Congressional Apology to Native Americans Is Just Cheap Talk

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 8, 2009

Apology Op-Ed
Robert T. Coulter
Executive Director, Indian Law Resource Center
www.indianlaw.org



‘No Thanks’ to Congressional Apology

This week the U.S. Senate passed a resolution apologizing to Native Americans for the wrongs done by citizens of this country. Robert T. Coulter, Executive Director of the Indian Law Resource Center, says what happened is a failure on the part of Congress to really acknowledge what it has done in the past.

The Senate has just passed a resolution that apologizes to American Indians and other Native Americans for the wrongs done by citizens of this country. But a genuine apology means you won’t do it again, and this resolution does nothing at all to stop or correct the on-going wrongs that the federal government inflicts on Indian and Alaska Native nations. Unfortunately our government still takes Indian land without paying for it, still refuses to account for the Indian money it holds, still violates its treaties with Indian nations without making amends, and still maintains a body of policy and law that is so discriminatory and racist that it should have been discarded generations ago.

To make a real apology, Congress needs to stop doing the things that it is apologizing to Indian nations and other Native peoples for. Americans generally do not know that the federal government continues to treat tribes and Alaska Native nations this way, and the evidence is that the public does not support or condone this mistreatment.

It is astonishing to most Americans that the federal government is still taking Indian land and resources – without due process of law and without fair market compensation, sometimes with no compensation at all. Of course, the Constitution says that Congress may not take anyone’s property except with due process of law and with fair market compensation. But these rules are not applied to most land and resources owned by Indian tribes, and the government takes the land and resources at will. Obviously, this is wrong. Today, the government is trying to drive Western Shoshone Indians off their homelands in Nevada without a semblance of due process and with a payment of about 15 cents per acre. This is gold mining land, but that doesn’t make it alright to take it from its Indian owners. There are other present day cases. A few years ago, Congress confiscated part of the reservation that was shared by the Yurok Nation in California and turned it over to another tribe. Congress gloated at the time that it could do this without paying compensation because of Congress’ so-called “Plenary Power” over Indians and their property.

A few years ago, Congress passed a law that orders a fund of money belonging to nine Western Shoshone tribes to be taken from the tribes and handed out by the Interior Department to some but not all individual tribal members. The bill was passed over the objections of most of the tribes.

The Interior Department still will not fully account for Indian funds that it holds. This national shame is reported regularly in the press. The Department is defying the law, as it has done for generations. The United States still insists that Indian tribes and in some respects Indian individuals, are in a state of permanent, involuntary trusteeship, with the federal government as trustee. No one else in the US is subject to such unaccountable “trusteeship.”

Congress today insists it can put Indian nations and tribes out of existence at any time. Indian nations and tribes still have no real right to exist in US law. The threat of termination is very real. Some small Native tribes in Alaska have recently heard this threat from congressional sources.

Congress also insists that it may freely violate treaties made with Indian nations. Sadly this is not a thing of the past. It does this today – regularly. Treaties are contracts, and the government cannot freely violate its contracts with others, but it does so – often – in the case of Indian treaties.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States, an international legal body that is officially recognized and supported by the United States, recently concluded that US policies regarding Indian lands are discriminatory and constitute a violation of human rights. But the Bush Administration defied the Commission and the present Administration is still refusing to change the discriminatory laws it applies to Indian tribes.

This on-going pattern of lawless and arbitrary congressional power over Indians has resulted in a negative, risky, unpredictable business climate on Indian reservations that inhibits needed economic development.

To be clear, many of the things Congress is considering apologizing for are still being done to Indian and Alaska Native tribes and to Native Hawaiians as well. Sadly, the United States, especially the US Congress, has never given up its insistence on treating Indian and Alaska Native nations with injustice and discrimination. This is not only wrong but very bad public policy and wholly out of keeping with American values.

Congress should conduct hearings and adopt a resolution promising never again to take Indian or tribal property without due process of law and fair market compensation. The resolution should promise that Congress will never again terminate any Native American tribe or its government and never again violate or abrogate a treaty with an Indian nation without making full compensation and correcting all resulting harm to the Indian nation. Congress must examine and change all federal laws, regulations, and courtmade law that deprive Indian nations and tribes of constitutional rights. Congress must pass legislation to assure that the government accounts fully for the Indian money and property it holds.

Without such commitments from Congress, an apology will be just another offense against Native Americans. Until the government changes its ways, things cannot be expected to improve much in Indian country. This is a good time to make the changes.
__________________________________________________________

Source: Indian Law Resource Center

Native Rights News is making this material available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
____________
Native Rights News (NRN) is published by the Alliance for Indigenous Rights, a nonprofit corporation owned and operated by Temple Beit Shem Tov as part of its Peace and Justice Ministry.

Peruvian Government Massacres Indigenous Protesters Prior to Conclusion of Negotiations

PERU: Native Protesters Search for Their Dead

By Milagros Salazar / IPS

BAGUA, Peru, Jun 11 (IPS) - Indigenous people taking part in protests near this town in the northern Peruvian province of Amazonas that ended in a bloody clash with the police last week are now focusing on drawing up a list of the dead and missing, amidst a climate of fear and mistrust.

Several eyewitnesses said they saw police load the bodies of dead protesters into a helicopter and dump them into the Marañón river, after the Friday, Jun. 5 incident in which both demonstrators and policemen were killed. But authorities from the prosecutors office failed to find any more bodies on their third search in the area, carried out on Wednesday.

For the past two months, native protesters have been blocking roads and access to oil industry installations to demand the repeal of a series of government decrees that violate their land rights, which are protected under the constitution and by international conventions signed by Peru.

"The helicopter stopped at least three times to pick up bodies," Luis Padilla, a member of the Awajun ethnic group from Río Santiago in Amazonas province, told IPS. "That was between eight and nine in the morning on Friday," added Padilla, who said it took three days to reach the town of Bagua from his village.

Padilla, who was wary of the camera, said that on Friday, Jun. 5 the police opened fire on the protesters manning the roadblock at a spot along the highway into Bagua called Curva del Diablo (Devil’s Curve), at around 6:00 AM, and that in response the indigenous demonstrators used their spears. "We defended ourselves," he said.

The police "picked up the bodies of our brothers and sisters and dumped them into the Marañón river," added Joel Tupicá, from the district of Nieva, who along with Padilla and another 24 Indians, including two women, were on their way back to their home villages on Wednesday, five days after the violent incident that left at least 30 protesters and policemen dead.

The number of victims is in dispute, with the authorities saying 10 civilians – including protesters and local residents - were killed and indigenous groups putting the total much higher.

A climate of fear and tension

Oswaldo Bautista, chief prosecutor of Amazonas province, told IPS that around 1,000 indigenous people have returned to their villages over the past few days, and that most of them had taken refuge in local churches for fear of reprisals by the state security forces.

Lawyers with the non-governmental Coordinadora de Derechos Humanos human rights group, who have come to Bagua to verify what happened last week, said more than 50 protesters are still under arrest in four different towns.

The incident, described by Amazon Watch programme coordinator Gregor MacLennan as a "massacre" of peaceful protesters, some of whom were still asleep at the roadblock when the police showed up, while others were shot as they fled, has heightened the tension in the area, because the army and police are still posted here and a curfew remains in place.

Several "apus" (traditional leaders of indigenous communities) have decided not to return to Curva del Diablo, for fear of being arrested. The authorities have blamed the violence on the leaders of the Peruvian Rainforest Inter-Ethnic Development Association (AIDESEP), an umbrella group of 28 federations of indigenous peoples that has led the protests.

AIDESEP’s top leader, Alberto Pizango, has been given asylum in the Nicaraguan Embassy in Lima.

"They burned the bodies of some protesters, over there," said Padilla, who was unable to provide the names of victims due to the chaos and confusion that reigned on Friday and the fact that the demonstrators came from more than 356 different villages and communities.

AIDESEP has set up committees in each community tasked with drawing up lists of people who have not returned to their homes, in order to demand that the state provide information on their fate.

"We want to recover the bodies of our missing people," said Edwin Montenegro, the local leader of Río Kanus in the Amazon district of Condorcanqui, who was directly involved in the Jun. 5 incident.

At the Curve of Death

Some 3,000 indigenous protesters were blocking the Fernando Belaúnde Terry highway at the Curva del Diablo when the police showed up to dismantle the roadblock early that morning and told them, just before opening fire, "you’ll leave here dead or alive," said Montenegro.

He told IPS that in the days leading up to the events of Jun. 5, protesters and local authorities had met with General Víctor Uribe, who was in charge of the operation to break up the traffic blockade, with a view to reaching a peaceful agreement.

Montenegro said a Thursday, Jun. 4 meeting with General Uribe failed to produce results. However, they had agreed to continue the talks on Friday at 10:00 AM – a meeting that never took place, because the attack on the protesters occurred four hours earlier.

The mayor of Condorcanqui, Héctor Requejo, confirmed to IPS that on Thursday they met with Uribe in the camp at the Petroperú oil refinery, and that the general said he himself could not make any decisions, but merely followed orders from Lima.

Montenegro said that when they opened fire on the crowd, the police aimed directly at the protesters, and that people were shot from a helicopter as well, which also launched tear gas canisters.

In the confusion, he was able to save his brother-in-law, prominent Aguaruna leader Santiago Manuin, president of the Condorcanqui Provincial Protest Committee (Comité de Lucha Provincial de Condorcanqui), who was seriously wounded.

Three young indigenous men who are being treated for bullet wounds at the Gustavo Lanatta Hospital in Bagua confirmed that the police launched the attack, without warning.

The three young men are all former members of the army. One of them, 24-year-old Paulo Bitap López from the village of Shusug, told IPS that a group of former soldiers decided to approach the police before the operation to break up the roadblock, to attempt to dissuade them, but that they found themselves caught up in a rain of bullets.

Rosa Mondragón, a 54-year-old woman who lives near the spot where the incident took place, said she saw tear gas being thrown from a helicopter, and showed prosecutor Bautista bullet marks on the walls of her house, as well as more than 20 backpacks and bags of utensils of indigenous protesters who slept overnight at her house for a week but fled after the attack.

The prosecutor searched gullies and ravines near the Curva del Diablo on Wednesday, after doing the same in other areas on Sunday and Monday in response to reports by local residents that bodies had been hidden there.

Bautista told IPS that no bodies were found in the latest search, only clothing and bottles of chicha, a traditional corn liquor.

Shots in the square

One of the wounded interviewed by IPS in the hospital was Daniel Torres Manay, a 55-year-old resident of Bagua who was hit in the stomach by a police bullet on Friday Jun. 5 when he was near the square where the police station is located.

Torres and his wife Amelia Delgado said the police began to shoot that day at around 11:00 AM when a group of people gathered outside the police station, after they heard that the indigenous protesters had been attacked.

According to the head of the Amazonas ombudsman’s office, Roberto Guevara, five of the nine victims acknowledged by the authorities were local residents, not indigenous people, killed by police bullets in the streets around the square.

"President Alan García committed this crime," complained Torres, who has undergone two unsuccessful operations to extract the bullet, and is waiting to be transferred to the northern city of Chiclayo for life-saving surgery.

"After we draw up a list of our brothers and sisters who were killed, we will continue our protest," said Montenegro. "The government thinks that we have chickened out, but that will never happen. The blood of their brothers and sisters is an incentive to the Awajun people. The state has provoked us. We don’t want to talk to either (Prime Minister) Yehude Simon or (Interior Minister Mercedes) Cabanillas."

Two decrees suspended

In a 57 to 47 vote Wednesday, Congress decided to suspend the implementation of two of the decrees protested by the native groups, which according to experts and legislators affect the rights of indigenous people and violate the constitution and International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention 169 on indigenous people.

The government decrees, which are aimed at promoting foreign investment in the framework of the free trade agreement signed with the United States, open up indigenous land to private investment by oil, mining and logging companies.

Indigenous people in Peru’s Amazon jungle region, where oil companies are increasingly active, began last year to hold protests to demand that the decrees be revoked.

A multi-party legislative committee also recommended last December that they be overturned.

But AIDESEP vice president Daysi Zapata criticised the legislature’s decision to suspend the two decrees, because her organisation is demanding that they be struck down.

On Thursday, social movements held national demonstrations in solidarity with the indigenous protesters, and an indefinite strike was declared in several areas in the country’s northeastern Amazon region.

"The Amazon represents our market, our pharmacy, our home, our survival; we are defending it for the good of our people and of humanity," said Montenegro.

__________________________________________________________

Copyright 2009: IPS-Inter Press Service

Native Rights News is making this material from IPS: The Story Underneath available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
____________
Native Rights News (NRN) is published by the Alliance for Indigenous Rights, a nonprofit corporation owned and operated by Temple Beit Shem Tov as part of its Peace and Justice Ministry.

Call to Action: Demand OAS Support a Strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Demand a Strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Indigenous rights to life, land, equality, natural resources, self-determination, and religious freedom are under attack. A strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples will help prevent human rights violations in the Americas.

• Gross violations of human rights are occurring against Indian and other indigenous peoples in North, South and Central America.
• Developers deprive Indians in the United States of their right to religious freedom by desecrating sacred places such as Bear Butte and the San Francisco Peaks.
• One in three Indian women in the United States will be raped in their lifetimes. This epidemic of violence violates Native women’s rights to life, security of the person, and equal treatment.
• The United States continues to try to take Western Shoshone HOMELANDS for military testing, gold mining and nuclear waste disposal in violation of Western Shoshone property rights.
• More than 1,244 indigenous people have been assassinated in Colombia in the past five years.
• Maya Q’eqchi’ people suffer death threats, the burning of their homes, and forced removal for defending their land rights from mining interests in El Estor, Guatemala.
• Canada continues to ignore Innu land rights, resulting in the forced relocation of Innu families and the loss of their traditional hunting grounds and homelands.
• More than 3,000 illegal miners threaten the survival of the Yanomami people in Brazil by invading their lands, contaminating their rivers, introducing fatal infectious diseases, and murdering their people.
  
  This persecution is not unique to particular countries. It is part of an alarming trend of human rights violations against indigenous peoples in North, Central, and South America. Indigenous rights to life, land, equality, natural resources, self-determination, and religious freedom are under attack. The Organization of American States, a regional body made up of the 35 countries of the Americas, is currently negotiating an American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Countries of the Americas must commit to the recognition and implementation of indigenous rights by adopting the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
  

ACT NOW FOR A STRONG AMERICAN DECLARATION by sending letters to OAS member countries urging them to support a strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. [click here to send letter]

Following is a copy of the letter you will be sending to the government of every nation that is a member of the Organization of American States (OAS). (You will also have to opportunity to include any personal comments or statements.)

"Dear Ambassador,

I am seriously concerned about the widespread violation of indigenous peoples' human rights in the Americas and the need for a strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. I strongly urge your country to commit to the adoption of a strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by actively engaging in negotiations immediately.

A strong American Declaration is crucial to recognize indigenous human rights, including the right of self-determination, treaty rights, cultural and religious rights, rights to lands and resources, and more. Further, a strong American Declaration will address the particular regional issues in the Americas that are not dealt with in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, such as gender equality, violence against Native women, and indigenous peoples under internal armed conflict.

More importantly, we need a strong American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to prevent the grave treaty and human rights violations that Indian and Alaska Native nations currently face in the United States and throughout the Americas. In the United States, the government is allowed to confiscate certain Indian lands in violation of the Constitution, one in three Native women is raped in her life time, and developers deprive Native peoples of their right to religious freedom by desecrating sacred places such as Bear Butte, South Dakota.

The situation is even more appalling in Central and South America. Extractive industries threaten the survival of many indigenous nations, including the Yanomami in Brazil and the Maya Q'eqchi' in Guatemala, and indigenous peoples are being assassinated in Colombia. A strong American Declaration will help to secure Indian rights and prevent further human rights abuses. The OAS and OAS member countries must commit to the adoption of a strong American Declaration.

It is more important than ever to have a strong American Declaration which enjoys widespread support. In 2007, 143 countries affirmed their commitment to indigenous rights through their historic adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Only four countries voted against the Declaration. Three of those four -- the United States, Canada, and Colombia -- belong to our region, which has some of the largest indigenous populations in the world. All countries of the Americas must take their obligations to respect and promote indigenous rights seriously.

Thank you in advance for your country's commitment to the negotiation and adoption of a strong American Declaration.

Sincerely,

[Your Name, Organization, Address, Phone & Fax]"

___________________________

The Indian Law Resource Center is a non-profit law and advocacy organization established and directed by American Indians. We provide legal assistance to Indian and Alaska Native nations who are working to protect their lands, resources, human rights, environment and cultural heritage. Our principal goal is the preservation and well-being of Indian and other Native nations and tribes.

___________________________

__________________________________________________________
This article has been adapted from Indigenous Notes
the newsletter of the Indian Law Resource Center

Native Rights News is making this material available with the express permission of the Indian Law Resource Center . This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
____________
Native Rights News (NRN) is published by the Alliance for Indigenous Rights, a nonprofit corporation owned and operated by Temple Beit Shem Tov as part of its Peace and Justice Ministry.

NWT High Court Denies Aboriginal Land Claims and Upholds NT Intervention Program

Violent scenes at High Court after land rights decision

Originally published in WAtoday.com.au (02-02-09)

Protesters stormed inside the High Court and clashed with police after the court dismissed a challenge against the federal intervention into Northern Territory Aboriginal communities.

Dozens of anti-intervention protesters, both indigenous and non-indigenous, pushed through the court's front doors minutes after it rejected the case brought by traditional owners from the Arnhem Land community of Maningrida.

Carrying banners and clapping, the protesters chanted, "Always was, always will be Aboriginal land," as they moved into the court's main foyer.

Security guards tried to prevent the protesters from entering the building but were quickly overwhelmed.

Police appeared on the scene soon after, triggering scuffles as they tried to force the protesters back outside.

After a tense half-hour stand-off, the protesters took their demonstration to the streets of Canberra.

Under the NT intervention program, launched by the Howard government in a bid to tackle child sexual abuse, the commonwealth took control of township leases, abolished the permit system, introduced welfare restrictions, boosted police numbers and imposed alcohol and pornography bans.

Maningrida traditional owners Reggie Wurridjal and Joy Garlbin took on the commonwealth over its compulsory five-year takeover of their land.

The land, measuring 10.456 square kilometres, includes a township, four sacred sites, an outstation, a sand quarry, a billabong and a ceremonial site.
The elders, along with the Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation, argued the commonwealth failed to acquire the land on "just terms" as required by the constitution.

But the court, by a six to one majority, rejected their argument, saying the laws underpinning the intervention properly provided for compensation for Aboriginal organisations and people.

Retiring Justice Michael Kirby, in his final judgment in the court, dissented, arguing the case should be sent to trial.

"The law of Australia owes the Aboriginal claimants nothing less," he said.

A majority of justices also overruled a 1969 High Court decision which held that the just terms requirement in section 51 of the constitution did not apply to laws made by the commonwealth for the governing of the NT and ACT.


__________________________________________________________
Copyright © 2009. Fairfax Digital

Native Rights News is making this material from WAtoday.com.au available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.

--
Posted By Perry Chesnut, Editor to Native Rights News at 2/03/2009 06:52:00 AM

Nicaragua Finally Complies with Order of Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Grants Awas Tingni Title to Ancestral Lands

UNITED NATIONS Press Release

---

UN expert praises Nicaragua for formally
confirming land ownership for
indigenous group

17 December 2008

GENEVA – On 14 December 2008, the Government of Nicaragua, in a long-awaited ceremony, gave the Awas Tingni community the title to its ancestral territory, which consists of some 74,000 hectares of densely forested lands. "This affirmative step by the Government of Nicaragua represents an important advancement in the rights of indigenous peoples worldwide," said the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, Professor James Anaya.

The Special Rapporteur congratulated the Government of Nicaragua on completing the demarcation and titling of the lands of Awas Tingni, a Mayangna community that is one of the many indigenous communities that populate the country's Atlantic Coast region. The titling of Awas Tingni's territory marks the culmination of a decades-long struggle by the community to gain recognition and protection of its ancestral lands.

On 31 August 2001, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued its decision in the case of Awas Tingni v. Nicaragua, finding that Nicaragua had violated the rights of the Awas Tingni community for both granting concessions to log within the community's traditional lands and for failing to recognize Awas Tingni property rights in those lands. In its historic decision, the Inter-American Court found that the right to property, as affirmed in the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights, protects the traditional land tenure of indigenous peoples.

This was the first case in which an international tribunal with legally binding authority found a government in violation of the collective land rights of an indigenous group, setting an important precedent in international law.

The Special Rapporteur was present at the titling ceremony on Sunday, along with several government dignitaries and indigenous leaders who traveled to the remote community for this momentous event. He stated there that, "The titling of Awas Tingni's lands reflects a commitment on the part of the Nicaraguan Government to implement the judgment of the Inter-American Court. In addition, it provides a model for other governments to comply with their international legal obligations to recognize and protect the rights of indigenous peoples to their traditional lands and resources in practice."

The Special Rapporteur calls upon the Government of Nicaragua to continue to advance the human rights of indigenous peoples in the country and to address their ongoing concerns in accordance with international standards.

________________________________________________________

Commentary by Perry H. Chesnut, Editor, NRN

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, headquartered in San Jose, Costa Rica, exists to interpret and enforce the provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights. Created by the Organization of American States in 1977, this autonomous judicial body has no jurisdiction over any member state of the OAS unless that state has signed the American Convention on Human Rights. To date, Canada has declined to ratify the Convention, and despite the fact that the United States signed the Convention in 1977, and despite the fact that noted American legal scholar and jurist Thomas Buergenthal sat on the Court from 1979 through 1991 and served as its President from 1985 through 1987, the United States has never ratified the Convention. The legal effect of this is that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has no jurisdiction to hear or decide cases of alleged violation of human rights by Canada or the United States - even though they are members of the OAS.

This is just one more example of the jarring clash between our governments' propaganda about protecting the human rights of their citizens and the actual facts. Imagine, for example, if the United States were tried for the 1993 mass murder of its own citizens at Waco, Texas (54 adults and 22 children members of the Branch Davidian religious sect), or for the FBI's 1979 murder of Native American rights activist John Trudell's mother-in-law, pregnant wife and three children. Nope, it's unimaginable for at least two reasons: (1) we're the good guys, remember? Our government would never assassinate its own citizens for target practice or political payback. And (2), just in case anyone disagrees that we're the good guys, we're the most powerful nation on earth, and we're never going submit to the jurisdiction of any court put together by a bunch of two-bit Latin-American countries. They can do that to themselves if they are so inclined, but we - the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - are different. We are the exception to the rules that govern other lesser peoples and nations and can do anything we want to. And if we do it, that automatically makes it right and not subject to question, debate or review by anyone except ourselves. In fact, we are a rule unto ourselves.

Having said that, I want to end on a brighter note by emphasizing the power of international public and legal opinion on the actions of national governments, including those of the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the only four nations to vote against the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN DRIP), adopted by the UN General Assembly on September 13, 2007. The erosion of goodwill toward and respect for the United States by the world community over the last eight years has been enormous, with international polls showing that many people believe that the United States has lost its moral compass and many others naming our country as the "most dangerous country in the world." Our own citizenry's awareness of the decline of U.S. moral and ethical authority, both domestically, and with respect to its standing in the world community is one of the main reasons for the wholesale repudiation of the Bush Administration and Republican Party and their doctrines - all of which have the purpose of making the entire planet and 95% of its population subject and subservient to the insatiable greed of the now global corporations and the 2% of the world's population who own and manage them. The tide of world opinion is turning against those who would destroy the earth, its climate, and the indigenous people who understand the interrelationship of the earth and all living beings and who view cooperation, sharing, and the maintenance of balance and harmony as spiritual obligations. And so this legal case and Nicaragua's compliance with its decision are two more thorns in the heel of global corporate capitalism. Slowly, like the drip, drip, drip of water on a rock, international legal decisions and international public opinion will wear away the grip unrestrained capitalism has on the citizens and institutions of our own nations (U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand). There is good reason for optimism.

Huge Land Rights Victory for Brazilian Indians

Indians rejoice as Supreme Court affirms land rights

Survival International
11 December 2008

Indians across Brazil are celebrating today as the majority of judges in the Supreme Court ruled to uphold indigenous land rights in a key case. Indian representatives have called the decision, made yesterday on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a ‘great victory’.

The ruling concerns the indigenous territory Raposa-Serra do Sol (‘Land of the Fox and Mountain of the Sun’) in the Amazon state of Roraima. A small group of powerful farmers, who want the Indians’ land and are supported by local politicians, had petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the Brazilian government’s legal recognition of the territory. President Lula signed the territory into law in 2005.

Yesterday eight out of eleven Supreme Court judges affirmed the Indians’ rights to the land, saying it had been demarcated according to the constitution. They affirmed the importance of maintaining indigenous territories as single, continuous areas and stated that territories on Brazil’s borders do not pose a risk to national sovereignty.

The five tribes of Raposa-Serra do Sol had struggled for thirty years to reclaim their ancestral land. The group of farmers refused to leave the area when it was demarcated as an indigenous territory, and since the demarcation they have been waging a campaign of violence against the Indians in order to resist being removed from the land.

Shocking footage taken in May this year shows gunmen hired by one of the farmers attacking a Makuxi Indian community, throwing homemade bombs and firing assault rifles. Ten Indians were wounded in the attack.

The judges also ruled that the farmers must leave Raposa-Serra do Sol, but did not specify when. This will be decided when the ruling is concluded during the court’s next session starting in February 2009, when the remaining three judges deliver their rulings.

Makuxi leader Jacir José de Souza of the Indigenous Council of Roraima (CIR) said today, ‘The land is our mother. We are happy that [our land] has been reclaimed and that the Supreme Court has vindicated indigenous people.’

The Indians of Raposa-Serra do Sol believe that the loss of their land would have destroyed their way of life. Indians elsewhere in Brazil also feared that if the Supreme Court had overturned the demarcation of the territory, it would have left their lands open to similar legal challenges.

Survival’s director Stephen Corry said today, ‘This is fantastic news for the people of Raposa-Serra do Sol. The Brazilian government must now make sure that the farmers leave the area and that the campaign of terror against the Indians ends. It must also ensure that Indian land rights are upheld nationwide, so that never again will we see such blatant attacks on Indians on their own land.’

For more information please contact Miriam Ross at Survival International (+44) (0)20 7687 8734 or (+44) (0)7504 543 367 or email mr@survival-international.org

Act now to help the Indians of Raposa–Serra do Sol
Your support is vital if the Indians of Raposa Serra do Sol are to survive. There are many ways you can help.

Donate to the campaign for the Indians of Raposa Serra do Sol (and other Survival campaigns).

Write to your MP or MEP (UK) or Senators and members of Congress (US).
Write to your local Brazilian high commission or embassy.

If you want to get more involved, contact Survival…


Spread the message share this story
Delicious
Digg
reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
___________________________________________________

© Survival International, 2008

Native Rights News is making this material from Survival International available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.

Canada Ignores Pleas of Native Leaders, Adds to Poverty and Homelessness of Native Peoples in Preparation for 2010 Olympic Games

CANADA: Native Rights Concerns Cloud 2010 Games
By Jon Elmer

VANCOUVER, Dec 1 (IPS) - A coalition of indigenous elders, social justice activists and community organisers is voicing opposition to the upcoming Winter Olympics, promising to continue their protests up to and throughout the 2010 games.

Taking advantage of a three-day media briefing hosted by the official Olympic body in late November, the Vancouver Organising Committee (VANOC), activists and native representatives invited the local and visiting international media to an office in the heart of the what is commonly known as Canada's poorest neighbourhood, the Downtown Eastside, to hear "the other side of the Olympic story".

Rallying under the banner of "No Olympics on stolen native land", speakers representing nine native and community groups outlined connections between native poverty, dislocation and homelessness and the staging of the games in Vancouver and Whistler, 120 kms north of Vancouver.

Arthur Manuel, a former chief in the Neskonlith Indian Band of the Secwepemc nation, accused the Canadian government of attempting to whitewash the structural violations of native sovereignty. "We are the poorest people in the country," Manuel said. "Not because this country is poor, but because [the government] continues to violate the human rights of the indigenous people, by not recognising our Aboriginal title and our treaty rights."

Nearly all of the province of British Columbia -- including the land on which the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics will be staged -- is not subject to any treaty and the land has not been otherwise ceded or surrendered by its indigenous inhabitants, as Canada's highest court has recognised.

Manuel cited Canada's refusal to sign on to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as evidence that the government does not intend to follow the principles of international law in dealing with native sovereignty. In September 2007, the U.N. declaration was passed 143 to four, with the United States, Australia and New Zealand joining Canada in opposition.

James Louie, a member of the St'at'imc nation whose traditional lands encompass the rapidly expanding Whistler mountain and resort, said the expansion of infrastructure and development for the Olympics undermines the status of his people's case before the Organisation of American States treaty process.

"Because we have no treaty with Canada, the imposition and encroachment of Whistler -- their hydro lines, their highways, their railroad, you name it, anything they do with our territory -- is illegal," Louie said.

The Olympics have spurred a construction and development boom in Vancouver and Whistler in particular, and in British Columbia in general. Between July and September 2007, 843 major capital projects were planned or underway throughout British Columbia, valued at U.S. 108 billion dollars, according to the provincial government's ministry of economic development.

A VANOC budget report last year pegged the operating costs for the games at 1.32 billion dollars. The provincial and federal governments have provided an additional 468 million dollars, primarily for venue construction, including ski hill development in St'at'imc territory. The official Olympics budget does not include major infrastructural projects undertaken by the government in preparation for the February 2010 games, including the 484-million-dollar expansion of the Vancouver-to-Whistler highway.

Seislom, a Lil'wat elder who is also known as Glen Williams, addressed the legacy of the expansion around Whistler and its impact on the environment. "When my grandfather took me up Whistler mountain, the land was pure. Now it's polluted, it's desecrated. I ask myself the question: what will my grandchildren get from all of this?"

According to VANOC, 20.5 million dollars in venue construction and 95,163 dollars in non-venue contracts have been awarded to Aboriginal businesses through an incorporated native society called the Four Host First Nations Society (FHFN).

Several speakers challenged the role of FHFN in their communities. Seislom said the FHFN "choose not to recognise traditional, hereditary chieftainships" and instead only "recognise their own chieftainships in terms of corporate development, in terms of the Department of Indian Affairs, in terms of anything to do with money and power."

Dustin Johnson, a Tsimshian activist and organiser, also questioned the legitimacy of the FHFN. "It is important to make a distinction between elected leaders under the Canadian Indian Act system and the traditional governments, the traditional leaders," he said.

Canada imposed the Indian reserve and band council system through Indian Act of 1876, nine years after the country was founded. It wasn't until 1953 that the Act was amended to allow natives to organise around a land claim, which had previously been illegal.

Johnson characterised the Four Host First Nation Society as a small group of "elite native capitalists who don't represent the majority of native people".

"They'll paint the picture that they are trying to create economic development and self sufficiency, but it's really twisting the logic of what our people stand for: a lot of our people stand for sustainable development and protecting what little we have left of our lands and resources," Johnson said.

____________________

Outgoing Vancouver mayor Sam Sullivan, who presided over a sharp increase in homelessness during his tenure, has called the crisis "a civic, and provincial and national shame."

____________________

Arthur Manuel criticised the government and the FHFN for spending millions showcasing native arts and culture while ignoring the structural causes of the poverty. "They are using that money for the purpose of disguising the violations of human rights of the indigenous people of this country."

The BC Child and Youth Advocacy Coalition last week issued a report that showed BC for the fifth-straight year has the highest rate of child poverty in Canada, at almost 22 percent. The rate for native children is 40 percent but, the report notes, "the number would be significantly higher if the data had included children living on reserve." Recent statistics from the Canadian government's Department of Indian and Northern Affairs put the number of natives in BC at 122,000; about half live on reserves.

In Vancouver, the largest urban centre to host a Winter Olympics, there is likely as many as 8,000 homeless people, according to researchers at Simon Fraser University's Centre for Applied Research in Mental Health and Addiction, a disproportionate number of whom are native.

The rates of child poverty and homelessness continue to increase.

Laura Track, a lawyer with the Downtown Eastside's Pivot Legal Society, said that over 1,400 units of affordable housing have been lost since Vancouver was awarded the games in July 2003. Hundreds of tenants have been evicted from single-room occupancy hotels in the Downtown Eastside, as the Olympic-borne real estate development boom has deepened the homelessness crisis.

Outgoing Vancouver mayor Sam Sullivan, who presided over a sharp increase in homelessness during his tenure, has called the crisis "a civic, and provincial and national shame."

Vancouver is anticipating as many as two million visitors during the XXI Winter Olympic Games to be held from Feb. 12-28, 2010. According to VANOC spokesperson Suzanne Walters, more than 10,000 members of the media are expected for the games, including 2,900 print and photo-journalists.

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=44930


Native Rights News is making this Inter Press Service News Agency material available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.

Native Canadians Protest 2010 Olympics

November 25, 2008
Haider Rizvi, OneWorld US


NEW YORK, Nov 25 (OneWorld) - A peaceful protest against the 2010 Vancouver Olympics was broken up by riot police last week, but human rights groups and indigenous communities are vowing to continue to oppose what they say are misplaced priorities and the forced evictions of low-income people.

"No Olympics on stolen native land," is the slogan that has become a rallying point for activists protesting the role of corporate interests in building the venue for world sports in Vancouver.
Indigenous groups and housing advocates charge that corporations involved in the business of the Olympics are not only causing environmental damage but are also driving locals out of their homes.

"The history of the Olympics is one rooted in displacement, corporate greed, repression, and violence," stated the Olympics Resistance Network (ORN), a coalition of native rights and anti-poverty groups.

Last Thursday, the coalition and its sympathizers staged a peaceful protest in Vancouver against the abuse of native lands. Police responded with force and made several arrests.

The protest took place at a time when more than 200 international reporters were present in the northwestern Canadian city to get a glimpse of the Olympics preparations.

Activists complain that most members of the foreign press, however, failed to report the other side of the Olympics story: police violence against peaceful protesters.

"Canada wants to present itself as this great country where human rights are celebrated, but we see here clear violations of aboriginal rights," Ben Powless, an indigenous activist, told OneWorld.

________________
"They used riot squads. But we were not about to give up just yet."- Marylynn Poucachiche, activist

________________

In addition to the United States, Canada is one of the few nations that voted against last year's United Nations resolution to adopt the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The historic declaration calls for the recognition of the world's 370 million indigenous peoples' right to control their ancestral lands and resources and their right to practice their traditional way of life.

Indigenous activists contend that the Canadian government has no right to use their land in Vancouver to stage the Olympics, because the natives of British Columbia never signed a treaty to surrender their lands.

In this context, they cite the British Royal Proclamation requiring legal surrender of the sovereign territories to the crown, which never took place. The 1763 Proclamation is part of Canadian law.

Thus, as the natives' legal argument goes, neither the central government nor the provincial one has the legal or moral authority to govern British Columbia.

"This is a government that voted against the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. They are violating indigenous rights, in addition to destroying many sensitive environments," said Powless.

Contrary to official claims about the economic and social benefits of the Games, activists say the Olympics arrangements are posing a threat to the urban poor, the environment, and human rights.

In the city of Vancouver, for example, according to some accounts, the authorities have taken over several low-income housing projects and promised to provide alternate accommodations by 2010.

Activists say they are outraged that the government has cut health and education spending while providing billions of dollars to corporations engaged in the Olympics business.

"The capitalists are making millions, while the poor are literally dying in the urban and reservation ghettos," according to activist-writer Zig-Zag, who contributes to the Web-based publication EarthFirst Journal.

The Journal reports that in the east of downtown Vancouver, over 500 units of low-income housing have already been lost since Vancouver won its Olympics bid in 2003.

"Hundreds of people have been evicted as landlords upgrade their hotels for Olympic tourists," according to the Journal. "Police have begun criminalizing the poor to clean up the streets [as well]."

Like many indigenous thinkers and activists, Powless, who has attended a number of international meetings on climate change and indigenous peoples' rights, is visibly angry.

"We've had our elders put in jail for opposing this senseless destruction," he said. "We've had many of our homeless forced out of whatever limited housing they do have to make way for rich tourists."

There have also been reports of government efforts to pay off tribal leaders, but most observers agree that would not prevent a vast majority of natives from joining the protests.

"All of those folks are coming together here during the Olympic Games to try and tell the other half of the story through creative, non-violent action," activist Garth Mullins told the Canadian Press.

Last week, some native leaders sent a joint letter to the Canadian Prime Minister urging him to address their concerns over the issue of the Winter Olympic Games and their impact on natives' land and living situations.

Meanwhile, others vowed to arrange more protests all over the country in the coming months and years -- until the Olympic flame arrives in Vancouver for the opening of the Games in February 2010.

"They used riot squads," said activist Marylynn Poucachiche, who was the first one to be arrested by the police during Thursday's protest. "But we were not about to give up just yet."
____________________

OneWorld.net: Latest News, Groups Working on Indigenous Rights
OneWorld TV: Indigenous Colombians March 62 Miles to Demand Justice, Land

Native Rights News is making this OneWorld.net material available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.

Western Shoshone File Suit to Prevent Desecration of Sacred Mount Tenabo

For Immediate Release

Contacts: Carrie Dann, Western Shoshone grandmother, 775-468-0230
Dan Randolph, Great Basin Resource Watch, 775-722-4056
Jason Bill, Western Shoshone Defense Project, 775-397-6726 or 775-744-2565


Restraining Order Requested – Shoshone Grandmothers Plan Resistance Day Proposed Mine Site

November 25, 2008, Crescent Valley, Newe Sogobi ( Nevada). As the holidays approach and the world watches President-elect Obama and the bailouts; back in Nevada, home state of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, it’s business as usual. Late yesterday, attorneys for several Western Shoshone tribes and non-profit indigenous and environmental organizations filed a request in the federal District Court in Reno, NV seeking a restraining order against the construction of one of the country’s largest open pit gold mines on the flank of spiritual Mt. Tenabo. The mine company has already begun demolition of the pinyon forest with heavy machinery on the site ripping out trees at a reported rate of 30 acres per day.

As they await a Court hearing and feeling compelled to take immediate action, tomorrow, a group of Shoshone grandmothers will travel to the proposed mine site to conduct a day of Resistance to the destruction of the area and the approval of the mine by the United States. Mt. Tenabo is a well-known home to local Shoshone creation stories, spirit life, medicinal, food and ceremonial plants and rocks and continues to be used to this day by Shoshone for spiritual ceremonies and cultural practices. Over the years, tens of thousands of individuals and organizations from across the United States and around the world have joined with the Shoshone and voiced their opposition to this mine –in fact, the mine is being referred to as the “most opposed mine in the world”.

“We want them off this mountain, this is a spiritual genocide what’s going on; destroying our mountain is destroying our beliefs. Removing water is death to the mountains. No way. We will take whatever action we need to – we’re going through the U.S. courts and we will stand on this Mountain in support of her and call on those people around the world to stand with us in solidarity.” Stated Carrie Dann, Western Shoshone Grandmother, Executive Director of the Western Shoshone Defense Project and recipient of the Right Livelihood Award (the alternate to the Nobel Peace Prize).

Barrick Gold Corporation, the world’s largest gold mining company, headquartered in Canada, plans to construct and operate the mine, known as the Cortez Hills Expansion Project. The area is located entirely within the territory of the Western Shoshone Nation, recognized in the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley. The Mine would blast and excavate a new massive open pit on Mount Tenabo over 900 acres in size, with a depth of over 2,000 feet. It would include several new waste disposal and processing facilities (including a cyanide heap-leaching facility), consisting of approximately 1,577 million tons of waste rock, 53 million tons of tailings material, and 112 million tons of spent heap leach material. The Mine would include an extensive groundwater pumping system to dewater Mount Tenabo and associated water pipelines that will transport the pumped water away from Mount Tenabo. In total, the mine would permanently destroy approximately 6,800 acres land on and around Mount Tenabo, over 90% of which is classified as federal “public” land.

In 2002 and 2003 the BLM conducted a series of armed seizures in the same area, of the Dann family’s cattle and horses, claiming the Danns were “trespassing” on public lands. The Danns, along with other Western Shoshone, have challenged the U.S. claims to their ancestral and treaty lands as recognized by the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, which recognized Western Shoshone rights in much of Nevada. These legal battles went all the way to the Supreme Court, and on to International Fora. In March 2006 the Western Shoshone received a ruling from the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, CERD, a treaty body set up by the United Nations and ratified by the United States in 1993.

The Decision issued by CERD, and reconfirmed this year, urges the United States to immediately freeze, desist and stop any further actions against the Western Shoshone peoples, including legislative efforts to privatize their land. CERD ordered the United States to stop immediately and initiate dialogue with the Western Shoshone. The Decision specifically mentioned Mt. Tenabo and the destruction of Western Shoshone lands by mining corporations.

“In the 1800’s, the U.S. sent in the Calvary to remove the Indians and to kill off our sources of food, such as the Buffalo. Now here they are, just days before Thanksgiving in 2008, destroying our Mountain of life and the pinyon trees which are our food. This is happening today and it’s outrageous.” Says Joyce McDade, Western Shoshone grandmother.
Barbara Ridley, another Western Shoshone grandmother participating in the resistance states: Who’s Thanksgiving is this anyway? What have we got to celebrate? There’s no Thanksgiving for our people – they tell us we don’t have our land but we still use it for our foods, plants and ceremonies. This mountain is very important to us and people should respect our request to leave it alone.”

The plaintiffs are being represented in court by Roger Flynn of the non-profit legal firm, the Western Mining Action Project, which specializes in mining law. The Grandmothers’ Resistance Day will take place of the South Flank of Mt. Tenabo at the proposed mine site beginning at approximately 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, November 26th.

For more information on the Western Shoshone land rights issues, Cortez Hills Project, Mount Tenabo, and the legal challenge go to http://www.gbrw.org/ and http://www.wsdp.org/. A copy of the Temporary Restraining Order filed yesterday is attached.

BLM Gives the Go-Ahead to Desecration of Western Shoshone Sacred Mountain

For Immediate Release:
Contacts:
Larson Bill, South Fork Band Council of Western Shoshone, 775-744-2565/775-397-6726
Dan Randolph, Great Basin Resource Watch, 775-722-4056
Julie Cavanaugh-Bill, Western Shoshone Defense Project, 775-397-1371


Thanksgiving the “Cortez” Way - U.S. Ignores Western Shoshone Objections – Barrick Gold Readies Itself to Carve up Mount Tenabo Spiritual Area


November 20, 2008 Reno and Crescent Valley, NV

Last week, after years of determined opposition from Western Shoshone, the U.S. Department of Interior, through its Bureau of Land Management (BLM), approved one of the largest open pit cyanide heap leach gold mines in the United States on the flank of Mount Tenabo – an area well-known for its spiritual and cultural importance to the Western Shoshone. The area is home to local Shoshone creation stories, spirit life, medicinal, food and ceremonial plants and items and continues to be used to this day by Shoshone for spiritual and cultural practices. Over the years, tens of thousands of individuals and organizations from across the United States and around the world have joined with the Shoshone and voiced their opposition to this mine. The mine has been referred to as one of the most opposed mines in the world and indeed the level of public opposition is unprecedented for the BLM. With the threat of mine construction beginning as early as this week, the South Fork Band Council of Western Shoshone, the Timbisha Shoshone Tribe, the Western Shoshone Defense Project, and Great Basin Resource Watch, today filed a complaint in the Reno Federal District Court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to stop the mine.

Barrick Gold Corporation, the world’s largest gold mining company, headquartered in Toronto, Canada, plans to construct and operate the mine, known as the Cortez Hills Expansion Project. The Project area is located entirely within the territory of the Western Shoshone Nation, recognized in the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley. The Mine would blast and excavate a new massive open pit on Mount Tenabo over 900 acres in size, with a depth of over 2,000 feet. It would include several new waste disposal and processing facilities (including a cyanide heap-leaching facility), consisting of approximately 1,577 million tons of waste rock, 53 million tons of tailings material, and 112 million tons of spent heap leach material. The Mine would include an extensive groundwater pumping system to dewater Mount Tenabo (in order to keep the open pit and mine workings dry during mining) and associated water pipelines that will transport the pumped water away from Mount Tenabo. In total, the mine would permanently destroy approximately 6,800 acres land on and around Mount Tenabo, over 90% of which is classified as federal “public” land.

“How are we, as a nation, showing our values, if we allow a transnational corporation to destroy this ‘church’ for all time, just to get 10 years worth of gold.” Says Larson Bill, Vice-Chairman of the South Fork Band Council. “There are dozens of active gold mines on Western Shoshone lands already, there is no need for this one, which is clearly immoral and irresponsible. The public should be aware that Nevada is not a waste land, but is the home of ranchers, sportsmen, fishermen and homesteaders that have enjoyed the lands alongside the Shoshone people for generations. We have been clear in our opposition to this mine and while Barrick tries to cloud the real issues with gifts and money, we continue to oppose this project – they have not bought our people, the traditions nor the lands of the Shoshone.” he adds.

The proposed mine area has been found by the BLM, in repeated ethnographic studies, as being of extreme spiritual and cultural importance to the Western Shoshone. One report says: “Mt. Tenabo is … considered a traditional locus of power and source of life, and figures in creation stories and world renewal. As the tallest mountain in the area – the most likely to capture snow and generate water to grow piñon and nourish life – it is literally a life-giver. Water is to earth what blood is to the body, and these subterranean waterways are likened to the earth’s arteries and veins.”

Carrie Dann, a world renowned Western Shoshone elder, and recipient of the Right Livelihood Award (known as the “alternative Nobel Peace Prize”) has been among those to lead the fight to protect Mount Tenabo from mining for over 15 years. “Mount Tenabo should be left alone – no further disturbance. This mine will drain the water from Mount Tenabo. They will be sucking the water out of the mountain forever. The destruction of the water is like the destruction of the blood of the earth; you are destroying life of the earth and the people and wildlife that depend on it. Dewatering is taking the life of future generations. Water is sacred, all life depends on it,” says Carrie Dann.

“Next week we celebrate Thanksgiving - The question that the courts and the people of this country need to ask themselves is will we continue to tolerate these violations against the First Peoples of this land or will we finally turn the tide of injustice and protect these sacred areas?” Says Julie Cavanaugh-Bill, Consultant to the Western Shoshone Defense Project.
“None of us are opposed to mining, if it is done responsibly, however this project is as irresponsible as it gets. The BLM has a legal responsibility to protect the air, water, and ecological values of the area as well as the religious freedom of Western Shoshone, and to fully analyze the impacts of a proposed project. In each case, this mine would clearly violate the law.” Says Dan Randolph, Executive Director of Great Basin Resource Watch. “This is an example of how the Bush Administration is rushing to protect their corporate friends in their last few months in power. The BLM denied requests to extend the comment period on the Environmental Impact Statement not only from us, but also from several Western Shoshone tribal governments. Therefore, we are forced to now turn to the courts to stop this project. We know that Barrick will begin work on the mine as soon as they can, to cause enough harm in an attempt to make the religious rights arguments moot, and the BLM and Bush Administration appear to be more than willing to help them in every way possible.”

The plaintiffs are being represented in court by Roger Flynn of the non-profit legal firm, the Western Mining Action Project, which specializes in mining, public land, and environmental law.

For more information on the Cortez Hills Project, Mount Tenabo, and the legal challenge go to http://www.gbrw.org/ and http://www.wsdp.org/

(Photo courtesy of Great Basin Resource Watch, http://www.gbrw.org/)

Republic of Lakotah Answers Questions

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Republic of Lakotah Answers Questions

Russell Means answers some direct email questions.

on: January 26, 2008, 02:35:41 PM

From the online Lakotah Republic Forum



This is a response to an email sent to the webmaster from Pokey from the Rosebud Reservation. January 25, 2008

Response: Dear Pokey, Russell Means has asked me to respond to your letter. I will do my best. Some of the responses, particularly the ones with exclamation marks, are direct quotes from Russell. I have regrouped some of your points to address them together.

Best, Jerry Collette

Interim Attorney General Provisional Government


QUESTION: The Lakota leaders rejected the Lakotah Freedom Delegation's proposal. We are NOT part of what Russell Means is trying to do. There has been rejection statements in the news papers from our leaders.

Response: British colonial government leaders rejected the proposal by the American colonists to declare their independence. They were not part of what the signers of the Declaration of Independence were trying to do. There were rejection statements in the newspapers from the colonial governors appointed by the Crown.

QUESTION: Russell Means even read to us a letter of rejection form his own tribe. Russell read the letter from the Indian administrators (who have the full authority to administer US government Indian policies and nothing else) because their letter detailed gross treaty violations by the US.

Response: These “leaders” see the same problems as the freedom seekers do, but they still believe in the treaties. Do they still believe in the Tooth Fairy, too?

QUESTION: He didn't ask the Lakota people or our leaders about this before he started. It hasn't been brought to our Elders or any other of our people beforehand.

Response: In 1974, the first International TREATY Conference at Wakpala on the Standing Rock Sioux Indian reservation in what is now called South Dakota was where the Declaration of Continuing Independence was created. (The full text of the Declaration is available at http://republicoflakotah.com/docs/declarationofcontinuingindependence.pdf) The conference was attended by numerous elders. These were not your ordinary elders; most of them were born to parents who had been born free, they had never been to schools, and they spoke little or no English. These elders gave Russell and the younger participants two mandates. The first mandate was to become recognized by the International Communities. On September 2007, when the United Nations passed the Declaration of Indigenous Rights, that mandate was fulfilled. The second mandate is to return to our original status as free and Independent Nations. On December 17, 2007, the Lakotah Freedom Delegation notified the Department of State of the United States of America, we are unilaterally withdrawing from all Treaties and Agreements entered into between the United States of America and Lakotah. Before going to Washington, Russell traveled all over the five state area meeting with key people over a seven month period. Russell is now in his sixty-ninth winter, and has been working on achieving better conditions for the Indian people for over forty years. He is an elder!

QUESTION: Smoky and I went to the meeting in St. Francis and we left about 3:00 because what he was saying just wouldn't work the way he thinks it would.

Response: You left before the best part. The closing ceremony was amazing.

QUESTION: Here's some questions you might ask him. 1. If we are no longer part of the US how will we support our people? We wouldn't be able to get US Grants anymore either. We are having a hard enough time now even with the government programs and grants! We don't have any kind of industry, all the government programs we have now will stop because they are part of the treaties and US government.

Response: The US government has done a tremendous job of training Lakotah people to be dependent. We are now in a transition period, during which those programs continue while we reestablish our independence. This was done in the Compacts of Free Association that the US government did when the former Trust Territories of the Pacific, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Palau, and the Federated States of Micronesia, reestablished their sovereignty and freedom.

QUESTION: 2. Where will our communications systems come from ? We don't have any of our own companies. Will we have to import all our food and goods which will make prices sky rocket way out of our ability to pay? What will we do if companies that have what we need don't want to have anything to do with us now that we have our own money system ?

Response: Companies will trade. That is what they do. Prices tend to be lower in countries with less regulations. For example, identical prescription drugs are as much as ninety percent cheaper in other countries as they are in the US. This is because the US has so many laws that the Lakotah people do not need. Industry is flocking to invest here since we have reasserted our sovereignty. Investors like free countries. Their money return is faster and greater. Check out the investment that happened in the eastern European countries after they became free from the Soviet Union! Other countries, like East Timor, etc., have had similar investment booms.

QUESTION: 3 What kind of money system will we have ? What do we have to back it up with ? No one is going to put their money in our banks, with out some kind of interest or returns, and say ok here do what you want to with it. Will our money be excepted every place we want to spend it ?

Response: We expect that there will be many money systems. Some people will still use US dollars. We also plan to have our own currency, which will be backed by gold and silver. We have people from all over the world interested in this because, unlike the US dollar and all other governments currencies, ours will be backed by real value, not just printed up whenever the central bankers decide, like the US dollar, etc.

QUESTION: 4. How will we defend ourselves ? We don't have any Peaceful in place nor weapons of any kind. You know everyone even the US will be at war with us trying to over throw our government. If they succeed we would really lose everything including the treaties. Sure these other countries would bring weapons and someone that knows how to use them and help us defend our country, they want a piece of the pie too.

Response: Who's kidding who here ? The US is not our enemy, and they have no reason to attack us. Costa Rica has no Peaceful . The US has brainwashed its people that it needs a global Peaceful presence and taxes them like mad to fund it. We will not follow such a folly. Everything we are doing is lawful and legal! We are following US laws and international laws. We will never have to expend anyone else's money so we can have an army. We do not need one!

QUESTION: 5. What utilities will we have ? Where will they come from ? How will we pay for it ? 6. What do we have as far as postal services? 7. Passports, visa's, paying duty ? Mission, S.D. isn't part of the Rez. Will we need a passport and visa to go shopping and pay duty on the goods we buy there ? Will they accept our form of money and will we have to pay extra like Canada and other countries do ? Will we have to have a visa to go to Antelope, Winner, Valentine ? We'd have to go through Mission to go to these places. Will friends and families that don't live here have to go through all this to come visit us ? My grand-daughter and great-grand daughter live in Mission. We live in Rosebud 10 miles from Mission. 10. What about all the medical and other people providing services we need that aren't Indian ? Will they have to have passports, visa's and work permits ? What about their friends and family that want to come visit them from outside of our country but live with in the U S ? 11. What would become of all the money that was paid into Social Security. I know the SS wouldn't give it all back to the people that > paid into it all during their working years.

Response: Transitions for all these kinds of things have been done before elsewhere. There are experts who know how to do this, and they will help us, too. Already we have doctors, lawyers, engineers of all types, skilled workers, teachers, etc, etc. etc., emailing us wanting to come to a free country! When you are truly free, you don't have time to complain!

QUESTION: 8. Will we still have tribal presidents or will we have one president to run our country like the other countries do ? Would we have a president or a dictator ? If we couldn't vote on a president, we'd have a dictator wouldn't we. 12. What laws will we have ? Who will determine what they are ? Who will enforce them ? 13. What foreign policies will we have ? Who will determined what they are ? Will the people have anything to say about it.

Response: We are only the provisional government; we are serving as midwives for the rebirth of the Lakotah as a free people. The Lakotah people will decide on their own form of government. Remember, we are not starting from scratch. Before the white man came, Indians governed themselves freely for thousands of years. The white man used the Indian model to create the United States Constitution.

QUESTION: 14. Exactly where would our country be located ? Would it be all the 5 states or just one ? And which one would it be if it was just one ?

Response: The map you see represents the 1851 treaty boundaries, but our traditional lands go beyond that. The exact boundaries are yet to be determined. We are not waiving any claims to our traditional lands.

QUESTION: 15. No taxes? If we don't have to pay taxes who will pay for all the stuff that the taxes pay for now, like roads, schools, jails, our government workers, and all the other things it pays for ? We can't spin gold out of straw.

Response: We expect that there will be local taxes, but not national ones. The local governments will support the national government. We are not expecting to have huge governments. Free people do not need them. They do not work, anyway. We have seen that.

QUESTION: If we was to be part of this he would have to come up with some better ideas on how things was to be done and take it to the people and find out if that's what everyone wants. 16. Why wasn't this brought to a vote by the people ? No one has the right to speak for all of us with out our consent. Even our tribal presidents don't have the right to give the ok with out asking us how we feel about something like this and giving us a chance to vote on it. I am an enrolled member and I'm an Elder but no one said any thing to me, the first I heard of this is when someone from Ohio asked me about it in an E-Mail. All the Elders I asked about it said they didn't hear anything about it either.

RESPONSE: We came to a treaty meeting on Rosebud (at St. Francis) before we went to DC. Then, we had the meeting at Rosebud after we came back, part of which you even attended. We are having more meetings; we just had one at Standing Rock last weekend, we are having one at Yankton this weekend, and we are scheduling one for Rapid City. We will also be posting more info on the website as things develop.

QUESTION: Even our tribal President didn't know.

Response: We did not ask the permission of the US authorities disguised as tribal leaders. They like the existing system. They are in power, and they get to keep that power by begging to Washington for crumbs for our people. Then, eighty-three cents of every dollar they get from Washington goes to administration, and seventeen cents ends up passing through the reservation briefly on its way back to the white man's corporations.

QUESTION: Please excuse all the questions but these are all issues that would have to be addressed in a satisfactory way before we would even consider being our own separate country in the middle of the U S. They will all be addressed during the transition period. The United States has not left yet. If Russell Means really wanted to do something worth while, why don't he petition the US Government to honor the treaties instead of trying to start a war that every one knows we will lose and our country would be taken over with out any treaties or anything else and we would be a lot worse off than we are right now.

Response: Russell has been working for over forty years to get the US to honor its treaties. There will be no war with the US. Do you really believe the US people will allow their government to bomb us? We can count on things getting worse if we continue under US domination.

QUESTION: Every one here on the Rosebud Reservation tell me Russell is just trying to fill his pockets at the expense of our people.

Response: Out of his concern for his people, Russell is paying a lot of his own money to do this. However, a rising tide does raise all the ships in the harbor. With freedom and economic prosperity in Lakotah, we will all do better. Does anybody expect our situation to improve much under the current system? You know that everything has gotten worse during your lifetime. Wake up and smell the coffee!

QUESTION: Sooner or later every one will know he's just making a fool of himself, well if it was just himself I would just laugh along with every one else but he's making the Lakotah look like fools right along with himself! Russell admits that he was foolish to believe in the treaties for as long as he did, but does not fault the Lakotah people who still believe in them. By the way some one needs to teach Russell how to spell Lakota, there's no "h" at the end of Lakota !

Response: You are free to spell it the white man's way if you prefer.