3 ms·

This idea was one of the strands of the biggest, hugest conspiracy theory of the 90's variously known as the Inslaw scandal, The Octopus, etc., which pulled int

This idea was one of the strands of the biggest, hugest conspiracy theory of the 90's variously known as the Inslaw scandal, The Octopus, etc., which pulled into itself events surrounding a murder involving an obscure (23 member, iirc) group of Native Americans, the Cabazon: > Some believe Alvarez had discovered money-skimming by outsiders helping the tiny Cabazon Band of Mission Indians manage its fledgling casino. Others suspect, however, that he had stumbled onto plans for a top-secret weapons deal on reservation land. > Witnesses and court documents diverge considerably, however, on whether a secret partnership between the Cabazon tribe and the private security firm Wackenhut Corp. was a deal to provide security services, build a munitions arsenal or sell weapons to the Nicaraguan Contras, a U.S.-backed rebel group. [1] Trouble is, as far as your question goes, various government entities including the Justice Dept. and the CIA, etc. were the ones taking advantage of the territorial immunity of the tribe concerned (in various of the conspiracy scenarios, that is, which I in no way endorse, though I still read up on it when possible) If you're interested, for an overview of the wider ramifications, [2] & [3] are not-bad entry points. 1: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-murder-case-dropped-in-1981-ca-tribal-slaying-2010jul01-story.html http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-murder-case-dropped... 2: https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/may/16/FBI-promis-part-1/ https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/may/16/FBI-promi... 3: https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2018/mar/15/danny-casolaro-primer/ https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2018/mar/15/danny-cas...

arminiusreturns 8y ago
Nice to see others still think of Danny Casalaro. PROMIS should be a huge deal here, he'll, Bill Hamilton used to frequent Schneider blog and even claim that back then the NSA was backdooring low level chip manufacturers, among many other interesting claims. That whole thing is still super relevant.
smnrchrds 8y ago
> Trouble is, as far as your question goes, various government entities including the Justice Dept. and the CIA, etc. were the ones taking advantage of the territorial immunity of the tribe concerned. I just had the scary thought of the US setting up Guantanamo-like prisons on reservations. If it was legally possible, they probably would have done it already.
- Bartweiss 8y ago
  The plenary power doctrine holds that US tribes aren't sovereign with regard to the US federal government, which is why they're controlled by laws instead of treaties. This is also why you can't get tribal protection against federal criminal charges. But the flip side of that is that tribal sovereignty can't protect government actions; as the superior power both Constitutional rules and international treaties would remain in force. (I can't work out what's up with the Inslaw case. Tribal territory definitely doesn't legalize CIA arms deals, so there isn't even a motive for a conspiracy like that. But even Wikipedia suggests that case could "drive a sane man to madness".)
Bartweiss 8y ago
> various government entities including the Justice Dept. and the CIA, etc. were the ones taking advantage of the territorial immunity of the tribe concerned (in various of the conspiracy scenarios) I'm sort of baffled by this. Kagama found that the US has plenary authority over tribes; they aren't sovereign states with regard to the US governmen. As far as I can tell that also means violations of federal law - even by the government - can't be shielded by tribal law no matter where they happen. I know you're not endorsing the conspiracy, but is there any chance you could clarify how this legal dodge was alleged to work?
- ttctciyf 8y ago
  So, bearing the non-endorsement caveat in mind.. :) One version was that the Cabazon immunity > made it feasible to pursue on the reservation the development and/or manufacture of materials whose development or manufacture would be subject to stringent controls off the reservation. - from Michael Riconosciuto's affidavit in the Inslaw case, which can be found at http://www.larsschall.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/RiconosciutoAffidavitINSLAWMarch1991.pdf http://www.larsschall.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Riconos... The claims in this document were elaborated in various ways through the 90s and beyond by all shades of conspiracy-inclined folk, and I wouldn't put too much stock in any particular thing Riconosciuto says, let alone the elaborations of others, though the literature flowing from his various claims remains interesting to me personally.
  - Bartweiss 8y ago
    Interesting, thanks very much. I guess "avoids manufacturing controls" is a bit more coherent than "you can buy and sell whatever you want on tribal land" since it's presumably about an agency regulation instead of directly violating a federal law. Still doesn't sound correct, but then again everything I'm finding about the Inslaw case says it's an absolute maze of craziness, in both the official version and the conspiracies. Thanks for some fun reading on a weird corner of history!
    - ttctciyf 8y ago

arminiusreturns 8y ago

Nice to see others still think of Danny Casalaro. PROMIS should be a huge deal here, he'll, Bill Hamilton used to frequent Schneider blog and even claim that back then the NSA was backdooring low level chip manufacturers, among many other interesting claims. That whole thing is still super relevant.

smnrchrds 8y ago

> Trouble is, as far as your question goes, various government entities including the Justice Dept. and the CIA, etc. were the ones taking advantage of the territorial immunity of the tribe concerned. I just had the scary thought of the US setting up Guantanamo-like prisons on reservations. If it was legally possible, they probably would have done it already.

Bartweiss 8y ago
The plenary power doctrine holds that US tribes aren't sovereign with regard to the US federal government, which is why they're controlled by laws instead of treaties. This is also why you can't get tribal protection against federal criminal charges. But the flip side of that is that tribal sovereignty can't protect government actions; as the superior power both Constitutional rules and international treaties would remain in force. (I can't work out what's up with the Inslaw case. Tribal territory definitely doesn't legalize CIA arms deals, so there isn't even a motive for a conspiracy like that. But even Wikipedia suggests that case could "drive a sane man to madness".)

Bartweiss 8y ago

> various government entities including the Justice Dept. and the CIA, etc. were the ones taking advantage of the territorial immunity of the tribe concerned (in various of the conspiracy scenarios) I'm sort of baffled by this. Kagama found that the US has plenary authority over tribes; they aren't sovereign states with regard to the US governmen. As far as I can tell that also means violations of federal law - even by the government - can't be shielded by tribal law no matter where they happen. I know you're not endorsing the conspiracy, but is there any chance you could clarify how this legal dodge was alleged to work?

ttctciyf 8y ago
So, bearing the non-endorsement caveat in mind.. :) One version was that the Cabazon immunity > made it feasible to pursue on the reservation the development and/or manufacture of materials whose development or manufacture would be subject to stringent controls off the reservation. - from Michael Riconosciuto's affidavit in the Inslaw case, which can be found at http://www.larsschall.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/RiconosciutoAffidavitINSLAWMarch1991.pdf http://www.larsschall.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Riconos... The claims in this document were elaborated in various ways through the 90s and beyond by all shades of conspiracy-inclined folk, and I wouldn't put too much stock in any particular thing Riconosciuto says, let alone the elaborations of others, though the literature flowing from his various claims remains interesting to me personally.
- Bartweiss 8y ago
  Interesting, thanks very much. I guess "avoids manufacturing controls" is a bit more coherent than "you can buy and sell whatever you want on tribal land" since it's presumably about an agency regulation instead of directly violating a federal law. Still doesn't sound correct, but then again everything I'm finding about the Inslaw case says it's an absolute maze of craziness, in both the official version and the conspiracies. Thanks for some fun reading on a weird corner of history!
  - ttctciyf 8y ago