And now:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 20:23:33 EST Dispossession, Disillusionment and Deception: US/Native Interaction and the Imprisonment of Leonard Peltier The purpose of this writing is to provide a straightforward summary of the history and conditions that comprise the state of affairs between the United States and North American Native American peoples, and focusing on the imprisonment of Leonard Peltier. This was written by a non-Indian, for non-Indians. My intent is to explain in plain language what I have read, heard and learned from examining these issues to someone who is not "familiar with the story". It is from reading and from presentations made by people present at the time that I provide this writing. If I cannot be brief with such complicated issues, or authoritative with a first hand understanding, I can at least be plain with what I have concluded. In the 1970s, the political climate in the mainstream United States was turbulent. The Vietnam War had effectively alienated a large portion of a generation of young Americans from their parents, and mistrust of the government was extremely high, fueled by various large-scale deceptions that had been brought to light, such as Watergate and the secret war in Cambodia. It had never before been the case that a US government had been documented as blatantly and deliberately deceiving the American public. In the US government, there were powerful factions whose primary, almost sole, concern was the nation's security, and whose goal was to restore the sense of stability and strength that the Vietnam War had eroded. Their singleminded tactics were ethically questionable and, when brought to light, often found illegal. Rather than reclaiming the sense of progress and intitiative fostered in the early 1960s, the government found itself in a series of grave legal and moral dilemmas. The majority of the population was largely split. One one side, those in deep denial, with sullen anger towards any who would question the ultimate good intentions of the elected government. On the other, those who felt betrayed, expressing their outrage, and whose critical mistrust of the government would set the tone for citizen-to-government relations for years to follow. It could not be denied that it was no longer a question of whether or not the government was capable of lying, it was what the government was lying about and why. For many, it seemed that this could be just about anything. Fundamental principles had been flaunted by the government's actions, and for many, the time had come to proclaim these principles as loudly as possible. One effect of this climate was to push civil rights and human rights issues into the background while at the same time enflaming political passions and cynicism in minority communities. Additionally, an influx of minority veterans brought various positive and negative influences into the inner city. Among the positive, a sense of unity with the greater portion of the country. Among the negative, drugs and heightened disillusionment. In a world where the government would lie to the affluent about how their tax money was spent, those less affluent who had made any gains at all in the 1960s needed to further consolidate and unify in the face of growing instability and harsh economic realities. The more idealistic concerns of the 60s faded in the light of more realistic ones, and also in the light of the more mundane concerns of codifying and realizing the depth and breadth of the rights that people had so strongly proclaimed in policy and law. In terms of Native American reservation-based communities, there was and is a fundamental difference: these political entities were not "minority segments" of the mainstream culture, but were and are distinct sovereign nations, with a complicated relationship to the United States government. There were a few who held onto their traditional cultures after decades of what might best be termed policies that supported the "accelerated extinction" of their cultures, and their ideals had been brought into the mainstream limelight during the late 60s-early 70s. The need to proclaim certain rights and freedoms was felt inside these communities, and they were amplified by the experiences and successes of off-reservation Indi'ns who were rediscovering their once outlawed culture. At this time it was realized that if the culture was not propagated, it might fade beyond recovery, and traditional spiritual teachers connected with many young Native people whose desire to understand "traditional Indian medicine" led them to "come back into the circle" of Indian spirituality. The occupation of Alcatraz was one of the events that nutured this. Many, maybe even many more, young people with no Indian ancestry also tried the same path. For some it was an idle fad, but the interest helped keep the spark of the more intangible, spiritual side of the cultures alive during a time when more material concerns were taking center stage. Additionally, an influx of veterans returning to the reservation and off-reservation indian communties well brought their share of outside influences, not the least of which was an affirmation of the craziness of the mainstream culture, and the duplicity of the US government. Native communites have historically provided a disproportionate number of military personnel, and the Vietnam War was no exception. However, unlike previous returning veterans, the lacking sense of accomplishment and honor was especially keenly felt among people who have a deep warrior tradition. A sense of restlessness and a need to cleanse the spirit from the Vietnam experience moved some of these to serve the community and organize. You could say that AIM grew out of this general atmosphere, along with an understanding on the part of the people who supported AIM that things could be made right when given the correct access to the system. In the 70s, AIM was popularly recognized as "a militant organization" that supported Native American rights, whatever those were. But, it was, and is, more than that, and less than that. AIM was, and is, a group of people that understand what goes on in First Nations politics, and have worked to understand the Federal bureaucracy and legal codes pertaining to indians. Which is something that less than 1% of the population of the United States ever has to be concerned with. This makes them a group of experts of sorts, and also a set of people with largely useless knowledge. It is unlikely that most Americans will ever need someone to help them set up access to an "inipi", or sweatlodge ceremony, in prison. You might say that by doing this in the darkest of places, people involved with AIM are by extension protecting your access to religion in the most normal of places. The politics of the First Nations can be as complicated as any local politics in any other culture, with the added ultra-regulation of "things Indian" by the Federal government. In terms of what we see as the "political organization" of the government, we see a variety of things, from miniaturized versions of the US gov't to what resemble a cross between a town council and a gathering of your mom and her friends. In terms of the "political factions" in the population, we can often see that there are "progressives" and "traditionalists". But the reason these concepts are framed in dubious quotes is that the actual structure of the community is far more personal, far more historical and far more complicated than meets the eye. It might be said here that there is one primary thing that we "newcomers" have never really understood clearly. Indian negotiators' ability to provide a word for word recounting of decades-old oral treaties in the 1700s astonished early colonials, who didn't really grasp the depth of professional and culturally-supported training that made this occur. But the fact is that the oral culture emphasizes this ability, the love of the spoken word aids this. Most indian cultures share this emphasis, and the result is that you only have to "show and tell" the indian people once. They will remember. So, if you tell them you will send soldiers to kill them if they practice their religion, and you do it, they will remember. Their children will remember. Their grandchildren will remember. Their children will remember. Also, if you show and tell one thing one time, and another the other time, this inconsistency will be remembered, and it is cruelly true that honest, trusting attempts will be made to reconcile the inconsistency-- to make sense out of something that was never intended to make sense. It is not unrealistic or dramatic to say that the terrors and hypocrisies that were inflicted in the 1800's are what many Native communities are recovering from just today. It is not at all unrealistic to suggest that the acute problems with alcohol and substance abuse in an attempt to "self medicate" brutal memories and dead expectations into oblivion. It is likely not far off the mark to say that the First Nations of North America have witnessed more devastating oppression, corruption, duplicity, betrayal, and disillusionment from more governments who insist that they are acting a) as they must or b) in the peoples' best interest, more intensely over a longer period of time than any peoples in history. The goal of this array of evils comes down to dispossession: of land, of resources, of rights. Lands they inhabited for tens of thousands of years, have been the prized possessions of a succession of the World's Most Powerful Nations over the last few hundred years. The legacy of dispossession began promply in the 1500's. At one point, "the Indian" had more than he could share. At another, he had more than was for his own good. At another, he had more than he had a right to. At another, he had more than he had agreed to the last time around. At another, he had enough to sell some more because it was for his own good. And finally, he had so little that to ask for anything else was ridiculous-- he had no standing to do so! For the longest time, this was the goal: kill the indian to save the man, and assimilate the man into the mainstream. It has only been recently, in the past one or two decades, that we consider that the "spiritual identity" and "the man" cannot be separated, or at least, that "the man's" right to have a spiritual identity, regardless of how it might differ from our own, is sacred. This may seems like an irrelevant recounting of history, but it is key in trying to grasp the issues. Typically, we view our history unfolding through a porthole. Typically, the First Nations view it unfolding through a picture window, they react to it, they live in it, and they feel it: they need to go back to the agreements made in the 17-1800's to figure out things. Another reason that this is important, as has happened throughout human history, there would be those traitors who would become willing and eager participants in the selling out to escape personal annihilation, and to achieve personal material comfort. Historical forces collided with human nature on the Pine Ridge reservation as they often do in the First Nations, as they often have. Remember: One thing that the forces of evil have on the forces of good is that the forces of good often never really get how evil evil can be until it's too late. Another thing is that the people who make up the components of the forces of evil don't set out to be that, but circumstances conspire to make that occur. Another other thing is that there are people who know how to generate those circumstances, and/or to take advantage of them when they occur. And these, are the Bad Guys. Now, most people when they start to hear about what happened to Leonard Peltier will say things like "well, his group shouldn't have gone down their to mess with the FBI". As can be expected in a situation that culminates in a courtroom, we see the "two sides" in the issue: the US gov't and AIM. There is also a third side, which is the side of the Pine Ridge government of that time. In respect to that, there is also a significant set of circumstances, which we don't see (because, again, we often can't see how evil evil can be). That significant set of circumstances are these: 1) In the early 70s, the policies of Dick Nixon may have caused an undue amount of young American soldiers to be killed in Vietnam, and various factions closely associated with the administration of Dick Nixon committed crimes 2) In the mid 70s it is widely believed that various factions closely associated with the Pine Ridge Tribal government of Dick Wilson committed murders. These factions were called "G.O.O.N" for Guardians of Oglala Nation. They are characterized as a "death squad", and many of the people that lived in that place at that time regarded them as such. If we can see how the first can happen in one of the most widely publicized, scrutinized and accountable governments in the world, we can certainly see how the second can happen in one of the least, which by extension was backed and supported by the first. So while the administrations changed in that time, the same poison of government deception, corruption and deceit is evidenced in that smaller government in kind of an historical ripple effect: taking a little longer to reach the furthest edge. The divisions in a smaller political body are more keenly felt, and more evident, to the entire population. The economic forces of the 70s were such that economic growth was allowed to surge during the Vietnam war, and then collapse on itself. Inflation was the worst ever: you had to make more to have less. The price of gas had gone insanely high. In a time like this, you look where you normally wouldn't bother to find resources: the cookie jar, or under the cushions of the sofa. Or the Pine Ridge indian reservation. Now, as one who can now see through the picture window of history, you should know there are two things that you need to get resources from indian land. I am going to call this the "old 1-2": 1) An agreement that you can have the resources 2) Someone legally believable enough to sign it The agreement in question (1) would pertain to a part of the Pine Ridge reservation that had uranium under it: those rare resources, the coins underneath that sofa cushion. What Dick Wilson's government supplied was part (2). It didn't matter that Dick Wilson's government had less than 20% of the vote. It didn't matter that the people in that place were as disillusioned with their government as we with ours, only more able to completely re-make it. That government was recognized by the US as the authority, they were the legally believable entity, they could sign the agreement. Now you might ask "Don't you need something to trade?". Well, in the case of someone who can't really complain to anyone other than the system you run if you wrong them, you may or may not be required to actually come up with something to fulfill your side of the agreement. This is based more on how much you care about how difficult you think this will make things in future relations. One of the things that the indians have managed to do (as they are looking through a picture window) is to outlast the dispossessor's estimation of the duration of future relations. (Now, a brief test: after just reading that, if you just frowned, you are evil. If you just smiled, you are good.) Okay, now, they were going to get a whole bunch of uranium with this ol' 1-2. What is one thing you can do with uranium? Well, you can make nuclear bombs. Anything that has anything to do with nuclear bombs is, conceivably, a national security thing, right? Remember the factions in the US gov't I described before. Remember their tactics, and their singlemindedness. Now, Dick Wilson's government were "progressives". This means that, in theory, they saw the proceeds from resources on Pine Ridge as something that could be used to enrich the whole Oglala Nation for the future. They could take the money used from this, and other mineral rights deals, and make the reservation a better place to live. Whether or not life is better there as a result of this deal might be addressed by one of the people who lives there now. "Traditionalists", on the other hand, conceive the land as being something more than a resource. They conceive it as something sacred. Obviously, this makes things difficult for people who want to purchase resources. Let me say that indian nation governments can strike a balance between the two, and often do in very surprising ways. But, because they can abuse their power just like any other government, and there is less scrutiny by the press and other entities. What the traditionalists supplied was opposition to the smooth implementation of the "ol' 1-2". What AIM supplied when they came to protect the traditionalists was a more difficult opposition. Remember, AIM knew how to get the correct access to the system. Understand that the people AIM works with only wanted places to herd their animals, or to cut their own wood, or to pray where they always have prayed. These folks are not, were not, adept at navigating the legal system. And the legal system that surrounds Indians is one of the most complicated there is. So even a little access, even a little "AIM-ing" in the right direction, could make these traditionalists a threat to the ol' 1-2. And now, because of the uranium, this was national security. Once that rubber stamp identity gets applied to a situation, it is exceedingly difficult to remove, and it can seal a lot of things. Additionally, the AIM group was marked by Federal law enforcement as a dangerous subversive organization. I think that some things need to be frankly stated about the circumstances surrounding AIM: 1) AIM was founded by ex-convicts. 2) AIM members were found to have been involved with illegal activities. 3) The AIM members on the Pine Ridge reservation were known to be armed. Now, it is the case that Nelson Mandela is an ex-convict. It is the case that Thomas Jefferson and his cohorts were involved in illegal activities. It is the test of time that exonerates them. It is the case that just about anybody who has lived in a place where coyotes or foxes might get in with the farm animals is armed. (I said I'd make this plain, not urbane). (Unlike Leonard Peltier, however, neither Nelson Mandela or Thomas Jefferson were doing time the _whole_ time the test was in progress.) Some other things that should be frankly stated: 1) People on the Pine Ridge reservation were in fear for their lives. They were, truth be told, armed in expectation of something more than coyotes or foxes. 2) The AIM people did understand they were in a dangerous situation and that they might have to defend themselves. The reason for this was... 3) Traditional people, people who opposed Dick Wilson's government were being found dead. There are few parallels to this situation in our understanding, again because we fail to know how evil evil can be. These things are made plain in "The Spirit of Crazy Horse" and Leonard Peltier's own book, "Prison Writings: My Life is My Sundance". Buy these books, or get them from your library if you want to know. The second is much less reading than the first, and the first is much more detailed and in depth than the second. Finally, these things that should be frankly stated: 1) On June 26, 1975 two FBI agents allegedly searching for a young Indian accused of stealing a pair of used cowboy boots spotted several men enter a red pick-up truck. They followed the truck briefly. The occupants of the truck pulled over. Shots were fired though no one knows who fired first. 2) A shootout ensued between indian people and FBI men. 3) Two FBI agents died as a direct result. One AIM activist died as a direct result. 4) Leonard Peltier claims he was not in the truck, but at the AIM encampment. He and several other AIM activitists fled at the conclusion of the shootout. 5) Subsequently, over a long period of time, more traditional people, AIM activists and people who supported AIM's presence were found dead, killed by violent means, on Pine Ridge. I feel that the events of the shootout that occurred, as they are presented and understood by both the indian witnessess and the US government, are less important than these above factors, and the following: 1) The members of AIM are aware of the implications that confrontations with Federal authorities would have. This is clear from the aforementioned books, and presentations by others present at the scene. 2) AIM people were anticipating a confrontation with G.O.O.N. people. 3) AIM people had absolutely nothing to gain in a confrontation with the FBI, and no reason to seek one. 4) Dick Wilson's administration, faced with the presence of AIM people on the reservation, could use the assistance of Federal authorities in their removal. 5) The FBI would benefit from the complete neutralization of AIM as a political force among native people in the US. 6) Dick Wilson's administration would benefit from the complete neutralization of AIM as a credible source of legal/political assistance for traditionals on Pine Ridge. 7) Unlike G.O.O.N, AIM was never, even in US government testimony, characterized as a "death squad". 8) G.O.O.N people were armed with the same ordnance and light arms as the FBI, this being provided by the Federal government: M-16s. 9) The FBI agents were killed with .223 caliber bullets, which are fired by M-16s. 10) AIM members and their surviving supporters at the scene have repeatedly come forth in public to discuss their activities and the events of that day. 11) G.O.O.N. members have not. 12) Leonard Peltier claims he was not in the proximity of the shooting, having just awakened. 13) There is no eyewitness testimony that places Leonard Peltier in the proximity of the shooting. 14) There is no connection between Leonard Peltier and a weapon of the type that killed the FBI agents. 15) There is no connection between the red pickup truck and members of AIM. 16) Leonard Peltier was inexplicably denied the use of the legal arguments (self defense) that exonerated two other AIM activists accused with the murders of the FBI men. These facts are supported by both the AIM/indian accounts and the FBI accounts/evidence that have not been adjudged "tainted". I'd say that Mr. Peltier deserves a new trial Mike Mc Morris
