Indians, Politics, and Money
by David A. Yeagley
Originally published at FrontPageMagazine.com | April 18, 2002
Today, if you lived in Cayuga County, New York, or around the town of Ledyard, Connecticut, or in Paxton, Illinois, you might swear that Indians were still the enemy. And if you lived on land now claimed by the Seneca, the Pequots, or the Miami, you may not have recognized the Clinton-appointed U.S. Department of Justice as the real foe.
Through Indian land claims, the Clinton ‘cartel’ has disguised itself, and still wants to rob innocent people of everything they’ve earned, owned, and lived for.
And it’s not really about land. It’s about casinos―?and money. If you happen to live where the Clinton Co-op wants a casino, you lose.
The casino industry, on an Indian reservation, is tax-free. This means astounding profits for select contractors, businessmen, politicians, and tribal leaders. The Clinton appointed Justice Department (most of whom are still in office), and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (under Clinton appointees) have played up the "independent nation" status of Indian tribes, so Democrat businessmen can come in and create casinos on Indian reservations. All related businesses like hotels, shopping malls, and restaurants, are also tax-free. The tycoons then make fantastic ‘campaign contributions’ directly to the DNC and apparently individual Clinton cronies.
Skip Hayward, the "Pequot," has made enormous contributions to the DNC through his Foxwoods casino in Connecticut. Thomas Wilmot, one of the country’s largest shopping mall contractors, is a famous Clinton fundraiser.
Wilmot invested in Indian casinos in Connecticut, and now is financing the legal suit of the Miami Indians (Oklahoma) in exchange for interests in their casino planned for Paxton, Illinois. He’s also supporting the Seneca-Cayuga tribe (Oklahoma) in their bid to build a Niagara Falls casino.
And how can Oklahoma tribes claim land so far away? Many tribes in Oklahoma were originally from eastern states. They were evicted there, and forced out to "Indian Territory."
Now the U.S. Department of Justice, guided by shrewd developers like Wilmot, wants to declare certain historical Indian evictions and treaties invalid, so Indians like the Seneca-Cayuga of Oklahoma can reclaim their ancestral homes back east. Then tax-free casinos can be built there—and the DNC and the Clintonites can get their kickbacks.
The treaty trick is simple. Many early 17th and 18th century Indian treaties were made by state and local authorities. But the Clinton Justice Department says only the federal government has the authority to make treaties with "independent Indian nations."
Therefore, the early treaties are subject to nullification. The advantage? They mostly concern land claims in the older, heavily populated eastern parts of the United States, those with the most gaming profit potential.
If you were a homeowner or business owner within these Indian land claims, you might be effectively evicted and financially ruined. The Department of Justice wants massive acreages and millions of dollars taken from non-Indian people and returned to certain Indian tribes. Never mind how many generations these non-Indians may have owned, lived on, and developed the same land.
The "non-Indians" are almost exclusively white people.
Why would the U.S. government deny so many white people their right to ownership of private property? The useful idiots of the left say it’s ‘historical justice’ for Indians, but the facts say it’s money―?for the Democratic Party and Clinton clan.
Are these people are just politically correct sacrificial lambs, stripped of all their rights, for the greater good of the Clinton Party?
In 1924 Washington declared all Indians "American citizens," but the Clinton appointees are today willing to give them special treatment, as though they were still historically independent nations. For the sake of profit, Clinton appointees like Kevin Gover (BIA), Janet Reno, Bruce Babbitt, and Hillary simply use Indians as their political mascot.
"American Indian tribes are sovereign nations within the United States," said Hillary Clinton during the Lazio debates in the New York senate race (2000). (Syracuse, NY, The Post-Standard, November 2, 2000). "The U.S. government maintains a nation to nation relationship with American Indian tribes."
And it’s a sweet relationship, when an estimated $10 billion in BIA accounts suddenly becomes unaccounted for under Babbitt’s tenure. Sweet, for the Clintons and their friends, anyway.
And isn’t it odd that the mostly-white "victims" of Upstate New York, those most threatened by Indian land claims, can’t muster any rhetorical defense stronger than the hackneyed liberal rhetoric of "justice" and "equal rights?" The Upstate Citizens for Equality (ECU) publishes a lot of information on the ills of the casino industry, but won’t recognize the Clinton factor behind it.
They must have voted for Hillary. Maybe they got what they deserve.
|
