Home Campaigns Sioux Nation Treaty Council Some thoughts on the Black Hills Claim

Some thoughts on the Black Hills Claim

Some thoughts on the Black Hills Claim

The Black Hills claim was based on a Fifth Amendment Taking not as a part of the Treaty. As such, the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution refers to us, Indians, as citizens of the United States, not as members of a totally distinct nation, the Great Sioux Nation. The Black Hills claim was not based on the Treaty issue which is authorized under Article VI of the US Constitution. The aboriginal claims are not addressed either since the Black Hills claim is under the Fifth Amendment which refers to citizens of the United States not the aboriginal peoples of this continent. However, by muddying the water, the USA is smart and will try to keep everyone confused by mixing all these issues together: the aboriginal claims, the Treaty issue, and the American citizenship issue (or as we refer to it as the illegal occupation issue. We are their prisoners and must abide by the prison rules. We have the Executive Order that created the reservations as POW camps if you want a copy.) We all need to keep these issues separate and not let the USA or Canada join them together as they are three, distinct, and separate issues.

From the Tituwan (Teton Sioux Nation) Treaty Council perspective, everything regarding American law stops for us (Tituwan) in 1868. However, the USA has tried to confuse everyone: the Congress, the states, the people, both Indian and non-Indian, by promoting what they call American Indian Law. This American Indian Law might have ramifications on other tribes because of their own treaties or agreements they made, but for us Tituwan with the last treaty, the 1868 treaty which is supported by the March 3rd Act of 1871, then everything stops at 1868. We are under illegal occupation by the USA since they started killing the buffalo, letting the miners into the Black Hills, and ultimately putting us in the POW camps (reservations) which was the only thing they could do as an occupation force.

We have to live under their illegal occupation laws until such time as we obtain our freedom. That is why delegates from the Tetuwan (Teton Sioux Nation) Treaty Council keep approaching the United Nations. There have been other Indigenous nations who have obtained their freedom through help from the United Nations. East Timoor is one. Our efforts will not be that easy and it will take massive public pressure from the other nations of the world to help us. Even then, will the USA give us our freedom?
Yes, I agree that there needs to be much dialogue about these issues. Dialogue needs to occur in the communities, in large gatherings, and in intertribal meetings, as well as making the non-Indians aware of these things. After all, their government lied to them and let them think they could live in our Treaty Territory.
Unfortunately, that lawyer, Kettering, is only looking to make oodles of money, and the people are again being tricked into thinking they are going to be getting big bucks. The USA has, in the past, in many, many cases, charged the people for back payments (offsets) for health, food, etc, and in the end Indian people have come out losing everything.
We also must continue to encourage the return of our culture and the understanding that Ina Makoce is sacred, and you do not sell your Mom. Again, I think if we understand and unite together on all these issues, then we can stop these moves. Thanks for letting me say my few thoughts on this.
Charmaine White Face, Spokesperson; Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council

Mission Statement

"Defenders of the Black Hills is a group of volunteers without racial or tribal boundaries whose mission is to preserve, protect, and restore the environment of the 1851 and 1868 Treaty Territories, Treaties made between the United States and the Great Sioux Nation."

Speaking about radioactive fallout, the late President John F. Kennedy said,

"Even then, the number of children and grandchildren with cancer in their bones, with leukemia in their blood, or with poison in their lungs might seem statistically small to some, in comparison with natural health hazards. But this is not a natural health hazard and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of even one human life, or the malformation of even one baby who may be born long after we are gone, should be of concern to us all. Our children and grandchildren are not merely statistics toward which we can be indifferent."

July 26, 1963 upon signing the ban on above ground nuclear tests