Obama Giving America Back to Native Americans?

delldude

Veteran
Oct 29, 2002
28,945
6,016
Downrange
Could Obama Accomplish This?

big_chief_obama_wishes_you_a_happy_birthday_card-p137444132340138905qiae_400.jpg


President Obama is voicing support for a U.N. resolution that could accomplish something as radical as relinquishing some U.S. sovereignty and opening a path for the return of ancient tribal lands to American Indians, including even parts of Manhattan.


Academic legal experts indicate that American Indians during the Carter era first drew up plans for reacquisition of lost tribal lands, setting the stage for the U.N. resolution that Obama is embracing. The feasibility study, eyeing 650 million acres of federally owned land in the U.S., was conducted by the Indian Education Institute at Eastern Oregon State, one expert recalled for WND.

scalp.gif


The president said, "No statement can undo the damage that was done. But it is only by heeding the lessons of our history that we can move forward."

Obama's interest is personal. He noted during the 2008 presidential campaign he was officially adopted by the Crow Nation, an Indian tribe in Montana, and he was given an Indian name.

"My Crow name is 'One Who Helps People Throughout the Land,'" Obama said.

My link
 
I think I will wait till I hear some details on this. With out even knowing the facts, the idea of giving Manhattan to anyone is sheer stupidity and is not/will not happen. So I am pretty sure that part of the article is BS on it's face. As for other federal lands, I do not see an issue with it. As I recall the BIA has substantial independent authority as it is on tribal lands. Also, is there a treaty between the US and native americans that was not violated by the US. Given the way the natives were treated, giving them some of their land back seems like the least the US could do. Unfortunately, given the influence of our culture over theirs and the loss of their history over time, I do not see them being able to manage it very well. Sad situation any way you slice it.
 
I think I will wait till I hear some details on this. With out even knowing the facts, the idea of giving Manhattan to anyone is sheer stupidity and is not/will not happen. So I am pretty sure that part of the article is BS on it's face. As for other federal lands, I do not see an issue with it. As I recall the BIA has substantial independent authority as it is on tribal lands. Also, is there a treaty between the US and native americans that was not viols out ated by the US. Given the way the natives were treated, giving them some of their land back seems like the least the US could do. Unfortunately, given the influence of our culture over theirs and the loss of their history over time, I do not see them being able to manage it very well. Sad situation any way you slice it.


In this case you have to look at the source. More importantly the parts WND leaves out. Such as the fact that a UN resolution means absolutely nothing in a US Court. Or that some of the tribes that may have had land in said area may no longer exist. I would have thought that these two points would have been brought up. Not at WND though, it's much more fun to ignore facts that you don't like. Along with wasting people's time instead of focusing on issues.
 
I heard on Fox news where that spot was already given away to the Islamic radicals for a Mosque? Which is it... :huh:


May be they formed an alliance. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Wouldn't that just be a kick in the pants... :lol:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top