Will the Lakota Indians Suffer the Same Fate as the Confederacy?

December 20, 2007 by  
Filed under News

On the 147th anniversary of South Carolina’s secession from the union, the Lakota Indian tribe formally withdrew from all treaties made with the United States to form their own nation.

Indian rights activist Russell Means said:

“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.”

Mr. Means further stated that:

“if you were to renounce your US Citizenship, you would be living there tax free.”

The article further claims that the United States has not upheld their end on 33 signed treaties.

Most of the articles I have read concerning the new secessionist movement believe that our federal government has over reached its powers. They believe that we should go back to the original framework of the constitution and start from scratch.

I am reminded of President Lincoln’s logic to enter the Civil War. Do you remember? It was to “Preserve the Union”. This leads me to wonder how President Bush will react to the actions of the Lakota Indian Tribe. Here are a few questions I have regarding the US reaction:

  • With this secession, should we expect to see the annihilation of the Lakota Indian Tribe?
  • Do the Lakota Indians have the capability to defend themselves from the US Military?
  • Will the government recognize there secession and accept the loss of land and tax money?

It is my understanding that secession is still constitutional based on the 10th ammendment of the Constitution. I guess this will provide the growing secessionist movement a sight into the complications they may face if and when they make there move to secede.

Compliments to FoxNews for the quotes.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • leanne

    Yeah, but Russia’s Putin is backing them. I admire what they want to do, but I don’t want to see them entangled from one bad alliance to another. Curious to know if they will renounce the dollar. If so, back your currancy with gold. If no currancy, something called a gifting society works pretty good, but keep reserves in gold to maintain security .

  • Mike in Alaska

    I am amazed at how LITTLE press this is really getting. Fox has a blurb, the various ‘alphabet’ news groups have little to nothing, and it’s not making television news at all.

    I keep trying to discuss this with my peers and have discovered that the vast majority of them are religiously hipocritical bigots. I’m amazed to hear church-going folks talk such smack as:

    1. “…be fun to see them react when the military rolls tanks in over them.”
    2. “Why can’t they just ‘gel’ with the rest of America?”
    3. “Their life expectancy is only low because they’re all drunk chain-smokers.”
    4. “…coulpe bombs will change their mind.”

    Unfortunately these people were in a voting majority a few years back and elected (sort of) someone of similar stripes.

    Mitaku Oyasin!! We are all related!

  • Mike in Alaska

    Sorry ’bout the typos….

    and coulpe = couple.

    …And why should they have to DEFEND themselves from the US military? The land they’re claiming was PROMISED them by a treaty that article 6 of the constitution, the supreme law of our land, essentially guaranteed to them in perpetuity! (which lasted 4 years…until gold was discovered on their land)

    It’ll be interesting to see what manner G-dub violates the constitution to quash this.

  • Rich

    The question is valid, but it bears noting that technically secession is only applicable to states. Indian nations are not seceeding from the Union because they are not part of it; they are only bound by treaty, so legally it is a question of whether one party is guilty of breach of contract.

    Doesn’t matter in the end, though, because Uncle Sam drives tanks…

  • http://www.united-garage.cn/ Rose Norton

    Drag your thoughts away from your troubles… by the ears, by the heels, or any other way you can manage it.

  • Pingback: united states indian tribes()

  • Pingback: lakota indian tribe()

  • http://www.newsandweb.com/secession.html secession

    I received a lot of spirited comments from the last post, so I thought I’d keep poking the bear with the stick. There’s an assumption going through the topic of Sarah Palin’s (non)relationship to the Alaskan Independence Party that works