If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   Now that we civilized the land the Onondaga Indian Tribe of New York is fighting to reclaim 2.5 million acres, including Binghamton, Oswego, Syracuse and Watertown   (nydailynews.com) divider line 143
    More: Asinine, Watertown, Binghamton, Onondaga Indian Tribe, Onondaga Nation, Syracuse, Onondaga, New York, Central New York  
•       •       •

4789 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Oct 2012 at 1:55 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



143 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-13 05:42:27 PM

UltimaCS: chuckufarlie: maybe they should have spoken up sooner.
If you spent more time with your head outside of your ass, you'd know that this has been a legal issue since such treaties were signed.

maybe we should find out how many people in this tribe are left and their percentage of tribal blood.
Why does it matter? Surely you're not so ridiculously antiquated that you still hold onto the idea that Natives (the only people in the Western Hemisphere where this matters) are only as Native as their blood allows? Would you sponsor a bill that says government handouts should only apply to people who can trace their lineage to forefathers?

maybe they should shut up and find a life.
I'm glad you're taking the country's oldest issue so seriously.

maybe they should be happy that they were not completely wiped out long ago.
I just hope you're not the kind of animal who says this to their parents/grandparents before shoving them in a home.


1, The fact that this has been an issue for so long is not important. Each situation must be treated alone. In THIS case, they should have spoken up sooner.

2. Bloodlines seem to matter to the Indians. Show me a tribe with a money source to share among the tribal members and I will show you a tribe that has put limits on who is and who is not a member of the tribe, Beyond that, there has been Federal limitations based on percentage of tribal blood for a long time. Many of the handouts given to Indians is based on bloodline percentage,

3. Troubles with the Indians is not the oldest issue in the country. It is just the oldest not to be settled. More Indians would assimilate if they were not given handouts by the govt. Spend some time in western states with large reservations and then get back to me. No group of people takes advantage of the govt. more than the Indians.

4. The idea that there is any comparison between the failure to completely wipe out the Indians and sending old people to a home is based on stupidity. There is no way to make a logical comparison. Not that you are all that logical.

So, it seems that your real problem is a lack of information on the subject coupled with the erroneous idea that you do have that information.
 
2012-10-13 05:49:29 PM

phalamir: chuckufarlie: maybe they should have spoken up sooner.

maybe we should find out how many people in this tribe are left and their percentage of tribal blood.

maybe they should shut up and find a life.

maybe they should be happy that they were not completely wiped out long ago.

So, what you are saying is that if any corporation that wants to can totally null any agreement it may have with you, and you will slin off and kill yourself in a corner to avoid causing them any problems for breaking a legal contract.

They found a life; they decided to adopt the Western legal system as their model, i.e. they did what you wanted. They then realized that they had a legal claim based on the failure of other entities to love up to the terms of that contract. If the case was "John Smith is suing Edward Taylor because Edward Taylor agreed to pay John Smith for 10 acres of land, but then Edward Taylor refused to, and now John Smith is suing Edward Taylor to get his land back" how would it be any different legally than what this is?


why do so many farkers come up with analogies that would not make sense to any intelligent person? I guess it is because so many of you are not intelligent. Your analogy would be better, but still stupid, if you said that John Smith's great great great grandson who suing for the land.

BTW, the Indians did not do what I wanted. I would want them to learn to stand on their own two feet, stop asking the govt. for handouts and stop instigating lawsuits like this one.

Did you read the article? This stems back to 1788 and 1822. The lawsuit was not filed until 2005. That is a long time between the "wrong" and the lawsuit. Hopefully you can do the math.

There is a statute of limitations for most actions. Let's make the limit 100 years and tell the Indians to go fark themselves.
 
2012-10-13 06:09:01 PM
Many butthurt folk here today who have no clue concerning their Constituting or the BIA. So... the usual.
 
2012-10-13 06:11:03 PM
Constitution.

Stupid auto correct.
 
2012-10-13 06:17:22 PM

2wolves: Constitution.

Stupid auto correct.


yea, blame it on that.

Now explain to me how the Constitution has anything to do with this? This tribe filed a lawsuit in 2005 about something that had happened in 1788 and 1822. They lost that lawsuit. They had their day in court. That is all that any of us can or should expect from the government.
 
2012-10-13 06:23:07 PM

chuckufarlie: phalamir: Decados: I am getting so damed sick and tired of all of this crap.

You all lost the war against civilization. Please either acclimate into our, the victors, society, or go off into a little corner and just die. Go away. Stop whining that every mound of dirt that's more than a foot tall is 'sacred' to you. Stop pretending that the land you forced OTHER indians out of has 'always been a spiritual heartland to our people'. Stop claiming that just because you're 1/10000000'th indian that you have 'special rights'. Stop pretending that you're not a conquered people.

The reservation system was a result of our bigotry towards native americans, and it's continued existance only perpetuates the cultural differences and divisions.

They are; they are suing for breech of contract. What you are complaining about is that they are using the white man's tool to roger the white man.

You: Be like us white people; stab others inthe back and use legalistic gooble-de-gook to rape the other guys silly!
Them: Well ... if you insist: we signed this; your designated representatives signed this; you haven't been honoring the deal; we're gonna sue you for breach of contract; bend over pretty-boy
You: Noooooooooooooooooo! That's not faaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr !

maybe they should have spoken up sooner.

maybe we should find out how many people in this tribe are left and their percentage of tribal blood.

maybe they should shut up and find a life.

maybe they should be happy that they were not completely wiped out long ago.


Hey - they're doing things our way - in courts, with lawyers and so on. What's your beef? Nobody asked you to contribute to their legal fund - mind your own business.
 
2012-10-13 06:23:45 PM
Laws of adverse possession (squatters law) usually give the rightful owner 7 years to make the legal claim in court to get back his property . I think we are past 7 years. Next case.
 
2012-10-13 06:25:28 PM
www.apachetitle.com
 
2012-10-13 06:29:41 PM

ThrobblefootSpectre: Laws of adverse possession (squatters law) usually give the rightful owner 7 years to make the legal claim in court to get back his property . I think we are past 7 years. Next case.


Meh. Let the courts decide - there is settled law on all this shiat. I don't give a f**k one way or another.
 
2012-10-13 06:30:25 PM

jso2897: chuckufarlie: phalamir: Decados: I am getting so damed sick and tired of all of this crap.

You all lost the war against civilization. Please either acclimate into our, the victors, society, or go off into a little corner and just die. Go away. Stop whining that every mound of dirt that's more than a foot tall is 'sacred' to you. Stop pretending that the land you forced OTHER indians out of has 'always been a spiritual heartland to our people'. Stop claiming that just because you're 1/10000000'th indian that you have 'special rights'. Stop pretending that you're not a conquered people.

The reservation system was a result of our bigotry towards native americans, and it's continued existance only perpetuates the cultural differences and divisions.

They are; they are suing for breech of contract. What you are complaining about is that they are using the white man's tool to roger the white man.

You: Be like us white people; stab others inthe back and use legalistic gooble-de-gook to rape the other guys silly!
Them: Well ... if you insist: we signed this; your designated representatives signed this; you haven't been honoring the deal; we're gonna sue you for breach of contract; bend over pretty-boy
You: Noooooooooooooooooo! That's not faaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr !

maybe they should have spoken up sooner.

maybe we should find out how many people in this tribe are left and their percentage of tribal blood.

maybe they should shut up and find a life.

maybe they should be happy that they were not completely wiped out long ago.

Hey - they're doing things our way - in courts, with lawyers and so on. What's your beef? Nobody asked you to contribute to their legal fund - mind your own business.


wouldn't fark be an awfully lonely place if everybody minded their own business? A rather stupid idea on your part.

They went to court SEVEN years ago and they lost the case. They do not want to accept the ruling of the court. They have not filed an appeal, they are taking to the streets to protest. So much for doing things our way.
 
2012-10-13 06:31:50 PM

jso2897: ThrobblefootSpectre: Laws of adverse possession (squatters law) usually give the rightful owner 7 years to make the legal claim in court to get back his property . I think we are past 7 years. Next case.

Meh. Let the courts decide - there is settled law on all this shiat. I don't give a f**k one way or another.


the courts DID decide and the Indians lost. They just do not want to accept it.
 
2012-10-13 06:33:52 PM
God what a bunch of tards. Back to TF for me. See you later, suckers.
 
2012-10-13 06:36:29 PM
Interestingly, the people arguing that the first people to set foot on a piece of land own it forever and ever, are making a strong argument that the United States owns the moon.  And probably mars at some time later.
 
2012-10-13 06:38:16 PM

ThrobblefootSpectre: Interestingly, the people arguing that the first people to set foot on a piece of land own it forever and ever, are making a strong argument that the United States owns the moon.  And probably mars at some time later.


who are these morons trying to lay claim to the moon/Mars?
 
2012-10-13 06:39:08 PM
If they weren't strong enough to hold on to their possesions, they have no rights to it anymore.

Kind of a mote point after the 14th Amendment was ratified.
 
2012-10-13 07:06:55 PM
Good luck to them.
 
2012-10-13 07:19:03 PM

chuckufarlie: 2wolves: Constitution.

Stupid auto correct.

yea, blame it on that.

Now explain to me how the Constitution has anything to do with this? This tribe filed a lawsuit in 2005 about something that had happened in 1788 and 1822. They lost that lawsuit. They had their day in court. That is all that any of us can or should expect from the government.


Who has the power to ratify and break treaties? The Constitution says Congress.

Wish to try again?
 
2012-10-13 07:31:54 PM

2wolves: chuckufarlie: 2wolves: Constitution.

Stupid auto correct.

yea, blame it on that.

Now explain to me how the Constitution has anything to do with this? This tribe filed a lawsuit in 2005 about something that had happened in 1788 and 1822. They lost that lawsuit. They had their day in court. That is all that any of us can or should expect from the government.

Who has the power to ratify and break treaties? The Constitution says Congress.

Wish to try again?


good for you, you paid attention in school. Now if you would actually answer MY question - explain to me how the Constitution has anything to do with this? When did Congress break this treaty?

And before you answer, in the entire history of Indian Treaties, rarely was it Congress that broke them. Citizens broke treaties, the Indians broke treaties, Congress - not so much.
 
2012-10-13 07:42:00 PM
Maybe the Onondagas might get their way if they pushed the point home by burning down a few churches, to show whitey what time it is.
 
2012-10-13 07:56:27 PM

ZombieStreetCred: Maybe the Onondagas might get their way if they pushed the point home by burning down a few churches, to show whitey what time it is.


that would be a great idea, if you do not win in court, kill people.
 
2012-10-13 08:00:43 PM

KrispyKritter: the indigenous indian of land later called the USA are first line proof that we the great unwashed will never rise up and revolt against the wealthy power elitists who own and control the country. my daydreams of thugs who wear badges and scum who hold political office being caged and paraded in the streets, decapitated and displayed on pike and pole, the streets running red with blood as the citizens right the wrongs will never take place. just one more year that Santa doesn't give me what i want the most.


Kind of scary in the progressive world. Would you respect their basic human rights as you, and your Democrat friends "parade" them?

Would they have due process before you ececute them?

/people wonder why i'm not with brand d anymore.
//its the filth like this that has taken it over.

austin_millbarge: What Americans consider "civilizing" the land:

[randylewis.org image 750x562]

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]

[cf.juggle-images.com image 600x373]


BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Where's the photo of the "Ghettos on the Praries"? Or a few Indian Casinos

phojo1946: Let Congress make them all full American citizens and abolish the reservation system...problem resolved.


Like this? Oh, they did that, a long time ago , the reservations are a horrible, old school method of providing security, and General Welfare, to a displaced people. They, the Indians, are citizens, and are allowed to move around the country now, that they have stopped killing others.
 
2012-10-13 08:13:45 PM

chuckufarlie: ZombieStreetCred: Maybe the Onondagas might get their way if they pushed the point home by burning down a few churches, to show whitey what time it is.

that would be a great idea, if you do not win in court, kill people.


Isn't that sort of what happened in the American Revolution?
 
2012-10-13 08:17:38 PM

wellreadneck: chuckufarlie: ZombieStreetCred: Maybe the Onondagas might get their way if they pushed the point home by burning down a few churches, to show whitey what time it is.

that would be a great idea, if you do not win in court, kill people.

Isn't that sort of what happened in the American Revolution?


I guess that your moniker is inaccurate. NO, that is not what happened in the American Revolution.
 
2012-10-13 08:35:53 PM
You lost. Get over it.
 
2012-10-13 08:45:08 PM
phalamir

Decados: I am getting so damed sick and tired of all of this crap.

You all lost the war against civilization. Please either acclimate into our, the victors, society, or go off into a little corner and just die. Go away. Stop whining that every mound of dirt that's more than a foot tall is 'sacred' to you. Stop pretending that the land you forced OTHER indians out of has 'always been a spiritual heartland to our people'. Stop claiming that just because you're 1/10000000'th indian that you have 'special rights'. Stop pretending that you're not a conquered people.

The reservation system was a result of our bigotry towards native americans, and it's continued existance only perpetuates the cultural differences and divisions.

They are; they are suing for breech of contract. What you are complaining about is that they are using the white man's tool to roger the white man.

You: Be like us white people; stab others inthe back and use legalistic gooble-de-gook to rape the other guys silly!
Them: Well ... if you insist: we signed this; your designated representatives signed this; you haven't been honoring the deal; we're gonna sue you for breach of contract; bend over pretty-boy
You: Noooooooooooooooooo! That's not faaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr !


So much this.

Seriously people, what's with all the anger towards some Native Americans trying to get their damn land back? Do you guys throw these same hissy fits when you find a thread about North Ireland?

You don't think those "mounds of dirt" are sacred? Well I'm not getting a sacred vibe from your church, I think I'll shiat on the altar. After all, fair is fair.

And right of conquest? Welp, guess we better give the WTC site to Al-Queda then, seeing as they conquered it.

50$ says that the same people here complaining about Native Americans are the same ones who piss and moan about illegal immigrants.
 
2012-10-13 08:52:59 PM

ArcadianRefugee: Need_MindBleach: Mantour: [capital-flow-watch.net image 244x261]

To expose the "noble lie", as these lands were stolen through force or fraud from the Indian tribes. And you cannot build a moral society if its foundation is built on immoral actions.


/Just a hunch.

Let me let you in on a little secret....virtually all land in the world, even the land that Indian tribes lived on, was stolen from someone else. To learn more, read some ancient history, or some pre-columbian history. It's all the same, over, and over and over. Murder and conquest, or murder and the driving off of the losers. Over and over, on every region on earth inhabited by humans.

If we all give back what we've taken, I suppose we'll all have to move back to where our ancestors came from.

/Africa's gonna be crowded


And in my case, that's gonna be REALLY interesting:

a) One branch of my ancestry is Cherokee and Irish.
b) The other major branch is (of what we know) probable Melungeon--which is a lovely mix of Irish, Cherokee, and African-Americans who managed to either become "freemen" or escaped to Appalachia--with possibly some additional English or Irish admixture.

For me to "go back to the land of my ancestors" in full is probably going to involve placing me in a very large Blendtec blender (YES, IT BLENDS!) and mailing various bits of me to North Carolina, Ireland, England, and at least one if not more than one West African country :D Either that, or I'm going to have at least six different citizenships (THAT'S going to make going through airport security fun, I'll tell you...)

/will note that in general I've had relations in this country on both sides for longer than the US has existed as a nation and not as a collection of British commonwealths :D
 
2012-10-13 08:55:32 PM

MeanJean: 50$ says that the same people here complaining about Native Americans are the same ones who piss and moan about illegal immigrants.


Duh, they know the value of keeping the illegal immigrants out. Since the previous natives didn't do such a great job.
 
2012-10-13 09:26:03 PM

MeanJean: phalamir

Decados: I am getting so damed sick and tired of all of this crap.

You all lost the war against civilization. Please either acclimate into our, the victors, society, or go off into a little corner and just die. Go away. Stop whining that every mound of dirt that's more than a foot tall is 'sacred' to you. Stop pretending that the land you forced OTHER indians out of has 'always been a spiritual heartland to our people'. Stop claiming that just because you're 1/10000000'th indian that you have 'special rights'. Stop pretending that you're not a conquered people.

The reservation system was a result of our bigotry towards native americans, and it's continued existance only perpetuates the cultural differences and divisions.

They are; they are suing for breech of contract. What you are complaining about is that they are using the white man's tool to roger the white man.

You: Be like us white people; stab others inthe back and use legalistic gooble-de-gook to rape the other guys silly!
Them: Well ... if you insist: we signed this; your designated representatives signed this; you haven't been honoring the deal; we're gonna sue you for breach of contract; bend over pretty-boy
You: Noooooooooooooooooo! That's not faaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr !

So much this.

Seriously people, what's with all the anger towards some Native Americans trying to get their damn land back? Do you guys throw these same hissy fits when you find a thread about North Ireland?

You don't think those "mounds of dirt" are sacred? Well I'm not getting a sacred vibe from your church, I think I'll shiat on the altar. After all, fair is fair.

And right of conquest? Welp, guess we better give the WTC site to Al-Queda then, seeing as they conquered it.

50$ says that the same people here complaining about Native Americans are the same ones who piss and moan about illegal immigrants.


Read the article, moron. The tribe took this to court in 2005 and they lost. They are trying to fight a treaty from the 1700s; Did you get that?? The 1700s. What took them so long?

As for your ignorant statement about right of conquest. If you want to negate that idea, you are going to screw up every border in the world several times over.

BTW, they do not want the land back. What they want is a large pile of money that they do not deserve.
 
2012-10-13 09:29:25 PM

chuckufarlie: wellreadneck: chuckufarlie: ZombieStreetCred: Maybe the Onondagas might get their way if they pushed the point home by burning down a few churches, to show whitey what time it is.

that would be a great idea, if you do not win in court, kill people.

Isn't that sort of what happened in the American Revolution?

I guess that your moniker is inaccurate. NO, that is not what happened in the American Revolution.


You've guessed correctly. Although they may not have burned churches, didn't the colonists seek redress in British courts, either lose or face veto , ignore judgements, offer armed resistance to lawful orders and then kill people.
 
2012-10-13 09:41:45 PM

wellreadneck: chuckufarlie: wellreadneck: chuckufarlie: ZombieStreetCred: Maybe the Onondagas might get their way if they pushed the point home by burning down a few churches, to show whitey what time it is.

that would be a great idea, if you do not win in court, kill people.

Isn't that sort of what happened in the American Revolution?

I guess that your moniker is inaccurate. NO, that is not what happened in the American Revolution.

You've guessed correctly. Although they may not have burned churches, didn't the colonists seek redress in British courts, either lose or face veto , ignore judgements, offer armed resistance to lawful orders and then kill people.


Are you really going to compare the activities of a tribe of Indians to the American Revolution? Funny that you would because this particular tribe fought against the colonists in that war. They were responsible for slaughtering women and children, all under the guidance of their British allies.

Any fool who wants to compare the two is a moron of the extreme. These Indians fought a series of wars against the USA. They lost. Treaties were signed and agreed to. Those treaties were signed in 1788 and 1822. It is extremely stupid to try to pursue an adjustment to those treaties at this point.

There are so many things that are so different between this tribe and what the colonists did that it amazes me that anybody would try to compare them.

But by all means, convince the tribe to go on the warpath. That will solve all of the problems with who owns the land. They will end up with a cemetery.
 
2012-10-13 10:02:59 PM
As a former 10th Mountain Soldier, let me say this from the bottom of my heart.

fark Watertown.
 
2012-10-13 10:24:37 PM
Welcome to New Zealand. Oh wait, sorry didn't see you there USA.
 
2012-10-13 10:44:21 PM

chuckufarlie: wellreadneck: chuckufarlie: wellreadneck: chuckufarlie: ZombieStreetCred: Maybe the Onondagas might get their way if they pushed the point home by burning down a few churches, to show whitey what time it is.

that would be a great idea, if you do not win in court, kill people.

Isn't that sort of what happened in the American Revolution?

I guess that your moniker is inaccurate. NO, that is not what happened in the American Revolution.

You've guessed correctly. Although they may not have burned churches, didn't the colonists seek redress in British courts, either lose or face veto , ignore judgements, offer armed resistance to lawful orders and then kill people.

Are you really going to compare the activities of a tribe of Indians to the American Revolution? Funny that you would because this particular tribe fought against the colonists in that war. They were responsible for slaughtering women and children, all under the guidance of their British allies.

Any fool who wants to compare the two is a moron of the extreme. These Indians fought a series of wars against the USA. They lost. Treaties were signed and agreed to. Those treaties were signed in 1788 and 1822. It is extremely stupid to try to pursue an adjustment to those treaties at this point.

There are so many things that are so different between this tribe and what the colonists did that it amazes me that anybody would try to compare them.

But by all means, convince the tribe to go on the warpath. That will solve all of the problems with who owns the land. They will end up with a cemetery.


If we hold these Indians responsible for the actions of their forebears I'd think we'd also hold the descendants of treaty-breakers accountable, if that's what they are. Did everyone keep their word? Is judicial enforcement of signed and agreed to treaties what the judge terms as "inherently disruptive"?

Warpath? Why would I want that? I just pointed out that their conquerors did not win in court,and then killed people. As for cemeteries, I figured they'd probably cremate, having grown weary of McMansions thrown up over the family plot.
 
2012-10-13 10:59:42 PM
hbk72777
You've never heard of squatting? Nothings changed in this country, you can still try to take what belongs to others.
See this story
Link


Abandoned property belongs to nobody. That's a Fox "News" article, so there's no telling what reality is.


Ecliptic
The Iroqouis fought for the British. They lost. Fark them.

They fought on whichever side they thought would result in them keeping their land. Nations that fought on the side of the settlers never fared any better.


chuckufarlie
that would be a great idea, if you do not win in court, kill people.

According to most Farkers, that would make it theirs.

I guess that your moniker is inaccurate. NO, that is not what happened in the American Revolution.

Right: You have to make an eloquent declaration before you start killing people.

Read the article, moron. The tribe took this to court in 2005 and they lost. They are trying to fight a treaty from the 1700s; Did you get that?? The 1700s. What took them so long?

Maybe they thought the country had gotten more civilized. Guess not!

As for your ignorant statement about right of conquest. If you want to negate that idea, you are going to screw up every border in the world several times over.

We certainly wouldn't want to make things hard for cartographers...

What they want is a large pile of money that they do not deserve.

It's not like we were born on third base or anything. Being an Indian means a person starts off with exactly the same advantages as white people. For realz.
 
2012-10-13 11:22:57 PM

chuckufarlie: Read the article, moron. The tribe took this to court in 2005 and they lost. They are trying to fight a treaty from the 1700s; Did you get that?? The 1700s. What took them so long?


You can't be serious. You are asking why the Indians didn't simply sue the USA in the late 1700s to get their land back?

I guess they could have avoided the whole "Trail of Tears" thing just by hiring a lawyer too, amirite?

This is probably the dumbest argument in the whole thread.
 
drp
2012-10-13 11:24:12 PM

austin_millbarge: What Americans consider "civilizing" the land:

[randylewis.org image 750x562]

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]

[cf.juggle-images.com image 600x373]


What Native Americans do to the land:

www.obama4poker.com 

images.mentalfloss.com

media.ksee24.com

Honestly, it's the only bit of Native American culture that they seem to be proud of around here.

/ images hotlinked
 
2012-10-13 11:38:54 PM

chuckufarlie: BTW, they do not want the land back. What they want is a large pile of money that they do not deserve.


What do you "deserve", asshole?
 
2012-10-13 11:42:15 PM

JK47: festoon: Well, considering that Europeans stole the land from them in the first place. And that they were already thought of as "civilized" 350 yrs ago - even by the European invaders' standards. And that the US Govt has broken every treaty they've ever made with them - Maybe they have a right to sue to get back what is theirs.


And considering how societies way back when occupied territory why should they have a right to sue for territory they stole?


There's a difference between stealing and refusing to honor a legal contract.
The white people who signed the contract didn't really regard the natives as people anyway and too stupid to ever actually ask that the contracts be enforced, so the signings were (to them) just for show.

Or so they thought.

Now the native americans are using the white man's laws in the white man's courtrooms to force the white man to honor his contracts. Good for them. Guess they're not as stupid as once thought, eh?
 
2012-10-14 12:10:03 AM

Xcott: chuckufarlie: Read the article, moron. The tribe took this to court in 2005 and they lost. They are trying to fight a treaty from the 1700s; Did you get that?? The 1700s. What took them so long?

You can't be serious. You are asking why the Indians didn't simply sue the USA in the late 1700s to get their land back?

I guess they could have avoided the whole "Trail of Tears" thing just by hiring a lawyer too, amirite?

This is probably the dumbest argument in the whole thread.


The really ironic thing--the Cherokee Nation DID try to stop the whole "Trail of Tears" thing by going all the way to the Supreme Court (and the decision in question is pretty much the entire legal basis for the sovereign status of First Nations in US law)--ruling that the state of Georgia's attempt to remove the Cherokee Nation was in fact quite illegal.

Alas, Andrew Jackson subsequently became the first President to directly defy a Supreme Court order (which in and of itself should have triggered a bit of a constitutional crisis) and proceeded to have the US Army march pretty much everyone who didn't hide in the mountains (and shoot back) or who didn't sneak off the trail (and subsequently try to pass as "Black Dutch" or "Black Irish" and became functionally illegal aliens in their own country for the next hundred years) right the fark to Goddamn Oklahoma by gunpoint in the dead of winter in what is probably the first modern incident of what is now known as "ethnic cleansing".

Suffice it to say that there are a fair number of their descendants who have not so much faith in the court system as a result.

/yup, some of my ancestors bailed and/or hid out and "passed"
//there's a real reason that there's a rather large population of descendants of the Five Civilised Tribes in the Southeast who are not "Dawes Act Indians"--pretty much they stopped trusting the legal agreements after being farked over the first time
 
2012-10-14 12:18:32 AM

chuckufarlie: BTW, the Indians did not do what I wanted. I would want them to learn to stand on their own two feet, stop asking the govt. for handouts and stop instigating lawsuits like this one.


What the fark are you talking about?
They aren't getting handouts from the government, they're getting handouts from the morons that go to the casinos.
 
2012-10-14 12:19:51 AM

chuckufarlie: 2wolves: Constitution.

Stupid auto correct.

yea, blame it on that.

Now explain to me how the Constitution has anything to do with this? This tribe filed a lawsuit in 2005 about something that had happened in 1788 and 1822. They lost that lawsuit. They had their day in court. That is all that any of us can or should expect from the government.


How could they file a lawsuit in 1822? they weren't even regarded as people then. Neither was any other non-white... or woman. Native americans weren't even granted citizenship until 1924, if you were a native american born before 1924 you STILL were not a citizen, and some states didn't even grant them voting rights until 1948. That's after WWII and within living memory.

Their case would likely have been dismissed before opening arguments, if they had been allowed to file it at all. So no, all the sh*t that happened to them wasn't just long ago and far away, which means that the timing of their suit is perfectly valid.
 
2012-10-14 12:22:50 AM

phojo1946: Let Congress make them all full American citizens and abolish the reservation system...problem resolved.


Shut the fark up. No simple, well thought solutions allowed.
 
2012-10-14 08:03:22 AM
This thread is relevant to my interests. I will be anticipating travel disruptions along the 81 corridor south of Syracuse.
 
Displayed 43 of 143 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report