UN Investigator Says U.S. Should Return Stolen Land To Indian Tribes

"The Treaty of Penn with the Indians" by Benjamin West (1771)

"The Treaty of Penn with the Indians" by Benjamin West (1771)

Says a new UN report on the conditions of Indigenous peoples in the Americas. Chris McGreal writes in the Guardian:

A United Nations investigator probing discrimination against Native Americans has called on the US government to return some of the land stolen from Indian tribes as a step toward combatting continuing and systemic racial discrimination.

James Anaya, the UN special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, said no member of the US Congress would meet him as he investigated the part played by the government in the considerable difficulties faced by Indian tribes.

Anaya said that in nearly two weeks of visiting Indian reservations, indigenous communities in Alaska and Hawaii, and Native Americans now living in cities, he encountered people who suffered a history of dispossession of their lands and resources, the breakdown of their societies and “numerous instances of outright brutality, all grounded on racial discrimination”.

“It’s a racial discrimination that they feel is both systemic and also specific instances of ongoing discrimination that is felt at the individual level,” he said. Anaya said racism extended from the broad relationship between federal or state governments and tribes down to local issues such as education.

Continued Here

47 Comments on "UN Investigator Says U.S. Should Return Stolen Land To Indian Tribes"

  1. I don’t know, the reservations near my house are full of mansions on pretty big pieces of land, their own police, factories, and general smugglers. Maybe just give people benefits for selling land to native families in a average to lower income bracket. Although I suppose that’d be just more racial discrimination against everyone else.

  2. Is this blog titled Disinfo or Info? Since it just regurgitates press from the MSM it’s sometimes hard to tell. 

    I’ll take a crack at it, though. What the Guardian did not report: 
    1. The UN investigator (Anaya) is a U.S. citizen whose previous career was as an attorney with the Gila River Nation – the largest tribal casino operator in Arizona. 

    2. His “investigation” into 300 tribes, 1 million people and 1,000 treaties was conducted over the course of 10 days with no supplemental staff, interviewers, sociologists, statisticians, attorneys, historians, etc. 

    3. The largest piece of land he mentioned by name should be “returned” was in South Dakota and (coincidentally, of course) happens to be adjacent to a Sioux casino, is necessary for a planned expansion of said casino and which Sioux have been foiled after 10 years of efforts to purchase it. 

    • Given the amount of destruction and brutality that native tribes have had to suffer, historically from the white man, your accusations against the UN investigator, even if they are true (don’t know if they are), are of so little importance that I couldn’t even care less for even checking them down.

    • Auto5734955 | May 10, 2012 at 6:52 pm |

      Dante, I keep seeing you knocking ‘Disinfo’ , I’m just curious, if this site leaves such a bad taste in your mouth why do you continue to partake? 

  3. sam23sirius | May 9, 2012 at 6:43 pm |

    Maybe the UN should stop starving people and molesting kids in Africa.

    • That’s NATO’s job. The UN’s the one that keeps the African kids from being beheaded legally by the Russians and Americans.

        • The US uses propaganda to give you your opinion, just like the Nazis would have. That doesn’t say the UN stole food, it implies it. I wouldn’t touch the other one with a ten foot pole, and I think it was made that way.

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 10:05 am |

            Enjoy your world government, the world will be a better place without dirty white boy al ciaduh folks like me anyways, right?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 10:18 am |


          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 10:43 am |

            Mao and Stalin would be so proud of you, a single tear of pride would be running down their cheek.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 11:00 am |

            not a maoist nor a stalinist, and neither is the UN. save your tears for the people whom really deserve it: everyone not on the right, whom the right seeks to disenfranchise.

            red-baiting- is that what they teach you at reich wing bullshit U?

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 11:06 am |

            I am not a right winger, but I can see what the UN is really all about. But, don’t worry soon enough you can turn me into the state and have me blackbagged as a thought criminal.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 11:08 am |

             racist? check.
            red baiter? check.
            poster on fox news ? Check.

            right wing? check.

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 11:12 am |


          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 11:17 am |

            the depth of my wit humours and surprises even me sometimes

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 11:12 am |

            I am so racist I have biracial kids..

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 11:15 am |

            then show a little empathy and intellectual concern for the article content. it must be nice to rest on white male privilege and make unverifiable internet claims.

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 11:18 am |

            The person from the article sits on a board for native casino gambling. But I am sure he only feels the way he does out of concern. 

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 11:09 am |

            Mao and Stalin were not left wing or right wing, they were totalitarians. Statism was and will always be the enemy of free men.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 11:14 am |

             i’m not a statist, but i am interested in social and economic justice- and if that is expressed through the UN so be it.

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 9:07 pm |

            The UN leaves death and devastation in it’s wake. Social justice can only exist if individual rights are protected. Liberty is the most moral and humane way for any society to conduct it’s self. If you want the protection of the state and entities like the UN so be it. I do not want that protection, so the least you can do is not advocate for armed thugs to enforce your version of social justice on me. If you can’t do that then accept your immorality.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 10:07 pm |

            i’m not advocating for africom or even the UN; however in the case of the UN- there is a legal and moral precedent for human rights-whether they continously follow it is a seperate disussion. i think both the state and capital are oppressive forces, but human rights, the rights of the earth and ability for both individuals and communities to determine their own course (democracy+sovereignty) is the only moral claim i assert. the US is founded on blood (as is canada, australia, and every other colonialist nation) – to not try to rectify that evil is immoral- and i cannot abide by that.

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 10:22 pm |

            Our entire civilization is founded on blood. It is impossible to change that without changing human nature.Using the state, or state endorsed agencies, to use violence to force folks to play nice only makes it worse, violence begets violence. I am glad you are not advocating for the UN, I assumed you were. I do, however, have to disagree about democracy being moral, it is merely the tyranny of the majority.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 10:35 pm |

            the UN is not endorsing state violence, merely recomending the US fulfill its treaty obligations and not impede on the sovereignty of native groups. as a libertarian i’d have thought you’d appreciate that. i think republicanism, and representative politics is the tyranny of technocrats and oligarchs, i’d much prefer my democracy to be consensus, grass roots, and of the ‘unwashed masses’ as you refer to them. that way everyone or no one can play.

          • Auto5734955 | May 10, 2012 at 7:00 pm |

            Rothchilds and Koch’s would be proud of you.  A smirkish grin of greed wold be adorning their faces.

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 9:02 pm |

            Hahahaha! Advocating for free humanity is now akin to eeeeevilll capitalism. I really don’t see how anyone could look at what africom and the UN has done in Africa and feel smug about it. The UN can just stay out of my country, I don’t want their kind of “help”

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 10:57 am |

            LOL, the jesus is a mushroom kid puts out info on the 42 fallacies and the entire alternative info community are suddenly experts…

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 11:22 am |

            this is in reply to your comment about James Anaya, casino ownership is and was a way to lift native people out of 200 years of genocidal history and abject 3rd world poverty and the historical trauma that has become a legacy for indigenous groups. if that is true, i see absolutely nothing wrong with it.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 11:25 am |

             and the US has honoured all its treaty obligations for all recognised bands and tribes? i don’t think so! the US is sitting on massive amounts of uncompensated land. What anaya is saying is to recognise US treaty obligations for ALL bands and tribes not just his.

          • I don’t know who the fuck “the jesus is a mushroom kid” is supposed to be or where he supposedly put out info on fallacies, but it doesn’t matter anyway because your previous comment is still a false dilemma and this last one is ad hominem.

            If you reply to this, do try to write something relevant.

          • sam23sirius | May 10, 2012 at 10:09 pm |

            Aren’t you the clever one selectively pointing out a rhetorical error in a comment section?  I was not informed that this was a formal debate. Smug lil pricks that read a book about rhetorical devices and feel like they are now somehow above the unwashed masses suck proverbial ass. How’s that for ad hominem?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 10, 2012 at 10:31 pm |

            not that great to be honest. if you want to be insulting, don’t tell someone they are both more well-read and more intellectual than you are.

          • sam23sirius | May 11, 2012 at 3:39 pm |

            Who said I haven’t read books about rhetorical devices? Pointing out things taught day one in any debate class in situations in which they do not apply isn’t really all that intellectual, it is more pseudo intellectual. The world is full of enough pseudo-intellectuals spouting inane things they read about but don’t really understand. Sounding smart and being smart are two widely disparate things.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 11, 2012 at 4:34 pm |

            as widely disperate as an anarcho-capitalist US-gov’t apologist/protectionist? just a thought.

          • sam23sirius | May 11, 2012 at 5:45 pm |

            I am none of those things.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 11, 2012 at 6:28 pm |

            your rhetoric completely fits in line with an anarcho-capitalist view point and US protectionism- the stuff about liberty as morality, anti statist, anti UN, democray as tyranny. Nothing about the market though. nothing about corporate personhood, or how fascism has taken hold. funnily enough it’s all pretty much off the alex jones, ayn rand or perhaps murray rothbard bandwagon.

          • sam23sirius | May 11, 2012 at 6:40 pm |

            I am more an American Individualist, in the tradition of Lysander Spooner. I do agree with the overall philosophy of liberty, and of the current cast of characters running, I would be tempted to vote for Paul. I am really not a big fan of voting though. I try not to encourage the system any more than I have to.

  4. not if britain has something to say about it

  5. DeepCough | May 9, 2012 at 9:31 pm |

    First off, the Indians already got their land (that would be India, you see) back–from Britain, get it? Secondly, why would the U.S. do a thing like returning pillaged land from the indigenous tribesmen of the American continent? That’s like Great Britain holding the U.S. responsible for the American Revolution.

  6. I dunno, there’s just something appealing about an external organization coming into the states and saying “No, no, that’s not how you do it.  You should do it like this because we said so” for a change.  Nice reversal.

  7. Gregory Wyrdmaven | May 10, 2012 at 10:42 am |

    In Uhmurkah, apartheid never ended.

  8. The UN would also like the US to start paying their yearly membership dues, something the US has never, ever done, and never, ever will.

Comments are closed.