Lakota break from US

[Okwes]

Descendants of Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse break away from US
> 20 hours ago
>
> WASHINGTON (AFP) — 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 warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties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.
>

[blackcrowheart]

U.S. Out of the Upper Midwest
The Lakota Sioux start their own country

~ By RON GARMON ~

www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=6732&IssueNum=239
<http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=6732&IssueNum=239>

~ Not happy: Sitting Bull ~

Look at me, see if I am poor, or my people either. The whites may get me
at last, as you say, but I will have good times till then. You are fools
to make yourselves slaves to a piece of fat bacon, some hard-tack, and a
little sugar and coffee.
–Sitting Bull
As we see, Sitting Bull didn't do spin. Some of the celebrated
Hunkpapa war chief's modern-day Lakota cousins minced few words in
taking their First Nation out of the United States last month. Four
members of Lakotah Freedom Delegation, a small cadre of leaders from AIM
(American Indian Movement, a longtime foe of U.S. policy towards
indigenous people), declared the new nation of Lakotah out of treaty
land in five states. Actor and longtime activist Russell Means declared,
"This is a historic day for our people. United States colonial rule
is at an end!"
Critics back in the former Dakotas called it an "empty gesture,"
with the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader making clucking sounds about
"treaties their forefathers signed" in their coverage's lead
paragraph and right-bent bloggers everywhere dismissed the announcement
as a stunt. LFD's withdrawal letter laid out a tale of worthless
treaties, rigged justice, stolen resources, and brute fraud, dating from
the first agreement made with the Jefferson administration in 1805.
Stunt or not, later visits with respectful delegations from Venezuela,
Bolivia, Chile, and South Africa drove the seriousness of the matter
home.
Last September's non-binding Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples upheld the right to self-determination, even to the point of
voiding existing legal arrangements. This underreported human rights
advance, claims Lakotah Freedom, was a chance to nudge a
generations-long struggle a necessary step forward. The Declaration was
opposed by the U.S., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, but 143 other
nations supported it.
I called up LFD and spoke to Canupa Gluha Mani (Duane Martin, Sr.)
longtime AIM activist, veteran of the 1973 Wounded Knee standoff and one
of the four delegates sent to Washington. "They can kill us if they
want to," he shouted, outrage venting through the receiver.
"They can assassinate us. However, it's up to them to understand
what they've been doing since the treaties were signed since 1803.
Our people have been living up to it subsequently to this God-forsaken
day. The First Nations people wouldn't have to do this if the
colonial government in Washington lived up to its obligations. They lie,
so we have to endure Third World conditions with five or six families
living in a two-bedroom house. They never live by the treaties or else
they would've stopped the flow of illegal alcohol coming onto the
Pine Ridge reservation in June. That's how much they live up to
treaty. It's an insult. We were promised a treaty `as long as
the grass grows' and we get this? Don't be going into Iraq and
killing all the poor people only to turn it into a big Indian
reservation like they have here."
The sovereignty campaign claims a mandate from elders dating from the
mid-1970s, but the project has its local critics, like Rosebud Sioux
chairman Rodney Bordeux, who officially disavowed the whole enterprise.
Means preemptively dismissed conservative tribal opposition as
"Vichy Indians" and others talk grandly of issuing passports and
driver's licenses. The group's website regularly posts updates,
one confirming the bizarre rumor that Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin is
considering recognizing Lakotah and another denying a rather more
plausible-sounding tale of Dubya threatening to cut off federal
assistance to communities within it.
The Delegation released a map of the newly liberated zone on December
29, the 117th anniversary of the U.S. massacre at Wounded Knee.
Expropriated chunks of five Plains states put physical boundaries on
what was until now only a state of mind. Whatever else it is, this
invitation to the Lakota Sioux to imagine an independent existence in a
country less riven by violence and oppression is a brilliant stroke of
conceptual politics, however slow the payoff. "This is the beginning
to rebirthing," LFD liaison Naomi Archer put it. "We're not
expecting the world to chime in tomorrow with full recognition. What we
do expect is for Lakotah to be recognized as a nation. We're
indigenous, not a fraction within something larger."
"The majority of the people who think free, get it," chuckled
Mani. "The others who don't, don't. They love the conditions
being inflicted on them. We encourage all nations in the western
hemisphere to rise up and get back to traditional methods of reality.
They can be free, they can do the same thing, but only if they stop
relying on the enemy's way of doing things. "

[blackcrowheart]

Land of ‘Lakotah’ to be celebrated Saturday
Activists declare victory, plan for creation of new country
By Bill Harlan, Journal staff Friday, January 04, 2008
159 comment(s) Normal Size Increase font Size

Despite not getting support from recognized tribal officials, the Republic of Lakotah will gather for a victory celebration today.


Supporters of activist Russell Means' declaration of independence for a "Lakotah" nation will meet at noon today in St. Francis on Rosebud Indian Reservation.

"All the members of the Lakotah Freedom Delegation will be there," including Means himself, organizer Alfred Boneshirt said Friday.

Rosebud Sioux Tribe Chairman Rodney Bordeaux said Means does not represent his tribe. He also said the tribe's formal trust relationship with the federal government depends on the treaties.

However, most Lakota tribal presidents and chairmen have not responded to requests for comments from the Rapid City Journal.

Last month, Means and other organizers delivered a document to the U.S. State Department declaring that "Lakotah" was renouncing treaties with the United States.

A "Lakotah Freedom" Web site is announcing that liens will be filed against government property in a five-state treaty area that includes all of western South Dakota. (No liens will be filed against private property, the Web site says -- at least, not yet. Landowners are invited to discuss the issue with the Lakotah Freedom Delegation.)

The U.S. government has not responded to the declaration, and so far, the "Lakotah" declaration of independence has had no effect except to generate a worldwide response. Gay Kingman, executive director for the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen's Association in Rapid City, said she had fielded inquiries from Russia, Canada, South Africa and other countries.

Means is a member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe, and he lives on Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. But he does not represent a tribal government.

Boneshirt said today's "Victory Celebration" would show widespread support for the idea of secession. "I want people to understand it's not just Russell Means and his activists," he said.

Activities at the St. Francis community center will continue into Saturday evening, Boneshirt said, with a supper and a dance.

Boneshirt also is the coordinator of the Sicangu Grassroots Oyate, a Rosebud-based organization.

On the Net: Republic of Lakotah: www.republicoflakotah.com

Contact Bill Harlan at 394-8424 or [e-mail]

[blackcrowheart]

Lakota Indians Withdraw Treaties Signed With U.S. 150 Years Ago
Thursday, December 20, 2007

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

WASHINGTON — The Lakota Indians, who gave the world legendary
warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties with
the United States.

"We are no longer citizens of the United States
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html#> 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
said.

A delegation of Lakota leaders has delivered a message to the State
Department, and said they were unilaterally withdrawing from treaties
they signed with the federal government
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html#> of the U.S., some
of them more than 150 years old.

The group also visited the Bolivian, Chilean, South African and
Venezuelan embassies, and would continue on their diplomatic mission and
take it overseas in the coming weeks and months.

Lakota country includes parts of the states of Nebraska, South Dakota
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html#> , 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 U.S.
citizenship <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html#> , Mr
Means said.

The treaties signed with the U.S. were merely "worthless words on
worthless paper," the Lakota freedom activists said.

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
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317548,00.html#> 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 U.S. "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 U.S. 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 per cent above the norm for the U.S.;
infant mortality is five times higher than the U.S. average; and
unemployment is rife, according to the Lakota freedom movement's
website.

[blackcrowheart]

Lakotah Unilateral Withdrawal from All Agreements and Treaties with the
United States of America

We as the freedom loving Lakotah People are the predecessor sovereign of Dakota Territory as evidenced by theTreaties with the United States Government, including, but not limited to, the Treaty of 1851 and the Treaty of 1868 at Fort Laramie.

Lakotah, formally and unilaterally withdraws from all agreements and treaties imposed by the United States Government on the Lakotah People.

Lakotah , and the population therein, have waited for at least 155 years for the United States of America to adhere to the provisions of the above referenced treaties. The continuing violations of these treaties’ terms have resulted in the near annihilation of our people physically, spiritually, and culturally.

Lakotah rejects United States Termination By Appropriation policy from 1871 to the present. In addition, the evidence of gross violations of the above referenced treaties are listed herein.

Lakotah encourages the United States of America, through its Government ,to enter into dialogue with Lakotah
regarding the boundaries, the land and the resources therein.
Please contact the Lakotah Interests Section,
NaomiArcher, at [phone] or [e-mail].

Should the United States and its subordinate governments choose not to act in good faith concerning the rebirth of
our nation, we hereby advise the United States Government that Lakotah will begin to administer liens against real estate transactions within the five state area of Lakotah.

Lakotah, through its government, appointed the following representatives to withdraw from all the treaties with the United States of America based on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties entered into force in 1980 and the
U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007:

Teghiya Kte
Heretofore known as Gary Rowland

Canupa Gluha Mani
Heretofore known as Duane Martin Sr.

Oyate Wacinyapin
Heretofore know as Russell Means

Mni yuha Najin Win
Heretofore known as Phyllis Young

Lakotah Political and Diplomatic Relations with the United States of America

The first official contacts between Lakotah and the government of the United States of America began in earnest after the United States conducted a commercial transaction with France, commonly known as the Louisiana Purchase, in 1803. Prior to that time, Lakotah exercised complete and unfettered freedom and independence in their territory. According to the fantasy of United States’ history, the Louisiana Purchase was a purported sale by France to the United States of 530 million acres (2.1 million sq.km.) for $15 million. Part of this sale included the territory of Lakotah who, of course never had knowledge of, nor gave consent to, the sale of their national territory.

The first treaty between the U.S. and any segment of Lakotah occurred in 1805, , and various other treaties of “peace and friendship,” between Lakotah and the U.S. As citizens of the U.S. began to invade and encroach on the territory of Lakotah in increasing numbers, tensions and violence erupted. To prevent full-scale war, the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 was requested by the U.S., to allow a transportation route through Lakotah territory. The treaty did not impair the sovereignty or the independence of Lakotah. In fact, the treaty expressly recognized Lakotah as an independent
nation, and the treaty respected “all national business” of Lakotah.

After repeated violations by the United States of the 1851 Treaty, warfare broke out between Lakotah and the U.S.

Lakotah defeated the U.S. in the so-called “Red Cloud War,” leading to the U.S. to call for another treaty conference at Fort Laramie. The second treaty agreed for the U.S. to abandon the Bozeman Road, and the accompanying military forts that had been built along it, and promised to keep U.S. troops and settlers out of Lakotah territory. Almost immediately, the U.S. began violating terms of the treaty, allowing railroad and mining interests to trespass and steal Lakotah resources and territory.

In 1874, the infamous U.S. military commander, George Custer, led an
invasion of the most sacred part of Lakotah territory, the Paha Sapa (Black Hills), prompting an invasion of gold seekers, and provoking another war between the U.S. and Lakotah. As a result of the war, Lakotah territory was
illegally occupied by the U.S., and billions of dollars of natural resources have been stolen from the occupied territories of Lakotah.

The United States has engaged in multiple military, legal and political strategies for more than a century to deny Lakotah our right to freedom and self-determination. In 1876-77, in violations of the treaties that it had signed withLakotah, the U.S. engaged in a sell-or-starve policy to coerce Lakotah to sell our national homeland. Lakotah refused, and has consistently refused to the present time.

In 1871, the U.S. decided no longer to enter into treaties with indigenous nations, but the U.S. treaty-ending legislation made explicit that the new policy of the United States would in no way impair or limit those treaties
already in force between indigenous nations and the U.S. Lakotah have consistently relied on the sanctity of the treaty between the U.S. and Lakotah.

As mentioned above, the United States has consistently violated the treaties between Lakotah and the U.S., resulting in the loss of life, resources, and territory for Lakotah. Although the United States was willing to take the benefit of its bargain (i.e., territory and natural resources) in signing treaties with Lakotah, it was almost immediately unwilling to respect the mutual bargain to the Lakotah. The U.S. began to use U.S. law and policy to attempt to diminish the political, economic and cultural freedom of Lakotah.
After signing the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, the U.S. allowed its military, and its civilian citizens to invade Lakotah territory to steal gold, silver and other natural resources. The U.S. unilaterally violated the 1868 Treaty
throughout the 1870s and 1880s by coercing alterations in the Treaty onto Lakotah, without the required 2/3 agreement of Lakotah, as required in the Treaty.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the ongoing freedom and independence of Lakotah in the landmark case of Ex Parte Crow Dog (1883), two years later, the U.S. Congress attempted to steal Lakotah independence through the passage of the Major Crimes Act, that unilaterally extended U.S. criminal jurisdiction into Lakotah territory.

These actions were followed by more arrogant actions of the United States, culminating in the shocking Supreme Court Case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903). Although Lone Wolf involved the Kiowa and Comanche Nations in
what is now the State of Oklahoma, its impact adversely affected Lakotah. In Lone Wolf, the United States not only said that it could violate, change or abrogate treaties with Indian nations unilaterally, but it also said that the U.S.
Congress possesses plenary (absolute) power to legislate in any way in indigenous affairs without the consent or consideration of indigenous nations. By extension, Lone Wolf has been used to violate hundreds of treaties between the U.S. and indigenous peoples, including Lakotah. Through the operation of Lone Wolf, the U.S. stole the sacred Black Hills, allowed the mining of billions of dollars of gold from them, admitted that the Black Hills were taken in violation of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, and then offered to compensate Lakotah at 1874 land values. Lakotah have, to this day, rejected the offer of payment, and continue to insist on the return of the Paha Sapa (Black Hills).

An overview of violations follows:
• Homestead Acts
• Allotment Acts
• Citizenship Act forcing United States citizenship upon all American Indians
• Indian Reorganization Act a.k.a. Howard Wheeler Act (the first Apartheid Act)
• Forced relocation during the decades of the 1950's over the 1960's.
• Supreme Court decision disallowing our religions.
• Even though we are citizens of the United States of America, we are denied protections of the United StatesConstitution while living on Indian reservations, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

The operation of the United States in the nefarious ways outlined above are a violation, not only of the sovereignty and independence of Lakotah, not only of the solemn treaty signed between the U.S. and Lakotah, but it is a violation of the fundamental law of the United States itself. Article Six of the United States Constitution explicitly states that treaties signed by the United States are the supreme law of the land, and must be respected by every court and by every lawmaker, as such.

Referenced Documents

1. Treaties of Fort Laramie, 1851 and 1868
Full text of these treaties can be found at www.lakotafreedom.com/portfolio.html

2. Article VI of United States Constitution
Article. VI. - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several
States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

3. Vienna Convention on Treaties 1969; specifically Article 49, Article 60 Parts I and II

Article 49- Fraud
If a State has been induced to conclude a treaty by the fraudulent conduct govern questions not regulated by the provisions of the present Convention,
Have agreed as follows:

PART I

INTRODUCTION

Article 1
Scope of the present Convention The present Convention applies to treaties between States.

Article 2
Use of terms

1. For the purposes of the present Convention:

(a) 'treaty' means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international
law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular
designation;

(b) 'ratification', 'acceptance', 'approval' and 'accession' mean in each case the international act so named whereby a
State establishes on the international plane its consent to be bound by a treaty;

(c) 'full powers' means a document emanating from the competent authority of a State designating a person or persons
to represent the State for negotiating, adopting or authenticating the text of a treaty, for expressing the consent of the
State to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act with respect to a treaty;

(d) 'reservation' means a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State, when signing, ratifying,
accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain
provisions of the treaty in their application to that State;

(e) 'negotiating State' means a State which took part in the drawing up and adoption of the text of the treaty;

(f) 'contracting State' means a State which has consented to be bound by the treaty, whether or not the treaty has
entered into force;

(g) 'party' means a State which has consented to be bound by the treaty and for which the treaty is in force;

(h) 'third State' means a State not a party to the treaty;

(i) 'international organization' means an intergovernmental organization.

Article 60

Termination or suspension of the operation of a treaty as a consequence of its breach

1. A material breach of a bilateral treaty by one of the parties entitles the other to invoke the breach as a
ground for terminating the treaty or suspending its operation in whole or in part.

2. A material breach of a multilateral treaty by one of the parties
entitles:

(a) the other parties by unanimous agreement to suspend the operation of the treaty in whole or in part or to terminate it either:

(i) in the relations between themselves and the defaulting State, or

(ii) as between all the parties;

(b) a party specially affected by the breach to invoke it as a ground for suspending the operation of the treaty in whole or in part in the relations between itself and the defaulting State;

(c) any party other than the defaulting State to invoke the breach as a ground for suspending the operation of the treaty in whole or in part with respect to itself if the treaty is of such a character that a material breach of its provisions by one party radically changes the position of every party with respect to the furtherperformance of its obligations under the treaty.

3. A material breach of a treaty, for the purposes of this article,consists in:

(a) a repudiation of the treaty not sanctioned by the present Convention; or

(b) the violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the treaty.

4. The foregoing paragraphs are without prejudice to any provision in the treaty applicable in the event of a
breach.

Lakota 444 Crazy Horse Drive, P.O. Box 99; Porcupine, SD 57772 www.lakotafreedom.com

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