Lakota Sioux Indians Declare Sovereign Nation Status!

[Dillinger4]

We have many minorities in Canada. I was a minority for 15 years, and yes, we got "fucked over" many, many times.

As for the treaties being held by the nation vs provinces, I am inclined to think that they prefer the nation. I'm thinking back to the Quebec separation vote. One of the factors against Quebec was that the Indians prefered Canada over Quebec. Without the Indian's lands, Quebec would loss it's hydro resources.

Its a tricky issue.

I can only really I say I lean slightly towards supporting the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, but that may very well change.

I am beefing up on colonial canadian/first nations history as we speak.

But the disctinction I make is not between the State/Provinces, but the State/UN and International Law.

It would be like the Treaty on Human Rights for the Indigenous Peoples. Here is the Declaration itself, if you are interested. It is quite different to the protections offered in the Canadian Constitution.

http://www.iwgia.org/graphics/Synkron-Library/Documents/InternationalProcesses/DraftDeclaration/07-09-13ResolutiontextDeclaration.pdf

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

As support for my view that this has more to do with tribal politics than anything else:

Rodney Bordeaux, chairman of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, said his community has no desire to join the breakaway nation. Means and his group, which call themselves the Lakota Freedom Delegation, have never officially pitched their views to the Rosebud community, Bordeaux said.

"Our position on that is we need to uphold the treaties, and we're constantly reminding Congress of that message," Bordeaux said. "We're pushing to maintain and to keep the treaties there because they're the basis of our relationship with the federal government."

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/NEWS/712200347/1001

Russell Means - for his mid-December announcement in D.C. that he is unilaterally withdrawing the Lakota Sioux from treaties with the United States. News flash to Means: treaties are made between nations; you are a person and not a nation; you are not empowered to speak for the Great Sioux Nation; as an individual, you can only withdraw yourself from coverage of your nation's treaties. (Means is the same Oglala Sioux actor who tried to beat domestic violence charges by challenging the sovereign authority of the Navajo Nation to prosecute him - he took it all the way to the Supreme Court and lost.)

http://www.powwows.com/gathering/native-issues/42242-harjo-2007-mantle-shame-awards.html

Don't think there is an all unified voice on this or any other issue in Indian Country.

(The domestic violence charge being referred to here is the charge that he beat up his father-in-law, who was in his eighties, and both a Dine and Omaha elder).

 

[newharper]

Yuwipi

I'm sure you're right but once these things become a matter of legal discussion they often take on a life of their own. The lawyers are going to have decades of meat off this imo.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Yuwipi

I'm sure you're right but once these things become a matter of legal discussion they often take on a life of their own. The lawyers are going to have decades of meat off this imo.

I'm not sure how this is a matter of legal discussion. Russell Means is not an elected tribal leader. There are elections to decide these things. Means has lost every election he's stood for. He's just an individual with no official power to decide anything for anyone but himself.

What you might find interesting is that this news source hasn't said a word about this:

http://www.indiancountry.com/

 

[newharper]

I'm not sure how this is a matter of legal discussion. Russell Means is not an elected tribal leader. There are elections to decide these things. Means has lost every election he's stood for. He's just an individual with no official power to decide anything for anyone but himself.

OK,I see what you are saying, that he has no legal position to make these statements but I still think that once you open up a Pandora's box like this, the lawyers are going to feast. If that were to be true the end is not clear to say the least.

 

[bluestreak]

Good, even if it is just symbolic, I hope they get lots of support and recognition.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

OK,I see what you are saying, that he has no legal position to make these statements but I still think that once you open up a Pandora's box like this, the lawyers are going to feast. If that were to be true the end is not clear to say the least.

I'm sure that the lawyers can make out well on just about anything.

What it comes down to is that only Means and his clique seceded from the union. The tribal governments have not although it is being reported by the media as if they have....

 

[newharper]

I'm sure that the lawyers can make out well on just about anything.

What it comes down to is that only Means and his clique seceded from the union. The tribal governments have not although it is being reported by the media as if they have....

Very likely froth as you say, thanks.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Very likely froth as you say, thanks.

I must have been a good girl this year to get a gift such as a lack of argument from you.

I'm not worthy.

 

[newharper]

I must have been a good girl this year to get a gift such as a lack of argument from you.

I'm not worthy.

It is I who feels honoured.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

They could send in the National Guard.

If they weren't all over in Iraq bolstering the US deployment there, anyway.

For stuff like this, they usually use State Troopers. I don't think they've been deployed in Iraq.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Brilliant!

I am writing a paper on the recent UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which the US/Canada/Australia/New Zealand did not sign.

This is the way forward if those states will not give them the group rights that they need to survive.

If you're writing a paper, you should look into the ground breaking work done by the BC and Canadian govt in settling land claims, and granting sovereignty-association to aboriginal peoples.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I wonder how serious this will be - or is it more symbolic?

Could this even be the small beginnings of a balkanisation/breakup of the USA ...?

The Navajo already have their own nation in the Four Corners area, and it doesn't appear to have affected the state of the union so far.

A more likely balkanization scenario sees Oregon, Washington and maybe Idaho joining up with BC and Alberta, to form the nation of Cascadia.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

This movement towards indigenous sovreignty has been bubbling under for years, in the US and Canada. There have been quite a few incidents like this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oka_Crisis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustafsen_Lake_Standoff

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipperwash_Crisis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caledonia_Land_Dispute

The Ipperwash one ended with the death of an Indigenous man, Dudley George. Tragic.

A good place to start your research would be with the Haida, then maybe the Musqueam.

 

[soulman]

Man, that state trooper looks well scared

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Canada has experience in regions of the country declaring sovreignty. It was a bitter and painful experience for all Canadains. Since then, we have put rules and regulations into our constitution.

Since we already have those mechanisms in place, it would be silly to vote for a UN declaration that could undo the work we have done.

I don't think any changes were made to the Constitution, but I agree that we don't need some UN bureaucrats sitting in New York to help us with negotiation of native land claims; I suspect that Canadian expertise in the area far surpasses theirs.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I am not saying money is not an issue. It is only one of many.
.

You're right. It's about money, control of natural resources, and land ownership.

In other words, it's all about money.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

We have many minorities in Canada. I was a minority for 15 years, and yes, we got "fucked over" many, many times.

As for the treaties being held by the nation vs provinces, I am inclined to think that they prefer the nation. I'm thinking back to the Quebec separation vote. One of the factors against Quebec was that the Indians prefered Canada over Quebec. Without the Indian's lands, Quebec would loss it's hydro resources.

I'll tell you one group that would be deeply unhappy with Quebec separation: aboriginal people living in Quebec.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Man, that state trooper looks well scared

He probably was that, and also pissed, having to come in and clean up a mess created by the Surete de Quebec.

 

[newharper]

The Supreme Court of British Columbia refused to hear the appeal.

Did they give grounds.

Sorry my machine can't reference this; it is however from the

Gustafsen Lake Standoff site on wiki site that JC linked earlier.

working now.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustafsen_Lake_Standoff

Though what part of,

Gustafsen Lake Standoff site on wiki that JC linked earlier.

you found difficult I'm sure you'll get back to me on.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Did they give grounds.

What are you quoting from?

 

[Dhimmi]

I'm not sure how this is a matter of legal discussion. Russell Means is not an elected tribal leader. There are elections to decide these things. Means has lost every election he's stood for. He's just an individual with no official power to decide anything for anyone but himself.

What you might find interesting is that this news source hasn't said a word about this:

http://www.indiancountry.com/

Interesting series of posts there, thanks for that.

 

[newharper]

What are you quoting from?

I did edit the post.

 

[Dimitris]

Some various stuff that I have found for this.... mostly news reports and blog comments. Also a Report of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations
(my last link)


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

http://cofcc.org/?p=997

http://tailrank.com/4355571/Lakota-Secede-from-United-States-of-America



http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/71373/


http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message477509/pg1

http://www.halcyon.com/pub/FWDP/International/report13.txt

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Sorry my machine can't reference this; it is however from the

Gustafsen Lake Standoff site on wiki site that JC linked earlier..

I think Dillinger gave the Gustafsen link.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Did they give grounds.n.

Just looking at it briefly, I expect the reason they dismissed the appeal, is because they accepted that Canadian courts had jurisdiction over the accused.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Its a tricky issue.

I can only really I say I lean slightly towards supporting the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, but that may very well change.

I am beefing up on colonial canadian/first nations history as we speak.

But the disctinction I make is not between the State/Provinces, but the State/UN and International Law.

It would be like the Treaty on Human Rights for the Indigenous Peoples. Here is the Declaration itself, if you are interested. It is quite different to the protections offered in the Canadian Constitution.

http://www.iwgia.org/graphics/Synkron-Library/Documents/InternationalProcesses/DraftDeclaration/07-09-13ResolutiontextDeclaration.pdf

The UN has no jurisdiction here, also no land to give. The Queen In Right of British Columbia does, on both counts.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

OK,I see what you are saying, that he has no legal position to make these statements but I still think that once you open up a Pandora's box like this, the lawyers are going to feast. .

How will the statements of an individual, speaking legally for no one but himself, create a lawyer's feast?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I must have been a good girl this year to get a gift such as a lack of argument from you.

I'm not worthy.

It's your name. He's deferring to you on principle.

 

[Dillinger4]

The UN has no jurisdiction here, also no land to give. The Queen In Right of British Columbia does, on both counts.

It would be the equivelent of the Declaration on Human Rights. It is all about their rights. Indigenous Peoples would be able to refer their claims to a higher authority. Have a quick glance over that declaration, it is not long, and it uses pretty clear language.