Lakota Indians "Secede" from the US, Declaration of Continuing Independence - Page 2

Moorlands · #21 Posted **Jan 18, 2008, 5:24 PM**

wow, what a bunch of nut jobs. Good luck with that! LOL!

Xing · #22 Posted **Jan 18, 2008, 7:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moorlands

wow, what a bunch of nut jobs. Good luck with that! LOL!

urbanstl.com, right?

------------------

Good for them, for trying, but it probably wont happen. Their power is all but gone, unfortunately.

Moorlands · #23 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 12:40 AM**

^ yes,

and by calling them nut jobs I may have crossed the line, and for that I apologize.

kcexpress69 · #24 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 4:10 AM**

This is obviously the first I've heard of it. Apparently not enough noise has been made or I would have heard it on talk radio by now. With only a year left with the current administration, I would have to wonder If this will be an issue that might pick up steam in the coming years, especially if Obama or Hillary get elected. The problem is, regardless of who gets elected, if this were to somehow go through successfully, it might set a very dangerous precedent. What if the state of Vermont decided they wanted to secede? Or maybe the City of San Francisco? If memory serves me correctly, SF has symbolicly voted to do something like that. It sounds ridiculous, but the attitudes of some people are so extreme that they could actually want to do that. And of course, what about the southwest? Could they secede into Mexico? Like I said, it sounds farfetched, but if it happens, It won't be the only territory.

Jasoncw · #25 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 4:29 AM**

I don't think there would be a lot of worrying over places like San Fransisco. I think there would be more worrying about other places in, and outside of the US that have indigenous people (Southwest, Alaska, Canada, Australia, etc.).

Xing · #26 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 6:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moorlands

^ yes,

and by calling them nut jobs I may have crossed the line, and for that I apologize.

ok.

Rizzo · #27 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 9:51 AM**

Whatever... I don't care, they are like way over there somewhere.....

subterranean · #28 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 3:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcexpress69

This is obviously the first I've heard of it. Apparently not enough noise has been made or I would have heard it on talk radio by now. With only a year left with the current administration, I would have to wonder If this will be an issue that might pick up steam in the coming years, especially if Obama or Hillary get elected. The problem is, regardless of who gets elected, if this were to somehow go through successfully, it might set a very dangerous precedent. What if the state of Vermont decided they wanted to secede? Or maybe the City of San Francisco? If memory serves me correctly, SF has symbolicly voted to do something like that. It sounds ridiculous, but the attitudes of some people are so extreme that they could actually want to do that. And of course, what about the southwest? Could they secede into Mexico? Like I said, it sounds farfetched, but if it happens, It won't be the only territory.

They already govern themselves to a certain extent, just like the other sovereign nations in this country. I've just recently read that they do not have the full support of the tribe and that there are a lot of people who are for it, but without the full support of the tribal government, it will probably never get off the ground. If they do, however, get on board, I doubt there is much the U.S. government could unless they institute some sort of martial law, or have another shoot out. Which would be way overboard, but I wouldn't put it past these blood hungry administrators.

hudkina · #29 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 5:34 PM**

Or things would stay the same and the U.S. just wouldn't recognize any soveirgn state.

subterranean · #30 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 5:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hudkina

Or things would stay the same and the U.S. just wouldn't recognize any soveirgn state.

A problem is then, what do you do with all of these people who have renounced their U.S. Citizenship? This is permanent.

hudkina · #31 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 6:41 PM**

All 20 of them?

kcexpress69 · #32 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 7:57 PM**

As I said earlier, this may be an issue that will take place when another administration is in. If Russell Means just got this going in December, it will probably take awhile to sell more people on the idea. I realize that the Indian Nations are sovereign and there are different rules and laws, but I don't know what they are. RM had also better figure out how he's going to make this work without people paying taxes. That area is not exactly a boon for economic development. Omaha is the only "large" city and I don't think they would go for this. The casinos don't generate the same revenue the way they do down in Florida or Las Vegas.

Dale · #33 Posted **Jan 19, 2008, 8:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hudkina

Actually the Civil War put to an end any "constitutional right" to secede from the United States.

Also, it has everything to do with the U.N. and other nations of the world. If they do not recognize the Lakota Nation then it is no different from Taiwain or Palestine or Chechnya or Kurdistan or any other regions within sovereign states that have declared their independence but are not recognized as a sovereign state.

It is quite true that Lincoln destroyed the right of secession through force of arms.

HeneryHawk · #34 Posted **Feb 5, 2008, 2:43 AM**

They need to get with the program and assimilate, move beyond the stone age life they claim to love, and learn that the wheel is their friend ( even though they werent bright enough to invent it ).

Xing · #35 Posted **Feb 5, 2008, 9:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeneryHawk

They need to get with the program and assimilate, move beyond the stone age life they claim to love, and learn that the wheel is their friend ( even though they werent bright enough to invent it ).

araman0 · #36 Posted **Feb 5, 2008, 6:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasoncw

To be honest, I think this is either just to get attention (awareness of their situation), or a scam to get donation money.

Exactly. They don't even come close to having the power or resources to get this done, even if it were legal. (Which it's not.)

st steven · #37 Posted **Feb 7, 2008, 12:22 AM**

An old running joke among constitutional law professors:

"I never tell my students to read the Constitution itself. It will only confuse them."

Have you read the treaties? What exactly has the U.S. done to break them?

Lakota Treaty of 1851

Lakota Treaty of 1868