We Should Certainly Salute Freedom Activists Like.........

Jim Beers

the retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist, Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow.

But Let Us Not Forget,

There Are Native American Freedom Activists As Well.

A Native American of the Kiowa tribe concerned with the erosion of our rights and freedoms is

Mike Turner

of the Kiowa Association for the Preservation of Cultural and Rural Lifestyles

http://blog.myspace.com/kiowaassociation

Be Aware That Not Only Is The Constitution Of The United States Being Infringed Upon

But "the supreme law of the land," As Well.

To Give You Some Idea What Is "the supreme law of the land,"

Read This From The...........

American Indian Policy Center

Sovereignty

http://americanindianpolicycenter.org/pubs/index.html#treaties

Indian Tribal Sovereignty: It's Alive

By Larry B. Leventhal

The legal relationship between the United States and the respective Indian tribes is unique. Unlike all other political entities within the borders of the United States, Indian tribes derive their powers not solely through delegation, but also through their sovereign existence, past and present.

One attempting to derive some logic from Constitutional provisions, 371 treaties, periodic agreements, numerous statutes, an entire volume of the United States Code, federal regulations governing an over-inflated Bureau of Indian Affairs and other agencies, and often contradictory case law, must start with the proposition of initial sovereignty of the various tribes. Tragically, the development of the United states Indian law is drenched in blood (usually Indian), stolen lands (always Indian), and broken promises. Yet despite removal, allotment, and termination, the tribes remain as viable political and cultural entities.

<snip>

Under the United States Constitution, Article VI, Section 2, treaties entered into by the President and the Senate as mandated by Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, are considered to be "the supreme law of the land," As such, "judges in every state shall be bond thereby."

Under this Constitutional authority, the United States entered into approximately 371 Indian treaties with the various Indian nations. The Constitutional authority employed is the same as that which enabled the federal government to enter into other international treaties.⁽³⁾ Indian treaties represented agreements at law between two sovereigns -- the respective Indian nations and the United States.

The method of dealing with Indian by treaty was abandoned with the passage of the Appropriations Act of March 3, 1871. The prohibition of the use of the treaty form in dealing with the Indian nations arose out of jealousy on the part of members of the House of Representatives that they, unlike Senators, could play no part in the formation and approval of a treaty. The legislation expressly provides tat treaties ratified prior to the date of the cut-off would have continuing validity.

Many of the treaties with the respective Indian nations served to limit the sovereignty, rights and independence of the respective tribes. However, what is important is that there is a residue of sovereignty which remains inherent in these Indian nations which is exercised, not through powers delegated to Congress, but through the inherent power of the sovereigns. In other words, such treaties are "not a grant of rights to the Indians, but a grant of rights from them -- a reservation of those not granted." U.S. v. Winans, 198 U.S. 371, 381 (1905); Winters v. U.S., 207 U.S. 564 (1908); U.S. v. Ahtanum Irrigation District, 236 F.2d 321 (9th Cir. 1956)

<snip>

Source: http://americanindianpolicycenter.org/pubs/leventhl.html