I’m an 11 year Army veteran (Desert Storm, too – also saw the miracle of peaceful resolutions being in Germany when the Wall fell)—but I’m also of Cherokee (and Jewish) ancestry.

I can understand both sides of these issues. Merely being a veteran doesn’t make it right – in my Army we didn’t torture, for example. I’ve had people spit in my face when hopping off a plane in Class As in DC, too.

I’m trying to resolve both sides of these issues in my mind.

-Larry Breazeale, Msgt. (ret.) USAFR,
Vietnam/Desert Storm Veteran,
Vice Chairman of the NATIONAL VETERANS COALITION,
Constitution Party…www.nvets.org

I’ve two angles on this: I’m libertarian and have a strong Trail of Tears ancestry. I’d rather spend my time fighting for what’s right than over nuances in certain movements. I’m not a revolutionary; just a freedom sort of guy—but don’t want my kids to starve in the process.

I don’t know all of the the nuances behind all of the Lakota side of things, but would like two things: truth and positive change.

The comments on this article are really mixed, but you seem to be someone who might be able to provide some reasonable balance.

I’d like facts on both (all) sides. I’d also like freedom, at (somewhat) any reasonable cost. Like you, just the facts, please.

Interesting note: No one is challenging my title line.

Comments posted here do not seem to acknowledge a number of pertinent facts concerning the posture assumed by Lakota dissident Russell Means and three followers:

1. They as individuals or under the name of the Lakota Freedom Delegation do not officially represent the Lakota Nation and have no power to make any decision concerning the observance or non-observance of the terms of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty between the US and the Lakota Nation for the reasons explained below.

2. There is a body of Lakota representatives who are duly appointed by elders and traditional people of the Nation to deal with such matters. They meet regularly. They discuss the matter of the Black Hills, the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, etc.. in the Lakota language that Russell Means, educated for the most part in California “white” schools, neither understand or speak fluently or correctly enough to be accepted in or contribute to those meetings on an ongoing basis.

3. Russell Means has made a big deal about his being an “Oglala lakota Patriot” and tried to run for office several times on Pine Ridge reservation, each time being rejected by the Oglala people. The reason is evident to the Oglala people but not to outsiders: Russell Means is a Rosebud person, and not an Oglala. Both of his brothers live on Rosebud reservation, and for good cause. Bill, Ted and Russell Means are the sons of a Rosebud woman and a certain Hank Means who was the son of a full blood Crow woman and a white military man. None of the ancestry of the Means links them to any group of the Oglala people. (see genealogy – OLC Archives)

4. Russell Means has made it quite clear a number of times in the past twenty years that he no longer belongs to AIM. He is not an AIM leader.

5. Russell Means was charged once with the responsibilities of defending the provisions of the Fort Laramie Treaty, in 1974, by the coalition of Lakota elders, and thus the International Indian Treaty Council was created whose mission is to defend the Rights of the Lakota nation as stipulated in the provisions of th Fort Laramie Treaty. Russell was specifically charged with a certain task which he solemnly accepted. He voluntarily discharged or delegated his duties to his brother Bill.

Though Bill Means was appointed Executive Director of the International Treaty Council that took its case to the United Nations, Russell Means has consistently over the years affirmed the fact that he was chosen as the champion of the elders to uphold the Treaty Rights of the Lakota, and that he only delegated administrative responsibilities to his brother. However, over the years, political disagreement, particularly over the question of the Nicaragua alliances, created a gulf between the two brothers. Bill Means is still on the board of IITC, but the present executive director of IITC is a California woman who has no profound feeling or close connection to the Lakota people and their original decision regarding the formation of IITC or the mission of IITC.

In unilaterally declaring the 1868 Treaty null and void, Russell Means reneged on his promise made to his elders in 1974 to defend the Lakota Rights under that Treaty, and essentially betrayed his word to the entire Lakota Nation.

It is obvious he has never been or spent any time living on a reservation. As for hand the US giving Indians anything is a joke..
I say If the Lkota can get what was stolen from them for the greed of the white man all the more power to them. It may help the rest of us get back was stolen by lies and decite by Americas supposedly founding fathers.

Assalaamualaikum,

As an American ex-pat (living in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia) and convert to Islam, I support this historic turn of events. Indeed, those of us who recognize the Autonomy of our Creator, The Great Spirit, stand in solidarity with the Lakota People.

We are but a breath of life, a momentary breeze on the face of this beloved planet. So let that breath be enobled by the intention and deeds of our brothers and sisters, the Lakota. And let it be said we did not stand in silence and breathe this breath as cowards, fearful to do anything other than pray in solitude.

Mr. Means confronts Goliath and reminds him he is naught but a mortal heathen, a breath become foul and rancid with the blood of innocence. May Allah increase the right hand and arm of the Lakota, and may those whose new breath awaits the final hour, look on and be proud once more of this people so long asleep, so long waiting a man of strength and vision, a man unable to fear his own breath because he knows the Giver of all breath.

Wasalaam alaikum,

Omar Zaid bin Abdullah, as’Siddiq, M.D.
Research Fellow, ISTAC, K.L. Malaysia