California: Property rights besieged (Wacky Legislature at work!)

The Orange County Register ^ | Saturday, August 24, 2002 | Editorial Staff

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

For an example of how loony California's Democratic-controlled Legislature has become, one need only look at S.B. 1828, which would grant Native American tribes the power to veto any development within 20 miles of what they determine to be "sacred" lands.

[sauropod]

Screw the indians. They lost. 'Pod

[EggsAckley]

Developments will still happen, as the cash flows under the tables to buy off the Indians. We'll soon see some Indians becoming quite wealthy.

[Husker24]

Another reason to throw California out of the union and give it to Mexico.

[Tacis]

I never understood the ultra-liberal, extremist left wing romance with the concept of "sacred" Indian stuff. The Indians learned a long time ago that the leftists were fascinated with the beliefs of savage Indians and the Indians played that card very well. The Indians tied everything in to the spirits and, thereby, attached the word "sacrded" to everything. In fact, I'm surprised that California hasn't passed a law prohibiting the use of the word "Indian" as an adjective unless it is preceded by the modifier, "sacred."

So, we have sacred Indian condoms, sacred Indain casino chips, sacred Indian hookers and so on. But, the lefties love it and Indian lefties will become, "sacred Indian liberals."

[muawiyah]

The Indians did not lose. In fact, the Oneida and Mohican were fully allied with the United Colonies during the American Revolution.

They later on found their property stolen by the State of New York which turned around and gave it to illegal alien immigrants.

The US Government has just recently decided that it is time to give the land back to it's owners and kick off the illegals.

I bet you thought you would see some improvements made in INS standards and operating procedures in the near future didn't you?

(chortling loudly) - Ain't no way, not now, not in the future, not in the past.

[sauropod]

Guess I just don't buy "oral histories" as part of the
NEPA process. 'Pod.

[Carry_Okie]

If you ever saw how they trot out these $175/hr tribal shamans to determine if the site is sacred, you would know what a scam this really was.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

So, we have sacred Indian condoms, sacred Indain casino chips, sacred Indian hookers and so on. But, the lefties love it and Indian lefties will become, "sacred Indian liberals."

ROFL!

[marsh2]

Several years back an attempt was made to name the entirety of Mt. Shasta from top to foot as a National Historic Landmark due to its cosmological significance (sacredness) to local Indians. ( Note the Indians interviewed did not even belong to a federally recognized tribe.)

Not only would the mountain (including the town) be regulated, but everything that could be seen or heard from the mountain that could possinbly impact the spiritual "experience" of the mountain.

In the northern part of the county, land slated for a possible land exchange deal by BLM was set aside from the deal as the tribes claimed that the site was where the mythical coyote has performed one of his exploits. This claim also arose on land considerably south of that.

Medicine Lake, an area of geothermal exploration is now under permit appeal by a local tribe based on its sacred significance to a tribe.

The problem here is that localized sites with relics are not at issue. Vast landscapes are claimed to have sacred significance. Indian world views are very much in direct conflict with Western notions of private property ownership.

[snopercod]

The entire central coast of California used to "belong" to the Chumash - from Santa Barbara to San Simeon.

Nice chunk of property, there.

[Carry_Okie]

And the Ohlone up into Santa Cruz. IMO, from what I have seen of the guys who make the findings, most of thess claims of sacred areas are fraudulent.

[sailor4321]

Well, they're just about 200 years too late. If they could have gotten this law in, say, 1802, they could have vetoed any roads going west and we'd all be crowded together on the east coast.

Now, if a "white-eyes" project 20 miles outside the reservation is stopped because it violates Indian sacred ground, is it still a violation of sacred ground if the Indians build a casino on it? You know, someplace the like heart of downtown San Diego, or LA, or SF?