Author Topic: Central Band of Cherokee  (Read 70321 times)

Offline Don Naconna

  • Posts: 257
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #30 on: December 05, 2009, 05:08:43 pm »
OK thanks...

Offline GhostBear

  • Posts: 31
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #31 on: December 07, 2009, 11:59:40 pm »
I don't understand any of ten skey's posts either.....I live a little over an hour from Lawrenceburg, I've seen this group's "museum" on the town square but didn't go in.....read too much of their website to even want to go in and see what it was all about.  I also don't know about his/her attempt to connect Buford Pusser/Walking Tall to Lawrenceburg....not even close....McNairy county is over 80 miles to the west of this group on US64.  If anyone want me to actually check out their "museum/cultural center" let me know.

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 503

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 503
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #33 on: June 29, 2010, 02:22:52 am »
Chief Joe Sitting Owl White talks about Cherokee History on TV!

Joe Sitting Owl White “The Peace Chief” appears on TV to explain Cherokee History to viewers.  The name of the show is Tennessee Treasures.  He explains that his people are “The Old Settlers that went West” He also has a 1794 peace Medal from George Washington!  He’s also very proud that his people have 3 TREATYS with the Federal Government.  There are also 550 Tribes across America recognized by the Federal Government as Official Cherokee Tribes.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7GMRtddO6c

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lawrenceburg-TN/Central-Band-of-Cherokee/260565219193

They also have an upcoming appearance on the History Channel according to their Face Book Page.
Quote
Central Band of Cherokee In June, 2010, the Central Band of Cherokee will be featured on the History Channel! Keep your eyes open for us!
April 27 at 1:47pm • Comment • Like • View Feedback (9)Hide Feedback (9)
« Last Edit: June 29, 2010, 02:39:33 am by BlackWolf »

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 503
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #34 on: June 29, 2010, 02:28:28 am »
He also explains why Pocahontas looks like a little Jewish Girl, and how the Cherokees are really Jews.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/oopa-loopa-cafe/2009/11/27/joe-sitting-owl-white-and-the-jubilee-stone

WAY TO GO TENNESSEE COMMISION ON INDIAN AFFAIRS!
« Last Edit: June 29, 2010, 02:48:19 am by BlackWolf »

Offline ten-skey

  • Posts: 31
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #35 on: July 05, 2010, 01:42:43 pm »
ALL of this BREAKS the POWER AND AUTHORTY of N.C,AND OKLAHIOMA  Ten-skey

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 503
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #36 on: July 29, 2010, 07:03:16 pm »
I see that they had their website redone to make themselves appear more authentic.
http://www.cherokeeoflawrencecountytn.org/

Quote
Tribal membership in the Central Band of Cherokee is opening to any lineal descendent of the Cherokee inhabitants of the 1806 Congressional Reservation.

These people are full of baloney.  There was a Treaty made with the Cherokee in 1806 by the Federal Government.  
http://digital.library.okstate.edu/kappler/vol2/treaties/che0090.htm

One of many Treaties that was broken, when another one was made.  This was made with the Cherokee Nation, not with individuals.  After land sessions were made one after the other, eventually almost all Cherokees moved out of the ceded territory.   Cherokees were and still are very ethnocentric people.  Those that didn't want to move would have been forced out.


Quote
While many of our ancestors were not removed West to Oklahoma during the “Trail of Tears,” a number of Cherokee escaped and were given sanctuary by other Cherokee who resided on the 1806 Congressional Reservation lands.

No one escaped.  The Cherokees were for the most part in charge of their own removal.  There were maybe handfuls that didn’t remove.  They wouldn’t have been given sanctuary by Cherokees though, because virtually all Cherokees were rounded up and removed.  No Cherokees escaped.  The Eastern Band Cherokee’s ancestors are the only Cherokees that stayed on as a cohesive people.  There was a census just before the Trail of Tears.  If someone really does have Cherokee ancestry in Tennessee, then they should at least trace to one of the Rolls or census there. Judging by looking at these groups and their enrollment procedures and fabricated history, I’d say the overwhelming majority of these people are basing their Cherokee heritage on Oral History passed on through their family.  

A number of Cherokee were also able to make their way back immediately after the removals and there are some documented cases of this.  There were extensive Census and Rolls taken even of the ones that stayed behind on the Chapman and Siler Rolls.  
Most reputable genealogist these days will tell you that in most instances these oral stories of Cherokee ancestry were made up stories for a variety of reasons.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 08:14:42 pm by BlackWolf »

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 503
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #37 on: July 29, 2010, 07:07:44 pm »
Quote
Unlike many other tribes, we also use DNA evidence to support applications at the same standard accepted in Federal Court.
This link explains the issue of DNA testing here.
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1375.0

Quote
While DNA by itself cannot establish that an ancestor was resident on the 1806 Congressional Reservation, a DNA match with another legally established Central Band of Cherokee tribal member could corroborate other documentation provided.

This doesn’t hold much weight.  If one alleged Tribal member is basing his enrollment on oral history or a family bible that says he’s Cherokee, then this would be meaningless in establishing Cherokee heritage for someone else that can connect themselves to them.  

Winfield Scott began rounding up the Cherokee and there were eight forts in Tennessee constructed for this.  Ten internment camps were later constructed in Tennessee. By July of 1838, aside from the Oconaluftee citizen Indians, or the fugitive hiding in the mountains who would later be the ancestors of EB members, virtually all Cherokee were rounded up.  The scattered families that stayed behind would have been listed on the Chapman or Silers roll or another census.  If there really were cases of Cherokees who weren’t documented, nor had parents or grandparents that were documented, then they were extremely rare cases and would not by any stretch of the imagination account for the hordes of people in Tennessee who claim Cherokee heritage.
The majority of the Cherokees that avoided removal later joined up with the Eastern Band.  Actually many Eastern Band members today are descended from these people and can document it.  There is a myth that the Eastern Band is only composed of those who stayed in the NC area after removal when in fact after removal, they were joined up by Cherokee families from other areas such as Tennessee.  For the few that did avoid removal (who would have descendents that can prove it), they were in all likelihood scattered across a large geographical area.  These Cherokees after removal would not have had any significant contact with the other handfuls that avoided removal to form any cohesive group.  The only exception would be for the ones that jointed up with the Cherokees that would later be called the Eastern Band.  I know of some isolated cases of people who actually can trace to some of the other rolls and census of Cherokees that were still in the East.  I wouldn’t have a problem with these people forming a heritage group as Cherokee descendents, and I don’t have a problem with these people celebrating their heritage. But all the evidence shows that these are not the people we are talking about.
   
The problem is that the hordes of people in Tennessee who claim Cherokee heritage don’t have a drop of Cherokee blood in them, but on the contrary, are in fact the descendents of the MOBS OF WHITE INTRUDERS who invaded and colonized the Cherokee homeland in the South East. First the land and resources were taken, now these people’s very descendents are stealing one of the last things that theCherokee people have left, and that is Cherokee identity
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 08:21:01 pm by BlackWolf »

Offline ten-skey

  • Posts: 31
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #38 on: August 04, 2010, 02:12:48 pm »
REAL Cherokee and desendant of tennessee Cherokee HIDE from the WANNABEES , which are many - money in being indian !!!!  Ten-skey

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 503
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2010, 03:41:11 pm »
The Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Larry Echo hawk issues a proposed finding against acknowledgement of the Central Band of Cherokee, Lawrenceburg, Tennessee.  Some keys things stand out in the decision.  

http://www.victor-rocha.com/press_release/Echo%20Hawk%20Issues%20a%20Proposed%20Finding%2008132010.htm
http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS-IA/OFA/RecentCases/index.htm

"The evidence shows the petitioner is a voluntary association formed in 2000 of individuals who claim but have not documented Indian ancestry. There is no evidence that Petitioner #227 existed under any name prior to its emergence in 2000 as the “Cherokees of Lawrence County, TN, Sugar Creek Band of the Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy, Inc."

"The petitioner claims its members are descendants of Cherokee Indians who had not given up their rights to 1806 treaty lands in Tennessee, or are descendants of Indians living in Tennessee who evaded removal or escaped when the Cherokee were removed from North Carolina in the late 1830s. None of the evidence demonstrates the validity of either claim".

"The petitioner’s self-generated family histories and descent reports that attribute Cherokee ancestry to some of its ancestors are not supported by the evidence".

"OFA investigated CBC’s claims, located public records to verify members’ ancestors, and examined rolls of early eastern Cherokee Indians. The readily available public records clearly showed the petitioner’s members do not descend from any Cherokee group or any other Indian tribe. The evidence clearly shows the group’s ancestors were consistently identified as non-Indians, primarily “White” settlers coming to Tennessee in the early and mid-1800s from disparate locations. At no time were they identified as Indians or living in an Indian community".
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 04:16:15 pm by BlackWolf »

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 503
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #40 on: August 15, 2010, 03:42:31 pm »
http://www.victor-rocha.com/press_release/Echo%20Hawk%20Issues%20a%20Proposed%20Finding%2008132010.htm

"OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY-INDIAN AFFAIRS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Nedra Darling
202-219-4152

Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs Echo Hawk Issues a Proposed Finding against Acknowledgment of the Central Band of Cherokee, Lawrenceburg, Tennessee

Washington -- Assistant Secretary–Indian Affairs Larry Echo Hawk on August 6, 2010, issued a proposed finding not to acknowledge the petitioner known as the Central Band of Cherokee (CBC) (Petitioner #227) as an Indian tribe. The petitioner, located in Lawrenceburg, Tennessee, has approximately 407 members. The evidence shows the petitioner is a voluntary association formed in 2000 of individuals who claim but have not documented Indian ancestry. There is no evidence that Petitioner #227 existed under any name prior to its emergence in 2000 as the “Cherokees of Lawrence County, TN, Sugar Creek Band of the Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy, Inc.” Under the regulations, the Department may not acknowledge associations, organizations, corporations, or groups of any character formed in recent times.

The petitioner claims its members are descendants of Cherokee Indians who had not given up their rights to 1806 treaty lands in Tennessee, or are descendants of Indians living in Tennessee who evaded removal or escaped when the Cherokee were removed from North Carolina in the late 1830s. None of the evidence demonstrates the validity of either claim.

The Office of Federal Acknowledgment (OFA) evaluated the group’s petition under 83.10 e) of the acknowledgment regulations, which allows for issuing a proposed finding under criterion 83.7(e) only. To meet criterion 83.7(e), the petitioner must demonstrate descent from a historical Indian tribe or tribes that combined and functioned as a single entity. The petitioner’s self-generated family histories and descent reports that attribute Cherokee ancestry to some of its ancestors are not supported by the evidence. The recent decision of the Tennessee Commission on Indian Affairs to grant state recognition to the CBC does not provide evidence of Indian descent.

OFA investigated CBC’s claims, located public records to verify members’ ancestors, and examined rolls of early eastern Cherokee Indians. The readily available public records clearly showed the petitioner’s members do not descend from any Cherokee group or any other Indian tribe. The evidence clearly shows the group’s ancestors were consistently identified as non-Indians, primarily “White” settlers coming to Tennessee in the early and mid-1800s from disparate locations. At no time were they identified as Indians or living in an Indian community.

The petitioner clearly does not meet criterion 83.7(e), which satisfies the requirement for issuing a proposed finding under 83.10(e). If, in the response to the proposed finding, the petitioner provides sufficient evidence that it meets criterion 83.7(e) under the reasonable likelihood standard, then the Department will undertake a review of the petition under all seven mandatory criteria. If, in the response, the petitioner does not provide sufficient evidence that it meets criterion 83.7(e) under that standard, then the Assistant Secretary will issue a final determination based upon criterion 83.7(e) only.

The Department will publish notice of this proposed finding in the Federal Register. The regulations provide that the petitioner or any party will have 180 days after the publication of the notice to submit comments to rebut or support the proposed finding before the Department issues a final determination. After the comment period, the petitioner will have an additional 60 days to respond to the comments from third parties. Following the response period, the Department will begin work on a final determination.

The Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs has responsibility for fulfilling the Interior Department’s trust responsibilities and promoting self-determination on behalf of the 564 federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribal governments. The Assistant Secretary also oversees the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which is responsible for providing services to the tribes and their members, approximately 1.9 million individual American Indians and Alaska Natives, and OFA, which administers the Federal acknowledgment  process".

Offline ten-skey

  • Posts: 31
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #41 on: August 20, 2010, 03:08:49 pm »
This shows the rampant FRAUD that runns through tennessee AND why REAL tennessee cherokee keep such a low prefile ----ONE sin MONEY  Ten-skey

Offline tahcha_sapa

  • Posts: 31
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #42 on: October 10, 2010, 06:07:13 pm »
The group was featured on a Hisory Channel documentary "Who Really Discovered America?" on cable television on Sunday, 10 October 2010.
There may be a potential remedy to the problem of legitimate, enrolled members of federally-recognized tribes who need a process, and its enforcement, as a way of identifying and punishing fraudulent claims by non-indigenous people who promote themselves as legitimate members of federally recognized tribes.
The article below deals with the issue of frauds who claim to be legitimate members of the US armed forces who have earned the medals issued by the armed forces.  If the appeals succeed, it may be possible to find a way of using that particular law to create one to apply to those who fraudulently claim to be members of a federally recognized tribe. 

Law punishing fake heroes may go to Supreme Court

  By DAN ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Dan Elliott, Associated Press Writer   –

DENVER – The Justice Department is battling to save a federal law that makes it illegal to lie about being a war hero, appealing two court rulings that the statute is an unconstitutional muzzle on free speech.

The fight could be carried all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it would face an uncertain fate, legal analysts said.

"This is a Supreme Court that is friendly to parties asserting speech rights and skeptical about restrictions on those rights," said Kannon Shanmugam, a former Justice Department official.

Supporters of the law take the opposite view.

"It could wind up being the kind of landmark decision that the Supreme Court is going to have to give very serious and very broad consideration to, and I think they'll come down on our side," said Doug Sterner, a military historian.

The Stolen Valor Act makes it a crime punishable by up to a year in jail to falsely claim to have won a military medal, whether or not an impostor seeks financial gain.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco and a federal district court in Denver have both ruled the law is unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds.

Last week, government lawyers in California asked the full 9th Circuit to reconsider the ruling, calling it a decision of "exceptional importance." Prosecutors noted that the three-judge panel was split 2-1 with sharply differing views, and that the law is also under challenge in Colorado.

The 9th Circuit hasn't said whether it will take a second look.

In Colorado, prosecutors announced last week they would ask the 10th Circuit to overturn the district court decision. That appeal is expected to be filed in early November.

The Stolen Valor Act, which breezed through Congress in 2006, revised and toughened an existing statute that forbade anyone to wear a military medal that was not earned.

The California and Colorado cases were among the early prosecutions under the newly strengthened law.

Xavier Alvarez, a local water board official from Pomona, Calif., was indicted in 2007 after saying at a public forum that he was a retired Marine who received the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military decoration. Alvarez apparently never served in the military.

Alvarez pleaded guilty on condition that he be allowed to appeal on First Amendment grounds. The 9th Circuit ruled in his favor in August.

His attorney, Jonathan Libby, said Friday he believes both the full 9th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court would also find the law unconstitutional

Rick Glen Strandlof, who founded a veterans group in Colorado Springs, was arrested in 2009 after claiming he was an ex-Marine who was wounded in Iraq and had received the Purple Heart and Silver Star. The Marine Corps said it had no record that Strandlof ever served.

A Denver federal judge threw out the case against Strandlof in July.

Strandlof's attorney, Robert Pepin, said he is optimistic about winning at the appeals court or at the Supreme Court.

"It really ends up being a very interesting argument, with solid arguments on our side and strongly articulated arguments on their side," he said.

If government lawyers can't persuade the appeals courts to revive the law, they will likely ask the Supreme Court to hear the case, said Shanmugam, who served as the Justice Department's assistant solicitor general under President George W. Bush. The solicitor general is the government's top lawyer in arguments before the Supreme Court.

"When a federal court declares a federal statute unconstitutional, the solicitor general feels a strong obligation to defend the statute, where a reasonable argument can be made," Shanmugam said.

Shanmugam and others cited two 2010 Supreme Court rulings as indicators that the justices might overturn the Stolen Valor Act.

In one, the court overturned campaign spending limits on corporations and unions, and in the other it struck down a federal ban on videos that show graphic violence to animals. Both were viewed as free-speech cases.

Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University Law School, said the Stolen Valor Act answers no real legal need but was written for political reasons, so lawmakers could show they are on the side of real heroes by punishing impostors.

"There's already a considerable deterrent for people who are engaged in this kind of conduct," he said. "Many of these people are charged with fraud. If someone is only wearing medals without seeking any form of gain, it becomes highly questionable."

Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor, said the court traditionally requires the government to prove it has a compelling interest to restrict free speech, which could be difficult in this case.

"I don't think that anybody's going to stop being a brave soldier, or be a less brave soldier, or have less respect for a brave soldier, because some number of people lie about it," he said.

Sterner, the military historian, said he believes the law has a good chance of surviving, citing the divided vote by the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit.

"The fact that we had a 2-1 split bodes well at the 9th Circuit," said Sterner, whose wife, Pam, wrote a policy analysis in college that became the basis of the bill.

The bill's author in Congress, Colorado Democratic Rep. John Salazar, defended the law and said the rulings against it were misguided.

"You go out and you sacrifice and you earn these awards because of heroism. If somebody comes and tries to act like a hero, it kind of degrades what they did," he said. "It's defending their honor, as I see it."
« Last Edit: October 11, 2010, 12:56:04 pm by tahcha_sapa »

Offline ten-skey

  • Posts: 31
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #43 on: December 20, 2010, 08:26:41 pm »
as i related cherokee /jewish ties are deep and long lasting . the gov. has a manner of finding the truth , but allows the fraud to continue. as i relate ONE reason true tenn. cherokk continue to " hide out " .

Offline GhostBear

  • Posts: 31
Re: Central Band of Cherokee
« Reply #44 on: December 23, 2010, 03:00:39 am »
ten-skey.....the Lawrence county group is nothing but frauds.  I live about an hour away, have seen their claims and nothing matches the stories handed down by my grandmother and great grandmother.  The Cherokee are NOT Jewish.  This group had it's recognition pulled by the state of TN.....so they are now just a group of pretIndians.