We have a place to move if Ron Paul does not win!!!!!! YES!

[me3]

I hate to admit it but I hope we rout the place, we have the right if they are not friendly and hostile to Americans who live near by. Maybe I will be lucky enough to participate if they need C-17 Aircrew's to deliver cargo. We should not allow there to be unfriendly "nations" existing within our borders, this is a bad idea.

Fantastic arguments for neoconservatism.

Perhaps you were looking for this forum.

 

[kylejack]

I hate to admit it but I hope we rout the place, we have the right if they are not friendly and hostile to Americans who live near by. Maybe I will be lucky enough to participate if they need C-17 Aircrew's to deliver cargo. We should not allow there to be unfriendly "nations" existing within our borders, this is a bad idea.

We stole this place fair and square.

 

[DaneKirk]

I am very proud of these peopel. I would hope that the people of this Country that know something must be done, and will rally behind them.

This a big deal. I look to other tribes to do the same thing. This is huge in many ways. Finally we have people with enough balls to take these B*%$ on and let me assure you, unlike Waco and Ed and Elaine Brown, these people do not talk through their hat. Let the feds rush them, you will finally see people that will actually fight with all they have within them and it will not be hidden from view, it is too big now.

I too am part Cherokee and I see a great potential in this for all of us. They can now open their own banking. They will draw thousands of people to them and it will be boom towns start to spring up.

I believe they will get support from other foreign countries which could be uncomfortable should those nations defend them in any attack. This thing could grow into most all the states and fracture the Country. I say GOOD, its about time.

WOOOO HOOO!! The more I think about it the more excited I get. I will send them my support today and hope that many will do the same.

These are not people to be laughed at, they aren't called "braves" for nothing.

I doubt these "braves" will stand up well to a Marine Expeditionary Force or Army Division with Heavy Armor and Close Air Support, it is different because we in the military are Americans too (duh), we would be fighting on familiar ground, it would be a slaughter, I hope they try it and I hope I can help squash them. I will enjoy it very much. Now that they have withdrawn from the treaty we have no obligation to leave them be.

Sorry to sound so evil but there is only so much I can support, and having hostile Natives within our borders is not acceptable, nor should it be. Why don't they do what other natives do, build a bunch of Casinos and take all the Americans money and use it to make their peoples lives better. Doing this is only going to make them more impoverished.

 

[yongrel]

We stole this place fair and square.

Darn tootin!

 

[yongrel]

I doubt these "braves" will stand up well to a Marine Expeditionary Force or Army Division with Heavy Armor and Close Air Support, it is different because we in the military are Americans too (duh), we would be fighting on familiar ground, it would be a slaughter, I hope they try it and I hope I can help squash them. I will enjoy it very much. Now that they have withdrawn from the treaty we have no obligation to leave them be.

Sorry to sound so evil but there is only so much I can support, and having hostile Natives within our borders is not acceptable, nor should it be. Why don't they do what other natives do, build a bunch of Casinos and take all the Americans money and use it to make their peoples lives better. Doing this is only going to make them more impoverished.

Your thirst for blood both sickens and frightens me.

 

[DaneKirk]

Fantastic arguments for neoconservatism.

Perhaps you were looking for this forum.

Actually no I am not a neo-conservative; I support Ron Paul when it comes to foreign policy and everything else. Being used currently as a tool of that policy gives me credibility unlike you I am sure. Try living my life and see what I see for a while and I am sure you will not be so quick to label me a neo-con. I am not about to take shit from someone sitting back home who has little idea who I am or what I stand for!

Anyway, I just do not think having an unfriendly and I am sure hostile nation within our borders should be tolerated, that’s all. If they withdraw from the treaty they should be fair game. This is not an invasion of a country in the part of the world I am in, this is at home within our borders. You people who support this make me sick. This will only lead to the natives being more impoverished at the very least, so I do not see much to support. Let me emphasize again that I completely understand their anger about all the times they were screwed in the past. That is very legitimate.

 

[AisA1787]

How is NEW HAMPSHIRE to live in and work? Anyone

It's great! No sales tax, no state income tax, great scenery, nice people (mostly). I went to college in NH and also worked a couple of summers, so I don't have a full-time worker's perspective, but I plan on moving back when I get out of grad school.

Edit: slightly higher property taxes than other places, though... but it's worth it.

 

[kylejack]

Anyway, I just do not think having an unfriendly and I am sure hostile nation within our borders should be tolerated, that’s all.

Yeah, that's how they feel about you in their country too.

Government derives its power from the consent of the governed. Secession is a valid right.

 

[Carl_S]

The Indian situation is different in California. Through Indian rights legislation and lawsuits, reservation land that was improperly taken from tribes was restored by the purchase of smaller "rancherias" all over the State. The result is that California now has hundreds of small plots of land, all of which are arguably sovereign Indian territory.

Here's a map: http://www.kstrom.net/isk/maps/ca/california.html

If these rancherias took the Lakota's position, you could have hundreds of small territories in California that were outside the jurisdiction of the United States. Many of these are in desirable areas, such as San Diego, the central valley and northern California.

This is what has allowed the expansion of Indian gaming in California (and elsewhere.) Gaming is quite profitable, so I'm not so sure the tribes would give that up to wage a battle with the U.S. government. But it is conceivable that some of the rancherias could withdraw from the treaties and become a "nation within a nation" - totally outside U.S. control. It could be only 40 acres of land, but that land would be a "free country." No taxes, no State laws, no Federal laws...

 

[rodent]

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iVC1KMTOgwiSoMQyT2LwZc9HyAgA

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 told a handful of reporters and a delegation from the Bolivian embassy, gathered in a church in a run-down neighborhood of Washington for a news conference.

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.

They also visited the Bolivian, Chilean, South African and Venezuelan embassies, and will continue on their diplomatic mission and take it overseas in the coming weeks and months, they told the news conference.

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.

The treaties have been "repeatedly violated in order to steal our culture, our land and our ability to maintain our way of life," the reborn freedom movement says.

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 US "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 US 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 percent above the norm for the United States; infant mortality is five times higher than the US average; and unemployment is rife, according to the Lakota freedom movement's website.

"Our people want to live, not just survive or crawl and be mascots," said Young.

"We are not trying to embarrass the United States. We are here to continue the struggle for our children and grandchildren," she said, predicting that the battle would not be won in her lifetime.

Best wishes to these people. I am rooting for them.

 

[speciallyblend]

ummm thats why

Who on earth would want to live on a run down Reservation. I understand their anger because of all the treaties our government broke, but this is weird. Anyone here that wants to go and live on a poor reservation is pathetic and not commited to fixing our problems as Americans, and quite frankly does not deserve to be an American. I personally think it is despicable to renounce your US citizenship in favor of this laughable commune that will be created. Have fun losers.

I hate to admit it but I hope we rout the place, we have the right if they are not friendly and hostile to Americans who live near by. Maybe I will be lucky enough to participate if they need C-17 Aircrew's to deliver cargo. We should not allow there to be unfriendly "nations" existing within our borders, this is a bad idea.

we need to change our country, ummm you and me are the unfriendly nation,its not the indians that are the problem its us,well not us,but the democrats and republicans who have destroyed our country,we the usa are the unfriendly nation with in our own nation..... so either you are confused or we can consider you to be a british(anti american) agent of the anti usa government(not-teasin) who has violated our constitution . actually your second paragraph is wierd,since you assume they are hostile to us,whne in fact we have raped them by stealing their lands and we are hostile to them. So the LAKOTA Indians are correct in what they are doing,they are defending themselves from hostile unamercan people,it is the federal government that has broken their treaties year after year.. The unfriendly nation is the united states,since they have destroyed the constitution.. WE NEED RON PAUL TO WIN so we arent the unfriendly nation with in our own borders. THE LAKOTA INDIANS HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. to me your the loser and a troll go get your baby bottle and crawl back into your pin and cry loser.
IM A RON PAUL REPUBLICAN,WE MUST SAVE OUR COUNTRY FROM WITH IN, THE BUSHES AND CLINTONS AND THE OLD 2 PARTIES are the threat within our nation.

 

[DaneKirk]

Your thirst for blood both sickens and frightens me.

I have no tolerance for hostile enemies within my country. I swore an oath to protect my country against all enemies, foreign, and DOMESTIC. I see this as a domestic threat. No other tribe I know of has called for people to come and live on their land like this and forced people to renounce there US citizenship, I see that alone as proof that they would be nothing but hostile. If they have issues there are I am sure plenty of other venues to take up their grievances other than pulling out of treaties.

If they think it is outdated why not negotiate a more updated one, did they try that. They are already technically a sovereign nation and could make there own laws and police themselves, that is what natives do back in my home state. This shows me they are nothing but hostile, and until I see otherwise my opinion will not change. Your support of "revolution" has gone to much to your head and you are starting to act as if your picture is actually an accurate representation of who you are.

 

[leipo]

Why don't they do what other natives do, build a bunch of Casinos and take all the Americans money and use it to make their peoples lives better.

Here's another dutch documentary while we're on the subject...

"The last dance in Shakopee (1995): A portrayal of the residents of an Indian reservation who make their living of a casino. Economically the casino is a blessing but socially it slowly corrupts the values of the Native Americans" (loose translation by me)..

http://cgi.omroep.nl/cgi-bin/streams?/vpro/35890838/windowsmedia.asf

 

[kylejack]

I have no tolerance for hostile enemies within my country. I swore an oath to protect my country against all enemies, foreign, and DOMESTIC. I see this as a domestic threat. No other tribe I know of has called for people to come and live on their land like this and forced people to renounce there US citizenship, I see that alone as proof that they would be nothing but hostile. If they have issues there are I am sure plenty of other venues to take up their grievances other than pulling out of treaties.

If they think it is outdated why not negotiate a more updated one, did they try that. They are already technically a sovereign nation and could make there own laws and police themselves, that is what natives do back in my home state. This shows me they are nothing but hostile, and until I see otherwise my opinion will not change. Your support of "revolution" has gone to much to your head and you are starting to act as if your picture is actually an accurate representation of who you are.

If you acknowledge that they are their own country, then this is not happening within your country. Lesotho is entirely surrounded by South Africa, and South Africa doesn't feel the need to invade it.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Dane wrote:

I have no tolerance for hostile enemies within my country. I swore an oath to protect my country against all enemies, foreign, and DOMESTIC. I see this as a domestic threat. No other tribe I know of has called for people to come and live on their land like this and forced people to renounce there US citizenship, I see that alone as proof that they would be nothing but hostile. If they have issues there are I am sure plenty of other venues to take up their grievances other than pulling out of treaties.

Have they an army, navy or air force?

Have they declared war?

Have they invaded other nations for the purpose of securing resources?

What if a state or group of states decided to secede?

Would you happily bomb them into atoms as well?

 

[libertygirl]

This could have all been resloved if the U.S. Government did what they said they were going to do. I am part Cherokee, and I support the Lakotas. Native Americans have been mistreated badly and they don't want to take it anymore. To say the American military should invade them is like putting butter on soggy bread. Nobody will like it. Native Americans just want what was promised to them and far be it from me to interfere.

Now renouncing my citizenship, I wouldn't do. But they are getting screwed just like the rest of Americans and people should realize we are all in this. Being against them only fuels the U.S. Government's plans to invade the U.S. with the military, which, again, NONE of us should want or tolerate in any form. After the indians, it's us.

 

[fedup100]

I doubt these "braves" will stand up well to a Marine Expeditionary Force or Army Division with Heavy Armor and Close Air Support, it is different because we in the military are Americans too (duh), we would be fighting on familiar ground, it would be a slaughter, I hope they try it and I hope I can help squash them. I will enjoy it very much. Now that they have withdrawn from the treaty we have no obligation to leave them be.

Sorry to sound so evil but there is only so much I can support, and having hostile Natives within our borders is not acceptable, nor should it be. Why don't they do what other natives do, build a bunch of Casinos and take all the Americans money and use it to make their peoples lives better. Doing this is only going to make them more impoverished.

You are absolutely correct, the feds with your help I presume would kill all these people and never give it a second thought.

The difference between you and a Lakota brave is bravery. I can promise you if you didn't have all your mega fire power, you wouldn't go, you like most white (see Waco and Ed and Elaine Brown) men are cowards.

A fair fight with these people would leave you dead and good riddance.

I have been on this forum for a long while now. The opinions and types of people I have encountered here have made me see clearly why we are in so much trouble in the Country.

I can say I am truly discouraged there will be a peaceful solution to freeing the truly good people from the grasp of these Souless nazi mad men that have been indoctrinated in the fed's schools.

 

[Noble]

the key to this argument is the word "tolerate"... we should not tolerate a hostile nation...

should we not tolerate it because we have the RIGHT, or the POWER?

remember, they were here first... and now they have re-claimed independence.

Do we have the RIGHT to enforce our control over these native people's sovereignty? or merely the POWER to do so.

Ron Paul is all about sovereignty... and I think the native americans have a damn good argument for having that sovereignty.

 

[DaneKirk]

we need to change our country, ummm you and me are the unfriendly nation,its not the indians that are the problem its us,well not us,but the democrats and republicans who have destroyed our country,we the usa are the unfriendly nation with in our own nation..... so either you are confused or we can consider you to be a british(anti american) agent of the anti usa government(not-teasin) who has violated our constitution . actually your second paragraph is wierd,since you assume they are hostile to us,whne in fact we have raped them by stealing their lands and we are hostile to them. So the LAKOTA Indians are correct in what they are doing,they are defending themselves from hostile unamercan people,it is the federal government that has broken their treaties year after year.. The unfriendly nation is the united states,since they have destroyed the constitution.. WE NEED RON PAUL TO WIN so we arent the unfriendly nation with in our own borders. THE LAKOTA HEAD THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. to me your the loser and a troll go get your baby bottle and crawl back into your pin and cry loser.
IM A RON PAUL REPUBLICAN,WE MUST SAVE OUR COUNTRY FROM WITH IN THE BUSHES AND CLINTONS AND THE OLD 2 PARTYS are the threat within our nation.

Well, supporting people who are doing the same thing that they complained about us doing countless years ago does not give them much credibility. The last part of your response makes me laugh. You attempts to label me as a baby are without merit. You are not even a tenth of the person I am, I have done more good for Americas image in the world here in Turkey than you ever could. You should see the looks on the young deaf children's faces when I go volunteer my tuesdays to work with them and bring some joy into thier life and help do upgrades to their underfunded, run down school. I have no time to argue with such ilk who knows nothing outside the safety of their own country. You make me laugh.

Although I do agree with you we need to elect Ron. C'mon, I am not that bad just because I do not think these natives are going about solving their issues the right way, to put it nicely.

 

[sakrelije]

Amen to all the supporters of the brave Lakota. This is not new, as other posters have mentioned, and has been ongoing since 1974. Mr. Means is also a (L)ibertarian an shares strong ideological ties with most everyone here - this has created two competing governments in the Lakota territory (nation? free state?) and it will be interesting to see what the other Lakotans think and if they go along. Personally, I think they're very lucky to have a free-thinker leading them. I'm sure that will actually dictate the final response from the Federal Government (though I'm sure a bloody response is already a contingency plan for "resolution"...).