 |
| Original Treaty of 1846 between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, U.S. National Archives and Records Administration |
From The Oregonian:
[Armed Occupier] Payne said the group believes the federal government has no constitutional authority to hold vast land tracts. He said any deed transferring land to the federal government should be considered void.That means they will have to void the 1846 Treaty with Queen Victoria.
As much as I may question Queen Victoria's philosophical right to rule by an accident of birth claimed to be a divine right, I don't think it's such a great idea to void U.S. Title to what is now Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, with many acres reserved to the United States at Statehood according to the Enabling Acts of the respective States and their own State Constitutions.
Besides, the U.S. Constitution is pretty clear and basic on this point:
To give those "vast tracts of lands back" would be to void the treaty and return the Pacific Northwest States to the current Queen, Elizabeth II, another accident of birth and a Saxon to boot. (They had to change their family name from "Saxe-Coburg and Gotha" to "Windsor" during WWI for PR purposes.)
I have never seen a more ridiculous and stupid, armed, political protest. I still hope and pray we can end this peacefully even if it is arresting them one by one as they head into town for more snacks. (I'm not making this up!)
And speaking of Queens with huge tracts of land:
Oh, and if it should be given back to anybody, I propose not the Queen, but the native inhabitants of the area. The Malheur Paiutes sure are interested.
___________________
For more serious history on the Oregon Treaty, see:
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1830-1860/oregon-territory
For Emily's link from below, see:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/4-000-artifacts-stored-oregon-refuge-held-armed-061523370.html
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land. . . .U.S. Cons., Art. VI. [emphasis added]
To give those "vast tracts of lands back" would be to void the treaty and return the Pacific Northwest States to the current Queen, Elizabeth II, another accident of birth and a Saxon to boot. (They had to change their family name from "Saxe-Coburg and Gotha" to "Windsor" during WWI for PR purposes.)
I have never seen a more ridiculous and stupid, armed, political protest. I still hope and pray we can end this peacefully even if it is arresting them one by one as they head into town for more snacks. (I'm not making this up!)
And speaking of Queens with huge tracts of land:
Oh, and if it should be given back to anybody, I propose not the Queen, but the native inhabitants of the area. The Malheur Paiutes sure are interested.
___________________
For more serious history on the Oregon Treaty, see:
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1830-1860/oregon-territory
For Emily's link from below, see:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/4-000-artifacts-stored-oregon-refuge-held-armed-061523370.html
Just read this as part of an article this morning: (https://www.yahoo.com/news/4-000-artifacts-stored-oregon-refuge-held-armed-061523370.html)
ReplyDelete"Bundy said people interested in archaeology are welcome to explore the refuge, but that cattle ranchers and loggers should have priority when it comes to land use.
""Before white man came, so to speak, there was nothing to keep cattle from tromping on those things," Bundy said.
"Though some countries had domesticated cattle 10,000 years ago, the animals came to the United States with European settlers.
""We also recognize that the Native Americans had the claim to the land, but they lost that claim," Bundy said. "There are things to learn from cultures of the past, but the current culture is the most important.""
There are no words for the ignorance and arrogance...
Ugh.
Thanks, Emily. I put in your link above as blogger doesn't let it work in comments.
DeleteI'm going to keep fighting this battle on the blog. I don't know what else to do with stupid people with guns. They really ought to include background checks for mental health and a basic IQ level to own a firearm.