According to Lakota Oyate (For a Free & Independent Lakota Nation), on December 30, 2007, the Lakotah Freedom Delegation website and contact info were hijacked by one delegation member without consent of other delegates. Further, to quote Lakota Oyate, the "So-called 'Republic of Lakotah' and 'provisional government' is announced despite the fact 'republic' is not a Lakota word and Lakota already has a traditional form of government still in existence." Here is the new Lakota Oyate website, said to be supported by Canupa Gluha Mani (Duane Martin Sr.) of the Lakotah Freedom Delegation.
While it is Russel Means that is talking to foreign energy investors and it is the "Republic of Lakotah" that is doing things by the international book (international law and norms - thereby facilitating maximum international support) it is also Means that is the one being recognized, for better or worse, as essentially being the Lakotah Freedom Delegation by the very tribal governments that this delegation was to break from. Let me be clear: while I do not purport that Means is seeking this recognition as being the Lakotah Freedom Delegation, tribal councils (BIA puppets) treat this as if it is all Means' work. Meanwhile (no pun intended), other members of the Lakotah Freedom Delegation seem to be pointing the finger at Means for hijacking all of this. Intriguing...
While it is exciting that this is all heating up and that this story continues to unfold, the last thing that yours truly wanted to hear today was that there was such a schizm manifest in the original four delegates.
Secessions, Charlatans, and Statecraft
Applying Some Critical Thinking to the Lakotah Secession Movement
Tribal Gov'ts Announce They Don't Support the Lakota Freedom Delegation (NO KIDDING!)
Map of the Lakota Nation Revealed
Wikipedia's Entry on the Republic of Lakotah (some good information here) Here is a snip from that site:
The United States Department of State is referring queries on the subject of Lakotah to the United States Department of the Interior, which oversees the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Gary Garrison of the BIA said that the group's withdrawal "doesn't mean anything". "These are not legitimate tribal governments elected by the people", he said, but cautioned that "when they begin the process of violating other people's rights, breaking the law, they're going to end up like all the other groups that have declared themselves independent - usually getting arrested and being put in jail".
Opinion on the Federal Government's expected reaction within the Republic of Lakota leadership is divided; Russell Means has stated that "I don't expect the federal government to do anything. I don't believe they even know what to do", but Canupa Gluha Mani has said that "we'll probably get killed for this".
Response to the Press Release by Russell Means concerning the treaty relationship between the Lakota Nation and the US government, by the organization of Lakota elders known as Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council, created in 1893 by Lakota Chief He Dog to address treaty matters:
"There is a provision within the Treaty of 1868 which our ancestors had included. Article 12 says that the Treaty of 1868 could not be changed except by three-fourths of the (Lakota) adult male vote. This was done expressly to protect the people, the land, and our way of life...
.. Russell Means is only one man and has not received the 3/4 adult male approval. His efforts, however, remind the world that we still have an international treaty with the USA.
Charmaine White Face, spokesperson, Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council
Actually, you never would have known about this had it not been from Wikinews. Unless you interviewed Oyate. So in turn, you did get the story from Wikinews, just decided to call it your own.
Lakota Oyate PUT the information on their website so, no, your assumption that an interview was a prerequisite for having this information is not only false but each and every comment you leave indicates more and more strongly that you aren't even reading the material you claim as plagiarism. For one, this particular piece was written by ME and you still need to prove that you wrote it for it to have ever been your story to begin with. Secondly, if a source makes information available to many sources, and posting it at their website counts, then the agency or individual that gets to publishing it first does not suddenly become the source. Press conferences are great examples. The New York Times is not required by law or ethics to credit the L.A. Times if the L.A. Times attends the same press conference and beats the NY Times to print.
Additionally, your statement that had it not been for Wikinews (which I never heard of until you posted here) I would not have ever heard of this is false and ridiculous. I DID hear of this through other channels and for that statement to be true it would have to be true that the Lakota Oyate website would have never come forth were it not for your news service.
As well, you continually refer to this story as YOUR story and, again, you need to prove that you wrote this in order for it to be your story. I wrote the piece here and the quote I have is from Lakota Oyate directly. I repeat, for those who are linguistically challenged, that at no point have I even been to Wikinews online even now. Actually, especially now that I see all of this, I am going to heretofore refer to Wikinews as a Micky Mouse news service because you are stepping out of the shadows to make a complete fool of yourself and the outfit you purport to represent.
Mohawk Nation News: “LAKOTA NATION” CONFIRMED - THEY ARE NOT PART OF THE U.S.
Breakdown in communication has not deterred delegates of Lakota tribe
I'll try being nicer; I suppose it couldn't hurt. The first sentence in the first paragraph I wrote and the quote that ensues was taken from Lakota Oyate. Wikinews, you allege, broke this story but you are not the source of this. Lakota Oyate is. Breaking a story doesn't make you the source rather you reported quotes from said source; Duane Martin Sr. and the others are providing this at their website so if anyone has failed to attribute the breaking of the item I write about here it is Lakota Oyate. Your beef is with them. However, I really don't think they are going to give you credit for their own statements.
I WROTE it. You are doing a wonderful job of making Wikinews look like a bunch of keystone journalists. Want some more rope?
EVERYTHING that I have sampled from elsewhere has been credited exactly as such. However, the first few paragraphs are MY words and I will not attribute this piece to anyone other than who wrote it: ME. My story will be attributed to me. At no time did I ever see anything from Wikinews and at no time has anything been copied from Wikinews so I think it is time to come back to Earth.
Start dwelling in reality please.
Please attribute your story to Wikinews as they published the article first at: Lakota Freedom Delegation says spokesman Russell Means 'hijacked' organization
You know, when you accuse someone of something that you can verify is not true then there is legal liability. All you have to do is go to the link that YOU provided to see that they are not the same.
Go away now. You have no case.
Post new comment