The Recognition process - International Court & Mr. Tecumsah

[kosowith]

Dear RDR, please clarify for me what you are saying. Are you discussion recognition as an individual or as a group. Do you mean to say that anyone who thinks they are Indian and who does not have any association with an established group has the same rights to call themselves an Indian community as those who are recognized?  

I also do not really understand your vague example of the man who was "born Indian but lost his identity due to rule changes" I do not how someone can lose their identity due to changing rules.  Perhaps you mean enrollment, but you also say he died knowing who and what he was. So I am confused. Also, many of your comments fall into one of the first fallacies of debate logic….unsubstantiated vagueness...  An elder, many, many people, a lot of,  numerous...

As to your statement “Therefore any "community" (which can even be an intentional community set up for their own purposes!) where one resides, whether Native or not, may view a person living there as being "Indian" and that person would in effect fit THAT legal definition for those purposes of identity. While we may like to impose our own inference onto that definition - saying that "Native" is implied with the term "Community" the rule is specific and "implication" is not valid in a court of law.”

Here I have to totally disagree.  This implied “native” has been established in a court of law and upheld in appellate court.  To say that there was a deliberate omission of the term "Native" is incorrect according to Canby, Cohen and several other, legal guides, American Indian Law professors and Law schools.  

At the time most of these definitions were codified (1940-1942) the term "Native" was not in vogue and seldom used. Also, when discussing the number (you say 19, I say 28) of different definitions of “Indian” you have to take into consideration that a majority of the differences deal with different points of law and jurisdictions.  Such the different definition in the question of legal jurisdiction on or off reservation, non-tribal member on reservation, person who is enrolled in a different nation, land tenure and on and on.  One law that has NOT changed as far as enrollment qualification is that enrollment continues to be at the determination and discretion of the nation in question. That is why there are so many different rules and regulations for enrollment and what works for Southern Ute does not work for Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.
  
According to Cohen – to legally be considered Indian a person must fulfill two – criteria, First they must have some Indian blood (later clarified as, hypothetically traceable to a pre-Columbian ancestor usually accomplished through traceable ancestors who were identified as Indian) AND be accepted as Indian by their community (of origin – which mean that Indian community). In a following clarification it is stated that the community must be a federally or state recognized community.  For example in Epps v Andrus 611 F.2d 915 – the decision was: and this is a paraphrase – there can be no Indian without an recognized Indian tribe (or nation).  Same in Heath v US and a number of others.

But all of this is getting away from what I was attempting to address, and that is cases such as the following case –

(News article) - One very popular tribe known for the practice of selling memberships is the Kaweah Indian Nation, which has recently been under investigation after complaints were filed in 5 different states. Illegal immigrants are being sold memberships to this organization and told that their membership will allow them automatic US citizenship and exemption from deportation. Some people have paid as much as $1,200. just because they were so hopeful that this would allow them to stay within the US. Manuel Urbinia, this group’s “high Chief” has reported that they have already sold over 10,000 memberships. ...  (Texas Daily)


Some time ago when I looked at his web site, Urbinia clearly stated that he wants no recognition from the “fake” US government … etc. etc. just like I first commented on.

No matter how you cut it this fraud is WRONG.  I also know of very few people who question a person’s identity, unless they are using that identity to make money.

And I still say that it is difficult to operate as a self sufficient community within the boundaries of the US without dealing with the US government.  Even the Amish have to deal with local, state and federal goverment. For Indian people, without status, you remain totally subjected to US law and jurisdiction.  If you doubt this, try to invoke your own special tax code in your own community store, or decide that you don't have to pay state taxes.

The point is, for those communities who are the poorest of the poor, (according to AEI data, American Indian communities have the highest level of poverty, and the greatest degree of poverty in the US, despite the comparative wealth of profitable casino tribes) This is still the reason that groups seek recognition. No amount of outsiders who want to debate the justice of identification can change what many of my relatives, neighbors face every day. Our kids need help and they need it now.  No matter how unfortunate that may be – it is our reality.  When your kids are hungry you don’t care about much else.

Finally – we were discussion the general theme of this thread in a law discussion board and I had an interesting questions posed by an attorney from the Indigenous Peoples Permanent Forum.  That is  - and quoting –

HOWEVER, there are LEGITIMATE and TRADITIONAL enclaves, communities, individuals who live their lives as free of interaction with and interference by the United States as possible. Because they choose to not engage in any solicitation game of "recognition,"

He said he hears this all the time, but has never found a single legitimate indigenous community that did in fact choose to not engage with the dominant government.  So if at all possible could someone give me an solid documented example to take back to that discussion?

Thanks  

[Niiki]

All good points well taken, Superdog!

As to your comment:

So it is not my "generalities" that are of  concern as much as the "generalities" so often used by people as a way of drawing lines in the sand - an "us versus them" mentality which just doesn't stand up under scrutiny - legal, cultural, philosophical, logical scrutiny.

ONE TYPE of Example: A Chief from a tribe/nation wherein descent is matrilineal marries outside his tribe/nation...the offspring, who live in his country, speak his language, live in accordance with his people's ways, may not (depending on the currently "recognized" versus traditional governing body) be entitled to call their affiliation by that tribal name OR (again, depending on the tribe, nation, etc.) may call themselves "of" that tribe/nation, or even a "member" but not an "enrolled" member. This whole concept of "carding" is economic based and is racist and certainly runs contrary to the basic idealogy originally inherent to those tribes/nations. And it's the perennial ploy of the United States government when dealing with and doling to Native Americans - they hand out the "pie" and then that pie is "divided" to the point that most are left with crumbs. One alternative is to insist that not only does that  whole pie belong to the people, but so does the orchard from whence the cherries come, and the fields from whence the wheat is grown, and the energy that heats the oven, ad infinitum, and we can take care of our own kitchen, thank you very much, you may leave now, after you pay for YOUR piece of OUR pie( aka Treaty rights)!

Acceptance and Recognition 101 under the Great Law of Peace of Six Nations Confederacy etc.
 
First of all the name "Tecumseh Brown Eagle" that Abdul Abdullah Mohammed, has assumed without going through the proper traditional process of receiving of having the right to carry the name , was not honoured. According to verification from the Shawnees themselves he never asked permission from them to take on a name for himself of one of their notable chiefs. The Shawnee are not Erie. As the Shawnee are an off-shoot of the Delaware, and very closely associated linguistically to the Sauk-Fox and Illinois people, an Algonquian speaking people. The Erie, are of Hokan-Siouan linguistic family of the Iroquoian branch. Therefore it would seem more traditional and more right for Abdul, to have received an Erie name and not a Shawnee name. The Shawnee have also informed us that they also want nothing to do with this " Tecumseh Brown Eagle" as he has deceived them, lied to them, and was not able to provide proof to them of his lineage. They don't even want to mention his name,  as he is someone to them who doesn't even exist.
Therefore the Shawnee did not bestow the name of one their chiefs upon him!! No community recognition from the Shawnee!!
 
Secondly in review of his genealogy that he has circulated widely throughout, New York, Pennsylvania, Ontario and who knows where else, it has been verified that it isn't even his genealogy. In addition to this, the James Oliver Johnson 111, that he claims to be, and is not, on the father's , father's side is where this connection to a chief comes from and a Cherokee at that. Under our Great Law of the Six Nations Confederacy, our clans and nations are only determined through our mother's nation and clan, which would also be matrilineal all the way back. Since the Erie are also Iroquoian, the same law applies to them of determining clan and nation. We also have more than one chief as each clan and moiety of each clan has their chief. For example, my people,  the Mohawk, have 3 clans, Turtle, Bear, and Wolf, with 9 chiefs, 3 for each clan. The Erie were known and documented to have 30 representatives ( equivalent to chiefs) ."In an attempt to avoid open warfare, both sides agreed to a peace conference. However, in the course of a heated argument, one of the Erie warriors killed an Onondaga. The enraged Iroquois killed all 30 of the Erie representatives, and after this peace was impossible."
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:lSh1pDggOuAJ:www.dickshovel.com/erie.html+one+of+the+Erie+warriors+killed+an+Onondaga&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca
 
That being said, how can one so-called Erie Chief, "Tecumseh Brown Eagle", who improperly carries a Shawnee name, be the one and only chief of the Erie Indian Moundbuilders Tribal Nation, when in the past true history of the Erie Nation, there was more than one clan, and more than one chief?  The answer to this, is by referring to the including reference, all of their chiefs, were killed at the meeting with the Onondaga and Seneca. Under our law, their chiefs titles would have died with them, since they also did not raise up any other chiefs to take the place of the ones who had been killed.
 
Thirdly, it has been verified that the EIMTN membership is made of people that they take in that are not Erie by lineal descent, most of them are not even a NAI. If they are, they are from other nations, who are not recognized as being an NAI by their own people. So what does this say about this community, who identifies itself as an NAI community by it's name "Erie Indian Moundbuilders Tribal Nation"? That they falsely identified themselves as NAI when they are not or the vast majority of their members are not NAI.
 
Fourthly as far as community recognition goes, sure they may think they can self identify themselves as NAI, when our traditional laws under Great Law stipulates how we are known by our mother's nation and clan. So whose law do we as Six Nations Confederacy people acknowledge? It's not the newcomers!! It's our own! And our law does not recognize "Tecumseh Brown Eagle" as being an NAI. He himself made statements that he got his mother and fathers death certificates changed, because they both identified his parents as being Black. So what does that say about TBE? Is he a NAI as he claims and tries to lead many to believe, even the people around him? The answers to these questions are very clear!
 
Fifthly All of this being said, Abdul Abdulla Mohammed, is not really "Tecumseh Brown Eagle" as he has no right to carry that name. He is not Erie, because he is not proven it by lineage. He can not be an Erie Chief , because they were all killed in 1653. The remainder of the Erie survivors, were brought into the Six Nations Confederacy, and it also known that the Seneca-Cayuga of Oklahoma have Erie descendants.
The Erie have become part of our Six Nation Communities and now are identified through the nations and clans they were brought into. That's where the community recognition is at! Not from or within the "faux Eries" such as the "Erie Indian Moundbuilders Tribal Nation"

Lastly since, the " Erie Indian Moundbuilders Ttribal Nation" are not recognized by our government, the Six Nations Confederacy, on a Nation to Nation basis, because the Erie Nation Confederacy or Nation does not exist in our eyes and hasn't since 1656, and also since the EIMTN will not be recognized on a Nation to Nation basis with the US, Canada or UN, then it is "dead in the water"!! In order for them to go anywhere in reality they also have be able to work with all forms of government on a Nation to Nation basis. I do believe that's what certain intelligent people are trying to say in this thread.
 

Oneh
 
Niiki from Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory

[frederica]

That's a excellent post, why not add it to the TBE thread, any reason?

[Niiki]

I will


Niiki