Free at last? Not so fast. Leftist black racists in Oklahoma don’t want other blacks to be free. Some 2,800 blacks in Oklahoma have just been racially rejected by the Black Caucus of the Oklahoma legislators. How in the world did this come about?
The Cherokee Nation recently voted to drop 2,800 “freedmen” from their national citizenry. The freedmen are descendents of African slaves owned by the Cherokee people. The Cherokee Nation has decided, by overwhelming vote, (over 70 percent of the voters), that the freedmen are no longer members of the Cherokee nation.
The Black Caucus of Oklahoma has decided to protest in federal court. The Black Caucus apparently doesn’t want these black people to be considered black—but some other race, in this case, Cherokee.
Why would the Black Caucus have anything to do with the decisions of the Cherokee nation?
Five black members of the “black only” caucus, itself racially exclusive, have said that is has to do with the rights of the freedmen. Caucus member and Democrat house representative Mike Shelton (who votes for higher taxes) has said., “The Black Caucus is not against the Cherokees or any of the Native American tribes. But they broke sacred treaty.”
This is a completely false statement, and is made in an attempt to gain respect by showing a feigned honor for Indian treaties, about which Shelton obviously know little.
Rights and privileges to non-Indians living on Cherokee land are not affected by the vote of March 3, 2007. That vote was just to declare that anyone who could not demonstrate that he had at least one Indian ancestor on the rolls, according to the Dawes Act of 1887, would no longer be a member of the Cherokee Nation. Cherokee “citizenship” was granted to the freedmen just a year ago, in fact. But now the nation has decided to revoke that idea, by national vote. (It was the largest turnout ever, more than turned out for a recent constitutional amendment.) The treaty of 1886 contained the ruling that all non-Indians living on Cherokee land would have the same rights as Cherokee citizens. It never said the non-Indians were Cherokee. In 1975, the nation reasserted its sovereign right to determine its own citizenship.
The Cherokee Nation website posts “Know the Truth,” a collection of statements correcting myths that incite people like Shelton.
And the truth comes out:
Shelton said he is a descendent of the Cherokee Freedmen. He said he is most concerned about people who are now uninsured because they were provided health coverage prior to the March vote by the Cherokee Nation. He said this adds to the larger pool of uninsured.
It’s about money. Why, Shelton’s just looking out for those black people. If the Cherokee won’t take care of them, that means some one else will have to. It just means 2,800 more black people on public welfare. (No wonder Shelton supports higher taxes, as every good Democrat does.)
And let’s be more specific: it’s about casino money. The black leaders are going to try to make a court case that “rights” of the freedman have been abused? This just isn’t the case. How can they have rights to casino-funded health services if the casino is owned by the Cherokee Nation, and they are not citizens, and never were? How can they have Indian rights, when they’re not Indian?
Yes, African Americans cash in at the Mashantucket-Pequot “Indian” club in Connecticut. Yes, the Seminole Nation backed off when the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) offered separate funding to Seminole black “members” denied tribal rights. But all this is about money, not about blood.
Indians only value blood money. Why? Our ancestors spilled their blood to preserve our identity. We can never give it away. It’s not up for grabs.
Blacks rejecting other blacks is a most extreme irony. For the Oklahoma Black Caucus to reject blacks, hoping to make someone else pay for their medical bills, is a kind of slavery. As Cherokee Mike Graham says, the Caucus is acting like the KKK, only the Caucus shows racism against others, not just blacks. The Caucus despises the Cherokee Nation.
The Black Caucus would rather see blacks as ‘owned’ by Indians, than to be true free men.
Reprinted from FrontPage, April 3, 2007