Jarg wrote:
"Matt Giwer" wrote in message
...
Treaties are in fact the legal instruments that matter and they are
recognized by the tribes which signed them.

Do you really want to use treaties as the only basis for sovereignty?

We were not discussing sovereignty. We were discussing ownership. They are not
the same things. Only _federal lands_ are owned by the federal government.

Because I would be willing to bet a significant portion of the planet it
inhabited by people who took the land from other people without the benefit
of any treaty.

Nor are we talking any history prior to 1945 where the first international
agreements were signed to prohibit acquisition by conquest and the signatories
of them, such as members of the UN, swore they would not do so.

--
Whenever you read of Bush talking about withdrawing troops from Iraq you can
be certain the next day will have a report of sending additional troops.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3658
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
commentary http://www.giwersworld.org/opinion/running.phtml a5