Congress tells Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma: No Funding

[Josiah]

[QUOTE=John Cornsilk;1070825]

Well Josiah how do you rate your treatment at John's place??

Hey, Have you been to the Tulsa World this morning, and read the babblings of the DUD white man/supposed Cherokee, Mike Miller's Babblings...BTW have you been keeping up with my Publications on OpEd.com? Anyway I responded to the dumbut Miller, following link to TW is my response:

Tulsa World: Black caucus reignites freedmen dispute

Folks, the babbling by the Pokes-Person for the leader of (CNOT) Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Traitors, (Traitors) added for the traitorous acts by them against Cherokee People, no different than the Treaty party of 1835 that signed away the eastern homeland of the Cherokee and were executed, is exactly that, nothing but ignorant babbling:.

Therefore the Name becomes “Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Traitors” acronym-(CNOT) and they are NOT the Cherokee Nation, but that is another Saga, and if anyone is interested, documentation of the Bogusness of CNOT can be found at www.cornsilks.com, also there at the top of the page you will find Congresswoman’s Bill and within the website you will find documentation that corroborates the facts of historical law in Watson’s Bill.

Now back to the ignorant babble of CNOT Spokesman Miller! First lets begin with a little history of the of the Cherokee Freedmen, and so as not to make this post so long I will reference my writings that are published on the news website of (OEN) the First article at The Cherokee Freedmen Story the Material explains the Title. The next Article at is a continuation of the first with much documentation for corroboration.

With these publications from a reader came an all important question which was “How does Chad Smith justify what he does to the Cherokee Freedmen with Logic?" So I went to the CNOT website and on the Page of CNOT for material of NON INDIANS I found what is most likely the justifying material, on the right side of the website, click non indian link, along with other totally disgusting materials, a 16 point list of supposed logic, so I took this 16 point Item and De-bunked it for the answer to the Question, you can See Article Titled LOGIC AND JUSTIFICATION "NOT“!!

John “The Elder” Cornsilk
Cherokee Member of CNOT!
Purveyor of Simple Truth

Pretty good John, no pole axing...
LOL
I am doing alot of reading though, must say some very interesting reading...

[John Cornsilk]

[QUOTE=John Cornsilk;1058327]

That choice is yours, depends entirely on what you say, and what the members think of your words!

John C.

Well Josiah how do you rate your treatment at John's place??

Hey, Have you been to the Tulsa World this morning, and read the babblings of the DUD white man/supposed Cherokee, Mike Miller's Babblings...BTW have you been keeping up with my Publications on OpEd.com? Anyway I responded to the dumbut Miller, following link to TW is my response:

Tulsa World: Black caucus reignites freedmen dispute

Folks, the babbling by the Pokes-Person for the leader of (CNOT) Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Traitors, (Traitors) added for the traitorous acts by them against Cherokee People, no different than the Treaty party of 1835 that signed away the eastern homeland of the Cherokee and were executed, is exactly that, nothing but ignorant babbling:.

Therefore the Name becomes “Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Traitors” acronym-(CNOT) and they are NOT the Cherokee Nation, but that is another Saga, and if anyone is interested, documentation of the Bogusness of CNOT can be found at www.cornsilks.com, also there at the top of the page you will find Congresswoman’s Bill and within the website you will find documentation that corroborates the facts of historical law in Watson’s Bill.

Now back to the ignorant babble of CNOT Spokesman Miller! First lets begin with a little history of the of the Cherokee Freedmen, and so as not to make this post so long I will reference my writings that are published on the news website of (OEN) the First article at The Cherokee Freedmen Story the Material explains the Title. The next Article at is a continuation of the first with much documentation for corroboration.

With these publications from a reader came an all important question which was “How does Chad Smith justify what he does to the Cherokee Freedmen with Logic?" So I went to the CNOT website and on the Page of CNOT for material of NON INDIANS I found what is most likely the justifying material, on the right side of the website, click non indian link, along with other totally disgusting materials, a 16 point list of supposed logic, so I took this 16 point Item and De-bunked it for the answer to the Question, you can See Article Titled LOGIC AND JUSTIFICATION "NOT“!!

John “The Elder” Cornsilk
Cherokee Member of CNOT!
Purveyor of Simple Truth

[John Cornsilk]

[QUOTE=Josiah;1058314]

Wow I am still member? So am I the token CNOT - suckin fool?

That choice is yours, depends entirely on what you say, and what the members think of your words!

John C.

[Josiah]

[QUOTE=John Cornsilk;1058246]

Don't sweat it, it is all in the hands of congress, the wheels of justice is just slow, the words of one Congressman on receipt of the stuff..."holy shyt" he just got to get some power swingers involved, if you noticed one power ball has steped up, Barney Frank! Its comin you can count on it!

BTW, have you seen the videos on weezle.com then click on John Ross top right!

John C.

PS comin here is to dam much trouble why don't you come to John's Place and post, you are still a member, we got a 100 or So Cherokee members, and averaging 2,500 hits a day, people reading all over the world! We only got 2 CNOT-suckin fools posting on occasion!

Wow I am still member? So am I the token CNOT - suckin fool?

[John Cornsilk]

[QUOTE=Josiah;1058160]

By what form of understanding John??

So you are saying the Cherokee Nation in its present form is Illegal?
Yes I read your website...

Hmm
I wonder why then it has not been found to be Illegal
Hell they can determine if a Governor is paying for women almost Immediately!!! And whoosh instantly out of Power!!!

But your saying that the Cherokee Nation has found a way to bypass all that and still be in power today.

What I have posted up to this point comes from the Newspapers
Are you suggesting this conspiracy extends to the Newspapers also?

Am I to believe that you are the only one that knows the true story

John why have you not taken this to the Authorities end this shadow conspiracy???

As a Citizen of our Nation I believe it is your Duty to shine a light on this and once and for all end it!!!!
Bring out the reams of evidence and let the evidence stand on its own merit. I am sure any Law enforcement Agency would gladly look at this evidence and come to the same conclusion as you have...

Don't sweat it, it is all in the hands of congress, the wheels of justice is just slow, the words of one Congressman on receipt of the stuff..."holy shyt" he just got to get some power swingers involved, if you noticed one power ball has steped up, Barney Frank! Its comin you can count on it!

BTW, have you seen the videos on weezle.com then click on John Ross top right!

John C.

PS comin here is to dam much trouble why don't you come to John's Place and post, you are still a member, we got a 100 or So Cherokee members, and averaging 2,500 hits a day, people reading all over the world! We only got 2 CNOT-suckin fools posting on occasion!

[Josiah]

Here is another Article from a Newspaper

Appeals court to hear Cherokee Freedmen case
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Filed Under: Law | Politics

The dispute over the legal status of the Cherokee Freedmen will be heard by a federal appeals court in May amid efforts by Congress to resolve the controversy.

The Freedmen are the descendants of former slaves. They say a treaty signed after the end of the Civil War guarantees them citizenship in the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.

Tribal leaders and members disagree. In March 2007, Cherokee voters amended their constitution to deny citizenship to people who can't trace their ancestry to the Indian portion of the Dawes Rolls that were created by the federal government after the 1866 treaty.

A tribal court has reinstated about 2,800 Freedmen to citizenship pending a challenge to the referendum. But that hasn't stopped litigation over the dispute and it hasn't stopped members of Congress from threatening to cut federal funding to the Cherokee Nation.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs has said it will protect the rights of the Freedmen. Assistant secretary Carl Artman told Cherokee Chief Chad Smith that the tribe agreed to enroll the Freedmen "in exchange for amnesty and the continuation of the government-to-government relationship" in a May 2007 letter.

But the Bush administration says the litigation filed by Marilyn Vann, a Freedmen leader, should end since one of the main issues in the case -- the status of the Cherokee constitution -- has been resolved. In August, Artman approved changes to the tribe's constitution -- including a provision that eliminates future federal review of the document.

The Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss Vann's case but Judge Henry H. Kennedy in Washington, D.C., declined in a short decision on February 7. Kennedy, however, agreed to stay proceedings pending an appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

On May 6, a three-judge panel of the appeals court will consider another big issue in the case -- whether the Freedmen can sue the Cherokee Nation. Kennedy ruled that the tribe's sovereign immunity was waived by the 1866 treaty and the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which outlawed slavery.

The tribe is disputing the idea that it can be sued without its consent. Cherokee leaders say Kennedy's decision sets a bad precedent for Indian County, though only a small number -- most notably the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma -- signed treaties regarding their former slaves.

In addition to the lawsuit, the tribe is fighting legislation that could cut off its federal funds unless the Freedmen are permanently restored to citizenship. Last September, the House added a provision to the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act that would eliminate housing funds.

Chief Smith has appealed to other tribes in the U.S. and Canada -- and even to the United Nations -- to protect what he says is the Cherokee Nation's inherent right to decide who is entitled to citizenship. The tribe also has mounted an extensive lobbying and public relations campaign to protest the legislation.

"The legislation would, in effect, either allow Congress to determine membership in the Cherokee nation or sever federal financial obligations to the nation, close Cherokee businesses, and legitimize unfounded lawsuits against the nation," Smith told the United Nation's High Commissioner for Human Rights last month.

According to the tribe, it will lose out on $300 million in direct federal funding under the various pieces of legislation. Under one bill, the tribe will be forced to close its gaming facilities, which are a significant source of revenue.

The May 6 oral arguments will be heard by Judge David S. Tatel, a Clinton nominee, Judge Merrick B. Garland, a Clinton nominee, and Judge Thomas B. Griffith, a Bush nominee.

Tatel has heard a number of Indian law cases, including the Cobell trust fund case. Garland also has heard the Cobell case. Griffith is relatively new to the court and used to work for the Senate as its legal counsel.

Cherokee-Related Legislation:
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress) | H.R.2895 | H.R.2824 | H.R.3002

BIA Letters:
August 9, 2007 | July 11, 2007 | June 22, 2007 | May 21, 2007 | March 28, 2007 | August 30, 2006

Sovereign Immunity Court Decision:
http://www.indianz.com/docs/court/fr...rder121906.pdf (December 19, 2006)

Cherokee Nation Judicial Appeals Tribunal Decision in Freedmen Case:
Allen v. Cherokee Nation (March 7, 2006)


Indianz.Com > News > Appeals court to hear Cherokee Freedmen case


The courts will decide these issues
Here is my prediction: Nothing will be decided

[Josiah]

[QUOTE=John Cornsilk;1058115]

Nope I only call people names that demonstrate they are what they are and you do!

And there is nothing I can do to fix CNOT, there are two solutions pending, the Federal Court, and/or Congress, Watson's Bill and dam soon, I HOPE...

Its not they you don't agree with me, its that you don't agree with the fact of law, or even understand what you babble about. all you do is regurgitate Smith's equine manure!!

John Cornsilk

By what form of understanding John??

So you are saying the Cherokee Nation in its present form is Illegal?
Yes I read your website...

Hmm
I wonder why then it has not been found to be Illegal
Hell they can determine if a Governor is paying for women almost Immediately!!! And whoosh instantly out of Power!!!

But your saying that the Cherokee Nation has found a way to bypass all that and still be in power today.

What I have posted up to this point comes from the Newspapers
Are you suggesting this conspiracy extends to the Newspapers also?

Am I to believe that you are the only one that knows the true story

John why have you not taken this to the Authorities end this shadow conspiracy???

As a Citizen of our Nation I believe it is your Duty to shine a light on this and once and for all end it!!!!
Bring out the reams of evidence and let the evidence stand on its own merit. I am sure any Law enforcement Agency would gladly look at this evidence and come to the same conclusion as you have...

[John Cornsilk]

[QUOTE=Josiah;1058108]

John Cornsilk
Do you have plans to actually do anything about what you write about?
Maybe run for council?
For Chief?
To actually work to fix the things you say is broke...

Or do you like to call people names that dont necessary agree with your opinions...

You can call me all the names you want and it will not effect me in any matter.
I am not sure why you think I am a CNOT a Traitor to our people. I have lived in our great nation growing up and joined the Navy having served my time honorably, I now work for the Government again as an Aircraft Electrician.
Perhaps you think I should agree with you about everything and let you do my thinking for me.
I have read your website and looked at all your documents.


I will debate you and discuss what you want but to call me names when you know nothing of me is the measurement of a person that has issues that I can't solve.


Josiah Hair
Citizen of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (still)

Nope I only call people names that demonstrate they are what they are and you do!

And there is nothing I can do to fix CNOT, there are two soulutions pending, the Federal Court, and/or Congress, Watson's Bill and dam soon, I HOPE...

Its not they you don't agree with me, its that you don't agree with the fact of law, or even understand what you babble about. all you do is regirgutate Smith's equine manure!!

John Cornsilk

[Josiah]

[QUOTE=John Cornsilk;1057979]

You said:

I thought about what you wrote all morning long and am still puzzled by the term: "babbling CNOT-suckin fool"

Well Dang I gotcha thinking a little, NOW, if you would only carry it on to the realm of learning! Then by your words may I assume you are in understanding of what the term is and means, by my previous descripitive as to what the term is?? if so then we can move on to what is meant by my use of the term as it may apply to you!

You ask:

Was this based on what I previously wrote?

I say!

Just about everytime you babble, I understand now why you never came an posted on John's Place...Check out your post on 08-10-2007 09:25 PM,and my response fits today!

You Ask:

Based on the fact I dont agree with you "Lock-Step"?

I say!

Absolutely Not, based on the fact you attempt to twist up the meanings of words in regards to facts of law, in to pure equine feces, just like the weezle smith.

You asked:

Based on the fact that we have sat down had a meal together talked face to face and then you came to this conclusion?

How redicklus!!

If this is not the case:
Then it is just noise in the wind and without meaning...

Not hardly, most assuredly has a definite meaning, with respect to your evident support of the weezles absolute male bovine excrement, you regirgutate what he feeds: Therefore by my descrepiton of the term you are a CNOT-suckin fool!!

John Cornsilk

John Cornsilk
Do you have plans to actually do anything about what you write about?
Maybe run for council?
For Chief?
To actually work to fix the things you say is broke...

Or do you like to call people names that dont necessary agree with your opinions...

You can call me all the names you want and it will not effect me in any matter.
I am not sure why you think I am a CNOT a Traitor to our people. I have lived in our great nation growing up and joined the Navy having served my time honorably, I now work for the Government again as an Aircraft Electrician.
Perhaps you think I should agree with you about everything and let you do my thinking for me.
I have read your website and looked at all your documents.


I will debate you and discuss what you want but to call me names when you know nothing of me is the measurement of a person that has issues that I can't solve.


Josiah Hair
Citizen of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (still)

[John Cornsilk]

[QUOTE=Josiah;1057867]

You said:

I thought about what you wrote all morning long and am still puzzled by the term: "babbling CNOT-suckin fool"

Well Dang I gotcha thinking a little, NOW, if you would only carry it on to the realm of learning! Then by your words may I assume you are in understanding of what the term is and means, by my previous descripitive as to what the term is?? if so then we can move on to what is meant by my use of the term as it may apply to you!

You ask:

Was this based on what I previously wrote?

I say!

Just about everytime you babble, I understand now why you never came an posted on John's Place...Check out your post on 08-10-2007 09:25 PM,and my response fits today!

You Ask:

Based on the fact I dont agree with you "Lock-Step"?

I say!

Absolutely Not, based on the fact you attempt to twist up the meanings of words in regards to facts of law, in to pure equine feces, just like the weezle smith.

You asked:

Based on the fact that we have sat down had a meal together talked face to face and then you came to this conclusion?

How redicklus!!

If this is not the case:
Then it is just noise in the wind and without meaning...

Not hardly, most assuredly has a definite meaning, with respect to your evident support of the weezles absolute male bovine excrement, you regirgutate what he feeds: Therefore by my descrepiton of the term you are a CNOT-suckin fool!!

John Cornsilk

[Josiah]

As a guess? The great beast had not been fully annoyed yet...

It's not as if they didn't have the power...

LOL

Well we live in interesting times

[Zeke]

I wonder why the Department of the Interior did not step in and Dictate to the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma what they will do or not do in this matter in 1974, 1983, 1996, 2002 and 2006!!!

As a guess? The great beast had not been fully annoyed yet...

It's not as if they didn't have the power...

[Josiah]

Well Dang Josiah, I had hopes you were a REAL Cherokee thinking Cherokee, BUT no, you are a babbling CNOT-suckin fool! Let me explain CNOT, that is a acronym for Cherokee Nation Of Oklahoma (TRAITORS) added for the actions of the BOGUS entity known as CNO... Thus we get CNOT, And suckers are fools that support the SMITH babbled equine excrement; Thus CNOT-suckin fools...

Well if it is up to the Tribal Court to decide, the simple fact is they have, decided already, the Supreme Court of CNOT rulled the 6th of March 2006 See the order here allendecision

And then folks if you seriously wnat to know or simply learn the truth you could start with a visit to this site Cherokee Nation Sells Out I respond to a pretty good article there and with some links to documents for corroboration, and if you need more go to cornsilks.com,.

John Cornsilk

I thought about what you wrote all morning long and am still puzzled by the term: "babbling CNOT-suckin fool"
Was this based on what I previously wrote?
Based on the fact I dont agree with you "Lock-Step"?
Based on the fact that we have sat down had a meal together talked face to face and then you came to this conclusion?
If this is not the case:
Then it is just noise in the wind and without meaning...

[Josiah]

You don't think there's going to be some sort of tacit Federal validation there?

For example, as what started the thread, "you can determine what you desire, but we (Feds) know what we want you to do and, if you do not do it, you don't get $$$." That's a pretty big hammer to have: which wouldn't exist if there was true sovereignty.

As for the Cherokee having "already ruled," you'll note such does not appear to have settled the issue...

True enough!

There is many different issues in this:
Sovereignty
Self Governance
Self Determination


We all agree for example that the USA is a "Sovereign Nation" But even the US answers to the Oil producing nations and if you dont think that is true Look at the Gas Pump

We all answer to someone and No one is truly "on there own" There will always be external pressure applied in a political way and if that dont work then invasion is applied! Ask Iraq

But that does not really apply here does it, This will be tied up in Courts Tribal and Federal until a compromise is reached and the two sides agree on this compromise....
Hmm that sounds like two equals to me rather than a subordinate relationship!!!
Hmm I wonder why the Department of the Interior did not step in and Dictate to the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma what they will do or not do in this matter in 1974, 1983, 1996, 2002 and 2006!!!
Then Senator Watson would not be running around trying to remove funding from the Cherokees...
Hmmm

[Zeke]

Oh but that is not true! because in this case the Government is saying it is up to the TRIBAL COURT to decide

hmmm

You don't think there's going to be some sort of tacit Federal validation there?

For example, as what started the thread, "you can determine what you desire, but we (Feds) know what we want you to do and, if you do not do it, you don't get $$$." That's a pretty big hammer to have: which wouldn't exist if there was true sovereignty.

As for the Cherokee having "already ruled," you'll note such does not appear to have settled the issue...