Monday, December 10, 2007


The dictionary lists sovereignty as a synonym for freedom but in reality there is a significant difference between the meaning of the two words. “Freedom is the absence of hindrance, restraint, confinement, or repression.” while sovereignty is “above or superior to all others; chief, greatest, supreme”. Freedom has to do with action and sovereignty has to do with station.

Tribal sovereignty refers to the right of tribes or of federally recognized Native American nations to exercise limited jurisdiction within and sometimes beyond reservation boundaries.- Source Wikipedia

Sovereign sets the legal standard and determines the perspective from which decisions emanate and is dangerous when it is improperly used.

All sovereignty is granted by our Creator. God's Laws are to be obeyed and His dominion enforced. Human sovereignty not proscribed by our Creator's control is always tyrannical. It is the pathway to chaos and death.

The Government of the United States and American Indian Tribes is misusing sovereignty by attempting to exert control over God’s creation without regard for His Laws and His Kingship, which is bringing disaster upon individual American Indians.

American Indians are living in an Alice in Wonderland world in regards to His/Her sovereignty.

Friday, December 7, 2007


In recent times, the ideology in the policies of some Tribal Nations has been about power and the benefits power brings, one benefit is control of the Tribal purse string.

The biggest threat is the control power and money has over a society and that is where the real potential for evil is and where totalitarian societies can inflict horrors upon individuals.

Now, there are those who will argue that power and money are intertwined and are one in the same and they have a point. Money might be the first object of the average person, but eventually the realization emerges that power can be a very ease and productive route to wealth and vice versa.

Modern history is the account of how the central banking cartel converts its monopoly of credit into a monopoly of power. This entails destroying your connection with nation, religion (God), race and family. It means substituting objective truth (God, nature) with their Dictate (political correctness, etc.)

Tribal members have been sold out, "by their leaders", dumbed down by the media, under educated, and spoiled stupid by the tribal welfare state. (Anyone can be bought.) They either refuse to recognize what is happening or are too afraid to speak out because of the threat of dis-enrollment.

They believe they have prosperity and think they are free.

As Aldous Huxley said:
"A really effi­cient totalitarian state would be one in which the all powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves WHO DO NOT HAVE TO BE COERCED, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present day totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and schoolteachers." [Brave New World, Bantam Books, 1967, p. xii. Caps added.]

On the bright side, the knowledge that American Indian Tribal Government’s and the societies they've create is a fraud and doomed to fail, is strangely liberating. You will no longer need to touch your knee to the ground and grovel to this false god when it happens. "The truth does make you free!"

Thursday, November 1, 2007

The Devastation of American Indian Tribes

Since law creates the religion of a nation, engagement in the political arena is a righteous endeavor. But when victory involves the use of questionable procedures the process becomes evil. Politics in the United States provides a fundamental lesson in Hegelian Dialectics. Compromise with evil is standard practice; there are questionable coalitions, outright mendacity, consorts with the Devil, and manipulation of naïve voters. Victory is sought without regard to its cost. Most tribes and their members within Indian country have fallen into this trap.

Political decisions made by ferocious, unctuous elected leaders in organizations like the Pechanga, the Oneida, and a number of other American Indian Nations, are devastating tribal unity. By electing duplicitous individuals into leadership positions who promise tribal members a few crumbs from the Hog’s Trough while they, themselves, will be feasting on world governance and other inimical programs. Individual American Indian Tribal members are hoodwinked; their vote promotes an evil agenda.

It appears these Indian Tribes’, whose leaders, hold substantial sway over voting members cherishes their ability to manipulate the political process and are willing to relinquish the exclusivity of their spiritual beliefs in an evil pragmatic effort to secure victory for anyone who promises them a larger position of the slop at the Hog’s Trough. The fact that they may not understand the evil nature of Hegel and his Dialectic and are practicing it unwittingly does not mitigate the devastating effects it has on the unity of their tribes.

The cause of this evil can be summed up in three words: Apathy, Enmity, and Greed! These causes are like malignant tumors and if left un-treated will destroy the body. Any nation that either fails to acknowledge or is unable to discern reality and make decisions in its best interests from an accurate assessment is destined for destruction.

There are a number of evil independent conspiracies operating in parallel, highly organized, powerful, working to hold mankind in a satanic vice. Yet their actions show they're full of hate, in love with death, consumed by avarice. Courage and truth comes hard to them.What is needed are statesmen not pompous tenacious leaders who are unable to refrain from using subterfuge and turpitude.

If this steps on some toes, so be it. Don’t expect an apologue! Hopefully this will open some eyes and shed some light on one cause of an evil disease infecting Indian Country”…

Thursday, September 20, 2007

JURRIUS, Cui Bono "To whose benefit?"

Why do I fear for the Uintah and Ouray Reservation? Because I see an immanent crisis looming on the horizon, and the vast majority are unprepared to meet it.

For over one hundred and fifty years forces have conspired to destroy the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation while, at the same time, insidiously working to undermine the capability of the average tribal member to think or to reason from cause to effect. The result is that the average tribal member of the Northern Ute nation has not the slightest inkling of the deep problems' they face or how to go about solving them because of the deep biased divisions between bands and individuals!

There is something basically counterintuitive about the viral pettiness of the partisanship that's occurring within the reservation. The diametric opponents' has been reduced to sound and fury signifying nothing…

The perpetual ‘us’ versus ‘them’ sophomoric battle of nonsense may be cool for a high school pep rally and political fund raising dinners, but it is a cancer which genuinely threatens the existence of the Reservation.

Instead of a multi-media harangue of ‘neener-neener’ the tribe needs grown ups to develop, implement and maintain policy. Instead of smart people doing dumb things the tribe needs a basic analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. And that ‘SWOT’ analysis should be focused on securing the land,its resources and economic development for the furture instead of partisan advantage.

The reasons for this situation are, at this point, best left to historians to pick at the nits. The negative consequences of extricating your fist from the tar baby needs to be addressed by reality check motivated adults, not partisan hacks.

Partisans may get a visceral rush out of throwing rocks but reality reveals ‘do overs’ are not an option. What is done is done…

"When you let someone do it for you, they'll do it to you!"

Thursday, August 23, 2007

The Castle Doctrine

Castle Doctrine refers to a legal concept derived from English Common Law as it is presently applied in sections of the United States of America. It designates one's home (or any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protections from both prying and violent attack. In the United States, laws informally referred to as 'castle laws' can sometimes impose an obligation to retreat before using force to defend oneself. The Castle Doctrine provides for an exception to this duty. Provided one is attacked in their own home, vehicle, or place of business, in jurisdictions where 'castle laws' are in force, one may stand their ground against an assailant without fear of prosecution.

The Castle Doctrine is now in Texas awaiting Governor Perry's signature. That makes sixteen states now in support of citizens. Critics opposed to the Castle Doctrine and who are urging Governor Perry to nix it fail to understand the concept. It's not hard to grasp if you love people, it's hard to follow if you disrespect family.

Editorials encourage Texas Governor Perry to veto the bill because it would mean a return to the Wild West, and that more guns would put more people in harm's way. As I said, they fail to understand the concept.

The clue is that these anti-liberty positions basically say that gun owners are the aggressors. Projection. Interference with a civil right and family and personal safety is aggression. Meanwhile, most Americans understand that editorial boards and public officials under oath have no say-so in opposing a civil right - more aggression.

Let's look for a moment at the outright hostility the anti-gun activists exhibit so clearly. Look at it not as a civil right issue - which it is - but also as a how-you-run-your-own-household issue. You are head of a household, and you protect your family. You want to learn what you need to know in making your best-informed decisions on how you run your home. You don't want newspapers keeping things from you or officials failing to protect your interests by refusing to mention certain legal facts.

For all their bad advice, three things the anti-guns cannot deny -

1. Police have no duty to protect individuals. In all fifty states, they simply don't really have to come, much less arrive in time. For failure to protect, the Supreme Court held in 2005 no constitutional right to police protection. Been that way since 1845. Tough luck.

2. Citizens in this country are already possessed of all legal authority to use up to deadly force when facing grave danger. Editorial boards and people who encourage you to dial 9-1-1 and do nothing until they get there obfuscate this. Bad advice to a head of a household responsible for his children and for his/her own life.

3. Police understand that the individual is the first - and last - line of defense in facing grave danger alone and do not oppose guns as advertised. Good to know if you're head of a household.

...So the anti-gun activists try the emotional hysterical language of Wild West, easy access to guns, illegal guns and Harm's Way instead. As if average citizens are completely irresponsible or gun runners.

As always, what some officials think of you shows up as outright hindrance of how you may run your own home.

In criticizing the Castle Doctrine, anti-gun activists are handing out very bad advice - advice that gets people killed by turning their backs on aggressors (walking away), by waiting for police while the aggressors carry on (call 9-1-1 instead), and by being talked out of their legal authority (don't resist violence) - and this is one of the worst offenses against the country - editors and officials talking people out of their legal authority to respond when facing grave danger alone.

And that's why anti-gun is anti-liberty: it talks citizens out of their personal, legal authority, “your Authority.”

That authority is recognized and affirmed by the Castle Doctrine, and it is an expression of respect for the citizen now with the force of law. That authority has been there all along, even when hidden by anti-gun activists, but now clarified and affirmed.

As head of a household, how do you now adjust your preparedness for an encounter with violent crime at home and away from home?

Every state should have a Castle Doctrine law, because it builds rapport between the government and the governed by respecting the citizen immensely. Government's job is not to protect people -- government's job is to protect our rights.

The Castle Doctrine is good for the country. And it's a great plank for 2008 candidates.

Friday, August 17, 2007

Values, An Elder's Message

"If a child hasn't been given spiritual values within the family setting, they have no familiarity with the values that are necessary for the just and peaceful functioning in society."
--Eunice Baumann-Nelson, Ph.D, PENOBSCOT

When we are born, we start with a beautiful empty mind ready to be given our beliefs, attitudes, habits and expectations. Most of our true learning comes from watching the actions of our parents and others. As we watch our family or relatives, whatever their actions and values are, so will be the children's values and acts. If we see our families living a just and peaceful way of life, so then will the children. If we see our family shouting, arguing and hateful, so will it be for the children. The cycle of life - baby, youth, adult and Elder is all connected. If the older ones have good values, it will be connected to the children.

Oh God, my Creator, if there are values I have missed, it is not too late. I can get them from You. Teach me today Your spiritual values. Respect, trust, giving, honesty, wisdom etc. Amen.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

“It Set the Indian Aside as a Problem”

Criticizing the Indian Reorganization Act

The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, known as the Wheeler-Howard Act, and called the Indian New Deal, dramatically changed the federal government’s Indian policy.

*As far as the Indian Reorganization Act is concerned, in my opinion, is possibly one of the worst intentioned happenings that could have possibly taken place as far as individual Indian people are concerned. Although it did stop the alienation, the sale of Indian lands and did stop the allotment system, it created a socialistic society, and set the Indian people apart from the mainstream of American life and made them a problem. So what this has really done, it has substituted in place of the governing system that the Indians had prior to the Indian Reorganization Act, an (a European white man’s) idea of how they should live, rather a paternalistic type of government that had as its object the socializing of all the activities of the Indian people. One cannot help but think that there was an overt conspiracy in the back of the mind of these bureaucrats.

Now when speaking of bureaucrats, I not only include the actual officeholders, but the families and friends of all these officeholders who form the controlling and guiding memberships of these Indian organizations. I want to elaborate a little on the effects of the Indian Reorganization Act insofar as it has deterred the development and the independent thinking of the Indian people. In the first place, it set the Indian aside as a problem. The Indian was and is still being told that he was/is a problem from the very day that he are born under this system and as he grows older, he is by the presence of these so-called experts in agriculture and ranching and other activities they were paying lip service to teaching the Indians, he is made to feel that he is inferior, that he isn’t able to compete. So that the whole system emphasized the activities of the Indians as a whole for the benefit of the whole, rather than the individual, (private enterprise system of our American system.) He isn’t taught to be a capitalist, which they must be taught in order to survive in today's modern society in this country.

Many of the programs had limitations, particularly, the cattle program. They would allow an Indian to acquire a few head of cattle and he couldn’t get any more. I forget the exact figures, but there were limitations put on him so that any programs that were instituted were not aimed at benefiting the Indian but where some side effects did benefit him, it was probably an unfortunate occurrence because their main objective was to show what they’ve been doing to members of Congress on the Appropriations Committee to justify the millions of dollars they were spending, when actually, the Indian was getting little or no benefit from any of this. And I think the main thing that was wrong with the whole thing was that the setting of the Indian aside on a different place in the state, designating him as a problem, making him feel he is a problem, beating down rebels, beating down Indians who expressed any independent thinking, rewarding collaborators, rewarding them economically and with positions of importance in some intense and completely stifling independent creative thinking from the Indian people, having, different laws apply to him, setting up a different kind of government. In other words, the American Indian isn’t under the same kind of government that his white neighbors are. Rather, what should have been done is set up a county system exactly like the neighboring counties, with county officials, with municipal officials, with Indians going about their daily political and economic activities in the same way that other people in the state are, so that they could benefit from the intercourse, (dealings or communications,) with their white neighbors and the meetings that they have, state-wide meetings of county officials, municipal officials, and in fact, becoming part of the mainstream of American life without sacrificing their customs and traditions.

*Paraphrased from an interview of Ramon Roubideaux, a Brule Lakota, and given to historian J.H. Cash in 1968.

Within a few years of its passage by Congress, elections were held on each separate reservation to accept or reject the IRA. Cleverly, John Collier, (commissioner of Indian affairs in the 1930’s who was responsible for the new policy,) had gotten language into the bill stipulating that the Act was accepted as long as a majority of adults did not vote against it. This got around the issue of "traditional" Indians who saw cooperation of any kind with the federal government as an encroachment on sovereignty. Ultimately a majority of adult Indians on a majority of the existing reservations accepted the IRA--or did not outright reject it--with the significant exceptions of the Crows, the Klamath, and the Navajo, where a majority actually voted and chose to reject it.

Next, tribal constitutions needed to be drafted and accepted. With no background in constitutional government, most tribes were forced to rely on model constitutions drafted by the Interior Department. These, of course, had a distinctly Euro-American flavor and, not surprisingly, the majority of tribal constitutions ended up resembling each other.

The legacy of the Indian Reorganization Act is the incorporation of Indian tribes into businesses, allowing them to exist as financial entities. While tribes still operate under financial limitations that states do not, without this provision of the IRA Indian tribes could never have entered into gaming or any of the other financial ventures that have allowed some tribes to be lifted out from under the blanket of poverty. But the individual American Indian still does not have a right to self-determination as long as the IRA exists and Indian tribes and individual American Indians refuse to face reality. And that reality is, “the American Indian is a Ward-of-the-State, second-hand citizens who needs to be treated as unruly stepchildren.” ‡

Wednesday, February 7, 2007

Food for Thought

Elephants wear tu-tus so they can hide in pine trees. Did you ever see an elephant in a pine tree? No? Well then, you know it works.
Ever stop to think, and forget to start again?
Despite the cost of living, have you noticed how it remains so popular?
Promises are like babies: fun to make, but hell to deliver.
USA Today has come out with a new survey: Apparently three out of four people make up 75 percent of the population.
What's the difference between roast beef and pea soup? Anyone can roast beef.
What's the main use of cowhide? To hold cows together.
You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.
Write your questions down on the back of a $20 dollar bill and send them to me.
IMPORTANT: No animals were harmed during the posting of this massage, although the mutt next door is living on borrowed time, let me tell you.