my rebellious streak fuels. definitely curious to see where this story will go.
well how'bout that . . . i'm curious as to how this story will unfold. it's about time the American government publicly admit that it repeatedly broke treaty terms with the Indians.
and don't give me this, "well they got casinos now and are taking everybody's money" b.s. that's an event that's only 10 to 15 years old (tops), that does not make up for all the broken promises or slaughter of America's indigenous.
my question is: how are they going to enforce their new Secession? and will the U.N. act as middleman?
the more I think about it, the more my rebellious streak fuels. definitely curious to see where this story will go.
You sound like a guy I know. He's very pro Indian rights.............to which my other friend said, "Well no one forced them to sell their land for a bunch of glass beads......" He's a trouble maker.
Anywhoo yes an interesting development.
__________________
Now I'm just laid bad - G35Princess
R.I.P. MBC
^^^While gamma doesn't believe so, I ultimately think it's mainly about money. The people nowdays seem to feel that they are always entitled to something, picking and choosing what they feel they are entitled to.
For example, say they get their sovereignty, who should govern? Shouldn't you go back to the decendents of the chiefs? Why should the common man be entitled to anything?
Brings up interesting debates everytime this happens. Waiting for Gamma's return.
__________________
Now I'm just laid bad - G35Princess
R.I.P. MBC
Location: New York, NY HOME OF THE DEFENDING SUPER BOWL CHAMPS!! THE GIANTS....and Brett Favre!
Posts: 13,228
yes i agree with you on that one gz. same thing with osme black people where they talk about reparations and such nonsense....not even worth a discussion cuz theres not really way to effective implement it within the spectrum of the current society
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neftali II
now people like Archie, those are people i look up to
Quote:
Originally Posted by GZire
Archer proves he is one of the most intelligent here.
They probably have more capital to fight with combined with the UN adopting a non-binding declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples helps their cause out tremendously. They can take this fight into the global court since they've been considered a nation themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzire
While gamma doesn't believe so, I ultimately think it's mainly about money. The people nowdays seem to feel that they are always entitled to something, picking and choosing what they feel they are entitled to.
For example, say they get their sovereignty, who should govern? Shouldn't you go back to the decendents of the chiefs? Why should the common man be entitled to anything?
Nowhere in that article did I hear the term "reparations." I agree with Archer that it is too hard to implement reparations for Black Americans, as well as Native Americans, because it's too hard to strategize who gets what vs. Japanese Americans in WWII concentration camps where the family lineage is only 1 generation.
Is it about money . . . I don't know yet . . . we shall see. Who should govern? Who ever they wish to elect.
It will be interesting to see if the United States makes them create their own power plants and other things of this nature. Also what will they do with roads and such that are currently on the land they expect to become a separate country....if they so choose to go this route.
__________________
biada: "I'm an idiot who bought a car I didn't like"
..............Nowhere in that article did I hear the term "reparations." I agree with Archer that it is too hard to implement reparations for Black Americans, as well as Native Americans, because it's too hard to strategize who gets what vs. Japanese Americans in WWII concentration camps where the family lineage is only 1 generation.
Is it about money . . . I don't know yet . . . we shall see. Who should govern? Who ever they wish to elect.
I am not talking about reparations. I am talking who will rule their land? Who will own their land? Is land ownership even a concept in their society? I don't know that much about the Lakota/Sioux, but I hear about Hawaiian Sovereignty often and I'd assume people are much the same around the world.
What I take away from it is there are a lot of people with a sense of entitlement. They want things since they feel they've been wronged (and in many cases have, or at least their ancestors have). However if you look at Hawaiian movement I have yet for the many people to say how they should rightfully get any lands since the Alii were the only landowners. The common people get nothing if they want it back the way it is and that is a fact.
__________________
Now I'm just laid bad - G35Princess
R.I.P. MBC
It will be interesting to see if the United States makes them create their own power plants and other things of this nature. Also what will they do with roads and such that are currently on the land they expect to become a separate country....if they so choose to go this route.
+1
It is so entangled. I would assume they would say you owe us x $$$ for using our land for y years. We will take all the improvements on our land + money.
I am not so sure seceding is even the right term as that would imply that they are part of the US rather than their own sovereign nation. The last time a member of the union tried to secede we got the Civil War.
__________________
Now I'm just laid bad - G35Princess
R.I.P. MBC
Lakota Indians Secede From US
