Woodland Indians Forum

You are not logged in.

Announcement

#1 Jul-17-2017 11:36:am

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4047
Website

Anti-Sovereignty Rants

Some comments on that editorial opinion piece posted above, about Christie's "tribal warfare."


constitution defender
21 hours ago

Finally, a politician that understands there is no U.S. Constitutional authority for any political department of a state or federal government to 'recognize' a select group of U.S./New Jersey citizen with "Indian ancestry" since the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 as being distinguishable from all other non-Indian U.S./New Jersey citizens. Such distinction is a fraud upon the United States Constitution, the non-Indian citizens of New Jersey and the treasuries of both New Jersey and the National governments!

This article is an astonishing piece of a deplorable lack of journalist curiosity regarding U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race" since The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924!That single Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, made moot all previous common law-state and federal-including Presidential Executive Orders, Commerce Clause and Treaty Clause alleged Indian Treaties (if any U.S. Senate confirmed Indian treaties actually existed pre-1924 Citizenship) regarding U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race" so often touted by politicians and Indian advocates as being legitimate law.

And yet, politicians and MSM continue to perpetuate willful blindness to the Constitutional absurdity that Congress, Presidents/Governors, Initiatives and Referendums can make distinguishable the capacities, metes and boundaries of a select group of U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race" post citizenship.

The United States Constitution makes for no provisions for:

1.Indian sovereign nations.None of the asserted tribes possess any of the attributes ofbeing a ‘sovereign nation:’ a.No U.S. Constitution recognition b. No international recognition c. No fixed borders d. No military e. No currency f. No postal system g.No passports h. et al

2.Treaties with its own constituency

3.Indian reservations whereby a select group of U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race" reside exclusively and to the exclusion of all others, on land-with rare exception-that is owned by the People of the United States according to federal documents readily available on-line that notes rights of renters as ‘occupancy and use’ by these distinguished U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race" only with the land owned by the People of the United States.

4.Recognition of ‘Indian citizenship’ asserted by various tribes.There is no international/U.S. Constitution recognition of “Indian citizenship" as there is no ‘nation’ from which citizenship is derived.

A simple question for politicians and MSM to answer…a question so simple, it is hard:
“Where is the proclamation ratified by the voters of the United States that amends the Constitution to make the health, welfare, safety and benefits of a select group of U.S./State citizens distinguishable because of their “Indian ancestry/race?"

FlagShare
LikeReply

MelloeYelloe
22 hours ago

I am with the state on this that there are no tribes as there are no indians. Ancestry from a few centuries ago does not make it so. Its too far removed. They want the status for a money making operation and some government handouts.
How many have been proven with dna and how far removed are they? This is ridiculous. Maybe we can all find out we are all related to George Washington or the Queen of England and claim rights. Maybe we ae indians too.
FlagShare
LikeReply

constitution defender
21 hours ago

@MelloeYelloe  Your post is correct. As of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, there are no more "Indians" within the original meaning of the U.S. Constitution...only U.S./New Jersey citizens with "Indian ancestry/race" entitled to no more and no less than every other non-Indian U.S./New Jersey citizen.  Of course, you will be pilloried, tarred and feathered by U.S./New Jersey citizens with "Indian ancestry/race," some politicians and Indian advocates as a heretic.
FlagShare
LikeReply

Slimey
1 day ago

As with the pension plan renig and unapproved bonding, Christie seems to have no problem using his lawyers to argue against the law.
FlagShare
LikeReply

constitution defender
21 hours ago

@Slimey  And what "law" might that be?  Title 25-INDIANS is an in-ratified "Irregular Engineering Standards Change" (IERS-pronounced 'ears') and does not exist!  No common law flowing from Title 25-INDIANS exist either. There is nothing in the United States Constitution providing authority for politicians to pass common law that makes the health, welfare, safety and benefits of a select group of U.S./New Jersey citizens distinguishable from all other non-Indian U.S./New Jersey citizens!

Last edited by sschkaak (Jul-17-2017 11:38:am)

Offline

 

#2 Jul-17-2017 07:39:pm

tree hugger
Site Admin
Registered: May-12-2006
Posts: 10947

Re: Anti-Sovereignty Rants

That hurt my head just reading that. neutral

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson