quote:

Jarmak posted:

Brainiac Five

Doc Hawkins posted:

Looks like Marty Two Bulls' hasn't drawn a victory cartoon yet, but of course, most of his work on the subject looks pretty victorious.

Tias posted:

So, Cracked of all places are bringing out claims that civil and military intelligence are employing jammers on the protest camp. Anyone knows how likely this is to be true?


E: The article uses these links, among others:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2016/11/the_at_t_time_warner_merger_and_the_standing_rock_protests.htm

https://www.nlg.org/nlg-and-aclu-su...-standing-rock/

I'm not in the US and don't know a lot about the ACLUs practices, but would they ask for an open record request unless they had a strong suspicion something was amiss?

ComradeCosmobot posted:

So while we're talking about 19th century Native American law, it looks like the Dawes Act 2.0 is going to be on the table under Trump.

And you thought Standing Rock and stealing Oak Flat were bad. We ain't seen nothing yet.

CommieGIR posted:

I'm going to love watching people in the thread try to justify this.

CommieGIR posted:

I'm going to love watching people in the thread try to justify this.

wateroverfire posted:

Various native groups are in favor so maybe ask them? It's not like even Native Amercans are of one mind on the topic.

wateroverfire posted:

Various native groups are in favor so maybe ask them? It's not like even Native Amercans are of one mind on the topic.

botany posted:

link?

Tias posted:

So, Cracked of all places are bringing out claims that civil and military intelligence are employing jammers on the protest camp. Anyone knows how likely this is to be true?


E: The article uses these links, among others:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2016/11/the_at_t_time_warner_merger_and_the_standing_rock_protests.htm

https://www.nlg.org/nlg-and-aclu-su...-standing-rock/

I'm not in the US and don't know a lot about the ACLUs practices, but would they ask for an open record request unless they had a strong suspicion something was amiss?

WoodrowSkillson posted:

The Reuters article lists some individual natives in related industries that seem to be of the mind that some of the regulations impede tribal profit on their own land. I know nothing beyond that and don't have the time right now to investigate further.

Testimony posted:

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

My name is Harrison Talgo. I am a member of the San Carlos Apache Nation. I am a former Tribal chairman, and I served as a member of the San Carlos Apache Tribal Council for 16 years. This is National Flag Day and I am proud to say I am a veteran of the Marine Corps and served my country with honor and duty in Vietnam. I am also a Tribal Elder.

Many times I have come before Congress as an official representative of my government to present issues affecting and in the best interest of the San Carlos Apache Tribal Government. But today, I come before you as a concerned private citizen of Bylas.
I am here to voice my support of HR.1904.

My ancestoral clan inhabited the Pinal Mountains in Arizona, the same region where many mining operations exist today and not far from the mining project proposed by Resolution Copper. My wife Elouise and I raised 7 children on the reservation. I understand the Apache way and am respectful of the traditions of my ancestors. They were proud and independent people.

I know the tribal leadership does not share my position. I have tried very hard to understand why they oppose this project when we are in such desperate need of jobs and industry. I believe that traditional Apache values are not mutually exclusive with economic development.
We are one of the poorest Indian tribes in the nation. Seven in ten eligible workers in the tribe are unemployed. Almost 80 percent of our people live in poverty. Alcoholism and drug use are rampant and suicide rates are high. The average Apache male has a life expectancy of 54 years, about 20 years shorter than the average American male.

Obviously, this places a tremendous strain on personal and family relationships and a heavy burden on social services – services the tribe struggles to provide.

Without jobs, our children are forced to move to neighboring communities or into the city to find work. Not many of them return. With each passing generation, a piece of Apache identity and culture is lost. I can tell you as a father and grandfather and one who grew up in traditional ways and learned the language of my fathers, that is heartbreaking.

Those who stay on the reservation face a bleak future. Only education and training and opportunities for good-paying jobs can improve that picture.
Even though our nearest reservation boundary is about 20 miles away from the Resolution project and our nearest community is almost 40 miles away by highway, that is a reasonable distance to travel for a job, especially when you consider the high wages and benefits that mining jobs provide. There also are opportunities for San Carlos residents to start businesses much closer to home that will supply and service a large mining operation like Resolution Copper. In discussions with Resolution, I have discovered the company is ready and willing to discuss these kinds of opportunities with San Carlos. Many Apaches worked at the former Magma Mine that is the base area for this new mine.

The issue today is not about our reservation land, our sovereignty, our heritage, our self respect – these are not for sale. This is about putting our people – a lot of people – to work. I believe economic development should be our leadership’s top priority. I have previously testified before Congress in support of economic development projects. I have done so in the face of opposition from other leaders who have opposed these same opportunities on and near the reservation. Some of those projects experienced costly delays as a result of the Council’s opposition, but they all were built eventually. And they have all hired Apaches.

I respect the Council’s desire to protect sites that have cultural or historical significance. I want that, too. But Oak Flat is a long way from us, and I believe strongly that it is possible for our traditional values to co-exist with economic progress. In fact, I don’t believe one can survive without the other. Economic progress and prosperity leads to a better standard of living, better health, better services and better education. It increases our capacity to learn and expands our cultural horizons. It gives us additional resources to explore and study our past, to protect what we hold sacred, to showcase and display those things that are culturally important, and to help the outside world better understand and appreciate the stories and traditions of our fathers.

Because many members of the San Carlos Apache Nation are dependent on the tribal government for food, utilities, and a limited number of available jobs, they often do not speak out against Council decisions in fear of losing those benefits. I am not afraid to speak out. I can assure you I do not stand alone as a member of the San Carlos Apache Nation in support of the Resolution Copper Mine and the jobs and prosperity it will create. I made personal phone calls to many people within my community of 2,000 tribal members and the majority of them responded in favor of this project.
I respectfully urge Congress to pass this bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I welcome any questions you and the committee may have.

wateroverfire posted:

There is Dale Miles, who is a tribal historian and member of the San Carlos Apache, who writes that Oak Flat is not a sacred site.

Or Harrison Talgo, former chairman and an elder of the San Carlos Apache tribe, who testified in front of congress supporting the land swap in 2011.


Bolding mine. I can't personally verify it, of course, but it is interesting if true.

There is a diversity of views on the topic.

The swap bill also, apparantly, specifically does not include certain locations in the area that do have cultural significance, such as Apache Leap.

CommieGIR posted:

Proper response to any idea that it'll be different this time around:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryAO8Zmv4ag

wateroverfire posted:

idgi.

edit: To clarify - I don't understand what you're getting at.

blowfish posted:

Privatisation is bad, therefore the proposed Dawes act 2.0 is bad.

blowfish posted:

Naturally, the copper mining company will roll in with killdozers Avatar-style, shoot the natives in the back and drop smallpox blankets out of Apache helicopters. While cackling about uncivilised savages and maximum profit like cartoon villains, that is.

Pellisworth posted:

who cares?

VitalSigns posted:

Self-determination is a very important concept in law, actually. My argument isn't that Mexican-Americans aren't disadvantaged enough, my argument is that they literally don't want this to happen (and the reason they don't is because they're not disadvantaged enough to prefer Mexican rule to US rule). It's a total red herring.

In an alternate reality where they did have enough grievances to organize a government and demand self-determination yeah sure I think it would be good to at least consider what they had to say. If California government were so bad that millions of people wanted Mexican rule of all things then gently caress at the very least we need to fix a lot of poo poo, stat.

VitalSigns posted:

Actually it is so designed: the argument for keeping the Senate is that the people in small states have unique experiences and interests that differ enough from the rest of the country that their minority wills deserve extra voting power. Ethnic group boundaries no more or less arbitrary than in invisible line on a map that divides Nevada voter power from California voter power.

blowfish posted:

Privatisation is bad, therefore the proposed Dawes act 2.0 is bad.

CommieGIR posted:

Privatization IS bad. What, are you kidding me? If you live in the US, you live in place that is living proof its a gigantic mistake.

wateroverfire posted:

Dude of all the places you could be living, the USA is one of the absolute best.

wateroverfire posted:

Dude of all the places you could be living, the USA is one of the absolute best.

CommieGIR posted:

gently caress. No. Privatized For Profit medicine is a loving nightmare. Know all the VA issues we've been having? Guess when the VA went downhill? When they started contracting it out to Private Contractors. For Profit prisons are literally taking money from education and dumping it into prisons faster than we can hand it to them, and since they get paid for every prisoners they get, they fully encourage a revolving door system.

Privatization is a loving nightmare and you're a heartless rear end in a top hat for suggesting its a good idea.

botany posted:

Outside of all the better ones.

wateroverfire posted:

Dude of all the places you could be living, the USA is one of the absolute best.

wateroverfire posted:

I guess so?

coyo7e posted:

I really wish whomever keeps tossing these big red titles onto people in D&D would get more original because it's confusing as gently caress having everyone's avatar be that same autistic guy.

coyo7e posted:

I really wish whomever keeps tossing these big red titles onto people in D&D would get more original because it's confusing as gently caress having everyone's avatar be that same autistic guy.

DeusExMachinima posted:

I got tentacle rape girl so there's that.

Dead Reckoning posted:

Well, I'm trying to figure out what people are actually advocating, so I can decide if I'm in favor of it or not. You're saying that tribes only exercise sovereignty over their members, not the land of the res, but VitalSigns and Commie seem to be arguing in favor of some new arrangement where the tribes exercise sovereignty over territory. Either the tribes don't gain any additional sovereignty, in which case I'm trying to figure out what the purported benefit would be, or they do and I'd like to nail down what people mean by that and the justice of seizing the land from its present owners.
You're altering the hypothetical instead of answering it. I am aware that returning the Cession to Mexico does not currently have widespread support. I am asking if, in the event that a majority of the descendants of those Mexican citizens who lived there when the territory was seized (who comprise a tiny minority of the current population of said territory) wished to return to Mexican sovereignty on the basis that their land had been unjustly seized 150 years ago, you would support that?

Dead Reckoning posted:

you're trying to pretend that ethnicity is comparable to state of residence to obfuscate that you were arguing for an ethnic supremacist government.

CommieGIR posted:

Privatization is a loving nightmare and you're a heartless rear end in a top hat for suggesting its a good idea.

CommieGIR posted:

Privatization IS bad. What, are you kidding me? If you live in the US, you live in place that is living proof its a gigantic mistake.