Lakota Indians declare independence

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2007-12-20 01:20pm

Dartzap wrote: Oh ho, I bet that's what King George said a few hundred years ago about his Empire...

Aye, and it's what Lincoln said just over a hundred and fifty years ago. The union must be whole, succession can not be tolerated.

FedRebel · Post by **FedRebel** » 2007-12-20 01:31pm

Dartzap wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:
Flagg wrote:Why bother? I've driven through that area. Let 'em have it.
Precedent Flagg, you let ANY part of the US succeed your going to set Precedent.

The union must be whole for now and forever.
Oh ho, I bet that's what King George said a few hundred years ago about his Empire...

South Carolina and a half dozen other southern states would disagree

... half the country tried to secede back in the 1860's and they payed for that mistake in blood, we even cut a swath of destruction through Georgia and South Carolina for good measure.

These Lakota better know what they're getting into, somebody better hurry and send them some texts concerning the US Army - Indian Wars

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2007-12-20 01:34pm

The thing is, there's no possible way the US could realistically prosecute an actual military campaign with today's media. It would tear the country apart.

Isolder74 · Post by **Isolder74** » 2007-12-20 01:36pm

Mr Bean wrote:
Dartzap wrote: Oh ho, I bet that's what King George said a few hundred years ago about his Empire...
Aye, and it's what Lincoln said just over a hundred and fifty years ago. The union must be whole, succession can not be tolerated.

And Jackson, and Tayler, and Madison, and Washington, and.....

White Haven · Post by **White Haven** » 2007-12-20 01:36pm

If this turns hostile, can we level Georgia again, just for old time's sake?

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-12-20 01:37pm

Mr Bean wrote:
Flagg wrote:Why bother? I've driven through that area. Let 'em have it.
Precedent Flagg, you let ANY part of the US succeed your going to set Precedent.

The union must be whole for now and forever.

Are they even part of the Union? From what the article was saying they are simply withdrawing their treaty obligations. I don't see anything about taking over former lands. They have sizable holdings that last I checked, were legally sovereign territory.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-12-20 01:38pm

White Haven wrote:If this turns hostile, can we level Georgia again, just for old time's sake?

Can we just do that anyway?

Lord Revan · Post by **Lord Revan** » 2007-12-20 01:47pm

Is it the yellow or red area that would form the new "nation"?

Invictus ChiKen · Post by **Invictus ChiKen** » 2007-12-20 02:05pm

While we are burning Georgia let's hit my home state of South Carolina again, it could some drastic renovation...

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-12-20 02:13pm

Lord Revan wrote:Is it the yellow or red area that would form the new "nation"?

The red. The yellow was the original size of the Lakota Nation, which included the Black Hills. I dunno what the hell the orange is supposed to be.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2007-12-20 02:14pm

Flagg wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:
Are they even part of the Union? From what the article was saying they are simply withdrawing their treaty obligations. I don't see anything about taking over former lands. They have sizable holdings that last I checked, were legally sovereign territory.

They are "sovereign" territory in the good old British sense of the word Sovereign. They are Sovereign enough they can have Casinos, but if we feel like moving in or taking back part of their land we can. They only have sovereign in the sense that they can say they are Sovereign, and we agree that they are Sovereign... unless we don't want them to be.

In all things that matter it's US land even if it's not in legal terms, US land.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2007-12-20 02:17pm

Lagmonster wrote:The article mentions a Lakota freedom activist group. Is this actually a unified Lakota tribe movement, or is this five guys blowing smoke while the rest of the tribe couldn't give a shit?

Good question, and here's the answer about their leader Russell Means.
Linky

Means loses lawsuit against Oglala Sioux election
Wednesday, March 9, 2005

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by activist / actor Russell Means that challenged the Oglala Sioux Tribe's recent election.

Means was defeated by Cecilia Fire Thunder last November. But he claimed that Fire Thunder wasn't eligible for tribal office because she did not live within reservation boundaries.

U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier did not rule on the merits because she said the federal courts have no jurisdiction over the internal tribal election.

Get the Story:
Federal judge dismisses Means' election complaint (The Rapid City Journal 3/9)

Relevant Links:
Oglala Sioux Tribe - http://www.lakotamall.com/oglalasiouxtribe
Russell Means - http://www.russellmeans.com

He's lost repeated attempts to hold tribal office, so I'd say he's just another self-appointed 'leader' in the mold of Al Sharpton, but with many fewer followers.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-12-20 02:17pm

Which is why I think this will be resolved in US Courts. I'm not convinced the Feds would win in that case, either.

Like I said before, I don't care. We stole all the good parts and let them have the shitty bits we didn't want. If they think they can make a country out of it, they're welcome to try.

Havok · Post by **Havok** » 2007-12-20 02:26pm

Wait, the OP says "5 state area", that means they are reclaiming parts of Montana, North and South Dakota, Wyoming and HALF of Nebraska.

Fuck it. I say let 'em have it, but the Americans that are already there should be granted dual citizenship, not have to renounce.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-12-20 02:32pm

havokeff wrote:Wait, the OP says "5 state area", that means they are reclaiming parts of Montana, North and South Dakota, Wyoming and HALF of Nebraska.

Fuck it. I say let 'em have it, but the Americans that are already there should be granted dual citizenship, not have to renounce.

The more I look into this the more I'm thinking this guy and a cadre of fellow nutjobs is scamming the AFP. I don't think this guy actually represents anyone but himself.

Even if it is legit, there is no way in hell these guys are going to reclaim their former territorial holdings. If the Feds didn't do anything about it, you can damned well bet that the South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and Nebraska Nation Guard units will.

Lord Revan · Post by **Lord Revan** » 2007-12-20 02:38pm

yeah if he has popular support with the tribes to get the former area, there's no way this could end well for them. Though I think he's like the Åland sessionist sure they're dead serious but rest of the people know that there's a) no chance in hell the "parent nation" would just let them go b)that their nation would ever funtion without massive support.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2007-12-20 02:38pm

Flagg wrote:
havokeff wrote:Wait, the OP says "5 state area", that means they are reclaiming parts of Montana, North and South Dakota, Wyoming and HALF of Nebraska.

Fuck it. I say let 'em have it, but the Americans that are already there should be granted dual citizenship, not have to renounce.
The more I look into this the more I'm thinking this guy and a cadre of fellow nutjobs is scamming the AFP. I don't think this guy actually represents anyone but himself.

Even if it is legit, there is no way in hell these guys are going to reclaim their former territorial holdings. If the Feds didn't do anything about it, you can damned well bet that the South Dakota, North Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and Nebraska Nation Guard units will.

Three of the four 'activists' are ex-Wounded Knee takeover veterans.
The other is a woman who has held various tribal offices, but as far as I can tell has no authority from the Ogala Sioux government to proclaim 'independence'.

I found this in another article about it.

If the U.S. government does not immediately enter into diplomatic negotiations, the group said in a news release, liens will be filed on real-estate transactions across the region -- an action it says could cloud title issues over thousands of square miles of land and property.

This is a favorite tactic of the tax protester movement, and is quite an annoyance for those who have to get the liens removed.
Reading between the lines, I'd say Means and his fellow nutjobs just want a quiet payoff to go away.

Steven Snyder · Post by **Steven Snyder** » 2007-12-20 02:44pm

Rapid City Journal Reports

Lakota group declares sovereign nation status
By Journal staff Thursday, December 20, 2007

A group represents the Lakota Sioux Indian representatives from various reservations and states said Wednesday that it is declaring sovereign nation status and withdrawing from all treaties with the U.S. government.

"This is an historic day for our Lakota people," said Native American action and activist Russell Means. "United States colonial rule is at its end!"

Means was part of a four member Lakota delegation that traveled to Washington, culminating years of internal discussion among treaty representatives of the various Lakota communities. Other delegation members included Women of All Red Nations founder Phyllis Young, Oglala Lakota Strong Heart Society leader Duane Martin Sr., and Garry Rowland, Leader Chief Big Foot Riders. Means, Rowland, Martin were all members of the 1973 Wounded Knee takeover.

The move to form an independent nation will focus on property rights in a five-state area where the treaties in question were drawn up. The states include South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming and Montana – areas that the group say have been illegally homesteaded for years despite knowledge of Lakota as the historic owners.

If the U.S. government does not immediately enter into diplomatic negotiations, the group said in a news release, liens will be filed on real-estate transactions across the region -- an action it says could cloud title issues over thousands of square miles of land and property.

"In order to stop the continuous taking of our resources – people, land, water and children- we have no choice but to claim our own destiny," said Phyllis Young, a former Indigenous representative to the United Nations and representative from Standing Rock.

Young added, "The actions of Lakota are not intended to embarrass the United States but to simply save the lives of our people.”

The group has been meeting all week with foreign leaders in an effort to gain political support for sovereign nation status, including Bolivia Indigenous President Evo Morales. Morales said his country is “very, very interested in the Lakota case.”

Fascinating...

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-12-20 02:47pm

See, this sounds less like actually trying to form their own nation and more like threats of economic terrorism.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2007-12-20 03:07pm

If they are seriously going to try and get the yellow territory as indicated on the earlier map in this thread, then the territory would include Omaha, NE. Which if the ast census estimate is accurate, has nearly 475,000 people living in the city itself, Although the last census in 2000 had that number below 400,000. I'm sure the state governments of the affected states will have plenty to say about this idea either way.

The yellow territory also includes Ellsworth AFB in South Dakota, but I don't know enough of the military geography in the area to know whether or not there are any other big bases within that boundary.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2007-12-20 03:26pm

Since there exists micro-nations here in Europe (Monaco, San Marino, Lichtenstein, Andorra, The Vatican State), how does the resources/infrastructure of the Lakota's claimed areas match up with any kind of viable micro-nation?

Battlehymn Republic · Post by **Battlehymn Republic** » 2007-12-20 04:09pm

Does this mean that Crimson Skies is going to happen now?

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2007-12-20 04:20pm

VT-16 wrote:Since there exists micro-nations here in Europe (Monaco, San Marino, Lichtenstein, Andorra, The Vatican State), how does the resources/infrastructure of the Lakota's claimed areas match up with any kind of viable micro-nation?

A micro-nation has the advantage of smaller scale. This would be like putting Luxembourg in charge of Kamchatka. Mostly wilderness, a little infrastructure, and lot of people who don't think you should be telling them what to do.

Darth Lucifer · Post by **Darth Lucifer** » 2007-12-20 04:21pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:The thing is, there's no possible way the US could realistically prosecute an actual military campaign with today's media. It would tear the country apart.

We could bring this movement down the same way "Petoria" was brought down on "Family Guy."

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-12-20 04:25pm

Mario1470 wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote:The thing is, there's no possible way the US could realistically prosecute an actual military campaign with today's media. It would tear the country apart.
We could bring this movement down the same way "Petoria" was brought down on "Family Guy."

Not really. I think there are natural gas deposits on their reservations.

Failing that, they are on the high plains so wind power is an option.