Page 1 of 3
Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:07 am
by Cryomaniac
Lakota leave treaties.The Lakota Indians, who gave the world legendary warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties with the United States, leaders said Wednesday.
"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.
A delegation of Lakota leaders delivered a message to the State Department on Monday, announcing they were unilaterally withdrawing from treaties they signed with the federal government of the United States, some of them more than 150 years old.
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 US citizenship, Means said.
The treaties signed with the United States are merely "worthless words on worthless paper," the Lakota freedom activists say on their website....
What do you people think about this? I think the government reaction will be interesting.
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:44 am
by Chacor
Just a bunch of wackos in my opinion. Nothing will change in actuality.
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:46 am
by Coredesat
I was just about to say, I see nothing really happening as a result of this.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:13 am
by Dionne
Tax free......? Hmmmmm?
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:21 am
by HURAKAN
The US won't allow a country within a country. I think they're reading too many fairy tales or don't know what happened to their ancestors.
Re:
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:37 am
by Cryomaniac
HURAKAN wrote:The US won't allow a country within a country. I think they're reading too many fairy tales or don't know what happened to their ancestors.
That begs the question of exactly what the US governemtn would do, since they could end up in a Waco-type situation, which wouldn't be good for anyone.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:12 am
by vbhoutex
What begs the questions is just how do they think all the infrastructure(infrastructure which they are stealing) in their "country" is going to be maintained and new infrastructure as needed is going to be built without any taxes. Did they set up a government, etc.? I don't think they have really thought this one through.
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:18 am
by TexasStooge
OMG! Let me put on my shock face!
I didn't see much change in the United States either.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:28 am
by lurkey
vbhoutex wrote:What begs the questions is just how do they think all the infrastructure(infrastructure which they are stealing) in their "country" is going to be maintained and new infrastructure as needed is going to be built without any taxes. Did they set up a government, etc.? I don't think they have really thought this one through.
I would like to know: if they do secede and renounce their US citizenship, will the US end the subsidies and millions spent on federal programs for the Lakota? I bet the Lakota activists are betting the US gov't will still the send the subsidies and still administer federal gov't programs. I am sure the Lakota will depend on the US for defense, unless Chavez and Castro (they have recognized the renouncation of the treaties) want to do it . .
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:02 am
by feederband
I since Custer is rolling in his grave.......
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:37 am
by Derek Ortt
Last I checked, the issue of succession was settled between 1861-1865
If they want to succeed, I say send in a couple of divisions, ESPECIALLY, if they are being supported by Chevez and Castro. We cannot allow a hostile "state" to be located within our USA
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:55 pm
by vbhoutex
If Castro and Chavez are in any way involved with this the US Government needs to make it abundantly clear HERE AND NOW that they will not allow any type of help or anything else from those countries to be used in the Lakota's efforts.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:39 pm
by Ptarmigan
This sounds a lot like that Family Guy episode where Peter Griffith declares his property his own nation.
Re:
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:03 pm
by gtalum
Derek Ortt wrote:Last I checked, the issue of succession was settled between 1861-1865
If they want to succeed, I say send in a couple of divisions, ESPECIALLY, if they are being supported by Chevez and Castro. We cannot allow a hostile "state" to be located within our USA
This isn't secession, at least not anything like that of the Civil War era. The Indian nations have always been sovereign within the US. It's a strange relationship. However, as the federal government thwarted the states from exercising their constitutionally granted powers in the civil war, I'm sure they'll renege on these treaties with the Lakota too. The federal government's always been good for dishonesty and treaty violations.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:37 pm
by Hybridstorm_November2001
One must keep in mind that this type of situation was one of the major reasons the Western Roman Empire came unglued in the early centuries of the 1st millennia AD. (one of the most glaring, yet by no means the only, example of this type of complete collapse). A sovereign nation which can not maintain it's territorial integrity, and exercise a measure of centralized control over the different scio-ethnic groups therein, will not remain one for long. In closing the federal government (under whose authority this falls) can not allow the situation to progress much further.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:00 pm
by gtalum
Hybridstorm_November2001 wrote:One must keep in mind that this type of situation was one of the major reasons the Western Roman Empire came unglued in the early centuries of the 1st millennia AD. (one of the most glaring, yet by no means the only, example of this type of complete collapse). A sovereign nation which can not maintain it's territorial integrity, and exercise a measure of centralized control over the different scio-ethnic groups therein, will not remain one for long.
I disagree. The Roman Empire fell because they allowed their government to become an ever-expanding bloated bureaucracy which eventually collapsed under its own weight. It had nothing to do with borders and culture, as some would have you believe.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:16 pm
by Ptarmigan
gtalum wrote:
I disagree. The Roman Empire fell because they allowed their government to become an ever-expanding bloated bureaucracy which eventually collapsed under its own weight. It had nothing to do with borders and culture, as some would have you believe.
The Roman Empire collapsed for various reasons, not just bureaucracy. Emperors were ineffective also. One reason was that it became really morally decadant and also the use of lead pipes that caused lead poisoning, which was called Saturnalia. Also, the Romans had very little advance in agricultural practice. To compound it, it had to contend with invading Teutonic tribes. In some ways, the Roman Empire lasted until 1453 in the form of Byzantine Empire, which preserved Roman and Greek culture. It fell to the Ottoman Turks.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:21 pm
by Coredesat
Ptarmigan wrote:The Roman Empire collapsed for various reasons, not just bureaucracy. Emperors were ineffective also. One reason was that it became really morally decadant and also the use of lead pipes that caused lead poisoning, which was called Saturnalia.
You may wish to reread your Roman history books; Saturnalia was a festival, not the lead plumbing system (which is still used in areas of Europe).
As for the Native Americans, the reservations technically do already run themselves; they are not under state or federal jurisdiction. Reservations are generally run by tribal leaders under the supervision of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of the Interior.
The activists announcing the "secession" are a bit misled because there is nothing to secede from; the tribes already essentially have home rule. Also, these activists do not seem to reflect the wishes of the actual tribal council, which is the only group that can decide whether to withdraw from any treaties.
Sending in troops...that would be the hugest overreaction in the history of the world.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:21 pm
by Hybridstorm_November2001
The Western Roman Empire suffered from waves of barbarian invaders who were unwilling, or unable, to assimilate into Roman society. Unlike previous barbarians who had assimilated in various parts of the Empire via Roman force and/or via a desire to embrace the Roman culture and way of life; much as many peoples through out the world today embrace Western style democracy, free market economies, and American culture. Granted it was not the only problem facing the Romans in the early centuries of the first millennia AD, other serious issues included; increasingly weak and ineffective leadership, stretchering their armies to thin, lose of a civic mind set & a sense of duty on the part of your average Roman Citizen, and increasing decadence and a corresponding increasing amount of ignorance about events in the outside world on the part of your average Roman Citizen.
Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:30 pm
by Coredesat
vbhoutex wrote:What begs the questions is just how do they think all the infrastructure(infrastructure which they are stealing) in their "country" is going to be maintained and new infrastructure as needed is going to be built without any taxes. Did they set up a government, etc.? I don't think they have really thought this one through.
Technically, the tribes have already had governments and have been allowed to establish infrastructures, just under federal supervision.