Pope’s remarks whitewashed the genocide of Indigenous Peoples

Hopefully, Pope Benedict XVI will soon formally revoke the 15th century papal bulls which were primarily responsible for the horrible atrocities committed against Indigenous Peoples and then lead the Catholic Church and Western “Civilization” through a process of radical transformation. And by doing so, lead humanity into a new age, wherein Indigenous Peoples will be given their due respect.

On May 9, 2007 Pope Benedict XVI arrived in Brazil for his first visit as pope to Latin America, where more than half of all Catholics live. During his visit he made perverse and morally obscene remarks which described the genocidal destruction of the Western Hemisphere’s pre-Columbus cultures as a “purifying” act which gave the indigenous peoples just what they were “longing for”. His historical revisionism whitewashes genocide, ethnocide, slavery, land theft, and the continuing subjugation of Indigenous Peoples.

The Pope declared that “the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean” were “silently longing” to receive Christ as their savior. Colonization by Spain and Portugal was not a conquest, but rather an “adoption” of the Indians through baptism, making their cultures “fruitful” and “purifying” them. Accordingly, “the proclamation of Jesus and of his Gospel did not at any point involve an alienation of the pre-Columbian cultures, nor was it the imposition of a foreign culture.”

In a United Nations World Conference against Racism document there are statements that radically contradict the Pope’s remarks. “Historians and academics agree that the colonization of the New World saw extreme expressions of racism – massacres, forced-march relocations, the ‘Indian wars’, death by starvation and disease. Today, such practices would be called ethnic cleansing and genocide.”

“In the fifteenth century, two Papal Bulls set the stage for European domination of the New World and Africa. Romanus Pontifex …declared war against all non-Christians throughout the world, and specifically sanctioned and promoted the conquest, colonization, and exploitation of non-Christian nations and their territories. Inter Caetera ….officially established Christian dominion over the New World. It called for the subjugation of the native inhabitants and their territories,….”

“The Papal Bulls have never been revoked, although indigenous representatives have asked the Vatican to consider doing so. These ‘doctrines of discovery’ provided the basis for both the ‘law of nations’ and subsequent international law. Thus, they allowed Christian nations to claim ‘unoccupied lands’ (terra nullius), or lands belonging to “heathens” or “pagans”. In many parts of the world, these concepts later gave rise to the situation of many Native peoples in the today – dependent nations or wards of the State,…”

According to Pope Benedict the invasion and conquest of the Americas, which caused the deaths of upwards of 90 percent of the indigenous population of around 100 million, was something the natives had been pining for all along. They weren’t just “asking for it,” as some male rapists depict the women they raped. They were actually “longing” for it, since salvation and “purification” came with it. The Pope’s logic is similar to the following statement. If a man brutally rapes a woman and she gives birth to his child she should be grateful and thank the rapist for raping her since their child came with it.

In the wake of (1.)…the United Nations statements about the Roman Catholic Church being primarily responsible for the genocide committed against Indigenous Peoples, and (2.)…nation states such as Australia and Canada recently apologizing for the atrocities committed against Indigenous Peoples in their nations, and (3.)…U.S. Senator Sam Brownback’s sponsored May resolution which acknowledges a long history of official depredations and ill-conceived policies by the United States Government regarding Indian tribes and offers an apology to all Native Peoples on behalf of the United States, a resolution that is making its way through Congress, and (4.)…the U.S. Colorado state government passing a resolution in April which compared the deaths of millions of American Indians to the Holocaust and other acts of genocide around the world, and (5.)…the recent Minnesota Sesquicentennial Commission’s admittance that Minnesota committed ethnocide and genocide against Natives during its early history…the Pope and other high ranking Catholic officials are, unquestionably, looking at dealing with another upcoming big scandal, a scandal that will make the pedophile priests’ sex scandal cover up look like a drop in the bucket.

Hopefully, Pope Benedict XVI will soon formally revoke the 15th century papal bulls which were primarily responsible for the horrible atrocities committed against Indigenous Peoples and then lead the Catholic Church and Western “Civilization” through a process of radical transformation, and by doing so, lead humanity into a new age, wherein Indigenous Peoples will be given their due respect.

by Thomas Dahlheimer

Independent Indigenous Sovereign Nations

The indigenous peoples living in this land are still being denied three of their–endowed by the Creator–unalienable equality rights, or fundamental human rights. The right to absolute root ownership of their scared traditional/ancestral homelands, the right to be recognized and treated as full independent sovereign nations and the–freedom of religion–right to fully re-establish their traditional religions within their sacred ancestral homelands.

Introduction:

After sending Paul Gorski, a nationally and internationally renowned multicultural educator and social activist, the following article, an article that was posted in Indigenous Peoples Literature, for posting on his website’s Digest e-mail forum, he posted the article. And after reading the post, Amy Kasi, the Program Manager for the National MultiCultural Institute, contacted me and asked if I would allow her to post a quote of mine from the article as well as a link to my article in the National MultiCultural Institute’s upcoming October newsletter. I said “YES”, and it was recently post on the NMCI’s October newsletter. It is posted on the newsletter’s SPOTLIGHT display.

On the 4th of July, most of us, being in agreement with our nation’s founding fathers’ 1776 signing of the Declaration of Independence, celebrated Independence Day. The declaration addressed taxation without representation, tyranny, liberty, governance and the “unalienable rights” of all people – rights that were “endowed by the Creator”. It was about colonist leaders’ struggle to define those ideas for themselves and multitudes of early immigrants living amongst the homelands of [existing] independent indigenous sovereign nations.

These indigenous nations possessed full independent sovereign nation status – which England, the Pope and the early immigrants [including our founding fathers] refused to recognize. This was an injustice that violated the– “endowed by the Creator”–unalienable right of indigenous nations to be rightfully recognized and treaded as independent sovereign nations with absolute root ownership of their homelands.

A United Nations World Conference Against Racism document presents information about this topic: “Historians and academics agree that the colonization of the New World saw extreme expressions of racism – massacres, forced-march relocations, the ‘Indian wars’, death by starvation and disease. Today, such practices would be called ethnic cleansing and genocide.”

“In the fifteenth century, two Papal Bulls set the stage for European domination of the New World and Africa. Romanus Pontifex …declared war against all non-Christians throughout the world, and specifically sanctioned and promoted the conquest, colonization, and exploitation of non-Christian nations and their territories. Inter Caetera ….officially established Christian dominion over the New World. It called for the subjugation of the native inhabitants and their territories,….”

“The Papal Bulls have never been revoked, although indigenous representatives have asked the Vatican to consider doing so. These ‘doctrines of discovery’ provided the basis for both the ‘law of nations’ and subsequent international law. Thus, they allowed Christian nations to claim ‘unoccupied lands’ (terra nullius), or lands belonging to ‘heathens’ or ‘pagans’. In many parts of the world, these concepts later gave rise to the situation of many Native peoples in the today – dependent nations or wards of the State,…”

Our nation stole Native lands and denied Native peoples (tribes) their right to independent sovereign nation status. Why and how did these atrocities occur? The British government had afforded Native lands a measure of protection by the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which had attempted to restrict colonial expansion beyond the Appalachian Mountains, and had alienated many American colonists. Likewise, many Native people knew that the American Revolutionary war against Britain was an unjust war, waged (in part) to gain the unrestricted ability to steal more of their peoples’ homelands and subjugate more of their people.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence accused King George III of unleashing “merciless Indian Savages” against innocent American colonists. The image of the trespassing-thieving-subjugating-genocidal-religious sectarian and white supremacist American colonists being “innocent” as well as the image of the brave and righteous Native people who fought on the British side in the Revolution in order to protect their Native liberties and homelands as “merciless Indian Savages” fixed a delusional and self-serving memory and imagination of the Native people’s role in the Revolution and wrongly justified their subsequent extreme mistreatment.

American colonists mistakenly believed that the Native people who were fighting on Britain’s side were fighting for the continuation of British monarchy and tyranny. A nation conceived in liberty need feel no remorse about committing genocide against those who had fought against its birth.

The subjugation of this land’s red indigenous nations and peoples by European colonization was a terrible injustice. And the establishment of a foreign–predominately white raced–independent sovereign nation throughout this land was even worse.

Most of the founding fathers were Masons. At that time, no nation believed in the “concept of freedom of religion”, including this land’s indigenous nations. In fact, at that time, the only place such an insane concept was to be found was in Masonry. From that perspective, America was actually founded on a Masonic principle, so that the basis and principle of national unity could no longer be officially based on the people’s unified religious beliefs. This Masonic principle, which is a founding principle of America, is an unholy principle that–at the time of America’s birth–the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, the Protestant King of England and the indigenous peoples of this land were opposed to.

In the Declaration of Independence the founding fathers defined and declared their supposed “righteous justification” for committing treason – by renouncing their English King’s rule over them. And they also established an illegitimate sovereign nation on land they stole from independent indigenous sovereign nations. The founding fathers wrongly separated themselves from the Pope and their King and then established an unholy and illegitimate nation state, the United States of America.

Our founding fathers did not respect this land’s indigenous nations and peoples’ unalienable human rights. And did not respect them, because they were under the spell of Pope Alexander VI and the King of England’s 15th century evil propaganda, as put forth in the “Doctrine of Discovery“ . I define this doctrine as being an indigenous peoples’ independent nations denying and land stealing doctrine. This doctrine was religious sectarian, Eurocentric, White racist and caused genocide and ethnocide to be perpetrated against this land’s indigenous peoples.

In 1823, the Doctrine of Discovery was quietly adopted into U.S. law by the Supreme Court in the celebrated case, [Johnson v. M’Intosh]. In respect to this Supreme Court case, Steve Newcomb, an internationally renowned legal scholar, wrote: “Writing for the unanimous court, Chief Justice John Marshall observed that Christian European nations had assumed ‘ultimate dominion’ over the lands of America during the Age of Discovery, and that–upon ‘discovery’–the Indians had lost ‘their rights to complete sovereignty, as independent nations,’ and only retained a right of ‘occupancy’ in their lands. In other words, Indian nations were subject to the ultimate authority of the first nation of Christendom to claim possession of a given region of Indian lands.”

“According to Marshall, the United States–upon winning its independence in 1776–became a successor nation to the right of ‘discovery’ and acquired the power of ‘dominion’ from Great Britain. Of course, when Marshall first defined the principle of ‘discovery,’ he used language phrased in such a way that it drew attention away from its religious bias, stating that ‘discovery gave title to the government, by whose subject, or by whose authority, the discovery was made, against all other European governments.'”

“However, when discussing legal precedent to support the court’s findings, Marshall specifically cited the English charter issued to the explorer John Cabot, in order to document England’s ‘complete recognition’ of the Doctrine of Discovery. Then, paraphrasing the language of the charter, Marshall noted that Cabot was authorized to take possession of lands, ‘notwithstanding the occupancy of the natives, who were heathens, and, at the same time, admitting the prior title of any Christian people who may have made a previous discovery.'”

Ironically, the same year that the Johnson v. McIntosh decision was handed down, founding father James Madison wrote: “Religion is not in the purview of human government. Religion is essentially distinct from civil government, and exempt from its cognizance; a connection between them is injurious to both.”

Most of us were taught growing up that the United States Constitution is designed to keep church and state apart. However, contrary to what we were taught, with the Johnson decision, the Christian Doctrine of Discovery was not only written into U.S. law but also became the cornerstone of U.S. Indian policy. The U.S. government was bent on promoting the establishment of a particular religion [Christianity], to the extent that it denied the Native pagan peoples their fundamental human rights. And because of the present-day existence of Johnson v. M’Intosh (and subsequent laws based on it), the U.S. government still continues to show perference toward Christianity and disfavors as well as suppresses the full restoration of traditional Native religions. And does so, by not repealing Johnson v. M’Intosh and subsequently giving the Native peoples’ sacred homelands back to them.

Johnson v. M’Intosh is based on a Christian religious doctrine that is inconsistent with the Constitution’s–prohibiting Congress from preferring one religion over another–religious clause of the First Amendment. Johnson v. M’Intosh is therefore in violation of the U.S. Constitution . This U.S. law also violates three unalienable fundamental human rights of indigenous peoples living in this land. This is in violation of the Declaration of Independence as well as internationally recognized norms of human rights declarations.

According to the Declaration of Independence “all people are created equal” and their–endowed by the Creator–“unalienable rights” are suppose to be respected. However, indigenous people living in this land are not considered equal. Because of their ancestors’ religious status at the time of their “discovery” by European colonizers, today’s Native people are still being denied [by the United States] their unalienable equality rights to have absolute root ownership of their homelands, and be recognized and treated as independent sovereign nations.

When it was legal to own black African slaves in our nation’s southern states, many U.S. citizens living in the northern states, including the President of the United States [Abraham Lincoln], decided to wage war against the southern states in order to save the Union as well as set the enslaved Africans free. And by doing so, show due respect for their–“endowed by the Creator”–unalienable equality right to be free people. The enslaved Africans were being denied their fundamental human right to be free people, and our nation set them free.

However, the indigenous peoples living in this land our still being denied three of their–endowed by the Creator–unalienable equality rights, or fundamental human rights. The right to absolute root ownership of their scared traditional/ancestral homelands, the right to be recognized and treated as full independent sovereign nations and the–freedom of religion–right to fully re-establish their traditional religions within their sacred ancestral homelands.

If we were to consider the indigenous peoples living in this land as being equal we would have to give their homelands back to them as well as give them due respect by recognizing and treating their nations as independent sovereign nations. And by doing so, we would be acknowledging that our “nation” is an illegitimate nation state.

How can a foreign people of a different race, language, religion and culture invade another peoples’ homelands and establish a legitimate independent sovereign nation on their land? It’s impossible.

When the Declaration of Independence was signed what happened to the indigenous people living in this land? The decisions that the earliest European colonizers (15th century popes) and the founding fathers made are why, after 500-plus years, indigenous people are still standing here trying to influence us to recognize that their nations are independent sovereign nations and our nation is an illegitimate “nation” established on their land, their continent.

Kevin White, a writer for Indian Country Today, wrote, in his July 25, 2008 article, Toward Indigenous Independence: “In the 1898 Curtis Act and the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act, the U.S. abolished tribal governments first and then required elected forms of governance with constitutions modeled on the U.S. to be recognized in the latter act – this despite many objections of indigenous nations and forms of governance that have existed since long before contact with the West.”

“Even treaty making came to an abrupt and permanent end by an act of the U.S. Congress in 1871 without any thought to existing sovereign indigenous nations’ positions, questions or consultation. I wonder what would happen if England suddenly and arbitrarily decided the 1776 Declaration of Independence no longer applied the way the U.S. did in 1871 regarding treaty making?”

I call for England (queen) and the Vatican (pope) to disavow and rescind the claimed validity of the U.S. Declaration of Independence that was used by the United States’ founding fathers–in defiance of England’s governing authority over them–to establish an illegitimate nation. A “nation” that from its birth denied the New World’s indigenous nations and peoples their– “endowed by the Creator”–unalienable human rights to absolute root ownership of their homelands and independent sovereign nations status and rights.

Maine’s Episcopal diocese is the first in the continental United States to protest against the Doctrine of Discovery. “The diocese passed a resolution at their annual convention calling for Queen Elizabeth and the Archbishop of Canterbury to disavow and rescind the claimed validity of the doctrine of discovery against all peoples, specifically as it is set forth in the 1496 Royal Charter granted to John Cabot and his sons by King Henry VII, and all other doctrines that have been relied thereon for the dispossession of lands and the subjugation of non-Christian peoples….”

Our nation’s founding fathers declared to the King of England: ”In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A nation-state [Prince] whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of free people.”

In respect to the government of the United States, have not the indigenous nations and peoples of this land been doing the exact same thing and receiving similar, and even more harmful, repeated injury ever since the establishment of our nation to the present-day? Is not our nation like a tyrant, and unfit to rule over this land’s indigenous people? People who would like to be free from our nation’s tyranny?

If the U.S. Declaration of Independence and revolutionary war is what freed the colonists from the tyrannical rule of an English monarch, what would the different indigenous sovereign nations of this land have to declare and peacefully resist to be free of the tyranny of the United States?

Resistance precedent: Proposed Oglala Lakota Constitutional Declaration of Independence…..The title of Birgil Kills Straight and Steven Newcomb’s proposed constitution is, Toward an Oglala Lakota Constitution – Statement of Basic Principles. Birgil Kills Straight and Steven Newcomb are the co-founders and co-directors of Indigenous Law Institute. Here’s the introduction statement of their proposed Oglala Lakota Constitution: We, the People of the Oceti Sakowin, have existed rightfully free and independent since the beginning of time. As a sovereign Nation, we are, and forever shall be, rightfully free and independent. Accordingly, we the People of the Oglala Lakota Nation have the inherent right to establish any government for ourselves. This is but an exercise of our inherent power and vested right of self-determination.

Another precedent: The Hawaiian Kingdom Government, a 70 member group of native Hawaiians, recently demand sovereignty for the Pacific island. They locked themselves in the Inlani Palace, one of Honolulu’s most popular attractions, and demanded independence from the United States.

Another precedent: Echoing the methods of the 1776 American Declaration of Independence, a small Lakotah native delegation of outsiders arrived at the U.S. State Department and produced a list of grievances–including the disappearance of their culture and the theft of their natural resources–before announcing that the Lakotah formally and unilaterally withdraws from all agreements and treaties imposed by the United States. This was a group of Lakotah outsiders’ “Lakotah” declaration of independence from the United States.

Another precedent: On September 2, 2008, members of the Oceti Sakowin (Seven Council Fires) of the Dakota Oyate reclaimed their people’s sacred Minnesota Coldwater Spring site, where there is [a] Dakota creation story. The Dakota (including the Dakota, Lakota and Nakota) are claiming their inherent right to their sacred sites. Because the U.S. did not keep the meager terms of a 1805 treaty, a treaty that provided the Dakota special rights to their Coldwater Springs site, as well as to 155,000 acres around the site, members of the Dakota Oyate have questioned the legitimacy of the United States government and the State of Minnesota to occupy this land base and are know occupying their sacred Coldwater Springs site as well as claiming their people’s inherent right to absolute root ownership of this sacred Dakota site.

Canadian precedent: The MNN Mohawk Nation News Staff state in an article titled, Why Canada is not legally a state, that: “Before European ‘visitors’ floated over the ocean and stumbled onto our shores, we formed a federation according to our constitution Kaianerehkowa. The Rotinoshonni:onwe Confederacy is made up of Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayuga, Seneca and Tuscarora. The Rotinoshonni:onwe Confederacy never gave possession of any territory to any European people. So far Canadians do not understand or acknowledge that we never agreed to join their colonial regime or to give up our original law or nationality. The Rotinoshonini:onwe Confederacy has never been legally incorporated into Canada and remains independent.” The Haudenosaunee Six Nations are independent indigenous sovereign nations. 

Note: This article, including reference links, can be viewed and read at: http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/843590

By Thomas Dahlheimer

Border Crossing Rights-kids poem-teacher tool

From the time that Skywoman fell

North America was on a turtle shell

Native people were free to roam

Turtle Island, our natural home.

Since 1492 we see and saw

Treaties that are still the law

The list is long and tattered too

So this is if you never knew,

The first ones were legal deeds

Two separate lines in wampum beads

Distinct ways, words, and ceremony

Governance and territory.

John Jay’s Treaty (article 3) of 1794*

Was also known as so much more

Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation

Recognized a sovereign nation

The border we called the ‘medicine line’

A margin of colonial design

The 1812 Washington treaty

Guaranteed our right to cross freely

1814 (article 9) Treaty of Ghent*

Reaffirmed what sovereignty meant

Three treaties that still recognize

Native people did not colonize

Again a treaty in 1842

Re-reaffirmed what we always knew

Another Washington treaty that would enforce

Our inherent right to cross of course

July 14, 1928

IDLA made no debate

Inherent rights to cross their line

Confirmed in Article 3* and Article 9*

In mid-July every year

There’s a crossing, you may hear

Autonomous homelands, our steps display

Within Canada and the USA

Inherent first, and treaty right

To cross their border, day and night

At the Whirlpool Bridge near the Falls you’ll see

Our people practice Sovereignty

Border Crossing Rights-kids poem-teacher tool »»

2008 Lakota Dakota Nakota Language Summit is a Huge Success!

The Language Summit was an effort to unite the Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota (“Sioux”) oyate (“peoples”) in both the United States and Canada in a collective and committed effort to revitalize and strengthen the Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota languages.

The theme of the summit was “Uniting the Seven Council Fires to Save the Language.” Seven Council Fires refers to the Oceti Sakowin, the name used to represent all “Sioux” bands collectively. More importantly, the theme reflected the urgent need for the Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota peoples to stand together and take action against loss of their beautiful languages. 

Each day started with the entrance of the eagle staffs and a prayer from Arvol Looking Horse, the keeper of the White Buffalo Calf Pipe Bundle of the Oceti Sakowin. Afterward, a keynote speaker addressed the audience before it dispersed to breakout sessions facilitated by language educators and advocates. 

The breakout sessions were designed to expose participants to language teaching methods, models, resources, and strategies that could be used to successfully teach and learn language with emphasis on creating new generations of speakers among the youth of the Oceti Sakowin. Breakout Sessions were facilitated by Dakota Iapi Teunkindapi Consortium, Faith Spotted Eagle, Lakota Language Consortium, Earl Bullhead, Stephanie Charging Eagle, George Patton, Jim Green, Bryan Charging Cloud, Dakota Wicohan, Sioux Valley Dakota Language Committee, Almona Kills In Water, Dr. Archie Beauvais and the Rosebud Sioux Tribe Lakota Language Preservation Project, Albert White Hat, Association on American Indian Affairs Native Language Program, Alexis Nakota Sioux Language Program, Biagio Arobba, Leonard Little Finger, Jerome Kills Small, and Wilmer Mesteth.

Keynote speakers and guest speakers, such as Arvol Looking Horse, Stephanie Charging Eagle, Leonard Little Finger, Ron His Horse Is Thunder, Chief Cameron Alexis, Chief Clifford Pouchette, Chris Mato Nupa, Oswald McKay, Virgil Taken Alive, Jay Taken Alive, Ben Black Bear and Rosalie Little Thunder, generally spoke about the importance of Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota language and its survival, and provided insight on the history on their reservation, reserve, or community’s efforts in revitalizing and strengthening their languages. 

Evening events during the Language Summit included traditional hand-games, Lakota Dakota Nakota language jeopardy, and music from local Native musicians.
Also taking place at the Lakota Dakota Nakota Language Summit was the Lakota Dakota Nakota elected leadership meeting. During this meeting, elected leadership engaged in a round table discussion on what role tribal political leadership could utilize its resources and governmental policies to assist in language revitalization.

Furthermore, the Oglala Sioux Tribe Education Department held a three-day planning session for the adoption of Lakota language as an alternative criterion for meeting No Child Left Behind AYP standards.

The Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota tribes and First Nations that attended the Language Summit are the Oglala Sioux Tribe, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Alexis Nakota Sioux First Nation, Wesley Band Stoney Nakoda First Nation, Yankton Sioux Tribe, Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate, Santee Sioux Tribe, Ocean Man Nakota First Nation, Carry the Kettle Nakoda First Nation, White Cap Dakota First Nation, Sioux Valley Dakota Nation, CanupaWakpa Dakota Nation, Upper Sioux Community, Lower Sioux Community, Prairie Island Dakota Community, Shakopee Mdewakanton Dakota Community, Pheasant Rump Nakota First Nation, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, Crow Creek Sioux Tribe, Bearspaw Stoney Nakoda First Nation, Chiniki Stoney Nakoda First Nation, Birdtail Sioux First Nation, Wahpeton Dakota Nation Rosebud Sioux Tribe, Fort Peck, and Fort Belknap Assiniboine.

Other tribes and First Nations represented were Sagkeeng First Nation, Delaware, Cherokee, Dine Nation, Chippewa, Ojibwe, Northern Cheyenne, Northern Arapaho, and the Manitou Rapids Reserve.

Planning has already begun for next year’s gathering, which will be held November 12-14, 2009, at the Ramkota Hotel and Convention Center in Rapid City, SD. If you any questions or would like more information concerning the Lakota/Dakota/Nakota Language Summit, please contact Mike Carlow at [email protected]

Pictures from the summit can be viewed at www.tuswecatiospaye.org and www.myspace.com/tuswecatiospaye

scholarships for native american students

Here is a list of places to look for scholarships for native american students. scholarships for native american students »»

native american school grants

There are many native american school grants available for native american tribal members. Here are some places to start looking for help. native american school grants »»

native american student loans

For a student to be eligible for many Native American scholarships, such as BIA scholarships, the student should be an enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe. Otherwise funding will most likely be denied. A Certificate of Indian Blood (CIB) card or document is generally accepted proof of membership in a federally recognized tribe. native american student loans »»

Eleven tribes participating in President Obama inaugural parade

AUTHOR: Jody Rave

Thousands of Native people from across the nation are in the capital this week to celebrate the Tuesday inauguration of the 44th president of the United States, a man who is bringing Indian Country with him to the Oval Office.

Eleven tribes will be participating in Tuesday’s inaugural parade. A powwow and American Indian Inaugural Ball will follow the swearing-in ceremony.

Eleven tribes participating in President Obama inaugural parade »»