Page 2: United Keetoowah Band of Cherokees File Suit Against HUD Page 3: Contact your Cherokee representatatives Page 4: BIA Says 1999 Cherokee Constitution Not Valid Page 5: Why State Tobacco And Fuel Compacts Are Unfair To Tribal Governments Page 6: State Revives Narragansett Smokeshop Raid Case Page 7: How Many Wives Or Women And Families Does Cherokee Chief Chad Smith Have? Page 8: Cherokees May Delay Vote On Freedmen Citizenship Page 9: What the 1970 Chiefs Act Means, by David Cornsilk Stacy Leeds for Cherokee Chief: Click here to read more about Stacy Page 10: Cherokee Nation versus Cherokee Freedmen: March 3rd Cherokee Vote, 2007 Descendants Of Freedmen Of The Five Civilized Tribes Click here to print your Cherokee Voter Registration Form PDF Does Cherokee chief Chad Smith have two wives or a wife and a mistress?
This is an excerpt from a Story in the Muskogee Phoenix back in 1999, should anyone be interested, a copy can be seen at the Muskgee County Library. And it serves to negate the implications of of this picture, that Chad Smith is a loving and caring husband and father. If you will, note the ages of the 2 sets of children, both sets were sired by Smith at the same time with two different women. While this is an old news item, the man is the same, and this authors reasoning for continually bringing it up, is to say if a man will do this to people he supposedly loves, what will he do as a Chief of the Cherokee people, who he quite well demonstrates not caring for, never mind loving, by his actions and a new cry for the ouster of a Class of Cherokee people, the Cherokee Freedmen descendents who Citizens of the cherokee Nation and members of the cherokee Nation of Oklahoma as declared so by the Cherokee Supreme Court. Cherokee attorney will run for Chief again:
By Donna Hales Phoenix staff writer.
Smith also may face an uphill hurtle in the court of public opinion. In addition to his wife and three Children, ages 5, 11, and 18, Smith confirmed Wednesday he has a second family of three children, ages 6, 10 and 11. He said he loves all his children and financially supports all of them.
'I�ve made every body aware and visited with a number of Cherokee elders,' Smith said.
He said most of the elders told him they are interested in what he could do for the tribe rather than in "this personal situation.' Smith said he would not give any more details because he doesn't want to bring embarrassment to any of his children. He added if the tribe wasn't in such disarray, he wouldn't be opening himself up to criticism over his personal life by becoming a candidate. He said, he had hoped the subject wouldn�t come up until later in his campaign. Decembmer 19, 2006 Federal District Court in Washington D.C. denied the Cherokee Nation�s Motion and provides their day in court for Cherokee Freedmen to enforce provisions of Treaty of 1866 and the 13th Amendment against U.S. Officials, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and Principal Chief Chad Smith. Judge Henry H. Kennedy handed down a ruling in the case of Vann v. Kempthorne, 03-01711, which denied the Cherokee Nation�s Motion to Dismiss an action filed by a number of Cherokee Freedmen citizens against United States Officials for breaching its fiduciary duty by failing to enforce the Treaty of 1866 and the 13th Amendment when Cherokee Freedmen Citizens were denied the right to vote in the Cherokee Nation�s 2003 election for Principal Chief and Amendment to the Cherokee Constitution. The ruling also permitted the Freedmen to amend its complaint to add the Cherokee Nation and Principal Chief Smith who have refuted the U.S. refusal to recognize the amendment to the Constitution and have set an election in February of 2007 to remove the Freedmen citizens from the Tribe subsequent to the filing of this action. Jon Velie, attorney for the Freedmen states, �The decision to deny the Motion to Dismiss is important because it gives these Cherokee citizens a Federal judicial forum to contest a violation of the Treaty of 1866 by both the United States and Cherokee officials. Ironically, the decision merely provides these American Indian citizens the basic rights others in American take for granted, their day in court. Although it may not be apparent to others in Indian Country, it is a positive outcome that the case was not denied because the effect would have nullified enforcement of Treaty rights. This is dangerous for all of Indian Nations because treaties are the paramount form recognition of the government-to-government relationship between Tribes and the United States. A technical defense eliminating enforcement of treaties could open legal challenges to others treaties, effecting the rights of Native Nations.� For individual Indians, such as Marilyn Vann and the other Plaintiffs, her rights preserved today are significant. It should be a basic right in any democracy that a citizen can stand up for her rights when her elected officials trample her constitutional rights to vote or threaten to remove her from her Tribe.� Marilyn Vann, lead Plaintiff states, �I am pleased that the honorable judge has held that the Cherokee Nation, a federally recognized tribe is required to follow the laws of the US Constitution and to follow the Treaty of 1866 as prior leaders swore to do more than 140 years ago when they wished to re-establish government-to-government relationships with the United States. Various lawsuits filed by the Cherokee Nation, such as those involving the Delaware Tribe of Indians have invoked this same treaty, yet when it comes to its citizens, this treaty all of a sudden becomes null and void in the eyes of the Tribe. Principal Chief Chadwick Smith told the Daily Oklahoman on November 24, 2002: �We have kept our word and promises in treaties.� The Cherokee Nation and the United States should continue to stand behind its treaties, I am happy the Federal Court in Washington will allow us to hold them to their word.� Therefore, it never had a continuous government to government relationship with the United States, a necessary requirement in petitioning the government for federal recognition. And the BIA's actions in recognizing CNO as a federally recognized tribe is illegal as well. Just like Chad Smith argued the BIA's actions recognizing the Delaware tribe was illegal because Delaware's were adopted by the Cherokee Nation. The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma never reformed under OIWA, the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act which was created to lift the limitations placed on tribes by the Curtis Act. When the last original Cherokee enrollee dies, Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma will probably be termintated by the government because there will be no more Cherokee citizens. The only survivors would be Cherokee descendants of Dawes enrollees who do not have roll numbers. They use their ancestor's roll number, because Cherokee Nation refuses to reform under the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act and reopen the rolls to include the descendants of the original Cherokee enrollees and make them actual citizens instead of only tribal members. The United States Congress passed the Curtis Act in 1898 to force the resistant tribes to agree to the allottment of their lands and dissolution of their governments. The U.S. Congress passed the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) in 1934 to restore Indian governments and provide for self-governance. However, the act specifically excluded the tribes in Oklahoma. The U.S. Congress passed the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act (OIWA) in 1936 to restore self-governance to Indian tribes in Oklahoma. This Act provided for the reorganization of tribal governments and repealed any disability Congress had imposed from past legislation, but only for tribes who reorganized under the authority of the OIWA. The only Cherokees in Oklahoma who have reformed and are "legally" a federally recognized Cherokee tribe are the UKB (United Keetowah Band of Cherokees). The BIA just told Chad Smith via fax that his bogus 1999 Cherokee Constitution is not valid because Congress has never approved it as required.
If someone has enough guts to challenge Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma in court and force them to prove they are a legitimate "federally" recognized tribe, they cannot succeed. Because they have not met the strict requirements set forth by the government. December 14, 2006 Principal Chief Chad Smith
P.O. Box 948
Tahlequah, Oklahoma 74465 Dear Chief Smith, After some consideration, I feel that I must respond formally to your
behavior at our December Tribal Council meeting. During the debate
concerning the veto override of the budget modification. You were
allowed to state your position concerning objections to the purchase
of rings by the Cherokee Nation of the State Champion Vian High
School Cheerleaders. Prior to this debate and vote taking place, I
had stated that it was my intention to withdraw that request. First, I may remind you that you are a guest at the Tribal Council
proceedings and are allowed to speak on issues only with the permission
of the council. I have never objected to you being allowed to speak at a
Tribal Council meeting, however since your behavior of December 11th,
2006, that position may change. During the debate you inferred that the public may find it interesting
that a member of this State Championship High School squad contained
my granddaughter. Such inference is correct and I am proud of my grand-
daughter in her accomplishments. She is a good child and a good Cherokee.
What I object to is your inference that this somehow tainted my request and
that this budget expenditure was for my personal benefit. This inference
is not true and I object to its connotation. It is inappropriate for any member during debate to specifially mention or single out a member of the body.
I don't mind you referencing me in debates or saying things about me. I am
a political official who represents constituents and frankly your opinion of me
causes me no concern. However, when you even attempt to bring in a child or a grandchild into a debate, you are doing yourself and the Cherokee Nation a disservice. You have often held yourself out as a statesman. Your actions of December 11th
were far from statesmen like. At the meeting, I asked you if you had any relatives within the second degree receiving Cherokee Nation money. You did not answer that question. I ask you again, if you have any relatives within the second degree who receive money from the Cherokee Nation or its instrumentalities. This would include sons, daughters, sisters-in-laws, whethere they are legitimate or otherwise. I have never thought it statesmen like to bring family members into debate.
However, since you have brought up this subject, all matters are now on the
table. I look forward to working with you concerning matters for the betterment of the Cherokee people in the spirit of GaDuGi. Sincerely, David Thornton Tribal Council Member Click on the Video below to see why Cherokee Chief Chad Smith is a liar and sellout to the Cherokee people.
Federal Judge Denies Cherokee Nation Motion to Dismiss Freedmen�s Right To Vote
Cherokee Chief Chad Smith Destroying Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
Letter to Cherokee Chief Chad Smith from Cherokee Tribal Council Member David Thornton
Search Engine Marketing and SEO Tools
