Tim Giago on the Huffington Post, and other places!
By: John Cornsilk
Mr. Tim Giago wrote an article, apparently for the Huffington post, it
turned up in the local media, with no comment section, so I sent Mr
Giago an email, the following will be what I sent him, with a few
type-o´s corrected some comment expanded where needed.
I tracked down the Article to the Huffington Post, and their comment
section is so limited in space, to 250 words you can barely say hi and
bye and be over the limit. I commented that I had sent Mr Giago the
email, he ignored it at first, but did finally acknowledge he had
received it with this sound-byte as a general statement where I had
addressed another posters ignorance:
Mr. Cornsilk should apologize to tbone99 because his comment is right
on. When Cornsilk emailed me I did not respond because I never respond
to someone with such a hatred for a tribal leader like Chad Smith. It
smacks of political revenge. I stand by my article as do the many, many
members of the Cherokee Nation that contacted me with their definite
approval of what I wrote.
And of course, I responded with the following sound byte:
Well Mr. Giago,
As you said of your article, I stick by my comment to tbone, facts are
facts as I lay them out in my articles I suggested he read, and the
ones by my Son David on the same page as well.
And if you wish to persist in babbling on Cherokee issues, my
suggestion would be you seriously read them as well and for
corroboration of my words simply click the links you will find there...
As I tell other folks that accuse me of hating Chad smith, I tell you
the same thing, I do not hate him, actually I pity him, for his
apparent mental deficiency...what kind of a sane man does what he did
to 2 women and 6 children?
I do most assuredly despise what he is and stands for. Now as for the
Cherokee that wish to stand by your article, I would guess ALL are
connected at the hip to the Swimmer/Mankiller Machine and beholden for
their exaggerated salaries to driver of the machine, Smith the dictator.
Now if you would like to discuss Cherokee issues such as Sovereignty,
Cherokee Freedmen, Bogusness of CNO, history/culture of the Cherokee,
go to www.cornsilks.com then
click on John's Place Banner!
Cherokee, CNO Member!
And let me say folks if you have not been to the Huffington Post simply
HERE And BTW, to see the articles mentioned above CLICK HERE
Now for the email:
I just read your article titled "Congressional Black Caucus Attacks
Sovereign Status of Indian Nations"
And as a near full blood Cherokee, that lives here in the land of the
"Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma" I am thoroughly disgusted with the
article, on several points...With your stature as a Native American
Author it would appear to me you would get prepared before you begin a
subject, specially out of the element of YOUR TRIBE!
Point number 1.
The Congressional Black Caucus, in attacking the sovereign status of
the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, is placing in question and in
jeopardy, the sovereign status of all Indian nations. At least that is
the conclusion drawn by many tribal leaders across America.
My Question is who are these Tribal leaders other than Chad Smith, and
the NCAI? Where Chads flunky Deputy Chief Joe Grayson is a supposed
leader...Joe as a Cherokee Man totally inept, who fills the
stereotypical drunken Indian bill to the max, and uneducated fool. who
is only there for the Indian appearance of the dynamic duo of top
Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (CNO) aficionados!!
Point Number 2.
In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the CBC, of which
Presidential Candidate Barack Obama is member, demanded that he support
their efforts to deny federal funding to the Cherokee Nation.
The letter reads:
When H. R. 2786, the Native American Housing and Assistance and
Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2007, was considered and
passed the House Members of the Congressional Black Caucus and others
insisted that the bill include a provision that would prevent the
Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma from receiving any benefits or funding
under the bill until the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma is in full
compliance with the Treaty of 1866 and recognizes all Cherokee Freedman
and their descendants as tribal citizens.
We understand that the Senate may be considering a version of this bill
that does not include these critically important requirements. We are
writing to advise you that the members of the CBC will not support, and
will actively oppose, passage of a NAHASDA bill that does not include
this limitation. We must send the unequivocal message to the Cherokee
Nation of Oklahoma that failure to provide full citizenship rights to
the Cherokee Freedmen will have severe consequences.
I would have to assume this is more of the CNO babble of blatant
out-right lie!! rather than your statement, it matches what they hawk,
the question is, what is Obama's status, is he a Senator or
Congressman, Senator I think, then the question would be, is The CBC
made up of both house members?
As for the Watson Bill and what it is and does only requires a simply
reading, NO where in the Bill will you find the term of anyone or any
Indian Nation Mentioned other than CNO, except under the Severance
Section at "#(3) OTHER FREEDMAN INDIANS- Not later than 6 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue
a public report to Congress on the status of freedmen in the Cherokee,
Choctaw, Chickasaw, Muscogee (Creek), and Seminole Nations of Oklahoma.
The report shall address whether each of those Indian tribes is
complying with all treaty obligations and Federal laws with respect to
its freedmen members, the level of participation of freedmen in tribal
leadership positions, tribal benefits received by the freedmen, and
previous or current efforts on the part of those Indian tribes to
disenfranchise its freedmen members".
Point number 3.
This is probably the first time in history that a Congressional Black
Caucus, or any other Black organization for that matter, has severely
threatened not only the sovereign status of an Indian nation, but also
the withholding of funds that could cause widespread damage to the
citizens of an Indian nation.
The people of the Cherokee Nation exercised their democratic rights
when 70 percent of them voted to extinguish the tribal citizenship to
the Cherokee Freedmen. The Freedmen are former Black slaves that became
a part of the Cherokee Nation under the provisions of the Treaty of
First part of the this statement almost true, we are Cherokee People!!
BUT, there is NO Cherokee Nation!! It was abolished by the Curtis Act
of 1898, we are simply descendants of Cherokee Citizens of the Dawes
era...We are "members" (of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (CNO), that
was born in 1975, of Ross O. Swimmer) now as for who exercised their
right to extinguish freedmen citizenship, It was NOT 70 percent of the
people as you say, the fact of the matter it was actually 75% of the
people that voted, which was a grand total of 8,000 give or take a few,
6,000 75% for kicking them out 2,000 25% said no by their vote...
Here comes the rub with your statement, you are not alone though, every
writer is guilty of the same thing, makes for drama in the article I
guess...The populace of the members of the CNO totals 300,000 give or
take a few, So do the math the vote of 8,000 was a whopping 2.66 % of
the Cherokee members/people of CNO voted to kick out the freedmen...You
are absolutely correct the Freedmen Descendant of the Cherokee Freedmen
of the Dawes era, are Cherokee absolutely no different than the rest of
we Cherokee and members of CNO.
Point number 1, Continuation:
The bill was introduced by Representative Diane Watson (D-CA). Tribal
leaders across America feel that this bill could threaten Indian
housing nationwide. They also believe that this action by the
Congressional Black Caucus could set a precedent where any Indian
legislation could be threatened by any special interest group.
In a memo sent out by Indian activist Ron Andrade it was noted that
Obama is also a member of the CBC. "Someone needs to ask him how he can
reconcile his support of the Congressional Black Caucus and his
rhetoric about supporting the sovereign status of tribal governments,"
The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and the Eastern Band of Cherokee
Indians of North Carolina met on Wednesday of last week in a joint
tribal council meeting. At the meeting they denounced legislation that
would cut federal funds to the Cherokee Nation unless the Freedmen are
restored to citizenship. The Eastern Band of Cherokee would not be
affected by the legislation.
A joint resolution issued after the meeting reads, "This alarming,
inappropriate and unacceptable overreach could set a precedent that
undermines the sovereign tribal governments throughout Indian country.
These proposed legislative actions threaten to turn back the clock on
hard-won rights and to cease a nation's right to exist."
See my response to point 1 above, WHAT leaders besides Smith and
Garcia, I ask???
Point number 4.
It should be noted that California is one of the worst states in the
Union where tribes are systematically removing and denying citizenship
Rep. Watson represents a voting district in that state. What has she
done about this problem in her own district? And what about the rest of
the Congressional Black Caucus? Are they not concerned that Indian
people are often removed from tribes in California without even a
democratic vote? Or will they only speak up when Black Americans are
And the final question: What gives the Congressional Black Caucus the
right to interfere in the internal affairs of an independent sovereign
These are all questions that every Native American leader and citizens
should be asking every member of the CBC including presidential
candidate Barak Obama.
The simple fact to remember, is when the California Tribes do what the
Cherokee Nation is doing and in the complete racist fashion against or
in violation of their own Law, or State Law, which they are not, they
have the right as a Legal Government to determine their membership, as
long as it is not a violation of federal civil right Laws, as
RACISM...And were it so, or happens to be proven so, then it will be up
to California to step in first, because they are a Public Law 280
State, that has jurisdiction in Indian matters. If they refuse then the
feds will get involved!
You finish with:
And isn't ironic that the very word "Caucus" is derived from the
Algonquin Indian language and means, "A group of people united to
promote an agreed -upon cause."
When the CBC begins to use its power to go after some of the tribes of
California for ejecting and denying citizenship to their members then,
and only then, will their actions against the Cherokee Nation of
Oklahoma have the appearance of justice or otherwise their objectivity
will always be in question to the sovereign people of the Indian
Not ironic at all, in that the CBC is only doing what their job and the
fiduciary role they assume with the plenary act of Congress requires of
them as representatives of ALL Cherokee People! And see my response
above, the CBC will only act in California when the state fails to
address any RACIST issue, or refuses to, because California does have
Cherokee, CNO member
Purveyor of Simple Truth!