Anita Johnson discusses the Freedman and Cherokee expulsion issue.
http://kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=27699
This is a radio program of where both Marilyn Vann and Mike Miller speak...
She doesn't even claim to have a Cherokee Ancestor and states that the Freedmen should be a member of an Indian Tribe even if they are not Indian...
What part of NO, doesn't she understand. Yikes!
The Civil War was fought so the Slaves could become citizens of the US not an Indian Tribe.....the Freedmen have a really convoluted position based on the historical facts.
The moderator made a big deal out of the low turn out on the vote. So what else is new, US Citizens don't even turn out well. I mean is the Cherokee Nation suppose to *force* people to vote. I live in CA and it took oh, about 2 weeks to register, so Vann is complaining about having a year to register. The Freedmen were included in the last election we had including the vote on the Amendment - it's called a democracy, majority of the voters rule.
The Delaware and Shawnee were not adopted by the Cherokee Nation. Just because the Federal Government moved them next door to the Cherokee and put them on the same role, certainly doesn't mean the Cherokee Nation adopted anyone. Those are both independent Tribal People. In the days that Dawes Roll was drawn up, the rules were not up to the Indian Nations, that was all dictated to them by the Dawes Commission and in those days, there just were no choices and I wonder if the Shawnee and Delaware even knew it happened until after it was done.
Now, the Freedmen need to respect the Cherokee People and their History.
Another comment Vann makes in this interview, something to the effect, they could sign their names, so she's sure they understood what they were signing....really? So I suppose all those morgtage folks in the recent housing crisis, when they signed their home loans knew what they were signing, they could sign their names as well, yet you continue to hear *they didn't know what they were signing*, now this is 21st century....if you take the 1866 treaty in historical context, I'm sure this Dawes Commission and Freedmen issue was an unindended consequence of signing that treaty, that those signing it, could not have possibly foreseen.
http://kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=27699
This is a radio program of where both Marilyn Vann and Mike Miller speak...
She doesn't even claim to have a Cherokee Ancestor and states that the Freedmen should be a member of an Indian Tribe even if they are not Indian...
What part of NO, doesn't she understand. Yikes!
The Civil War was fought so the Slaves could become citizens of the US not an Indian Tribe.....the Freedmen have a really convoluted position based on the historical facts.
The moderator made a big deal out of the low turn out on the vote. So what else is new, US Citizens don't even turn out well. I mean is the Cherokee Nation suppose to *force* people to vote. I live in CA and it took oh, about 2 weeks to register, so Vann is complaining about having a year to register. The Freedmen were included in the last election we had including the vote on the Amendment - it's called a democracy, majority of the voters rule.
The Delaware and Shawnee were not adopted by the Cherokee Nation. Just because the Federal Government moved them next door to the Cherokee and put them on the same role, certainly doesn't mean the Cherokee Nation adopted anyone. Those are both independent Tribal People. In the days that Dawes Roll was drawn up, the rules were not up to the Indian Nations, that was all dictated to them by the Dawes Commission and in those days, there just were no choices and I wonder if the Shawnee and Delaware even knew it happened until after it was done.
Now, the Freedmen need to respect the Cherokee People and their History.
Another comment Vann makes in this interview, something to the effect, they could sign their names, so she's sure they understood what they were signing....really? So I suppose all those morgtage folks in the recent housing crisis, when they signed their home loans knew what they were signing, they could sign their names as well, yet you continue to hear *they didn't know what they were signing*, now this is 21st century....if you take the 1866 treaty in historical context, I'm sure this Dawes Commission and Freedmen issue was an unindended consequence of signing that treaty, that those signing it, could not have possibly foreseen.