General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHouse Approves Bill to Give Apache Lands to Foreign Corporation
http://lastrealindians.com/house-approves-bill-to-give-apache-lands-to-foreign-corporation/I guess because Native Americans haven't been screwed over enough?
joshdawg
(2,646 posts)What else can one expect from a gang of thugs AKA republicans?
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)staggerleem
(469 posts)Like they've never done anything like this before?
What color is the sky on the planet you've been living on?
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)I know the US government has historically screwed over the Native Americans.
There's this:
The federal Indian trust responsibility is a legal obligation under which the United States has charged itself with moral obligations of the highest responsibility and trust toward Indian tribes (Seminole Nation v. United States, 1942). This obligation was first discussed by Chief Justice John Marshall in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831). Over the years, the trust doctrine has been at the center of numerous other Supreme Court cases, thus making it one of the most important principles in federal Indian law.
The federal Indian trust responsibility is also a legally enforceable fiduciary obligation on the part of the United States to protect tribal treaty rights, lands, assets, and resources, as well as a duty to carry out the mandates of federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages. In several cases discussing the trust responsibility, the Supreme Court has used language suggesting that it entails legal duties, moral obligations, and the fulfillment of understandings and expectations that have arisen over the entire course of the relationship between the United States and the federally recognized tribes.
Then this:
In the United States there are three types of reserved federal lands: military, public, and Indian. A federal Indian reservation is an area of land reserved for a tribe or tribes under treaty or other agreement with the United States, executive order, or federal statute or administrative action as permanent tribal homelands, and where the federal government holds title to the land in trust on behalf of the tribe.
http://www.bia.gov/FAQs/
So my question is can the government legally do this? Is this land military, public or Indian?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)This strip is not part of an Apache reservation, though IIRC it abuts it (somebody closer to the ground can correct me on that).
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)Curious minds and all that.
SamKnause
(13,088 posts)I am really starting to hate our corrupt corporate owned government.
My country's government is an embarrassment.
The way my country's government bends over backwards for domestic and global corporations is criminal.
I have no respect for my country's government.
Will my country's government ever stop fucking over Native Americans ???
tblue
(16,350 posts)They want us helpless. But we will not go quietly.
A Little Weird
(1,754 posts)brush
(53,745 posts)If it's after the new repug-run Senate takes over, fucking McCain and his bought-and-paid-for cronies will pass it.
staggerleem
(469 posts)I'm sure if one had access to a list of Granpappy McCain 's donors, one would find a substantial contribution from a certain British/Aussie copper mining company.
KinMd
(966 posts)This Senate shouldn't pass it. I believe that since there's a new congress they'll have to do it over again. President Obama should veto it anyway.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... PO will never sign it.
brush
(53,745 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Whether or not Obama would veto a standalone bill, we see here the tactic that will be used over and over and over during the next two years. Some right-wing wishlist provision will be added as a rider to "must-pass" legislation. This will be done whether or not the rider is related to the subject of the bill.
Will Obama incur the bad press of vetoing the Defense Department authorization bill just because of some comparatively obscure provision that the vast majority of Americans don't care about? I've signed the petition but I'm not optimistic.
I'm even more pessimistic about what will happen on this and other issues down the road. It would be one thing for Obama to veto a defense bill because of extraneous stuff like this. It will be another thing if he's done it 37 times already. The Republicans will keep throwing this kind of thing at him, and if he keeps vetoing them all, then he'll painted as an irresponsible obstructionist. His position, a completely reasonable one, will be "Send me a clean bill and I'll sign it," but I don't know whether that will win the battle of public opinion.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)it will not be just us libs that protest this but the people of this country. When Bundy was trying to steal our (WE the people) everyone got mad. Well John McCain and some foreign corporation are not trying the same play. We all need to stand up even if it means vetoing the must pass bill.
That senile old goat McCain needs to be voted out as soon as possible. In fact if he loves America at all he should resign.
But will he?
Thanks, Jim Lane, for reminding me. I'm half-melancholic at this point in or Corporate Police State.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)denbot
(9,898 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,508 posts)Link?
denbot
(9,898 posts)Thanks for letting me know I forgot it.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)annabanana
(52,791 posts)iscooterliberally
(2,860 posts)Thanks for the link.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)underpants
(182,634 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)packman
(16,296 posts)they (White, old men) won't screw over? Unbelievable. I sincerely hope the American Indian community and the American people rise up over this.
turbinetree
(24,685 posts)Maybe the right wing REPUBLICAN Congress had better re-learn and re-read the CONSTITUTION, they are so happy to invoke as there patriot dogma of hypocrisy since it is a continuation of there MANIFEST DESTINEY.
The FIRST NATION people of the country are a SOVEREIGN NATION, and we are to BE TREATED AS SUCH NO if or ands about it, you have to negotiate with US and if not it can be construed as an act of aggression
It's just like everything these a***holes do, NOTHING except for greed and they say they read and understand the CONSTITUTION, might as well use it as toilet paper, in fact it is toilet paper. just like everything else in this country.
I think its time that our people sold off the District of Columbia to a Foreign corporation, and all of the corrupt states ------oops that's already been done
lunasun
(21,646 posts)then the constitution is just in the way of $$$$$$$$$
hack89
(39,171 posts)it is not part of their reservation.
beerandjesus
(1,301 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)gordianot
(15,234 posts)dilby
(2,273 posts)This is still horrible and everyone should be pissed, this is not only sacred land but it's our land as well that is being given away to a foreign corporation who will destroy public land all for profit.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)"Ours" doesn't include foreign corporations at our expense.
hack89
(39,171 posts)belzabubba333
(1,237 posts)Stellar
(5,644 posts)It would appear that they hate EVERYBODY but their own kind.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)how really, really infuriating. this is america at this current time in history
Baitball Blogger
(46,684 posts)I'm sure that the terrific US legislation will come up with some other terrible idea to mitigate the damage.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,684 posts)to come out of this move. It's obvious that the Apache tribe will suffer damages.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Land sacred to the tribe is currently protected as part of a national forest. They can go there for their rituals, which don't adversely affect the land.
The proposal is to trade that land to the corporation in exchange for some land somewhere else. The corporation will then use the newly acquired parcel for its sacred purposes, i.e. the pursuit of profit (in this case, through mining), which will exclude the Native Americans from the area and also wreak environmental harm.
Baitball Blogger
(46,684 posts)Still stinks. I live in Florida where years back there was a controversy when the county, (controlled by good-ole boys and gals), attempted to swap public lands for private ones. The private ones were actually wetlands, where minimal construction or recreation would be allowed.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Whether there was a deal or not, however, the importance of public access to a particular parcel is certainly a factor to be considered, whether the access is used for scenic value or religious purposes or whatever.
niyad
(113,098 posts)and crass ignorance. apparently, there is no bottom.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)It is National Forest Land, that is close to a sacred spot of the Apaches.
No actual reservation land is being traded.
that being clarified, this is something that I have been fighting for years. Oak Flat is one of my favorite areas. To destroy it is criminal.
And to do it in this matter is treason.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)question. Of course not.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Apparently.
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)Screwing over Native Americans...so hey, why stop now?
Initech
(100,043 posts)joeglow3
(6,228 posts)The title VERY clearly conveys the idea that the Federal government is seizing sovereign land handing it over (just look at the responses here). That is NOT the case.
Now, I agree we should be upset and the point of the article is valid, but I am sick and fucking tired of lazy "journalists" who just lie to make their agenda seem stronger.
progressoid
(49,952 posts)Great.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)A land swap, not a give away.
Sections will be protected by the forest service.
Native Americans will be guaranteed access to certain sections.
http://m.eacourier.com/news/resolution-copper-land-swap-ok-d-by-house/article_a95a2844-7cf5-11e4-9852-b3e9019362a6.html?mode=jqm