Why should they have to buy back their land? Indeed. sigh....

I'd dearly love to hep make this right.

Reynolds at fair market value and then return it to the tribe, or at least do something like an easement that guarantees the tribes permanent access. It's a shame that the tribes have to come up with the money, although this is one case where they really should consider tapping into that $800 million reparation fund. Or, the Reynolds could have a heart and lower their asking price.

It's good enough for Canadians trying to build a friggin shit pipe to the sea.

see fit, at the price they want, though the gov. should offer to buy at a fair price so that some private entity doesn't get a hold of it first.

My post was intended as a swipe at Keystone and the use of eminent domain here in Texas by the Oil & Gas transmission mafia

and the work in progress Crazy Horse are blatant insults to the Natives. They even have CrazyHorse using what to the natives is an obscene gestire. And let usnot forget that mount rushmore was built by a Klansman as a KKK meeting place.

http://matadornetwork.com/trips/the-shady-history-of-mt-rushmore/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutzon_Borglum

From day one Mount Rushmore was to be a tourist attraction, not a meeting place for the KKK. Stone Mountain Georgia had long been the meeting place for the KKK since the second founding of the KKK in 1905.

People tend to forget they have been at least four different KKKs. The first was the post Civil War KKK. This started out as a Secret Society (like the Masons) but made up of ex Southern Army Veterans. The KKK quickly became a racist resistance group to the Reconstruction Governments of the South, Its reputed leader, Nathan Bedford Forest, closed it down in 1871 after passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (And called the Anti-KKK Act). The 1871 Act made it a crime to act "Under the color of Law" to harm another person. i.e. what the KKK was doing to African Americans in the South in the Reconstruction era, for the KKK always said what they were doing was following "The law" as their lynch and did other acts of violence against the recently freed slaves.

This first KKK was Racist, but not to the extent of the second KKK. The First KKK was more a resistance group (or opposition group) whose members tended to be racists (The whole basis of Southern Slavery was racist, you were NOT going to see that disappear in the 12 years between 1861 and 1877, the beginning of the Civil War to the End of Reconstruction.

The Second KKK, was the organization founded on Stone Mountain in 1905. In its heart it was a Racist organization (unlike the earlier KKK, I know the difference is not much more a nit picking difference, but it is a difference). Unlike the earlier KKK, it was not an organization against the existing state structure. In fact it supported the existing the state structure and its increasing racist nature and gave its racism the cover of being pro-America. In the 1920s it became known as a powerful voice to protect America from Communists and other anti-American groups. It tried to hide its racist background in the 1920s and emphasis its pro-American side (For this reason later President Harry S Truman thought about applying and Supreme Court Justice Black did join). William Jennings Bryan called it a phenomena that would quickly disappear almost as quick as it appeared and told fellow Democrats to ignore it for that reason (Bryan would die, but right after his death, this second KKK self destructed). The Reason Bryan said it would disappear is that it no long term view, just a claim that if you supported it, you were supporting America. Without a long range view, sooner or later it would find that it had to make some decision and that decision would turn off part of its base. The lost of part of its base would start a quick decline, as the prevailing side would what it to do more and more wanted it wanted, and turn off more and more members. In 1924 the KKK was the strongest political organization in the US, by 1928 this second KKK had died out. Slow start in 1905, conversion to a pro-American party about 1920, rapid raise to 1924 and quick decline by 1928.

While various organizations kept up the name of the KKK in the 1930s and 1940s, these were all small local groups. In the 1950s the KKK rose again, this time as a group opposed to the Civil Rights Movement. The various local KKK were used by other groups (Mostly while connected upper middle class people who did not want to get they hands dirty) that opposed the Civil Rights Movement as head-bashers. This third KKK boomed in the 1950s, came to its largest in the 1960s, and then broke up into small groups in the 1970s when they were abandoned by the same upper middle class person who had used them in the 1950s and 1960s.

Since the 1960s the KKK has been a series of small local interconnected groups (more interconnected today due to the internet). They raise they ugly heads every so often, but are generally ignore. On the other hand, they is evidence that certain upper middle class whites keep up contacts with these various KKKs so these local KKK can be called upon to bash heads when the upper middle class wants that done.

Today's KKK is dangerous, but no where near the size it was in the 1920s. The modern KKK is restrained compared to the KKK of the 1950s, but that is because no one is calling them to bash heads at the present time. Hopefully the KKK will disappear, but that also does NOT look like it will occur within the next 10-20 years.

My point is that Stone Mountain was a KKK meeting place, it is still a KKK meeting place. It was paid for by organizations either controlled by the second KKK or by the second KKK. On the other hand, the person that did the work appears NOT to have any racist attitude, but had to deal with the people (many racists) who were paying him to do the craving. Thus he interacted with them while making what, on its surface, is just a monument to the Southern Generals of the Civil War. The problem is the monument as craved gave a white-wash to the Racist nature of Slavery.

Side note: Nathan Bedford Forest had been a General during the Civil War, and later became head of the post Civil War KKK. He is NOT on the craving. The question is why? Did the KKK want to hide that the KKK was paying for the Craving? Did the Second KKK want to show it was NOT the post Civil War KKK/ Or did the KKK just did not like Forest for his brutal honesty? During the Civil War, when a Southern Politician was going on and on why the South was fighting the Civil War and that it was NOT for Slavery, Forest said (I Paraphrase) "If we are not fighting for Slavery, why are we fighting?". The Second KKK may NOT have like that quote but it summed up why the South Fought the Civil War,

Rare these days.

I'm sorry please correct me if I'm wrong but I really don't understand how Crazy Horse is an insult to native americans. It was commissioned by a Lakota elder, Henry Standing Bear, who it turns out didn't have 'permission' from the tribe to commission the sculpture. That is more of an insult from him to his own people, Ziolkowski maybe should have checked but I don't think I would label that as an 'insult' more of a politial/cultural insensitivity.
Of course also there is the question of if Crazy Horse would have wanted it carved, or if his family would have...and also if sculpting the rock is right in the eyes of the Lakota's religious beliefs. Not saying those concerns are wrong, just acknowledging them.

The way I see it is that there was one person who, although maybe misguided, wanted to create a counterpoint to Mt Rushmore. I can only imagine how many people learned more than they ever would have otherwise by visiting the monument, some maybe interested enough to educate themselves about the history of native americans in our country. That in addition to the good intentions and educational mission of it I don't see how it is an insult but rather a well intentioned idea.
Yes it was started wrong and the ethical questions about even building it are there but its not like its an image mocking them or something like that...it shows him pointing to the lands that he considered his people's...if anything that is a huge rock 'middle finger' to Mt Rushmore and the ones who took the land!

I'm sorry if I'm rambling or in any way offensive...I just am not clear on a few points, or maybe just disagree with you...and it is reeaaalllly late!

Back in the 1870s my great-great-grandfather and great-grandfather surveyed the railroads through the Dakotahs, probably the Black Hills. My great-grandfather was only 16 at the time and he told my grandmother tales about his adventures in the "wild Indain" lands.

They were working for what ended up being the Chicago & Northwestern Railroad Company. A cousin of my g-g-grandfather got them the job. He later became the president of the company and oversaw much of its western expansion. Part of his planning was that as the railroad was surveyed, towns along the route were laid out. The railroad needed towns as places to provide water and fuel for the trains and the US government gave the railroads the lands for those towns to support the lines.

I grew up hearing about my g-grandfather's adventures and his father's cousin who became an extremely wealthy and influential man but it was not until I began researching the genealogy and history that I put those stories together with the history of broken treaties and horrific treatment of the Indians in those areas. I have to put my feelings about that history in the same box that I do the ownership of slaves from the Southern branches of my family.

On the other side of things, though. I don't know a whole lot of things about my family history save for the fact that I am partially related to Red Cloud, as well as a shamaness.

If you want to learn more about the history of the railroad through that area, look up Marvin Hughitt. There are several obituaries, some article written at the time he retired, and other information.

I shook George McGovern's hand there in 1972.

Nice tax write-off and good deed. No?

Then again, he'll lease to the oil and gas fracking companies

they have a pretty good land-purchase budget, and I am sure they could write off donating it. Not that TNC does much of anything without making a bit on the side, but I am sure they could manage.

they pay for land that already belongs to them. The US governmen stole it from them in the first place.

Federal government could use the 800 fund to pay Reynolds and return the land to Lakota. Which official(s) could you contact to suggest and demand that?

getting the natives drunk and shoving a land claim under their noses, a gold claim (also of questionable validity), or what?

There was a lot of cheating and corruption back then, as now.

Well defined process and the sellers apparently have clear title under US law.

The courts have decided for quite sometime not to forcible take the land from existing property holders that was stolen generations ago. The restitution was given in terms of $$$. Nothing more can be done by the courts.

Not to use that money to buy back the land and help the tribe is sheer stupidity IMO.

You would be rich in a deeds and actions.

Those carry far more respectability and admiration.

I too would buy the land for them if I were rich.

I actually have a winning lottery list.

I have names of friends and family members, charities etc. on that list.

Native American Indians have always been on my winning lottery list.

I live in the Black Hills, should my land be taken from me and given to the tribe? Would doing that fix the wrong that was committed? If you would say 'yes' then I have to ask where should it stop...it seems many want to forget but the entirety of the United States was taken from its original inhabitants by illegal or immoral means and by people who aren't even ALIVE anymore!
The land shouldn't have been forced from its people in the first place but as far as I am concerned I am native to this land as well. I was born here, I have lived here my whole life and I consider the Black Hills in my own way to be sacred/special as well. I am one of the people who truly understand just how special they are and I wouldn't do anything to harm them. So how in the world would taking the land from me and forcing me out be any different from the original action?

Do you live on the land being sold?

No, I was referring to the sentiment that the black hills belong to the tribe and because of that sentiment the entiretey of it should be returned...there by forcing me off my land.

Now if it is simply a matter of a real estate transaction that is a completely different issue.
I really don't see why anyone other than the tribe itself should care if they buy it or not as long as the status is not changing other than which private entity owns it. If they wanted to make it 'become' part of the reservation there would be a whole other set of issues.

I find it very difficult to understand why Rosebud insists on “legal title” for themselves when quite a few other Nation have ancestral connections to Pe Sla. It seems for a dozen or so Tribes to put up 750,000 each for the lands to be placed in some form of trust is not an option. Why Not?

In the Oct. 3rd NY Times article, Mr. Boyd, treasurer of the Rosebud states, “It was always our intention to work with other tribes.”

Rosebud press release about securing funds: “The Rosebud Sious Tribal Council expressed its wish to work with other tribal councils on the management of the site, “if the sale is finalized in Rosebud’s favor”

Pe Sla defined as Pilgrimage Site again

Oct. 3rd 2012: NY Times article, “Our ceremonial patterns would collapse,” said Victor Douville, who teaches Lakota history and culture at Sinte Gleska University in Mission, S.D. Mr. Douville said that there had been annual_ pilgrimages at Pe’ Sla for 3,000 years,

Sept 3, 2012 , lastrealindians press release defined Pe Sla as:
“The Lakota pilgrimage site Pe’ Sla for the Sioux Nation“

Linda Kramer of Borderlands Ranch conducts “Spiritual Pilgrimages” in the Heart of Pe Sla as per her words along with the spiritual person Ben Rhodd from Pine Ridge who did the shake and bake ceremony for Chapel of Sacred Mirrors ceremonial grail.
read more: http://jpwade.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/black-robes-aim-pilgrimages/

Why did lastrealindians imprint on the global community through their Save Pe Sla fund raising campaign, that the Lakota Nation is so poor and financially incompetent and in dire need of financial assistance?

Anyone connect the dots between, Shakopee Tribe of Minnesota, now deceased Chairman Stanley Crooks (who died on the planned auction date) that had dialog with Rosebud Tribe in early July for auction bid proposals , … to the Indian Land Tenure Foundation of Little Canada, Minn. who is assisting in securing the 9million in funds to title the Reynolds Property? Shakopee is quite the giver with donations and funding, for example in 2010,2011 alone their gaming contributed in excess of 100 million to outside communities in donations and funding. Yes, ILTF is in their list of recipients. Mr. Crooks representing Shakopee accomplished quite a bit during his 20yrs of “business” that assisted in the growth of their gaming operations.

LRI bailed out of all dialog at the official Save Pe Sla fb page when an understanding of campaign fund raising arose and LRI refused to be transparent even in the most basic form. Since LRI wants to take credit for others efforts and preach from the podium how they saved Pe Sla, they should at least be up front and transparent.

Questions are now up in the air about 1/2 million plus of the 1.6 million used to secure a bid proposal . That 1.6 million which 380,000 (before campaign raising fees) of on-line donations is part of. That bid proposal amount that is suppose to include the unknown amount of direct donations to Rosebud Tribe as an option of the fund raising, that was meant for the Lakota “Nation” , not just Rosebud Tribe, even thou it did excluded all other “Nations” with direct ancestral connections to Pe Sla.

http://jpwade.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/panhandlers-trying-to-wash-away-blood/