Lakota Nation!

[Aloysius]

[url="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html"]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html[/url]

The Lakota have seceded from the United States! They are establishing embassies and issuing passports. This is a new nation in our midst.

Please pray that this does not end in disaster, as I fear that the federal government will not stand for it. I'm going to try to find a map of the Lakota territory which is, as far as the Lakota and I are concerned, no longer part of the United States of America. It involves parts of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming.

[Justin86]

Why do I think the feds will stay out of this to be politically correct? We all know white Southerners have no right to succeeded, but American Indians? Something tells me this is going to go unnoticed in Washington.

[Aloysius]

[img]http://www.canku-luta.org/images/1868.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www.canku-luta.org/images/mapkey1.jpg[/img]
Lakota Nation: Reserved by the 1868 Treaty for the unreserved use of the Lakota people
[img]http://www.canku-luta.org/images/mapkey2.jpg[/img]
1876: Lakota reservation after the US stole the Black Hills
[img]http://www.canku-luta.org/images/mapkey3.jpg[/img]
Lakota reservations after 100 years of court actions


I do not know how much of their territory they are attempting to claim, but by backing out of all of their treaties they may be attempting to claim some of the land at least from after 1876... of course, practically speaking, the only land which has practically and legally removed itself from the Union is the part after 100 years of court actions.

Of course, they may want to claim more of their land... it would be like how the Republic of Ireland claimed Ulster as part of their nation for so long in their Constitution even though practically it was not, so too maybe the Lakota will claim that entire area but only practically control those small sections of it.

[Justin86]

Why can't these people just take their casino profits and shut up?

[Aloysius]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1436974' date='Dec 21 2007, 05:03 AM']Why do I think the feds will stay out of this to be politically correct? We all know white Southerners have no right to succeeded, but American Indians? Something tells me this is going to go unnoticed in Washington.[/quote]
I fear some sort of intervention along the lines of WACO.

I am not so sure they will not intervene. They have continued to treat American Indians poorly despite political correctness, they have just done it in a more subversive manner. They won't send the Army against the Lakota, probably, but the Beaurau of Indian Affairs and the FBI haven't had any problem dealing with Native Americans in very politically incorrect ways up until the present.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Lol, I was just going to post about this.

More links (the first one is the best):

[i]WASHINGTON, DC - December 20 - Lakota Sioux Indian representatives declared sovereign nation status today in Washington D.C. following Monday's withdrawal from all previously signed treaties with the United States Government. The withdrawal, hand delivered to Daniel Turner, Deputy Director of Public Liaison at the State Department, immediately and irrevocably ends all agreements between the Lakota Sioux Nation of Indians and the United States Government outlined in the 1851 and 1868 Treaties at Fort Laramie Wyoming. [/i]
[url="http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/1220-02.htm?loc=interstitialskip"]http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/1220-...nterstitialskip[/url]

[url="http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/12/lakota-withdraw.html"]http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/...a-withdraw.html[/url]

[url="http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/NEWS/712200347/1001"]http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a.../712200347/1001[/url]

[CatholicCid]

Just shut down all their utilities and go from there.

I wonder what they will do if any non-Lakota happen to be living in the Lakota area.

Edited December 21, 2007 by CatholicCid

[Justin86]

What did they do the last time that happened..........

[CatholicCid]

On a more interested note, who is Russell Means and why did they quote him specifically?

Who makes up the delegation of Lakota leaders that spoke on half of all the Lakota and what allows them to do so? Do they have the total support of all their people? What happens to those who refuse to renounce their US Citizenship? The article seems to say they will be taxed by the Lakota.
It's interesting that they state they will issue their own driver licences (not valid in the US is my guess) and passports. What about currency? Will they use the USD or issue their own currency? I assume they are prepared for a postal system.

From the map posted, it seems they have already seperated themselves into a nation literally seperated in two.

[Aloysius]

They have a legal right to withdraw from these treaties. They have a legal right to be their own sovereign nation.

Like I said, what this means is that they'll practically have control of those smaller areas while claiming national borders beyond that. The way the Irish Constitution used to claim the whole Island of Ireland even though practically they had no jurisdiction over Northern Ireland. It is the reservations that they have control of.

We ought to negotiate deals with this sovereign nation for trade and friendship, not go around shutting off water and electricity. last I checked, American based companies were perfectly free to sell their services internationally.

The Lakota do not want Federal welfare or handouts. Any such handouts if they are being given out now ought to be ceased (though from what I've read, they have already been refusing them anyway). Other than that, the United States Government does not have jurisdiction over these people or their land. Practically that land means only the dark red parts of the map that I posted, of course.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='CatholicCid' post='1436987' date='Dec 21 2007, 06:28 AM']On a more interested note, who is Russell Means and why did they quote him specifically?

Who makes up the delegation of Lakota leaders that spoke on half of all the Lakota and what allows them to do so? Do they have the total support of all their people? What happens to those who refuse to renounce their US Citizenship? The article seems to say they will be taxed by the Lakota.
It's interesting that they state they will issue their own driver licences (not valid in the US is my guess) and passports. What about currency? Will they use the USD or issue their own currency? I assume they are prepared for a postal system.

From the map posted, it seems they have already seperated themselves into a nation literally seperated in two.[/quote]
they have not seperated themselves, they were separated by the maltreatment of the US government.

it is the legitimate government of the Lakota Reservations who has made the decision to declare their Independence. I do not know the statistics on the percentages of agreement within the Lakota community, but the Lakota Independence movement is pretty strong.

[Justin86]

I still say shut off their water and electrical supply. Your being ridiculous Al. Trade with foreign countries? It's our own country for crying out loud we won that war!

[Aloysius]

We signed treaties with them. We have been in breach of those treaties for a long time. The Lakota have simply withdrawn from the treaties which had been signed in good faith but one side (the US government) was not keeping up its end of the bargain.

The government is bound by the Constitution to honor its treaties as the supreme law of the land. if the Lakota withdraw from this treaty, we either have to go to war with them or accept their claim.

This is not our nation. It was part of our nation so long as we kept our treaty with the Lakota nation, ie so long as the Lakota nation agreed to their land being part of our nation. It is not now our nation, in my humble legal opinion.

In any event, I do not see where the government would have the authority to tell American companies who supply electricity and water to no longer deliver these services in exchange for money to the Lakota on the basis that they claim to be a sovereign nation. You're talking about imposing trade sanctions on the place... yet you think the idea that it's a foreign country is ridiculous. so really, you're talking about trade sanctions against a portion of land which you consider to be part of our country. even more ridiculous.

since when is our right to purchase water and electricity contingent upon our loyalty to the Federal Government? heck, maybe they should shut off my electricity and water, I'm not particularly fond of the current form of the federal government myself.

[KnightofChrist]

There is no right to secession, in that any state, city or group can not at will secede from the Union, without

A. Revolution

B. Consent of Congress

The Supreme Court ruled in Texas v White as much. "The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States. Considered, therefore, as transactions under the Constitution, the Ordinance of Secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the Acts of her Legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union. If this were otherwise, the State must have become foreign, and her citizens foreigners. The war must have ceased to be a war for the suppression of rebellion, and must have become a war for conquest and subjugation." - Chief Justice Chase

This would also apply to the Lakota since they mostly live in North and South Dakota.

And James Adams observed: "In the calm hours of self-possession, the right of a State to nullify an act of Congress, is too absurd for argument and too odious for discussion. The right of a state to secede from the Union, is equally disowned by the principles of the Declaration of Independence." Adams's fundamental argument was that no right of state secession or nullification existed under the Constitution because the right to revolution was a natural right of the people. [url="http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1207/article_detail.asp"]SOURCE[/url]

[KnightofChrist]

Native Territories or "nations" while they can self govern like that of a city are still subject to state and federal law.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Wow...that original area includes Omaha...if the government did give in (fat chance), my home would be in a foreign country...

[catholicinsd]

I can't say I blame them

Edited December 21, 2007 by catholicinsd

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1436978' date='Dec 21 2007, 04:12 AM']Why can't these people just take their casino profits and shut up?[/quote]

Why don't you take your beads and shut up?

[Mercy me]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1436991' date='Dec 21 2007, 08:13 AM']In any event, I do not see where the government would have the authority to tell American companies who supply electricity and water to no longer deliver these services in exchange for money to the Lakota on the basis that they claim to be a sovereign nation. You're talking about imposing trade sanctions on the place... yet you think the idea that it's a foreign country is ridiculous. so really, you're talking about trade sanctions against a portion of land which you consider to be part of our country. even more ridiculous.[/quote]

The US government absolutely can prevent US companies and those of any other country from conducting business there. They can sanction and in this case since the US surrounds the land in question blockade.

[Justin86]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1436991' date='Dec 21 2007, 10:13 PM']We signed treaties with them. We have been in breach of those treaties for a long time. The Lakota have simply withdrawn from the treaties which had been signed in good faith but one side (the US government) was not keeping up its end of the bargain.[/quote]
Would renouncing US citizenship or else you'll be taxed also be included in these treaties. I smell something fishy.

[quote]The government is bound by the Constitution to honor its treaties as the supreme law of the land. if the Lakota withdraw from this treaty, we either have to go to war with them or accept their claim.[/quote]
The Founding Fathers themselves broke treaties, and not just with Indians by the way.

[quote]This is not our nation. It was part of our nation so long as we kept our treaty with the Lakota nation, ie so long as the Lakota nation agreed to their land being part of our nation. It is not now our nation, in my humble legal opinion.[/quote]
Look, the reality is there was a war. The Lakotas lost. It's high time we take what's ours.

[quote]In any event, I do not see where the government would have the authority to tell American companies who supply electricity and water to no longer deliver these services in exchange for money to the Lakota on the basis that they claim to be a sovereign nation. You're talking about imposing trade sanctions on the place... yet you think the idea that it's a foreign country is ridiculous. so really, you're talking about trade sanctions against a portion of land which you consider to be part of our country. even more ridiculous.[/quote]
No....the only ridiculous part is you claiming they have validity to this claim.

[quote]since when is our right to purchase water and electricity contingent upon our loyalty to the Federal Government?[/quote]
Since we decided white Southerners didn't so much have a right to house if they weren't loyal.

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1437027' date='Dec 22 2007, 01:42 AM']Why don't you take your beads and shut up?[/quote]
And as usual our resident liberal makes an argument that no one understands. The Indians gave me beads?

Edited December 21, 2007 by Justin86