FingerLakes1.com Forums
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#579957 --- 05/21/07 09:24 PM Another Land Claim Bites the Dust
Rich_Tallcot Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 01/19/03
Posts: 5565
Loc: Greeneville, TN
http://blog.syracuse.com/news/2007/05/judge_rejects_oneida_land_clai.html

From the Syracuse Post Standard

Judge rejects Oneidas' claim for land
Posted by Glenn Coin May 21, 2007 1:34PM
Categories: Breaking News, Cayuga County, Government, Madison County

A federal judge today rejected the Oneida Indian Nation's claim to land in Central New York, but said the Oneidas may deserve to be paid retroactively for the low prices the state paid more than 100 years ago.

U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Kahn said it would be too disruptive to give back to the Oneidas the land they say was taken illegally from them in the 18th and 19th centuries. But Kahn did side with the Oneidas in ruling that the state paid the Oneidas just a fraction of what the land was worth on the open market.

The Oneidas say they were underpaid by about $500,000. With inflation, they say, they are owed $500 million today. The decision will almost certainly be appealed. In his ruling, in fact, Kahn gave lawyers the go-ahead to appeal to the 2nd U.S. District Court of Appeals.

The land claim was filed in 1974. Three tribes of Oneidas claim that about 250,000 acres in Madison and Oneida counties was bought from them illegally.

Staff writer Glenn Coin will have a full report in Tuesday's Post-Standard.

---------------------------------------------
From UticaOD.com
JUDGE KAHN'S RULING
Posted: May 21. 2007 3:57PM

Judge: Oneidas can't obtain land through claim


U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence E. Kahn today barred the Oneida Indian Nation from regaining property through the Nation's 33-year-old land-claim lawsuit.

"Past injustices suffered by the Oneidas cannot be remedied by creating present and future injustices," Kahn wrote in his ruling.

But Kahn's ruling left open the possibility that the Oneidas could seek redress including monetary compensation approaching $500 million for injustices committed against it when the state bought most of the Oneidas' land more than 150 years ago.

Kahn ruled after New York state and Oneida and Madison counties sought dismissal of the Oneidasí land claim, first filed in federal court in 1974. They cited the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2005 that said Sherrill could tax Nation property, and also on a federal court ruling limiting the Cayuga Indian Nation's land claim.

Kahn acknowledged these two cases are important precedents now.

"The courts have held themselves open to Plaintiffs' land claims for generations, however, recent legal developments raise the possibility that this Court might be compelled to close its doors now," Kahn wrote. "The Court does not believe that the higher courts intended to or have barred Plaintiffs from receiving any relief; to do so would deny the Oneidas the right to seek redress for long-suffered wrongs."

But he also acknowledged that other federal district courts have ruled differently on land-claim issues, and he gave the parties 10 days to file an immediate appeal of his ruling.

While the Nation lost out on its right to obtain property through its land claim, it issued a statement focusing on other aspects of Kahn's ruling.

"The Oneida people are gratified by the federal court ruling today," the Nation's statement said. "Although one count was dismissed, the land claim is alive and well and has a value exceeding a half a billion dollars. The court has reaffirmed that the transactions that took the Oneida land were illegal."

In his ruling, Kahn notes that the state entered into an agreement with the Oneidas on Sept. 15, 1795, to purchase about 100,000 acres of land. The state paid about 50 cents per acre but obtained seven times that amount when it resold the land to white settlers," Kahn said.

"The Court finds that Plaintiffs have adequately met their burden and have raised material facts as to the inadequacy of the consideration paid to the Oneida Indian Nation and the State's knowledge with respect to those payments," Kahn wrote.

The ruling concluded, "As explained above, the Second Circuit's Cayuga decision holds that equity bars the Oneidas' attempts to vindicate their rights to the lands promised to them by the United States and the State because of the disruption that would be caused to Defendants' expectations and those innocent third parties who now reside related lands. However, the equities also mandate that the Court not pass judgment without noting that the Oneidas and their ancestors have been subjected to historic levels of disruption -- disruption that forms the heart of this action and merits this Court's consideration."

Visit uticaOD.com later for more detail and reaction to this historic ruling.

Top
FingerLakes1.com
#580003 --- 05/21/07 11:33 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Rich_Tallcot]
reilley Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 01/17/05
Posts: 11744
Loc: between here and there
but they are gonna get money ....i would rather have money ..you can buy the land
_________________________
remember the smile



Top
#580007 --- 05/22/07 12:05 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: reilley]
Rich_Tallcot Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 01/19/03
Posts: 5565
Loc: Greeneville, TN
Yes Reilley.

But there are catches

1 - lands they purchase will not be reservation

2 - they'll still owe taxes on them (however, untill Judge Hurd's ruling that a municipality can't enforce tax laws on a tribe because they can't sue them to foreclose is overturned, their tax bills pile up.

3 - the BIA will not even consider lands for trust applications unless the taxes are paid up.

4 - the case will be appealed to the 2nd circuit and IF the attorneys THERE weren't so dumb as to not include laches in their arguments, the monetary award (which is all the Cayuga claim had left at that point) could be thrown out as well.

and 5- the Oneida tribe makes over a million a day anyway. What they're claiming is only a year's income for them.

I question the merits argued and am not up on the Oneida claim arguments in court like I was the Cayuga claim. The Oneida, in 1788, and the Cayuga, in 1789, each sold their lands to NYS and section 3 of each treaty both stated "of the ceded lands" in reference to the state reservations created. This acknowledges that the lands in debate were sold pre 1790 and all the tribe had was a use right to the state lands. But the Judge refers to the 1795 use right sale as a land sale. I don't know if they included their Treaty of Ft. Schyyler or not in the arguments.

Top
#580008 --- 05/22/07 12:08 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Rich_Tallcot]
Rich_Tallcot Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 01/19/03
Posts: 5565
Loc: Greeneville, TN
One more thing - if you recall the 60 Minutes coverage of their claim - the tribe wanted Twenty Two Billion Dollars PLUS the 225,000 acres of land.

Top
#1001363 --- 03/30/09 12:35 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Rich_Tallcot]
bluezone Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 12/19/04
Posts: 32556
Loc: USA
Originally Posted By: Rich_Tallcot
3 - the BIA will not even consider lands for trust applications unless the taxes are paid up.


The Oneida, in 1788, and the Cayuga, in 1789, each sold their lands to NYS and section 3 of each treaty both stated "of the ceded lands" in reference to the state reservations created. This acknowledges that the lands in debate were sold pre 1790 and all the tribe had was a use right to the state lands.



You think the tribe knows this?
_________________________
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."

Top
#1001619 --- 03/31/09 04:23 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Rich_Tallcot]
justaxme Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/31/05
Posts: 2351
Loc: On top?
"...said the Oneidas may deserve to be paid retroactively for the low prices the state paid more than 100 years ago."

I hope the French don't hear this, we only paid them about 3 cents an acre for the Louisiana purchase!!

And while we're on the subject, I got a good deal on a house I bought, do I have to worry about being sued for more money because the seller thinks he got screwed? WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
_________________________
I'm Justaxme, and I approved this message.

Top
#1001716 --- 03/31/09 06:53 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: justaxme]
bluezone Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 12/19/04
Posts: 32556
Loc: USA
The tribes claims are laughable.
How about we ask to have all the money paid out to the tribes for the past 200 years that had nothing to do with a treaty provision?
_________________________
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."

Top
#1001717 --- 03/31/09 06:55 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: reilley]
bluezone Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 12/19/04
Posts: 32556
Loc: USA
Originally Posted By: reilley
but they are gonna get money ....i would rather have money ..you can buy the land


They have been paid 8 times over and over and over and over and over....
But I doubt you comprehend this basic logic.
_________________________
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."

Top
#1014994 --- 04/26/09 11:27 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: bluezone]
helenkk Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 04/26/09
Posts: 1
Loc: washington,USA

Hi,

The above thought is smart and doesnít require any further addition. Itís perfect thought from my side.

Helen



Edited by FL1 Mod 2 (04/27/09 07:59 AM)

Top
#1015587 --- 04/27/09 11:33 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: helenkk]
queenbee Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 01/22/08
Posts: 1758
Loc: soul quest
Finally some good news.
_________________________
IF I DON'T MIND, IT DON'T MATTER!!

Top
#1015609 --- 04/28/09 04:29 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: queenbee]
justaxme Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/31/05
Posts: 2351
Loc: On top?
Wasn't there supposed to be some court decision to come down on friday the 24th? I can't keep track of all the lawsuits. Anyone?
_________________________
I'm Justaxme, and I approved this message.

Top
#1015639 --- 04/28/09 05:26 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: justaxme]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Wasn't there supposed to be some court decision to come down on friday the 24th? I can't keep track of all the lawsuits. Anyone?


The 24th was potentially decision day but alas, no decision. The next possible decision date is May 1.

Top
#1015701 --- 04/28/09 07:05 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
justaxme Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/31/05
Posts: 2351
Loc: On top?
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Wasn't there supposed to be some court decision to come down on friday the 24th? I can't keep track of all the lawsuits. Anyone?


The 24th was potentially decision day but alas, no decision. The next possible decision date is May 1.


Thanks. And what are we deciding this time?
_________________________
I'm Justaxme, and I approved this message.

Top
#1016131 --- 04/29/09 04:51 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: justaxme]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Wasn't there supposed to be some court decision to come down on friday the 24th? I can't keep track of all the lawsuits. Anyone?


The 24th was potentially decision day but alas, no decision. The next possible decision date is May 1.


Thanks. And what are we deciding this time?


All the issues associated with the County raids of 11/25 on the stores. The issue of whether or not the Nation can resume selling cigarettes, whether ot not the counties will be able to prosecute and the disposition of the cigarettes and computers taken during the raid. The NYS Appellate Court - Fourth Dept is deciding an appeal of Justice Fisher's earlier decision which said that the Nation can not sell cigarettes, the counties can prosecute and the counties can continue to keep the computers and cigarettes as evidence.

Top
#1016182 --- 04/29/09 05:29 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
Ranger Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 10/23/00
Posts: 25141
Loc: GOD's 1/2 acre
I would hope the decision is pretty obvious, seeing as how Lakeside is not on Reservation land, but obvious never really seems to apply in my estimation.
_________________________
TRUTH HAS NO AGENDA

Top
#1016266 --- 04/29/09 08:30 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
justaxme Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/31/05
Posts: 2351
Loc: On top?
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Wasn't there supposed to be some court decision to come down on friday the 24th? I can't keep track of all the lawsuits. Anyone?


The 24th was potentially decision day but alas, no decision. The next possible decision date is May 1.


Thanks. And what are we deciding this time?


All the issues associated with the County raids of 11/25 on the stores. The issue of whether or not the Nation can resume selling cigarettes, whether ot not the counties will be able to prosecute and the disposition of the cigarettes and computers taken during the raid. The NYS Appellate Court - Fourth Dept is deciding an appeal of Justice Fisher's earlier decision which said that the Nation can not sell cigarettes, the counties can prosecute and the counties can continue to keep the computers and cigarettes as evidence.


Thanks. I had some crazy idea that this would all end someday. Doesn't look like it in my lifetime.
_________________________
I'm Justaxme, and I approved this message.

Top
#1016386 --- 04/29/09 11:25 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: justaxme]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
Originally Posted By: justaxme
Wasn't there supposed to be some court decision to come down on friday the 24th? I can't keep track of all the lawsuits. Anyone?


The 24th was potentially decision day but alas, no decision. The next possible decision date is May 1.


Thanks. And what are we deciding this time?


All the issues associated with the County raids of 11/25 on the stores. The issue of whether or not the Nation can resume selling cigarettes, whether ot not the counties will be able to prosecute and the disposition of the cigarettes and computers taken during the raid. The NYS Appellate Court - Fourth Dept is deciding an appeal of Justice Fisher's earlier decision which said that the Nation can not sell cigarettes, the counties can prosecute and the counties can continue to keep the computers and cigarettes as evidence.


Thanks. I had some crazy idea that this would all end someday. Doesn't look like it in my lifetime.


I'm with you justaxme.

Top
#1016456 --- 04/29/09 12:22 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Rich_Tallcot]
Santa_Cruzer Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 04/22/09
Posts: 2225
Loc: Westside
Suface the Cayuga Nation!

What a great day that will be.
_________________________

LONG LIVE AARON COMETBUS!
http://www.freakradio.org
http://www.canorml.org

Top
#1016465 --- 04/29/09 12:38 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: justaxme]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
Told you the horse wasn't dead yet. The Cayugas keep reviving him and hauling him into court. They don't seem to understand the SCOTUS ruling. It doesn't matter whether the sale is on a reservation or not. Sales to non-Natives are taxable period.

Cayuga Nation = 150 Native Americans. Look at the damage they have done to NYS and Cayuga and Seneca Counties by court actions and defying court rulings.
_________________________



Top
#1016809 --- 04/30/09 04:34 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
justaxme Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/31/05
Posts: 2351
Loc: On top?
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
Told you the horse wasn't dead yet. The Cayugas keep reviving him and hauling him into court. They don't seem to understand the SCOTUS ruling. It doesn't matter whether the sale is on a reservation or not. Sales to non-Natives are taxable period.

Cayuga Nation = 150 Native Americans. Look at the damage they have done to NYS and Cayuga and Seneca Counties by court actions and defying court rulings.


I don't doubt that the counties and state will eventually win, it's just the frivilous lawsuit mentality of the tribes and the weakness of the state and feds that's draining. If our professional lifetime politicians had any balls, they would end this.
_________________________
I'm Justaxme, and I approved this message.

Top
#1016813 --- 04/30/09 04:40 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: justaxme]
Ranger Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 10/23/00
Posts: 25141
Loc: GOD's 1/2 acre
you gotta remember where the politicians get their backing from, and you'll be better able to understand why this has gone on for so long.
_________________________
TRUTH HAS NO AGENDA

Top
#1017028 --- 04/30/09 11:30 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: justaxme]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
Sorry to have to say that the out come will depend on the integrity of the ones with the power to make the final decisions. The Indians, from the ill gotten gains of their illegal business practices, have deep pockets. It will depend on who has accepted campaign funds, etc. from them. Unfortunately, some favor monetary contributions over voters when it comes right down to it.

Strictly speaking, no question, legally it should be decided in favor of the State and Counties.
_________________________



Top
#1017237 --- 04/30/09 07:07 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
Sorry to have to say that the out come will depend on the integrity of the ones with the power to make the final decisions. The Indians, from the ill gotten gains of their illegal business practices, have deep pockets. It will depend on who has accepted campaign funds, etc. from them. Unfortunately, some favor monetary contributions over voters when it comes right down to it.

Strictly speaking, no question, legally it should be decided in favor of the State and Counties.


Silver Fox-

Strictly speaking, please provide your legal credentials, as I will then be able to compare them to the Appellate Court Judges and decide if I am better off listening to your opinion or theirs!

I am starting to smell a - if you win, the judges will be high integrity individuals who have received no campaign contributions from Indians and if they win, the judges have no integrity and have been bought off by Indians scenario.

I would think your obvious level of commitment and fervor for this issue would mean that you had researched any "relevant" campaign contributions to this matter before you inferred such. I would appreciate it if you would share the results of that research.

Top
#1017324 --- 04/30/09 10:33 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
Hot Burrito Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 04/17/00
Posts: 767
Loc: Tiajuna Flats
If the court rules against the Cayugas will you/they respect their decision and stop selling cigarettes for good?

Top
#1017328 --- 04/30/09 10:54 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
You came on the forums wanting to deal in facts and yet clearly you have done no research. Your expertise is strictly second hand hear say and have made you look uninformed on a lot of factual issues. The only facts you are interested in and present here on the forums are the twisted historical facts of your employer that are not even close to the truth. The SCOTUS rulings should have been final. There never should have been any decisions to be made by the appellate court. If these courts decisions go in favor of the Cayugas I would definitely smell a very large rat. The only way they can win is by twisting the facts and baffling the judges with BS.

I have better things to do and I will not waste time researching anything else for you. You can do your own research and prove me wrong. As CFO you know full well, or should know, how much monies have been contributed and to whom. You also know how greed and money influence things.
_________________________



Top
#1017389 --- 05/01/09 04:37 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Hot Burrito]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: Hot Burrito
If the court rules against the Cayugas will you/they respect their decision and stop selling cigarettes for good?


Sorry don't know the answer - if the decision is in favor of the counties the Cayugas will have to see if they are able to take the matter to the Court of Appeals and then decide if they choose to do so. Same will apply to the counties if the decision is in favor of the Cayugas.

Top
#1017392 --- 05/01/09 04:42 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
You came on the forums wanting to deal in facts and yet clearly you have done no research. Your expertise is strictly second hand hear say and have made you look uninformed on a lot of factual issues. The only facts you are interested in and present here on the forums are the twisted historical facts of your employer that are not even close to the truth. The SCOTUS rulings should have been final. There never should have been any decisions to be made by the appellate court. If these courts decisions go in favor of the Cayugas I would definitely smell a very large rat. The only way they can win is by twisting the facts and baffling the judges with BS.

I have better things to do and I will not waste time researching anything else for you. You can do your own research and prove me wrong. As CFO you know full well, or should know, how much monies have been contributed and to whom. You also know how greed and money influence things.


You miss my point. I did not ask you to do any research on my behalf. As you correctly point out, I already know whether or not the Cayugas have made political contributions.

My point is - you infer that YOU know that information. I don't think you do, yet you have no problem implying otherwise. Unless you show me otherwise, I'll have to assume you are full of second hand hearsay!

By the way, I am COO, not CFO.

Top
#1017540 --- 05/01/09 09:56 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
Let's put it this way, I have spent hours doing research and that is a lot more than you have done. I know what I know based on research and facts and your opinion means very little to me. Most, if not all, of your facts are originated from your employer and are spun with misrepresentations of the truth and amount to nothing more than your/their opinion. You came on here asking for facts and haven't been happy when the facts and truth are presented to you. I fully understand your reluctance to "bite the hand that feeds you". Hopefully, the courts will have the integrity to uphold the decisions that have already been made by SCOTUS. Hopefully our governor and politicians at the state and federal level will have the integrity to follow the lead of SCOTUS and put an end to this nonsense once and for all. Hopefully the Cayugas will become law abiding citizens and good neighbors. Good neighbors in every sense like they have always claimed they want to be.

I am sure the Cayugas will do every thing in their power to keep things in court hoping to get the answers they want. Eventually that tactic may be their downfall. The courts may see it as the little boy that cried wolf one too many times and put an end to their defiance of previous court orders.
_________________________



Top
#1017574 --- 05/01/09 11:10 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Rich_Tallcot]
Santa_Cruzer Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 04/22/09
Posts: 2225
Loc: Westside
Cayugas NEVER surrendered their soverign nation status.
_________________________

LONG LIVE AARON COMETBUS!
http://www.freakradio.org
http://www.canorml.org

Top
#1017578 --- 05/01/09 11:43 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
Let's put it this way, I have spent hours doing research and that is a lot more than you have done. I know what I know based on research and facts and your opinion means very little to me. Most, if not all, of your facts are originated from your employer and are spun with misrepresentations of the truth and amount to nothing more than your/their opinion. You came on here asking for facts and haven't been happy when the facts and truth are presented to you. I fully understand your reluctance to "bite the hand that feeds you". Hopefully, the courts will have the integrity to uphold the decisions that have already been made by SCOTUS. Hopefully our governor and politicians at the state and federal level will have the integrity to follow the lead of SCOTUS and put an end to this nonsense once and for all. Hopefully the Cayugas will become law abiding citizens and good neighbors. Good neighbors in every sense like they have always claimed they want to be.

I am sure the Cayugas will do every thing in their power to keep things in court hoping to get the answers they want. Eventually that tactic may be their downfall. The courts may see it as the little boy that cried wolf one too many times and put an end to their defiance of previous court orders.


Silver Fox -

Please be clear. I do not have a problem with the fact that your opinion differs from mine on Cayuga Nation issues. I am fine with that! I'm sure we probably have differing opinions on lots of subjects and probably the same opinions on others. I, IN NO WAY, feel the need to change your opinion to agree with mine, on this issue or any other.

My point here is a simple one, but one I find very aggravating, which is the sole reason for my joining these posts. I did not come on to LEARN facts. I came to SHARE facts. The actual post that spurred me on was one that was in regards to Pullens Truck Center. The poster said "we have reason to believe" that Pullens does not pay sales tax. Now there is absolutely NOTHING that would lead someone to believe that Pullens doesn't pay sales tax and I would hope someone would verify such an accusation before making it in a public forum. But......I too often find on these posts that the verification step is not found necessary by the posters.

Your posts indicate that you are intelligent, articulate and possess a great deal of information regarding this subject. Those traits are not consistent with a person who would write the first sentence of your post. You have no idea how much research I have done. To assume I have done none and you have done lots is arrogant and presumptuous. Those traits are the very ones I find so annoying.

In summary, my issue is not with your opinions, it is with your assumptions.

Top
#1017592 --- 05/01/09 12:14 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
Your research must be fairly recent. By your own admission, when you first came on the forums you had done little or no research. If that has changed I am happy to hear and hope you will continue to look for your own truth.

However, a lot of your posts that you consider facts are merely misinterpretation of the historical documents that are exactly the same misinterpretations of your employer. Therefore, I would consider them opinions or even assumptions based on what your employer has told you. Yet you knock others for opinions and assumptions.

Hell will freeze over before I will see your facts as truth because they do not hold up against the SCOTUS decisions and treaty documents I have read.

In summary, my problem with you is claiming to know facts and yet you continue presenting the same misrepresentations that the Cayugas have presented for years. The same misrepresentations that have failed in the courts for years and will hopefully continue to fail. There are many facts that I have presented and documented where I found the information so others can verify it for themselves. If you consider that opinions so be it. Obviously you have your opinions and I have mine and neither of us will ever change the others opinion. One thing you can take to the bank,if I see you presenting a "fact" that goes against the facts in historical documents, i.e. Article 2 of the Treaty of Canandaigua, I will make every effort to correct it and document my findings.
_________________________



Top
#1017600 --- 05/01/09 12:33 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
Your research must be fairly recent. By your own admission, when you first came on the forums you had done little or no research. If that has changed I am happy to hear and hope you will continue to look for your own truth.

However, a lot of your posts that you consider facts are merely misinterpretation of the historical documents that are exactly the same misinterpretations of your employer. Therefore, I would consider them opinions or even assumptions based on what your employer has told you. Yet you knock others for opinions and assumptions.

Hell will freeze over before I will see your facts as truth because they do not hold up against the SCOTUS decisions and treaty documents I have read.

In summary, my problem with you is claiming to know facts and yet you continue presenting the same misrepresentations that the Cayugas have presented for years. The same misrepresentations that have failed in the courts for years and will hopefully continue to fail. There are many facts that I have presented and documented where I found the information so others can verify it for themselves. If you consider that opinions so be it. Obviously you have your opinions and I have mine and neither of us will ever change the others opinion. One thing you can take to the bank,if I see you presenting a "fact" that goes against the facts in historical documents, i.e. Article 2 of the Treaty of Canandaigua, I will make every effort to correct it and document my findings.



First - I never made a post saying I had done no research. If I did, in some strange moment of insanity please show me where I can find the post!
Second - any posts where I mention court cases or treaties are in response to a question posed to me. I AM NOT IN THE OPINION CHANGING BUSINESS. I have answered questions people asked me, probably cause I believe strongly in politeness, but my goal in doing so was never to convince anyone of anything.

I am very comfortable with my truth as you quite obviously are with yours.

I too will stay vigilant about correcting posts - any that misstate facts about the Nation or make assumptions without having the facts.

Top
#1018014 --- 05/02/09 10:14 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
That should keep us busy watching each other. ;\)
_________________________



Top
#1018632 --- 05/04/09 08:11 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
That should keep us busy watching each other. ;\)


Facts, Assumptions, Opinions and how we differentiate between them! Makes for an interesting world. I look forward to continuing to read your posts! \:\)

Top
#1018670 --- 05/04/09 10:01 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
Good morning!
_________________________



Top
#1018784 --- 05/04/09 01:00 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
Good morning!


By now it's afternoon. Good afternoon to you!

Top
#1023597 --- 05/13/09 05:48 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
Originally Posted By: SilverFox
Sorry to have to say that the out come will depend on the integrity of the ones with the power to make the final decisions. The Indians, from the ill gotten gains of their illegal business practices, have deep pockets. It will depend on who has accepted campaign funds, etc. from them. Unfortunately, some favor monetary contributions over voters when it comes right down to it.

Strictly speaking, no question, legally it should be decided in favor of the State and Counties.


Silver Fox-

Strictly speaking, please provide your legal credentials, as I will then be able to compare them to the Appellate Court Judges and decide if I am better off listening to your opinion or theirs!

I am starting to smell a - if you win, the judges will be high integrity individuals who have received no campaign contributions from Indians and if they win, the judges have no integrity and have been bought off by Indians scenario.

I would think your obvious level of commitment and fervor for this issue would mean that you had researched any "relevant" campaign contributions to this matter before you inferred such. I would appreciate it if you would share the results of that research.


I accidentally ran across this website today. I think it backs up my statement on political contributions and their effect on issues.

http://www.accessmontana.com/morris/page20.html
_________________________



Top
#1023829 --- 05/14/09 05:14 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
I agree that political contributions impact decisions made by politicians. And I think it is a problem, at pretty much every level of government.
I find the website you linked pretty confusing, but don't find any contributions made by the Cayugas. Contributions made by Indian Gaming I see. The Cayugas do not currently have Indian Gaming. Nationally, I understand that, like lots of other industries, political contributions are made by Indian owned businesses.
To assume that because many Indian Nations make political contributions the Cayugas must is not a reasonable assumption.
I believe our conversation was about the Cayugas only - not Indians in general.

Top
#1024011 --- 05/14/09 10:17 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
Driver8 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/19/00
Posts: 1081
Loc: Seneca Falls
Quote:
I find the website you linked pretty confusing, but don't find any contributions made by the Cayugas.


I seem to recall that Indian tribes are exempt from disclosure requirements. If so, there could thousands of bucks going into politicians' pockets from the Cayugas and that website wouldn't show a dime, right?

Top
#1024112 --- 05/14/09 01:51 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Driver8]
BJ Radford Offline
Member

Registered: 03/30/09
Posts: 314
Loc: Geneva
I think that the onus is on the politicians to do the reporting of the donations they receive. Donators (is that a word?) have no reporting responsibility so whether or not the Cayugas report is a moot point.

Top
#1024163 --- 05/14/09 03:44 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
Driver8 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/19/00
Posts: 1081
Loc: Seneca Falls
Nice dodge there.

I didn't say who the onus should or shouldn't be on.

I was responding to your argument that the website didn't show any Cayuga donations. I said that the exemption meant that we really don't know how much money the Cayugas might be giving to state and federal political campaigns.

You didn't address that. Instead you tried to shift the discussion to whether or not politicians should report their donations.

By the way, is the Cayuga's lawyer (French) still a federal lobbyist on the side? Are you going to tell me that he isn't lobbying the feds for your tribe?

Top
#1024189 --- 05/14/09 04:58 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: Driver8]
all seeing eye Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/05/07
Posts: 2351
Loc: Seneca Lake
The obligation to report donations is on the CANDIDATE, not the donors:

Here are the links to campaign disclosure reports:

http://www.elections.state.ny.us/DisclosureReports.html

http://www.fec.gov/disclosure.shtml
_________________________
"I never gave anyone hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell."

Harry S. Truman

Top
#1024991 --- 05/16/09 08:41 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: BJ Radford]
bluezone Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 12/19/04
Posts: 32556
Loc: USA
Originally Posted By: BJ Radford
You have no idea how much research I have done.


Research why the tribe must get trust land and then you will understand that the reservation that they speak no longer exists.
_________________________
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."

Top
#1025127 --- 05/16/09 01:02 PM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: bluezone]
SilverFox Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/19/00
Posts: 6485
Loc: Waterloo

Quote:
Research why the tribe must get trust land and then you will understand that the reservation that they speak no longer exists.


And it did not have to be disestablished by Congress because it was never a Federal Reservation. It was a state reservation that was mentioned in the Treaty of Canandaigua as a state reservation already in existance at the time of the treaty. The Federal government did state they would not interfere with this state reservation and was theirs until they chose to sell it. Which they did 200+ years ago to NYS. This acknowledgement did not make the state reservation a Federal Reservation. None of the 10 recognized tribes ever had a Federal Reservation. NYS being one of the original 13 colonies is also Sovereign and had the power to deal directly with the tribes at the time the land was sold back to them.


Edited by SilverFox (05/16/09 01:04 PM)
_________________________



Top
#1025419 --- 05/17/09 03:21 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: bluezone]
bluezone Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 12/19/04
Posts: 32556
Loc: USA
Originally Posted By: Rich_Tallcot
Originally Posted By: Rich_Tallcot
BJ: "but you know that poem - they came for a guy and I did nothing, then they came for the next guy and I did nothing.....you know how it ends."

THANK YOU. YES, WE KNOW. THAT'S WHY WE TAKE THE POSITION WE DO.

BJ: "Apparently it is a fact that it will not happen based on the Narragansett decision."

"APPARENTLY" SURE SOUNDS LIKE AN OPINION. IT IS A FACT THEY WERE NOT ON THE FEDERAL RECOGNITION LIST IN 1934. THEY CAN ARGUE THEY WERE A TREATY TRIBE, BUT SCOTUS HAS NOT RULED ON THAT AND THE MAJORITY DID NOT SIDE WITH THAT OPINION. IT IS A FACT THE RESERVATIONS IN NEW YOUR STATE ARE NOT FEDERAL. THE Narragansett decision CAN BE FOUND AT http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-526.pdf

BJ: "You forgot to mention create 70 jobs - the economic impacts of those jobs - payments to local vendors."

MOST JOBS WERE MERELY REPLACED WITH A NEW EMPLOYER DRIVING OUT OTHER JOBS - THE ECONOMIC IMPACT HAS RESULTED IN A $26 MILLION A YEAR LOSS IN TAX REVENUE - AND THE PAYMENTS TO THE LOCAL VENDORS WERE BEING MADE BY THE BUSINESSES THE CAYUGA REPLACED.

AS I RECALL THE LAST SETTLEMENT, IT WAS FOUNDED ON A CASINO IN THE CATSKILLS FROM WHICH ALL THE REVENUE WAS GOING TO COME TO PAY FOR THE LOST TAX REVENUE. AS BRIAN LAUDADIO FINALLY ADMITTED, IF THE CASINO DEAL FELL THROUGH WE WOULD STILL HAVE A TEN THOUSAND ACRE RESERVATION WITH NO INCOME OFFSET TO THE COUNTIES. THAT WAS THE DEAL THE COUNTIES VOTED NO ON. THE CASINO DEAL FELL THROUGH.

BJ: "Why hasn't such a black and white, factual issue been resolved long ago?"

THE LAND CLAIM WAS RESOLVED. THE COURT VOICED THEIR OPINION THAT THE CAYUGA TRIBE LOST THEIR LAND CLAIM IN 2005. THEIR OPINION MATTERS. THE TRUST PROCESS IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE AND ALWAYS EXPANDS SETTLEMENTS. WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH THIS ANYWAY. THE TRUST ISSUE IS FOUR YEARS OLD. THE TAX ISSUE BEING DEALT WITH BY THE COUNTIES IS ONLY FIVE MONTHS OLD. HOW LONG AGO IS LONG AGO?

NOTE FOR TRUMP: IT IS OUR OWN CONGRESSMEN AND SENATORS THAT SUPPORT THIS SYSTEM. THE TRIBES ARE MERELY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF IT. SCOTUS IS THE ONLY ENTITY THAT HAS NOT BEEN TAINTED WITH CASINO BACKERS AND CAMPAIGN DONATIONS.


_________________________
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."

Top
#1025931 --- 05/18/09 08:08 AM Re: Another Land Claim Bites the Dust [Re: SilverFox]
bluezone Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 12/19/04
Posts: 32556
Loc: USA
Originally Posted By: grinch
Originally Posted By: grinch
There was an article in the Finger Lakes Times concerning the release of the Impact statement if Trust status granted.

I tried the url published in the paper in order to reach the No Cayuga Land into trust and found it was not working properly.

Here is the correct url for that web site where you can express your views and opposition. I expect they will keep it up dated as matters unfold between now and July 4th. It is mentioned in the article that your comments are critical so take the time to click on the url, look for the area to comment and speak your mind. Do not worry about spelling or grammer.

Note the DEIS Impact study is now posted on that web site. It is a lengthy read, spend a little time and inform yourself of what is being proposed.

http://www.nocayugalandintotrust.net/

From the above web site:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How to Comment

You may mail, hand carry or telefax written comments on the DEIS to:
Franklin Keel, Regional Director
Eastern Regional Office
Bureau of Indian Affairs
545 Marriott Drive
Suite 700
Nashville, Tennesse 37214
Telefax: 615-564-6701

Please include your name, return address and the caption, "DEIS Comments, Cayuga Indian Nation of New York Trust Acquistion Project," on the first page of your written comments.

You may also comment to Seneca and Cayuga Counties via this website, and/or submit written comments to your county representative.

_________________________
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >