Forgotten History, Stolen Land, Treaty Violations, Constitution, Civil Rights, Law Firm, 18 USC 241

FORGOTTEN HISTORY UNITED STATES SEGREGATION OF AMERICA

What was the U.S Government's Plan To Segregate America?

What is acting under color of law?

According to the Federal Civil Rights Statutes and the FBI, Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," ...

Color of Law is Illegal
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States

What is the Slave Badge...

Are They Currently Being Used By The Police Department Today?

Racial Profiling refers to the discriminatory practice by law enforcement officials of targeting individuals for suspicion of crime based on the individual’s race, ethnicity, religion or national origin.

How Racial Profiling Even Began
Ever since slavery began, Black people have been racially profiled. In fact, the history of policing in America started with white men hired to find and return runaway slaves. The institution of slavery and the control of minorities, however, were two of the more formidable historic features of American society shaping early policing.

Slave patrols and Night Watches, which later became modern police departments, were both designed to control the behaviors of minorities. For example, in 1704, the colony of Carolina developed the nation’s first slave patrol. Slave patrols helped to maintain the economic order and to assist the wealthy landowners in recovering and punishing slaves who essentially were considered property.

The use of patrols to capture runaway slaves was one of the precursors of formal police forces, especially in the South. This disastrous legacy persisted as an element of the police role even after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Source: Eastern Kentucky University

Driving while Black in Des Moines, IA

Check the data. Racial profiling is often the reason a Black person may be suspected and stopped in the first place. Once a Black person in Des Moines, Iowa IS stopped, they are:

2.9 times more likely to be issued a citation,
3.7 times more likely to be booked for some reason,
3.6 times more likely to be booked for possession of a controlled substance, and
6.2 times more likely to be booked for interference with official acts,

than a white person.

Tecumseh

Tecumseh Deerfoot The Warrior and Freedom Fighter

Picture from the National Museum American Indian Smithsonian,

Native History: The Day Tecumseh’s Prophecy Rocked the World On August 11, 1802 Tecumseh predicted the ground would shake and on December 16, 1811, the New Madrid earthquake hit causing a seismic shift. CHRISTINA ROSE

This Date in Native History: Earthquakes and eclipses of the sun were among the deeds attributed to Tecumseh and his brother, but legends surrounding Tecumseh are as great as the truths, said Shawnee Second Chief Ben Barnes. “It is hard to know without proof or specific oral history just exactly what happened” on August 11, 1802 he said.

There is evidence that Tecumseh and his brother, Tenskwatawa, were prophets and visionaries who may have changed history had there been a little more help from the British, and more faith from certain tribes. As for help from the Creator, or “Master of Life,” the evidence follows.

Tenskwatawa was a victim of the times, with an intense longing for the ways of his childhood and a sense of hopelessness for the future. Lost in alcoholism, Tenskwatawa one day fell into a fire, and lived. Reborn into a spiritual fervor, he became known as The Prophet, declaring that the Master of Life had insisted that all ways associated with the white man must be abandoned.

Fed up with the ever encroaching, land stealing whites, Tecumseh took his brother’s prophecy and called for all Natives to unite as one people against the whites. More than 1,000 people from a variety of tribes joined Tecumseh, whose charismatic persona drew the respect and admiration of whites and Natives alike.

“He was part of the warrior division of his tribe,” Barnes said, describing Tecumseh as “a self-prescribed leader who became a war chief by assuming that mantle. Tecumseh said, ‘We will not continue moving west. We are going back to the old ways.’”

Romanticized by whites and described as having powerful medicine by his Native peers, historic documents describe Tecumseh as being “of commanding figure, nearly six feet tall and compactly built, dignified bearing and piercing eye, charitable in thought and action, brave as a lion, but humane and generous with all. An aboriginal American knight.”

Barnes reported that after Tecumseh saw the Shawnee burn Daniel Boone’s 14-year-old son, Tecumseh turned the tides toward a gentler society for his people. He was known to treat all people, men, women, enemies and prisoners, with justice and fairness.

Tecumseh's successful mobilization of so many Natives proved to the United States that the war had not been won. In an attempt to discredit The Prophet, the government insisted that the Indians seek proof that he was supported by the Creator. They got it after the prophet called for a sunless sky, which arrived shortly after in the form of an extreme total eclipse.

Legend has it that Tecumseh went amongst the Creeks to join in the rebellion, but when they refused to join his confederacy, he threatened that if they did not enlist before he reached Detroit, he would stamp his feet three times and they would feel their houses shake down through Mississippi.

Whether legend or prophecy, his words played out on December 16, 1811, when the first of three earthquakes were said to have occurred when he reached Detroit. Named the New Madrid earthquakes for New Madrid, Missouri, the U.S. Geological Survey writes that the earthquake was close to 10 times stronger than the one that destroyed San Francisco in the late 1800s and shook the earth strong enough to alarm the general population over an area of 1,553,428 square miles. The massive quake caused such a major shift of seismic plates that it was said church bells rang out in Boston, sidewalks cracked in Washington, D.C., forests disappeared, lakes were created, villages were swallowed and for a few hours even the Mississippi River ran backwards.

Crazy Horse, American Moorish Indian, Freedom Fighter, Indigenous, Sitting Bull, Sioux Tribe, nation

The Untold Truth Of Crazy Horse

Crazy Horse The Warrior & Freedom Fighter

Crazy Horse was an Oglala Sioux Indian chief who fought against being relocated to an Indian reservation. He took part in the Battle of Little Big Horn.

Who Was Crazy Horse? Crazy Horse was an Oglala Sioux Indian chief who fought against removal to a reservation in the Black Hills. In 1876, he joined with Cheyenne forces in a surprise attack against Gen. George Crook; then united with Chief Sitting Bull for the Battle of the Little Bighorn. In 1877, Crazy Horse surrendered and was killed in a scuffle with soldiers.

Early Years An uncompromising and fearless Lakota leader who was committed to protecting his people's way of life, Crazy Horse was born with the Native American name Tashunka Witco around 1840 near what is present-day Rapid Springs, South Dakota.

The details of how he came to acquire the name Crazy Horse are up for debate. One account says that his father, also named Crazy Horse, passed the name on to him after his son had demonstrated his skills as a warrior.

Even as a young boy, Crazy Horse stood out. He was fair-skinned and had brown, curly hair, giving him an appearance that was noticeably different from other boys his age. These physical differences may have laid the groundwork for a personality that even among his own people made him a loner and a bit distant.

Crazy Horse's birth had come during a great time for the Lakota people. A division of the Sioux, the Lakota represented the largest band of the tribe. Their domain included a giant swath of land that ran from the Missouri River to the Big Horn Mountains in the west. Their contact with whites was minimal, and by the 1840s the Lakota were at the peak of their power.

Changes for the Lakota In the 1850s, however, life for the Lakota began to change considerably. As white settlers began pushing west in search of gold and a new life out on the frontier, competition for resources between these new immigrants and the Lakota created tension. Military forts were established in parts of the Great Plains, bringing in even more white settlers and introducing diseases that took their toll on the native Indian populations.

In August 1854, everything boiled over in what became known as the Grattan Massacre. It started when a group of white men, led by Lieutenant John Grattan, entered a Sioux camp to take prisoner the men who had killed a migrant's cow. After Chief Conquering Bear refused to give in to their demands, violence erupted. After one of the white soldiers shot and killed the chief, the camp's warriors fought back and killed Grattan and his 30 men.

The Grattan Massacre is widely considered the conflict that kicked off the First Sioux War between the United States and the Lakota. For the still young Crazy Horse, it also helped establish what would be a lifetime of distrust for whites.

The Fetterman Massacre, Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 As conflicts escalated between the Lakota and the United States, Crazy Horse was at the center of many key battles.

In one important victory for his people, Crazy Horse led an attack on Captain William J. Fetterman and his brigade of 80 men. The Fetterman Massacre, as it came to be known, proved to be a huge embarrassment for the U.S. military.

Even after the signing of the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868, which guaranteed the Lakota important land, including the coveted Black Hills territory, Crazy Horse continued his fight.

Beyond his seemingly mystical ability to avoid injury or death on the battlefield, Crazy Horse also showed himself to be uncompromising with his white foes. He refused to be photographed and never committed his signature to any document. The aim of his fight was to retake the Lakota life he'd known as a child when his people had full run of the Great Plains.

The Battle of the Little Bighorn

Following the discovery of gold in the Black Hills, and the U.S. government's backing of white explorers in the territory, the War Department ordered all Lakota onto reservations. Crazy Horse and Chief Sitting Bull refused. On June 17, 1876,

Crazy Horse led a force of 1,200 Oglala and Cheyenne warriors against General George Crook and his brigade, successfully turning back the soldiers as they attempted to advance toward Sitting Bull's encampment on the Little Bighorn River.

A week later Crazy Horse teamed up with Sitting Bull to decimate Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer and his esteemed Seventh Cavalry in the Battle of the Little Bighorn, perhaps the greatest victory ever by Native Americans over U.S. troops.

The Death of Crazy Horse

Following the defeat of Custer, the U.S. Army struck back hard against the Lakota, pursuing a scorched-earth policy whose aim was to extract total surrender. While Sitting Bull led his followers into Canada to escape the wrath of the Army, Crazy Horse continued to fight.

But as the winter of 1877 set in and food supplies began to shorten, Crazy Horse's followers started to abandon him. On May 6, 1877, he rode to Fort Robinson in Nebraska and surrendered. Instructed to remain on the reservation, he defied orders that summer to put his sick wife in the care of his parents.

After his arrest, Crazy Horse was returned to Fort Robinson, where, in a struggle with the officers, he was bayoneted in the kidneys. He passed away with his father at his side on September 5, 1877.

Years after his death, Crazy Horse is still revered for being a visionary leader who fought hard to preserve his people's traditions and way of life.

Monument The Crazy Horse Memorial is located in the Black Hills of South Dakota. Started in 1948, the monumental sculpture is an ongoing project, carved from Thunderhead Mountain, and located about 17 miles from Mount Rushmore. It is set to be part of a museum and cultural center honoring Native Americans.

This is a long form text area designed for your content that you can fill up with as many words as your heart desires. You can write articles, long mission statements, company policies, executive profiles, company awards/distinctions, office locations, shareholder reports, whitepapers, media mentions and other pieces of content that don’t fit into a shorter, more succinct space.

Sitting Bull, American Moorish Indian, Freedom Fighter, Indigenous, Crazy Horse, Sioux Tribe, nation

The Untold Truth of Sitting Bull

Sitting Bull The Warrior & Freedom Fighter

The Story of Sitting Bull

According to “Biography Article”

“God made me an Indian.” —Sitting Bull

Sitting Bull was a Teton Dakota Indian chief under whom the Sioux tribes united in their struggle for survival on the North American Great Plains. Who Was Sitting Bull?

Sitting Bull joined his first war party at 14 and soon gained a reputation for bravery in battle. In 1868, the Sioux accepted peace with the U.S. government, but when gold was discovered in the Black Hills in the mid-1870s, a rush of white prospectors invaded Sioux lands. Sitting Bull responded but could only win battles, not the war. He was arrested and killed in 1890.

Early Years Arguably the most powerful and perhaps famous of all Native American chiefs, Sitting Bull was born in 1831 in what is now called South Dakota. The son of an esteemed Sioux warrior named Returns-Again, Sitting Bull looked up to his father and desired to follow in his footsteps, but didn't show a particular talent for warfare. As a result, he was called "Slow" for his apparent lack of skills.

At the age of 10, however, he killed his first buffalo. Four years later, he fought honorably in a battle against a rival clan. He was named Tatanka-Iyotanka, a Lakota name that describes a buffalo bull sitting on its haunches.

Much of Sitting Bull's life was shaped by the struggles against an expanding American nation. When Sitting Bull was young he was chosen as leader of the Strong Heart Society. In June 1863, he took up arms against the United States for the first time. He fought American soldiers again the following year at the Battle of Killdeer Mountain.

In 1865, he led an attack on the newly built Fort Rice in what is now called North Dakota. His skills as a warrior and the respect he'd earned as a leader of his people led him to become chief of the Lakota nation in 1868.

Defender of His People

Confrontation with American soldiers escalated in the mid-1870s after gold was discovered in the Black Hills, a sacred area to Native Americans that the American government had recognized as their land following the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty.

As white prospectors rushed into the Sioux lands, the American government tabled the treaty and declared war on any native tribes that prevented it from taking over the land. When Sitting Bull refused to abide by these new conditions, the stage was set for confrontation.

Sitting Bull's defense of his land was rooted both in the history of his culture and in the fate he believed awaited his people. At a Sun Dance ceremony on the Little Bighorn River, where a large community of Native Americans had established a village, Sitting Bull danced for 36 consecutive hours, slashed his arms as a sign of sacrifice and deprived himself of drinking water. At the end of this spiritual ceremony, he informed villagers that he had received a vision in which the American army was defeated.

In June 1876, just a few days later, the chief led a successful battle against American forces in the Battle of the Rosebud. A week later, he was engaged in battle again, this time against General George Armstrong Custer in the now famous Battle at Little Bighorn, known as the Battle of the Greasy Grass to the Lakota. There, Sitting Bull led thousands of Sioux and Cheyenne warriors against Custer's undermanned force, wiping out the American general and his 200-plus men.

For the U.S. government, the defeat was an embarrassment, and the Army doubled down its efforts to wrest control of the territory from Native American tribes. To escape its wrath, Sitting Bull led his people into Canada, where they remained for four years.

Sitting Bull's Return

In 1881, Sitting Bull returned to the Dakota territory, where he was held prisoner until 1883. In 1885, after befriending Annie Oakley, he joined Buffalo Bill Cody’s Wild West Show.

The pay was more than good—$50 a week to ride once around the arena—but Sitting Bull quickly grew tired of the performances and life on the road. He was shocked by the poverty he saw in the cities, and coupled with the hatred that was directed toward him by some of the show's audience members, Sitting Bull decided to return to his people. "[I] would rather die an Indian than live a white man," he famously said.

Final Years and Death

Back home, in a cabin on the Grand River not far from where he'd been born, Sitting Bull lived his life without compromise. He rejected Christianity and continued to honor his people's way of life. In 1889, Native Americans began to take up the Ghost Dance, a ceremony aimed at ridding the land of white people and restore the Native American way of life. Sitting Bull soon joined it.

Fearing the powerful chief's influence on the movement, authorities directed a group of Lakota police officers to arrest Sitting Bull. On December 15, 1890, they entered his home. After they dragged Sitting Bull out of his cabin, a gunfight followed and the chief was shot in the head and killed. He was laid to rest at Fort Yates in North Dakota. In 1953, his remains were moved to Mobridge, South Dakota, where they remain today.

Massachusetts opposed annexation of Texas to the U.S Texas belong Moorish people. Const. Law History

STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS OPPOSED ANNEXATION OF TEXAS

Resolution, General Assembly of Massachusettes, 1844

The state of Massachusetts submitted this resolution to the U.S. Congress formally opposing the annexation of Texas in January 1844. Massachusetts had opposed adding Texas to the Union at least once before. On May 21, 1838 they blocked an annexation resolution submitted by Tennessee.

Massachusetts’s opposition was led by John Quincy Adams (1767–1848), the former President of the United States who was serving in the House of Representatives as a Massachusetts congressman. Adams was the most outspoken abolitionist in the country and made it his life’s work to oppose what he called the tragic follies of his era.

"If the fundamental principles in the Declaration of Independence, as self-evident truths, are real truths, the existence of slavery, in any form, is a wrong." John Quincy Adams

Adams led a campaign to stop any talk of annexing Texas, saying the Republic was nothing but the “misbegotten and illegitimate progeny” of the slaveholding South. Adams believed that Texas still legally belonged to Mexico, and he fought attempts to put the United States in the position of annexing part of another country.

During a 22-day filibuster in the House of Representatives, he blocked the annexation of Texas in 1838. He was not as successful in 1845 when the issue came up again. On December 16, 1845, the U.S. House voted 141–58 with 21 abstaining to annex Texas. President James K. Polk made it official on December 29, 1845 and Texas became the nation’s 28th state.

HOUSE......No. 187
Common Wealth of Massachusetts. Massachusetts STATE Library

Consequences of Annexation.
Such-was the character of this act, and the object proposed by it. republic, whose animating principle is freedom, here appears as the pander of slavery. But the act of annexation did not pass in silence. It was earnestly and eloquently opposed, in its different stages, on the express ground that it would extend slavery, and entail upon the country war with Mexico. And these direful consequences are now upon us. The flag of the American Union waves over new state, whose unfortunate slaves look to it in vain for the protection which is implied in the Declaration of Independence. And war now rages between the United States and Mexico. One of the senators of Texas, Mr. Houston, who owes his seat in the national councils to this unconstitutional act, now declares that the present war with Mexico is but continuation of the Texan war, and that, when we took Texas, we took the war as by inheritance.” Such have been the consequences of that act.

The Western Boundary of Texas.
Texas was annexed; and the question arises, What was the territory which had thus been torn from Mexico and incorporated into our republic? What were its metes and bounds? Look first at the resolutions of annexation. By these, it is provided as follows :—“First, Congress doth consent that the territory properly included within, and rightfully belonging to, the republic of Texas, may be erected into new State, to be called the State of Texas, with republican form of government.”

And again, “The said State to be formed subject to the adjustment by the government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other governments.” These terms were acceded to by Texas. The introduction to her constitution, which has been approved by our Congress, expressly declares, that it is formed in accordance with the joint resolutions annexing Texas to the United States.” The constitution sets forth no boundary, while it follows the resolutions of annexation in excluding all territory not properly included within, and rightfully belonging to, the republic of Texas.

The absence of any express designation of the territory, by metes and bounds, as occurs in the treaty of 1783, acknowledging the independence of the United States, is sufficient proof that they were still undetermined, while the language of the resolutions recognizes “questions of boundary,” which notoriously related to the western frontier, or the line between Texas and Mexico.

The question recurs, What territory was properly included within, and rightfully belonging to, Texas? There are some persons, who, adverting to the early history of this territory, assert that it was once part of Louisiana, and that, as such, its western boundary was the Rio Grande. This position has, however, been assailed by an overwhelming array of authorities and illustrations, which leave it little more than hollow assertion.* But, whatever may be the conclusions with regard to it, it will not be questioned that Texas, first as Spanish province, and afterwards as one of the States of the Mexican confederacy, was bounded by the River Nueces, (Walnut River.)

This is an important geographical and historical fact, in itself almost conclusive upon the question, in the absence of countervailing proofs. Prominent leaders of (he now dominant party of our country, have solemnly declared that the boundary was not further west than the great desert between the Nueces and the Rio Grande. Mr. Benton, senator of the United States, in his speech of May 13, 1844, denounced the attempt to claim the Rio Grande, sometimes called the Rio del Norte and the Rio Bravo, as the boundary, which is one hundred and fifty miles farther west. He embodied his opinions in the following resolution:-
“Resolved That the incorporation of the left bank of the Rio del Norte into the American Union, by virtue of treaty with Texas, comprehending, as the said incorporation would do, part of the Mexican departments of New Mexico, Chihuahua, Coahuila, and Taraaulipas, would be an act of direct aggression on Mexico for all the consequences of which the United States would stand responsible.” In the House of Representatives, the chairman of the committee of foreign affairs, (Mr. C. J. Ingersoll,) on the 3d of February, 1845, made his remarkable declaration to the same effect

He said:---

“The stupendous deserts between the Nueces and the Bravo Rivers are the natural boundaries between the Anglo-Saxon and the Mauritanian races. There ends the valley of the west. There Mexico begins. Thence, beyond the Bravo, begin the Moorish people, and their Indian associates, to whom Mexico properly belongs; who should not cross that vast desert if they could, as we, on our side, too, ought to stop there, because interminable conflicts must ensue our going south, or their coming north, of that gigantic boundary. While peace is cherished, that boundary will be sacred. Not till the spirit of conquest rages, will the people on either side molest or mix with each other; and whenever they do, one or the other race must be conquered, if not extinguished.”

Massachusetts did not want Texas to be part of the United States. They said Texas properly belong to Mauritanian Races, or the Moorish people and their Indian Associates, to which Mexico properly belongs...

American National Common Law Group