Author Topic: Echota Cherokee  (Read 121684 times)

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #135 on: October 09, 2009, 12:07:07 am »
  Nobody is saying that NDNS that can't prove their heritage can't celebrate it and be proud of it.  Of course they can.

I like what LOM said at the start of this thread about this but I would take it a bit further..
If the CNO were to have 2 classifications that would solve most of the problem. one for citizenship and one for membership. Sure there would be a lot of bugs to work out. but a web presents in combination with more satellite offices would go a long way. And in fact they may be slowly going in this direction. 

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #136 on: October 09, 2009, 12:44:05 am »
 
 ........ So are the Echotas NDNS in your mind?  


Sorry to cut your post down to the above quote but, I simply can't answer you, I don't know. I kinda think so.
You say that they don't have a Tribal Government. But I think that they do, albeit a very screwed up one. Moma_porcupine said "And Paul , it is the responsibility of the groups making these claims ( and their supporters) to provide publicly accessible proof they are legit - not the other way around".  

I do think this is true. but I also think that this had to have already been done in order for them to have state recognition. So I guess it's a matter of finding it. But I do know that even if I found what ever they used as documentation it would be picked apart. So I don't know.... Does one accept a State Tribe or not? I already know how most people would answer that question.

Edit:
42 U.S.C. § 9801 et.seq. Section 674 of the act defines tribes as:

    (5) The terms "Indian tribe" and "tribal organization" mean those tribes, bands, or other organized groups of Indians recognized in the State in which they reside or considered by the Secretary of the Interior to be an Indian tribe or an Indian organization for any purpose.

45 C.F.R. §96.44(b):

    The terms "Indian tribe" and "tribal organization" as used in the Reconciliation Act have the same meaning given such terms in section 4(b) and 4(c) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b). The terms also include organized groups of Indians that the State in which they reside has determined are Indian tribes. An organized group of Indians is eligible for direct funding based on State recognition if the State has expressly determined that the group is an Indian tribe. In addition, the statement of the State's chief executive officer verifying that a tribe is recognized by that State will also be sufficient to verify State recognition for the purpose of direct funding.
  


OK,,, at this point I think I have decided that the Echotas are a real Tribe based on the above cited law. In as much as the Fed. Gov. gives the States the right to determine their status. Along with all of the hoops that they had to jump through to get that State recognition.
Even the story that LOM gave in post # 46 said that a Judge recognized their sovereignty when he stepped back from the case with a statement along these lines. " You have your own government you fix it your selves"

Unless of course an answer to my question to the ACIA says different.

Offline BlackWolf

  • Posts: 504
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #137 on: October 09, 2009, 01:15:28 am »
I think what it means to be a Tribe has been overlooked here.  The Federal Government recognizes Tribal Governments on a Government to Government relationship.  The US Constitution states that only Congress has power over Indian Affairs for good reason.  Many bogus State Recognized Tribes have applied and been denied Federal Recognition for good reason. 

Here is the testimony of Principle Chief Leon Jones of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians and Tribal Council Chairman Dan McCoy of the EB, presented to the Committee on Indian Affairs of the United States Senate on May 24th, 2000.  A good case is made as to why certain groups seeking Federal Recognition are not Indian Tribes by even the most liberal definition. 

http://indian.senate.gov/2000hrgs/s611_0524/jones.pdf

Offline Rattlebone

  • Posts: 257
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #138 on: October 09, 2009, 01:25:18 am »
I think what it means to be a Tribe has been overlooked here.  The Federal Government recognizes Tribal Governments on a Government to Government relationship.  The US Constitution states that only Congress has power over Indian Affairs for good reason.  Many bogus State Recognized Tribes have applied and been denied Federal Recognition for good reason. 

Here is the testimony of Principle Chief Leon Jones of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians and Tribal Council Chairman Dan McCoy of the EB, presented to the Committee on Indian Affairs of the United States Senate on May 24th, 2000.  A good case is made as to why certain groups seeking Federal Recognition are not Indian Tribes by even the most liberal definition. 

http://indian.senate.gov/2000hrgs/s611_0524/jones.pdf

 Exactly!

 One of the criteria for recognition is for a particular group to prove they  are self governing and have been since historic times. This would of course be an indicator that they are an historic tribe.

 In the case of the Echota Cherokee, I am betting there is no such thing and never has been until they created some bogus tribal council in order to achieve state recognition.


Offline bls926

  • Posts: 655
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #139 on: October 09, 2009, 03:52:29 am »
  Nobody is saying that NDNS that can't prove their heritage can't celebrate it and be proud of it.  Of course they can.

I like what LOM said at the start of this thread about this but I would take it a bit further..
If the CNO were to have 2 classifications that would solve most of the problem. one for citizenship and one for membership. Sure there would be a lot of bugs to work out. but a web presents in combination with more satellite offices would go a long way. And in fact they may be slowly going in this direction. 

This is the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. Membership? We're not talking about a club. We're talking about the Cherokee Nation. The historic Cherokee Nation is now three separate groups: EBCI, CNO, UKB. That's it! There are no other Cherokee Tribes. The Echota Cherokee of Alabama, SECCI, Chickamauga Cherokee Nation of Arkansas & Missouri, Southern Cherokee Nation of Kentucky, Georgia Tribe of Eastern Cherokee, and the couple hundred other groups are not Cherokee. They are not citizens of the Cherokee Nation. They may be descendants; but no matter how hard they try, they will never be Cherokee. They are not a Nation; they are not a Tribe. A Tribe has a common history, a continuous community, a nation-to-nation relationship with not only the Federal Government but with other Indian Nations. A group of people can't come together in the 70's or 80's and claim to be an historic anything.

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #140 on: October 09, 2009, 09:20:35 am »
 Nobody is saying that NDNS that can't prove their heritage can't celebrate it and be proud of it.  Of course they can.

I like what LOM said at the start of this thread about this but I would take it a bit further..
If the CNO were to have 2 classifications that would solve most of the problem. one for citizenship and one for membership. Sure there would be a lot of bugs to work out. but a web presents in combination with more satellite offices would go a long way. And in fact they may be slowly going in this direction.  

This is the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. Membership? We're not talking about a club. We're talking about the Cherokee Nation. The historic Cherokee Nation is now three separate groups: EBCI, CNO, UKB. That's it! There are no other Cherokee Tribes. The Echota Cherokee of Alabama, SECCI, Chickamauga Cherokee Nation of Arkansas & Missouri, Southern Cherokee Nation of Kentucky, Georgia Tribe of Eastern Cherokee, and the couple hundred other groups are not Cherokee. They are not citizens of the Cherokee Nation. They may be descendants; but no matter how hard they try, they will never be Cherokee. They are not a Nation; they are not a Tribe. A Tribe has a common history, a continuous community, a nation-to-nation relationship with not only the Federal Government but with other Indian Nations. A group of people can't come together in the 70's or 80's and claim to be an historic anything.


I don't remember what Tribe, but there are Fed. Tribes that use this classification. I didn't thunk it up. Members have all of the same rights as Citizens do except that they can't live on the rez or receive monies.

 <There are no other Cherokee Tribes> Yes there are,,,  Get you head out of the sand. you just don't like it. I understand that. I also understand that there are those (The Task Farce) that may be trying to change that FACT but I don't think they will be able to do that.

<They are not citizens of the Cherokee Nation>
Nor do they want to be. The sad FACT is they the CNO as much as they would like it are NOT the only Cherokee Tribe.

And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it. It's a step in the right direction.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2009, 10:09:03 am by Paul123 »

Offline bls926

  • Posts: 655
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #141 on: October 09, 2009, 12:41:30 pm »
I don't remember what Tribe, but there are Fed. Tribes that use this classification. I didn't thunk it up. Members have all of the same rights as Citizens do except that they can't live on the rez or receive monies.

 <There are no other Cherokee Tribes> Yes there are,,,  Get you head out of the sand. you just don't like it. I understand that. I also understand that there are those (The Task Farce) that may be trying to change that FACT but I don't think they will be able to do that.

<They are not citizens of the Cherokee Nation>
Nor do they want to be. The sad FACT is they the CNO as much as they would like it are NOT the only Cherokee Tribe.

And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it. It's a step in the right direction.


I think you missed the point I was making. Nation/Tribe vs Club. Someone is a citizen of their Nation, a member of a Club. You are born a citizen and will die a citizen, unless you renounce your citizenship. You join a club and as long as you continue to pay your dues you will remain a member. There are three legitimate Cherokee Nations. There are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs.

No, Paul, there are not any other Cherokee Tribes. As stated above, there are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs, heritage societies. Some do this in a respectful way, others aren't so respectful. Those are the facts. What I don't like is all these other groups pretending to be Cherokee Tribes. They give all Cherokee descendants a bad name.

If the Echota Cherokee don't want to be citizens of the Cherokee Nation, why are they pretending to be part of it? The term Cherokee Nation refers to the historic Nation. I never said CNO was the only Cherokee Tribe. I know that the Cherokee Nation is now the EBCI, CNO, and UKB.

Please explain what you meant by "And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it."

Offline Don Naconna

  • Posts: 257
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #142 on: October 09, 2009, 06:41:47 pm »
Quote
The fact that the CNO held black slaves meant that they shared his prejudices.


Actually it was a minorty of mixed blood Cherokees who took on the habits and customs of their white counterparts.  Not the majority of the Tribe.

Quote
So now you have a combination of a white racist Dawes representing a white racist government, following the "lead" of former slave owners and traitors to the Union.

You must not know much about politics in the Cherokee Nation during the Civil War.  For many Cherkoees, it was more about how the Tribe as a whole would make out, and under which side they would benefit most under.  Don't forget that the "Union" you mention is the same "Union" that drove the entire Cherokee Nation out of its homeland in 1838-1839 and forcibly removed the whole Tribe to Indian Territory.  I don't see how you can call the factions of the Cherokee Nation that sided with the South "Traders" to the Union.


That makes no sense. Who do you think the Georgia confederates were, they were the same people who drove the Cherokee out of Georgia. Indian Territory was part of the Union which established it. To take up arms in rebellion is treason, that's all. If you don't like the results of an election  what do you declare war? That's treason!

Offline Moma_porcupine

  • Posts: 684
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #143 on: October 09, 2009, 07:08:08 pm »
Don, as I said in my response that got moved to another thread, i don't see how this has anything to do with the topic of the people claiming to be Echota Cherokee's unless these attitudes towards people of African descent are what caused these people to become seperated from the main tribal groups. As far as I know this isn't the case.

For people reading this who didn't notice, the discussion of the CNO's relationship with people of African descent got moved to it's own thread , but as some of the discussions are intertwined it is a bit of a mess.
 
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=2377.0
Cherokee Freedmen

Offline Don Naconna

  • Posts: 257
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #144 on: October 09, 2009, 08:53:21 pm »
Thanks, I believe that the freedmen are a separate topic and should have a separate thread.

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #145 on: October 09, 2009, 11:08:04 pm »
I don't remember what Tribe, but there are Fed. Tribes that use this classification. I didn't thunk it up. Members have all of the same rights as Citizens do except that they can't live on the rez or receive monies.

 <There are no other Cherokee Tribes> Yes there are,,,  Get you head out of the sand. you just don't like it. I understand that. I also understand that there are those (The Task Farce) that may be trying to change that FACT but I don't think they will be able to do that.

<They are not citizens of the Cherokee Nation>
Nor do they want to be. The sad FACT is they the CNO as much as they would like it are NOT the only Cherokee Tribe.

And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it. It's a step in the right direction.


I think you missed the point I was making. Nation/Tribe vs Club. Someone is a citizen of their Nation, a member of a Club. You are born a citizen and will die a citizen, unless you renounce your citizenship. You join a club and as long as you continue to pay your dues you will remain a member. There are three legitimate Cherokee Nations. There are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs.

No, Paul, there are not any other Cherokee Tribes. As stated above, there are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs, heritage societies. Some do this in a respectful way, others aren't so respectful. Those are the facts. What I don't like is all these other groups pretending to be Cherokee Tribes. They give all Cherokee descendants a bad name.

If the Echota Cherokee don't want to be citizens of the Cherokee Nation, why are they pretending to be part of it? The term Cherokee Nation refers to the historic Nation. I never said CNO was the only Cherokee Tribe. I know that the Cherokee Nation is now the EBCI, CNO, and UKB.

Please explain what you meant by "And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it."

bls926,
Respectfully, I fully understand what is intended to be a Nation. The 3 Fed Tribes ARE fully Nations (well as far as the USA will allow them to be). And some of the State Tribes IF they ever get Fed, recognition will be a Nation too, and I believe that until (if ever) they do get it they will only be a Tribe. And yes some are Clubs and say so in their names. And Sure there are a big bunch of Frauds. Now we can keep on trying to re-define the words Nation, Tribe, Club until we are blue in the face but the simple FACT is that someone else has already done that.

The Echota Tribe does NOT and has never (as far as I can tell ) claimed to be a part of the CNO. It would be nice if the two could be Brothers but hell, the CNO can't even get along with it's Keetoowah Brothers, so I know that ain't happening. 

The 2 Clubs that the CNO have are their Satellite Communities and their First Families of the Cherokee Nation. There may be even more but these are 2 that I know about.

Links: http://www.cherokee.org/Organizations/Communities/Default.aspx
         http://www.cherokeeheritage.org/cherokeeheritage/first_families.html

     



 

Offline bls926

  • Posts: 655
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #146 on: October 10, 2009, 12:53:01 am »
I think you missed the point I was making. Nation/Tribe vs Club. Someone is a citizen of their Nation, a member of a Club. You are born a citizen and will die a citizen, unless you renounce your citizenship. You join a club and as long as you continue to pay your dues you will remain a member. There are three legitimate Cherokee Nations. There are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs.

No, Paul, there are not any other Cherokee Tribes. As stated above, there are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs, heritage societies. Some do this in a respectful way, others aren't so respectful. Those are the facts. What I don't like is all these other groups pretending to be Cherokee Tribes. They give all Cherokee descendants a bad name.

If the Echota Cherokee don't want to be citizens of the Cherokee Nation, why are they pretending to be part of it? The term Cherokee Nation refers to the historic Nation. I never said CNO was the only Cherokee Tribe. I know that the Cherokee Nation is now the EBCI, CNO, and UKB.

Please explain what you meant by "And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it."

bls926,
Respectfully, I fully understand what is intended to be a Nation. The 3 Fed Tribes ARE fully Nations (well as far as the USA will allow them to be). And some of the State Tribes IF they ever get Fed, recognition will be a Nation too, and I believe that until (if ever) they do get it they will only be a Tribe. And yes some are Clubs and say so in their names. And Sure there are a big bunch of Frauds. Now we can keep on trying to re-define the words Nation, Tribe, Club until we are blue in the face but the simple FACT is that someone else has already done that.

The Echota Tribe does NOT and has never (as far as I can tell ) claimed to be a part of the CNO. It would be nice if the two could be Brothers but hell, the CNO can't even get along with it's Keetoowah Brothers, so I know that ain't happening. 

The 2 Clubs that the CNO have are their Satellite Communities and their First Families of the Cherokee Nation. There may be even more but these are 2 that I know about.

Links: http://www.cherokee.org/Organizations/Communities/Default.aspx
         http://www.cherokeeheritage.org/cherokeeheritage/first_families.html

 

I'm not trying to redefine the words. I'm using them as they were intended to be used. Apparently you aren't familiar with their meaning, so I'll explain. Nation and Tribe are interchangeable. EBCI, CNO, and UKB are Nations; you can also use Tribe. A Tribe has a common history, a continuous community, a nation-to-nation relationship with not only the Federal Government but with other Indian Nations. The other groups professing to be Cherokee are Clubs; they are not Nations/Tribes. A group of people can't come together in the 70's or 80's and claim to be a Tribe. Where is their common history? Their continuous community? Their nation-to-nation relationship with other Nations?

I did not say that the Echota Cherokee claimed to be part of the CNO. However, the very fact that they call themselves Cherokee means they are claiming to be part of the historic Cherokee Nation. You highlighted part of what I said up there, but not the important part: The term Cherokee Nation refers to the historic Nation.

Clubs are excellent for citizens who do not reside in North Carolina or Oklahoma, so they can have a sense of community. They're also good for those who cannot enroll. This is a good thing. Maybe the Echota Cherokee and some of these other groups should look into something along these lines, instead of trying to set themselves up as Tribes.


Offline Rattlebone

  • Posts: 257
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #147 on: October 10, 2009, 01:05:58 am »
I don't remember what Tribe, but there are Fed. Tribes that use this classification. I didn't thunk it up. Members have all of the same rights as Citizens do except that they can't live on the rez or receive monies.

 <There are no other Cherokee Tribes> Yes there are,,,  Get you head out of the sand. you just don't like it. I understand that. I also understand that there are those (The Task Farce) that may be trying to change that FACT but I don't think they will be able to do that.

<They are not citizens of the Cherokee Nation>
Nor do they want to be. The sad FACT is they the CNO as much as they would like it are NOT the only Cherokee Tribe.

And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it. It's a step in the right direction.


I think you missed the point I was making. Nation/Tribe vs Club. Someone is a citizen of their Nation, a member of a Club. You are born a citizen and will die a citizen, unless you renounce your citizenship. You join a club and as long as you continue to pay your dues you will remain a member. There are three legitimate Cherokee Nations. There are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs.

No, Paul, there are not any other Cherokee Tribes. As stated above, there are hundreds of Cherokee Clubs, heritage societies. Some do this in a respectful way, others aren't so respectful. Those are the facts. What I don't like is all these other groups pretending to be Cherokee Tribes. They give all Cherokee descendants a bad name.

If the Echota Cherokee don't want to be citizens of the Cherokee Nation, why are they pretending to be part of it? The term Cherokee Nation refers to the historic Nation. I never said CNO was the only Cherokee Tribe. I know that the Cherokee Nation is now the EBCI, CNO, and UKB.

Please explain what you meant by "And FYI the CNO does have 2 type of CLUBS, as you put it."

bls926,
Respectfully, I fully understand what is intended to be a Nation. The 3 Fed Tribes ARE fully Nations (well as far as the USA will allow them to be). And some of the State Tribes IF they ever get Fed, recognition will be a Nation too, and I believe that until (if ever) they do get it they will only be a Tribe. And yes some are Clubs and say so in their names. And Sure there are a big bunch of Frauds. Now we can keep on trying to re-define the words Nation, Tribe, Club until we are blue in the face but the simple FACT is that someone else has already done that.

The Echota Tribe does NOT and has never (as far as I can tell ) claimed to be a part of the CNO. It would be nice if the two could be Brothers but hell, the CNO can't even get along with it's Keetoowah Brothers, so I know that ain't happening.  

The 2 Clubs that the CNO have are their Satellite Communities and their First Families of the Cherokee Nation. There may be even more but these are 2 that I know about.

Links: http://www.cherokee.org/Organizations/Communities/Default.aspx
         http://www.cherokeeheritage.org/cherokeeheritage/first_families.html

    



 


Quote
IF they ever get Fed, recognition will be a Nation too, and I believe that until (if ever) they do get it they will only be a Tribe.


 You are really starting to sound uneducated when it comes to Native issues Paul. I don't mean it to insult you or belittle you, but rather point out facts about what you say as I see them.

 The definition of a treaty is " a signed agreement between to sovereign nations." So in this regards since the colonial powers, and later the United States signed treaties with our nations; they were recognizing we were sovereign nations.

  In reality referring to our nations as tribes is a misnomer,and I often times cringe at even using the word "tribe" in speaking of our nations. Referring to our nations as "tribes" to me belittles our confederacies, tribal governments etc that existed long before the coming of Europeans.

 Even your usage here of the word tribe versus nations is hinting at the concept of a our political entities not being fully sovereign since you say  out how you feel the "Echota are just a tribe now, but if recognized would be a nation." So what you are saying is that since the USG doesn't recognize them on the federal level they are just something called a "tribe," but if recognized would be a "Nation." So what you are doing here is down playing the fact that we have been political organizations (nations) long before the United States itself even existed.

 If I were to play into your statement here on the usage of the word "tribe," I could still show great flaw and ignorance in your statements.

 Taking from wikipedia, which I realize is not a good source, but works okay to this capacity in being used here; it defines tribes as the following:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribe

 A tribe, viewed historically or developmentally, consists of a social group existing before the development of, or outside of, states.

Many anthropologists use the term to refer to societies organized largely on the basis of kinship, especially corporate descent groups (see clan and lineage).

Some theorists hold that tribes represent a stage in social evolution intermediate between bands and states. Other theorists argue that tribes developed after, and must be understood in terms of their relationship to, states.


 Now taking that into consideration, and to make a blanket statement about Native nations here in the western hemisphere I can say this.

 Most tribes have interrelated family units that for the sake of this discussion I will called "clans." When you have several "clans" together they form "bands." Of course we can then deduct more then one band coming together would constitute the "tribe."

 These Echota people I am sure have no real knowledge of what clans they might be from, if at all; with it being pretty obvious they most likely dont and if claim to do so, are just  making it up.

  So from a anthropological standpoint, these Echota people don't even have the basic building blocks in this society they are trying to gain recognition for, and claiming to be an authentic Cherokee population in doing so.

  Then from there I am sure that everything else from language, ways etc are also absent. In this I believe the Echota are  most likely trying to borrow known information from places like the Real Cherokee Nations themselves to obtain language knowledge etc.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2009, 01:09:42 am by Rattlebone »

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #148 on: October 10, 2009, 10:45:20 am »
Dang,, discussing what the definition of "is" is with you guys is more fun than discussing the Bible with a Jehovah's Witness and an Latter Days Saint at the same time.

bls926
Nation and Tribe are interchangeable. EBCI, CNO, and UKB are Nations; you can also use Tribe. A Tribe has a common history, a continuous community, a nation-to-nation relationship with not only the Federal Government but with other Indian Nations.

Rattlebone
In reality referring to our nations as tribes is a misnomer, and I often times cringe at even using the word "tribe" in speaking of our nations. Referring to our nations as "tribes" to me belittles our confederacies, tribal governments etc that existed long before the coming of Europeans.


And to think, you guys told me that I am miss-informed (well I think ignorant was the term)  as to what the definition of a Tribe is because I posted the USG's definition of it. ROFL

When you guys can agree amongst yourselves about what your definition is,, let me know.
In the meanwhile,,, I'll just use the Government's definition.

42 U.S.C. § 9801 et.seq. Section 674 of the act defines tribes as:

    (5) The terms "Indian tribe" and "tribal organization" mean those tribes, bands, or other organized groups of Indians recognized in the State in which they reside or considered by the Secretary of the Interior to be an Indian tribe or an Indian organization for any purpose.




Through out this thread you guys keep saying things like "You just can't form a tribe". It has been said over and over in several different ways. But that still doesn't change the FACT that this has ALREADY been done. You just keep refusing to admit it by trying to convince me that they SHOULDN'T have done it. The Catholics say the same thing about the Protestants.

Perhaps we should be debating the definition of CAN'T and SHOULDN'T.

Offline bls926

  • Posts: 655
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #149 on: October 10, 2009, 02:59:37 pm »
Paul, you're now grasping at straws; trying to twist things we've said. Nation and Tribe are interchangeable; however most prefer the term Nation. Nation denotes more respect than Tribe. The Cherokee, Choctaw, Lenape, Creek, Lakota are truly sovereign Nations. That's the point Rattle was trying to make.

No matter how many times you say the Echota Cherokee are a Tribe, it doesn't make it true. They're a Tribe in their own mind. They are not a Nation or a Tribe. A group of adults cannot come together and decide to create a tribe. There is no shared history, no continuous community, no nation-to-nation relationship with other Nations. The Echota are a heritage society, a club, made up of Cherokee descendants. Their ancestors chose to leave the Nation and they must live by that decision. What they and other similar groups are doing shows disrespect.