Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27

Thread: U. S. cannot nullify treaties with Indians

  1. #1
    anyones neighbor
    Guest

    U. S. cannot nullify treaties with Indians

    U. S. cannot nullify treaties with Indians
    November 14, 2009, 8:07 AM / 29 comments
    Story tools:



    It is sad to see so many readers responding to the issues of tax collection on reservation sales, without ever taking the time to examine or understand the realities of sovereignty or treaty rights.

    The idea that the government can just rewrite treaties to bring anything more into line with non-Indian viewpoints neglects the very concept of what a treaty is —an agreement between two or more sovereign nations. It cannot be nullified or abdicated by one party without the consent of the others.

    The idea that the state can refuse passage on public highways to Indian people because they claim their U. S. government acknowledged sovereignty is foolish and dangerous. American Indian people in this country have been guaranteed the rights of free passage, they traded away the rights to a whole lot of land in return for these rights.

    Some readers claim to have read most of the treaties and found nothing of the sort within them. Apparently, they have only read as far as they need to form their unfinished opinions. I suggest they reread the whole of the treaties and then ask themselves where they gained the right to the very land they stand upon while they rail away at people who gave them the right, through these same treaties, to stand there in the first place.

    Mark H. Vosburgh
    Albion
    http://www.buffalonews.com/opinion/e...ry/861226.html

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    1,713
    Quote Originally Posted by anyones neighbor View Post
    U. S. cannot nullify treaties with Indians
    November 14, 2009, 8:07 AM / 29 comments
    Story tools:



    It is sad to see so many readers responding to the issues of tax collection on reservation sales, without ever taking the time to examine or understand the realities of sovereignty or treaty rights.

    The idea that the government can just rewrite treaties to bring anything more into line with non-Indian viewpoints neglects the very concept of what a treaty is —an agreement between two or more sovereign nations. It cannot be nullified or abdicated by one party without the consent of the others.

    The idea that the state can refuse passage on public highways to Indian people because they claim their U. S. government acknowledged sovereignty is foolish and dangerous. American Indian people in this country have been guaranteed the rights of free passage, they traded away the rights to a whole lot of land in return for these rights.

    Some readers claim to have read most of the treaties and found nothing of the sort within them. Apparently, they have only read as far as they need to form their unfinished opinions. I suggest they reread the whole of the treaties and then ask themselves where they gained the right to the very land they stand upon while they rail away at people who gave them the right, through these same treaties, to stand there in the first place.

    Mark H. Vosburgh
    Albion
    http://www.buffalonews.com/opinion/e...ry/861226.html
    I agree with you "but" if Indians sell to anyone other than their own people, the State has every right to collect tax on those sales.

  3. #3
    anyones neighbor
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ichingtheory View Post
    I agree with you "but" if Indians sell to anyone other than their own people, the State has every right to collect tax on those sales.
    That's very true but so far, they haven't figured out how to do it. The nation is NOT going to collect taxes for NY state.

  4. #4
    Member PickOranges's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,420
    I have mixed feelings on this. I believe if our elected officials learned to manage our money we would not be in this financial mess right now.. Our legislators are always in the spending mode and then punish us all by raising fees , taxes and starting programs that never end for placing patronage.
    Kiss someone that's different. It helps.
    Lets get the facts first, then go for the jugular!!
    It's all transparent, just read between the lines..

  5. #5
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    and how did the Iroquios get "their land"?

    They stole it from the Huron, Neutrals, Susquehannock, Tionontati, and Erie.

    So they sold us land they didn't have a right to own - that's called fraud ab initio.

  6. #6
    Member PickOranges's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,420
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    and how did the Iroquios get "their land"?

    They stole it from the Huron, Neutrals, Susquehannock, Tionontati, and Erie.

    So they sold us land they didn't have a right to own - that's called fraud ab initio.
    http://tolatsga.org/iro.html

    In the United States, much of the Iroquois homeland was surrendered to New York land speculators in a series of treaties following the Revolutionary War. Despite this, most Seneca, Tuscarora, and Onondaga avoided removal during the 1830s and have remained in New York. There are also sizeable groups of Mohawk, Oneida, Cayuga, and Caughnawaga still in the state.
    Kiss someone that's different. It helps.
    Lets get the facts first, then go for the jugular!!
    It's all transparent, just read between the lines..

  7. #7
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    Quote Originally Posted by PickOranges View Post
    http://tolatsga.org/iro.html

    In the United States, much of the Iroquois homeland was surrendered to New York land speculators in a series of treaties following the Revolutionary War. Despite this, most Seneca, Tuscarora, and Onondaga avoided removal during the 1830s and have remained in New York. There are also sizeable groups of Mohawk, Oneida, Cayuga, and Caughnawaga still in the state.
    As iu said - they stoled it from others. funny to hear them complain that we stoled it from them.

  8. #8
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,617
    Quote Originally Posted by anyones neighbor View Post
    The nation is NOT going to collect taxes for NY state.
    Then why should people off the reservation pay taxes to support those on the reservation?
    “I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.” – Thomas Jefferson
    https://restore-representation.org/

  9. #9
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,617
    Actually, the U.S. can nullify treaties it is called abrogation. Since the U.S. stopped entering into treaties with the Indians in 1871 any subsequent act of Congress abrogates any prior inconsistent provision of any treaty.
    “I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.” – Thomas Jefferson
    https://restore-representation.org/

  10. #10
    anyones neighbor
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    Actually, the U.S. can nullify treaties it is called abrogation. Since the U.S. stopped entering into treaties with the Indians in 1871 any subsequent act of Congress abrogates any prior inconsistent provision of any treaty.
    The idea that the government can just rewrite treaties to bring anything more into line with non-Indian viewpoints neglects the very concept of what a treaty is —an agreement between two or more sovereign nations. It cannot be nullified or abdicated by one party without the consent of the others.

  11. #11
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    Quote Originally Posted by anyones neighbor View Post
    The idea that the government can just rewrite treaties to bring anything more into line with non-Indian viewpoints neglects the very concept of what a treaty is —an agreement between two or more sovereign nations. It cannot be nullified or abdicated by one party without the consent of the others.
    I think DTWarren is correct - moreover, under the treties that were enterted into before 1871, the indian nations agreed to be subject to the jurisdiction and laws of the United States.

    Cherokee Nation v. the State of Georgia, US Supreme Court1831:

    "Though the Indians are acknowledged to have an unquestionable, and, heretofore, unquestioned right to the lands they occupy, until that right shall be extinguished by a voluntary cession to our government; yet it may well be doubted whether those tribes which reside within the acknowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may, more correctly be denominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which must take effect in point of possession when their right of possession ceases. Meanwhile, they are in a state of pupilage. Their relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian."

  12. #12
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,617
    As American Citizens the Indians are represented by Congress so there is, at least in the case of Indians, consent from their elected representatives. However, even in the absence of this treaty rights can be abrogated at the will of Congress. Choate v. Trapp, 224 U.S. 665, 671, 56 L. Ed. 941, 32 S. Ct. 565 (1912). An Act of Congress may supersede a treaty. Thomas v. Gay, 169 U.S. 264, 271, 42 L. Ed. 740, 18 S. Ct. 340 (1898); The Cherokee Tobacco, 78 U.S. 616, 621, 20 L. Ed. 227 (1870). Generally, in the case of a conflict between an Act of Congress and a treaty, the one last in date must prevail to the extent they are inconsistent. Hijo v. United States, 194 U.S. 315, 324, 48 L. Ed. 994, 24 S. Ct. 727 (1904).
    “I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.” – Thomas Jefferson
    https://restore-representation.org/

  13. #13
    Member mnb811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Boston formerly Lackawanna
    Posts
    2,613
    The biggest issue is soon to be facing us REPARATIONS.If the African American "slaves" get theirs LOOK OUT.

  14. #14
    Member PickOranges's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,420
    Quote Originally Posted by nogods View Post
    I think DTWarren is correct - moreover, under the treties that were enterted into before 1871, the indian nations agreed to be subject to the jurisdiction and laws of the United States.

    Cherokee Nation v. the State of Georgia, US Supreme Court1831:

    "Though the Indians are acknowledged to have an unquestionable, and, heretofore, unquestioned right to the lands they occupy, until that right shall be extinguished by a voluntary cession to our government; yet it may well be doubted whether those tribes which reside within the acknowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may, more correctly be denominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which must take effect in point of possession when their right of possession ceases. Meanwhile, they are in a state of pupilage. Their relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian."
    I guess they just volunteeer to give up their rights that they had for thousands of years.

    A great example is when they took Tuscarora Indian's territory to build Robert Moses. Now ,the New York Power Authority answers to no one and blows all of the revenues it gets.

    You think they could of at least put in more modern turbines with our loot so we could produce more electricity.
    Kiss someone that's different. It helps.
    Lets get the facts first, then go for the jugular!!
    It's all transparent, just read between the lines..

  15. #15
    Member Save Us's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,407
    If NY could run a fiscally solvent state then none of this conversation would be necessary.

    Sadly they can't and even after the hell out of us they still can't close a budget gap.

    It's called reduced spending....try it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Indians pushed around in Canada too !!
    By gonerail in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 18th, 2008, 08:40 PM
  2. Honor Indian Treaties
    By truebe in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: September 14th, 2006, 11:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •