Declaration of Continuing Independence

BY THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL INDIAN TREATY COUNCIL
AT STANDING ROCK INDIAN COUNTRY JUNE 1974

A long time ago my father told me what his father told him. There was once a Lakota Holy man
called Drinks Water, who visioned what was to be; and this was long before the coming of the
Wasicus. He visioned that the four-legged were going back into the earth and that a strange
race had woven a spider's web all around the Lakotas. And he said, “When this happens, you
shall live in barren lands, and there beside those gray houses you shall starve.” They say he
went back to Mother Earth soon after he saw this vision and it was sorrow that killed him.

Black Elk, Oglala Sioux Holy Man


PREAMBLE

The United States of America has continually violated the independent Native
Peoples of this continent by Executive action, Legislative fiat and Judicial decision. By
its actions, the U.S. has denied all Native people their International Treaty rights, Treaty
lands and basic human rights of freedom and sovereignty. This same U.S. Government,
which fought to throw off the yoke of oppression and gain its own independence, has
now reversed its role and become the oppressor of sovereign Native people.

Might does not make right. Sovereign people of varying cultures have the
absolute right to live in harmony with Mother Earth so long as they do not infringe upon
this same right of other peoples. The denial of this right to any sovereign people, such as
the Native American Indian Nations, must be challenged by truth and action. World
concern must focus on all colonial governments to the end that sovereign people
everywhere shall live as they choose; in peace with dignity and freedom.

The International Indian Treaty Conference hereby adopts this Declaration of
Continuing Independence of the Sovereign Native American Indian Nations. In the
course of these human events, we call upon the people of the world to support this
struggle for our sovereign rights and our treaty rights. We pledge our assistance to all
other sovereign people who seek their own independence.


DECLARATION

The First International Treaty Council of the Western Hemisphere was formed on
the land of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe on June 8-16, 1974. The delegates, meeting
under the guidance of the Great Spirit, represented 97 Indian tribes and Nations from
across North and South America.

We, the sovereign Native Peoples recognize that all lands belonging to the various
Native Nations now situated within the boundaries of the U.S. are clearly defined by the
sacred treaties solemnly entered into between the Native Nations and the government of
the United States of America.

We, the sovereign Native Peoples, charge the United States of gross violations of
our International Treaties. Two of the thousands of violations that can be cited are the
“wrongfully taking” of the Black Hills from the Great Sioux Nation in 1877, this sacred
land belonging to the Great Sioux Nation under the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868. The
second violation was the forced march of the Cherokee people from their ancestral lands
in the state of Georgia to the then “Indian Territory” of Oklahoma after the Supreme
Court of the United States ruled the Cherokee treaty rights inviolate. The treaty violation,
know as the “Trail of Tears,” brought death to two-thirds of the Cherokee Nation during
the forced march.

The Council further realizes that securing United States recognition of treaties
signed with Native Nations requires a committed and unified struggle, using every
available legal and political resource. Treaties between sovereign nations explicitly entail
agreements with represent “the supreme law of the land” binding each party to an
inviolate international relationship.

We acknowledge the historical fact that the struggle for Independence of the
Peoples of our sacred Mother Earth have always been over sovereignty of land. These
historical freedom efforts have always involved the highest human sacrifice.
We recognize that all Native Nations wish to avoid violence, but we also
recognize that the United States government has always used force and violence to deny
Native Nations basic human and treaty rights.

We adopt this Declaration of Continuing Independence, recognizing that struggle
lies ahead – a struggle certain to be won – and that the human and treaty rights of all
Native Nations will be honored. In this understanding the International Indian Treaty
Council declares:

The United State Government in its Constitution, Article VI, recognizes treaties
as part of the Supreme Law of the United States. We will peacefully pursue all legal and
political avenues to demand United States recognition of its own Constitution in this
regard, and thus to honor its own treaties with Native Nations.

We will seek the support of all world communities in the struggle for the
continuing independence of Native Nations.

We the representatives of sovereign Native Nations united in forming a council to
be known at the International Indian Treaty Council to implement these declarations.

The International Indian Treaty Council will establish offices in Washington,
D.C. and New York City to approach the international forces necessary to obtain the
recognition of our treaties. These offices will establish an initial system of
communications among Native nations to disseminate information, getting a general
consensus of concerning issues, developments and any legislative attempt affecting
Native Nations by the United States of America.

The International Indian Treaty Council recognizes the sovereignty of all Native
Nations and will stand in unity to support our Native and international brothers and
sisters in their respective and collective struggles concerning international treaties and
agreements violated by the United States and other governments.

All treaties between the Sovereign Native Nations and the United States
Government must be interpreted according to the traditional and spiritual ways of the
signatory Native Nations.

We declare our recognition of the Provisional Government of the Independent
Oglala Nation, established by the Traditional Chiefs and Headmen under the provisions
of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty with the Great Sioux Nation at Wounded Knee, March
11, 1973.

We condemn the United States of America for its gross violation of the 1868 Fort
Laramie Treaty in militarily surrounding, killing and starving the citizens of the
Independent Oglala Nation into exile.

We demand the United States of America recognize the sovereignty of the
Independent Oglala Nation and immediately stop all present and future criminal
prosecutions of sovereign Native Peoples. We call upon the conscionable nations of the
world to join us in charging and prosecuting the United States of America for its
genocidal practices against the sovereign Native Nations; most recently illustrated by
Wounded Knee 1973 and the continued refusal to sign the United Nations 1948 Treaty on
Genocide.

We reject all executive orders, legislative acts and judicial decisions of the United
States related to Native Nations since 1871, when the United States unilaterally
suspended treaty- making relations with the Native Nations. This includes, but is not
limited to, the Major Crimes Act, the General Allotment Act, the Citizenship Act of
1924, the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, the Indian Claims Commission Act, Public
Law 280 and the Termination Act. All treaties made between Native Nations and the
United States made prior toe 1871 shall be recognized without further need of
interpretation.

We hereby ally ourselves with the colonized Puerto Rican People in their struggle
for Independence from the same United States of America.

We recognize that there is only one color of Mankind in the world who are not
represented in the United Nations; that is the indigenous Redman of the Western
Hemisphere. We recognize this lack of representation in the United Nations comes from
the genocidal policies of the colonial power of the United States.

The International Indian Treaty Council established by this conference is directed
to make the application to the United Nations for recognition and membership of the
sovereign Native Nations. We pledge our support to any similar application by an
aboriginal people.

This conference directs the Treaty Council to open negotiations with the
government of the United States through its Department of State. We seek these
negotiations in order to establish diplomatic relations with the United States. When these
diplomatic relations have been established, the first order of business shall be to deal with
U.S. violations of treaties with Native Indian Nations, and violations of the rights of those
Native Indian Nations who have refused to sign treaties with the United States.

We, the People of the International Indian Treaty Council, following the guidance
of our elders through instructions from the Great Spirit, and out of respect for our sacred
Mother Earth, all her children, and those yet unborn, offer our lives for our International
Treaty Rights.

~ download here [PDF document] ~

In gonzo journalism "You can’t be objective about Nixon"

In a way, Simon has brought to television a movement Tom Wolfe invented forty years ago in literature: New Journalism. New Journalism practitioners such as Wolfe, Norman Mailer and Hunter S. Thompson blurred the line between literature and journalism, combining the writing techniques of the former with the investigative reporting of the latter to offer what was, in their view, a more accurate picture of the events they were covering. Looking at “The Wire,” it's easy to see how the show makes use of three of the four devices Wolfe lifted from literary fiction. The events on the show are framed as scenes, not a narrative time line of “This happened, so then this happened, so then this happened.” Dialogue is presented as conversation, not as sound byte. And the accuracy of the everyday details of life in Baltimore — the dialogue, the locations, the bits that, in the words of Simon himself, “build a whole city” — contributes to the immersion that is so integral to the program's success.

New Journalism got its start as a different way for a writer to tell his story — to put some subjective zing into an otherwise objective story. Sometimes, New Journalists realized, the obligation to tell the whole truth makes it necessary to include the subjunctive — the way a person or a place makes you feel. As Thompson once said to explain his use of his own brand of the form, gonzo journalism, for political reporting, “You can't be objective about Nixon.”

~ from "The Wire's" New Journalism ~

The Onion: Shroud Of Turin Accidentally Washed With Red Shirt

VATICAN CITY—The Shroud of Turin, an ancient linen cloth believed to bear the image of Christ and considered by many clerics and devotees to be one of the holiest relics of the Christian faith, was inadvertently dyed a light shade of pink after being washed with a red T-shirt, sources reported Tuesday.

The holy antiquity, thought by some to be the very garment Jesus Christ was buried in, was discovered in 1354. Though it has suffered oxidation and fire damage over the centuries, this is the first time that the shroud has been harmed in a laundry-related mishap.

~ read on... ~

EFF: New Telecom Whistleblower Describes Possible Gateway for Massive Surveillance of Wireless Communications

Washington D.C. - Three powerful House Commerce Committee Chairmen strongly urged their colleagues Thursday to defer acting on requests for retroactive immunity and to demand more information from the White House and the telecommunications companies in the wake of disclosures by another whistleblower that the government apparently has been granted an open gateway to wireless communications by a major telecommunications company.

Babak Pasdar, a computer security consultant, has gone public about his discovery of a mysterious "Quantico Circuit" while working for an unnamed major wireless carrier. Pasdar believes that this circuit gives the U.S. government direct, unfettered access to customers voice calls and data packets. These claims echo the disclosures from retired AT&T technician Mark Klein, who has described a "secret room" in an AT&T facility.

The White House is putting heavy pressure on lawmakers to grant the telecoms immunity from lawsuits over the spying as part of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) legislation pending in Congress. But in today's letter -- written by John Dingell, Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce; Ed Markey, Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet; and Bart Stupak, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations -- the congressmen argue lawmakers must not "vote in the dark" on the immunity issue when "profound privacy and security risks" are involved.

~ more... ~

U.S. media's anti-Islamic slant

The United States is seen as using democracy to serve its own interests and the interests of its Middle Eastern allies, but not the people's. For example, the United States provides political and military support to Israel, despite many of its policies running counter to its own values.

After the end of imperialism in the early 20th century, attitudes in the Muslim world changed. People turned to religion as a way of rejecting and defying the policies of the West that their governments had been forced to implement for so long. Governments that continued to support those policies favourable to the West were seen as imperialist allies, responsible for holding the interests of foreign powers over those of their own people. Eventually, the politically oppressed began focusing their anger towards those foreign powers.

As we can see from this brief account of history, Muslim resentment for the West stems from a history of imperialism coupled with present-day Western policies that are perceived as unfair or unjust. But with the media's influence in America, many see differences in culture and religion, rather than foreign policy, as the main cause of tension and violence against the West.

According to intellectual and political activist Noam Chomsky, "the public is exposed to powerful persuasive messages from above… with leaders using the media to generate support, compliance, and just plain confusion among the public."

Polarising theories, such as Bernard Lewis's "The Roots of Muslim Rage" and Samuel Huntington's theory "The Clash of Civilizations?", are often adopted by the media and used to negatively influence people's perception of the other. Both scholars claim that "Islam is incompatible with the West". Although there are many works that promote positive images of the Muslim world, such as those by Edward Said, they are not predominant. But if highlighted, they could play a major role in shaping public perception.

The public has a tendency to simplify complex ideas and draw straightforward conclusions. The solemn duty and responsibility of the media rests in the pursuit of providing a balanced, objective lens by which the public can be informed. In the American media, it is common to present America's foreign policy and actions in the Middle East as initiatives to spread democracy and capitalism, and to maintain peace. Such simplified coverage does not promote a balanced view of either the Muslim or the American side.

~ from American media needs a new lens ~