Jump to content

Talk:Leonard Peltier

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Galar71 (talk | contribs) at 19:04, 8 July 2006 (→‎Political Prisoner). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconIndigenous peoples of North America Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

good form

Don't know much about this case, so I'll leave editing to the experts, but when quoting speeches, remember that it's considered good form to leave out repetitions and hesitations ("uh").


dudes, there is a gigantic hundreds of pages book about it. "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, by Peter Matthiessen". Some dont really like his book for various reasons i cant remember. I think it had something to do with him being a whitey outsider making his career and fame off some horrible tragedy... but its been a few years and my memorys fuzzy.


The earlier bits about Oglala were actually correct, though I think this version reads better.  :-D Anyway, there was a film made about it called Incident at Oglala; I think that might be where the poster got his/her info in re: the woman who testified. She's on there saying that she'd never met Peltier and just said what they told her to. An amazing confession, really. I can't remember her name either, sorry. I suppose I'll have to watch it again; it's been several years since I saw it last. --KQ


-- I haven't seen it. Amazon.com listing for it: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00000I1L9/qid%3D1002073341/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F0%5F1/104-0763331-6922347

IMDB listing:

http://us.imdb.com/Title?0104504

-- looks like a nice piece of propaganda, and I say that from a completely Neutral point of view -- whether he's guilty, whether he's innocent, looks like the film has the ability to powerfully sway people's feelings on the subject.


It's a good film but I wouldn't get it at that price. Kind of a B+ documentary, not as good as, say, Hoop Dreams or, um, Koyaanisqatsi, but well worth watching. And no, it doesn't make much attempt at NPOV. Look for it at your library, maybe? Or a bigger video store might have it; Robert Redford had some involvement with it (not directing, though). --Koyaanis Qatsi


Issues the article could address, which I'll work on when I have time unless someone beats me to it:

  • More details of LP's life if available.
  • When and at what age LP joined the AIM, and what work he did for them.
  • Circumstances surrounding the killings.
  • Canada is a very large country. More specifically where did LP flee to?
  • Name of the judge. More specific trial dates.
  • More details of his supporters' arguments.
  • Stated grounds for political prisoner status, at least for Amnesty, EP, and Dalai Lama.
  • I vaguely recall hearing something about serious health problems, a couple of years ago. Something about dental problems, and not receiving proper health care for them. Bare facts and any reference to them by supporters.

Tualha 03:51, Nov 13, 2003 (UTC)


What does "illegally extradited" mean? since extradition is a legal status, it seems to me that illegal extradition is logically impossible; either Peltier was legally extradited, or else he was not extradited at all, but peraps turned over illegally to the U.S. government. --- Dominus 19:15, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Associates?

The article about the incident frequently refers to the suspicious men as "Peltier's associates". Clearly, this is making the assumption that Peltier was guilty and that these men were helping him with his escape, providing for a non-NPOV article. Is there another way to word this so that it does not refer to being related at all to Peltier while remaining grammatically correct? Thanks. :) -- TheWanderer

Irrelevant Political Fantasies

Removed from article; maybe it has some use elsewhere like WikiSource:

In 2004 he ran as a U.S. presidential candidate for the Peace and Freedom Party.
== Statement as Presidential Candidate ==
Leonard Peltier's Official statement as Candidate for United States President, 2004 2 November election:
Luther Standing Bear, a Sioux Chief, stated: "Out of the Indian approach to life came a great freedom – an intense and absorbing love for nature; a respect for life... and principals of truth, honesty, generosity, equity, and brotherhood as a guard to mundane relations." These values will guide me as president. I am a Native American, deprived of my language, culture, and traditions; yet, I have survived the genocidal government policies against Indigenous Peoples. I will ensure equal rights to liberty, education, employment, housing, and health care, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation. I will work towards conflict resolution without the use of violence and ensure self-determination for all peoples. I live with injustice every day. Caged for over 28 years for a crime I did not commit, I am a political prisoner wrongfully convicted by a government that indisputably withheld and fabricated evidence, as well as coerced witnesses. No branch of government will correct this injustice. At the root of this injustice are the oppressive policies of the U.S. government against people of color and those with dissenting opinions. I pledge to eliminate such policies. I will abolish the federal death penalty and restore the constitutional protections which ensure justice for all people. Our environment is the essence of our life, but our government – in partnership with greedy corporations – haphazardly destroys it for the monetary benefit of a few. I will protect our environment to ensure our survival and the survival of our future generations.

-- (belated sig for my 06:23, 14 June 2005 contrib) --Jerzyt

Arguements for Pardon

_ _ The following is an example of the need for PoV-ectomy someone requested for this article (copied w/o markup):

The case for Peltier's pardon has been two-fold. One argument asserts his innocence, and that he variously had no knowledge of the murders (as he told CNN in 1999), that he has knowledge which he will never reveal, or (as told in In the Spirit of Crazy Horse) that he approached and searched the agents but did not execute them. Another argument holds that the killings (no matter who committed them) occurred during a war-like atmosphere on the reservation in which FBI agents were terrorizing residents in the wake of the Pine Ridge standoff in 1972.

_ _ These aren't arguements verifiably being made; they are more like slogans for preaching to the choir, bcz they don't make a connection to pardoning. He should be pardoned bcz his contradictory accounts of his role don't all include participating in a kidnapping of Federal officials that led to their murders? Bcz in spite of the implications of his being alive and the agents being dead, it was the government that was acting according to a state of war rather than enforcement of existing law in the wake of an armed insurrection?
_ _ Perhaps such arguements along those lines are being made, tho they have not been stated here. If they are, let's hear who's making them -- or a clear statement that they make them publicly only while wearing a balaklava to prevent prosecution for inciting insurrection.
_ _ There also should be mention of the reports that his pardon would be one of Clinton's lameduck actions. Any verifiable indications of why Clinton declined would be valuable.
--Jerzyt 20:48, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


I would like to help with the NPOV workover on this article, if there are any concerned persons who have input please leave it here not my talk page.

RomaC 12:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


It took a couple readings to decipher what you were trying to say, but first of all, using only that paragraph as a source, Peltier's accounts are not contradictory. HIS account (to CNN) is that he had no knowledge of it, and additionally, there are other arguments being made that he has other knowledge, and there is also an argument being made that he only searched the agents and did not kill them. The paragraph does not say that Peltier made all these arguments; only that they were made. Also, the last argument (which states that he searched the agents but did not kill them) is a direct reference to the incident itself, which was not a kidnapping in any way. The agents were following in a seperate car. There was no kidnapping, from what I've read. A shoot-out, and a murder, yes, but kidnapping? Not at all. Just something you might think about. You might also think about spelling words out completely. People might listen to you if you look a little more intelligent.

Sad, sad, sad

This entry is so far from non-biased!

How about this entry:

The officer, knowing that Peltier was a coward,...


Yes I see that. What course do you suggest to establish and maintain NPOV here? It seems the more details are added to this article, the greater the opportunity for manipulation through card-stacking and loaded language etc. Perhaps this article should be reduced to the bare bones, "just the facts"? People can seek out opinions and arguments about it on other sites or discussion boards but Wikipedia doesn't seem suited to or able to accommodate in-article arguments, they just turn into edit wars.RomaC 10:48, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let's get this done

Have fixed the Jumping Bull section some, the second half of the article needs more work. RomaC 14:57, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Again, I have worked through "The Aftermath" and "Alleged Trial Irregularities and Responses" sections (someone changed the section names to Title Case, style is the least of the trouble here so I went along with that). If there are comments or corrections please can we look at and discuss them here first because the article itself had become almost incoherent.

On to the next section, "Post-trial allegations," which is thorny. The Demain argument -- that Peltier, a convicted person, is in fact guilty -- seems pleonastic in nature but in my opinion it should nonetheless be represented here, although with considerations given to due weight.

In the next section, "Pursuit of freedom," we find a long list of individuals and groups who support Peltier's claim to innocence or status as a political prisoner, namely: " Nelson Mandela, Rigoberta Menchu, Amnesty International, Rage Against The Machine, Anti-Flag, the U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights, Tenzin Gyatso (the 14th Dalai Lama), the European Parliament, the Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights, Rev. Jesse Jackson and The Goats."

Now, that is a disparate bunch to say the least -- The European Parliament and The Goats don't belong in the same list I will venture. I would prefer eliminating (or marginalizing) rap groups and the like and instead having the more respected parties' positions on Peltier better spelled out, something like Demain's is.

To achieve this I propose combining the sections "Post-trial allegations" and "Pursuit of freedom" into a new section called "Post-trial debate and activities" or some such. Here I would summarize the positions and activities of all prominent concerned individuals and organizations (Demain, Amnesty, Kennedy Memorial Center, Mandela etc). I think that would be the most fair and objective way to present the varying viewpoints in this section of the article.

My goal is to be bold and make this a cleaned up and non-NPOV-disputed Wikipedia article, I would appreciate any constructive input. RomaC 12:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Could some information be given in terms of the statements as to his guilt by his prosecutors, e.g. do they, or some of them, as various supporters claim, state that it is unclear who killed the FBI agents?
-- Anonymous 01:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


22:17, 20 December 2005 edit. As there were no objections to my suggestion above, I did what I hope is a decent NPOV edit of the final bit of the article today. I hope this might be Wiki-acceptable. I welcome any comments and please be bold and improve the article further! It's my hope we can soon get to a point where we can remove the "Clean-up" tag that's been on the article since April 2005, and also the POV alert. RomaC 13:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


NPOV and Clean-up Tags Removed as there were no objections to my edits above and earlier. I hope this is a version of the article that most people can accept, but please improve it of course!
RomaC 03:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

80's Song for Peltier

Does anyone remember a pop-song from the late 80's about Leonard Peltier? I was about 8 yrs old back then ... What i remember is a collaboration video in the vein of "We Are The World" or "Ain't Gonna Play Sun City". Does anyone know it?--Amir E. Aharoni 20:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some clues

In your article about Leonard Peltier some information should be added, so that the reader can have a better understanding of the matter.

Here some clues:

a) On Paul DeMain, see IS HE A REPORTER, CRIME FIGHTER OR PEELED APPLE? PAUL DEMAIN AND THE FBI (in http://lpdctexas.blogspot.com/2005/09/is-he-reporter-crime-fighter-or-peeled.html).

b) When you deal with Leonard Peltier and Annie Mae Pictou-Aquash, one should take into account what appears in the official Leonard Peltier Defense Committee website: see Bob Robideau's statement FBI PUPPETS, PAWNS AND MURDERERS PELTIER REMAINS THE TARGET (in http://lpdcinc.blogspot.com/2005/07/reign-of-terror-operations-us.html).

c) Here Bob Robideau's two statements on the same subject: http://www.coloradoaim.org/blog/2005/02/press-relese-from-bob-robideau.html and http://lpdcinc.blogspot.com/2005/02/statement-from-bob-robideau.html.

d) Though it seems that the Wikipedians do not to like it very much, here Bob Robideau's another article to be taken into account: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Robideau.

Thanks.

joseba felix tobar-arbulu (Basque Country)

Wikipedia is a real fraud.

They have changed the article Bob Robideau sent to them.

Compare the article they posted in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Robideau) and the REAL one Robideau sent them:

Statement by Bob Robideau

                        “WHO IS GOING TO BELIEVE YOU BOB”

The history of the unjust 29-year imprisonment of Leonard Peltier is well-documented. As recently as late 2003 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit stated, "Much of the government conduct on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and in the prosecution of Mr. Peltier is to be condemned.”

FOI documents show that the FBI were actively engaged in falsifying reports to paint Pine Ridge as a AIM ready war zone. They fabricated documents, withheld evidence and coerced witnesses to convict Leonard Peltier. These facts are undisputed. Peter Matthiessen’s In The Spirit of Crazy Horse, along with the work of Churchill and Vander Wall, Agents of Repression, have chronicled the outrageous government misconduct which has put and kept Leonard unjustly in prison.

Zigrossi, FBI agent in charge of operations, said in the Canadian Fifth Estate program, ‘because of the death of agents Coler and Williams, “agents wanted revenge”.

Now we face a renewed FBI effort of spreading misinformation and manufacturing evidence designed and intended to seal Leonard's fate. In light of the recent trial of Arlo Looking Cloud fabricated evidence was presented; and the current extradition process of John Graham, misinformation is being spread which requires us to address THE FACTS and destroy the fiction.

During the trial of Looking Cloud, the government through several witnesses, all former AIM members, planted the idea that Leonard was in some way responsible for the murder of Anna Mae Aquash began to circulate. For instance, one Canadian television program stated, "At his [Looking Clouds trial the question was raised that Leonard Peltier ordered the execution fearing she was an FBI informer." An examination of the trial transcript will prove that no such statement was never made. The persistence of this inaccurate perception can only be understood in the context of the ongoing FBI campaign to deny not only Leonard Peltier justice, but justice for Anna Mae as well.

In addition it has become very clear to many of us that one of the central motivating reasons for the Federal Department of Justice’s decision to prosecute the Anna Mae case after some 26 years is because it presents a final solution to insuring that Leonard Peltier remain locked in prison for the rest of his life. The clemency campaign’s near success in freeing Peltier had propelled the FBI, who took extreme steps to stop President Clinton from granting clemency, took further steps with the Anna Mae case to stop any further avenues of freedom for Peltier.

Kamook Banks Ecoffey, a paid FBI informant, alleged that Leonard had confessed to the killing of the two FBI agents. When I asked Bernie about this she said, “I told them, I don’t care what my sister did, but you people hurt my family and I will never forget that and I just don’t want anything to do with any of you.”

The FBI knew who had executed Anna Mae 1976. Zigrossi knowingly said, “I’m sure they suspected her of being an informer and that’s probably what caused her demise. She was really a victim of circumstances…. (misfortune of war) There were several instances [after Rosebud and Oregon arrest] where she walked off and other people had to stay to pay the price. So rumor had it she was on our side . Kevin McKiernan observed, “…they must have had a celebratory dinner after that.” The FBI knew the three who had killed Anna Mae as early as 1976; they also knew the AIM leader who had ordered it.

Leonard had nothing to do with Anna Mae’s killing. Not only had he shared Anna Mae’s concerns about Durham with AIM leadership, but as the events leading to her death were unfolding, he was living as a fugitive incommunicado in Canada, where he remained until his arrest and extradition.

Further, Paul DeMain, editor of News From Indian Country, who in recent years has made outrageously inflammatory accusations about Mr. Peltier stated, "I neither believe nor feel that Mr. Peltier ordered, or was capable of ordering, the death of Anna Mae Aquash. I would have never said that Leonard Peltier ordered Anna Maes death because first of all I don’t believe that is the way that happened and second of all even if Peltier wanted her dead there was no authority for him to have ordered something like that....but the first proposition is that I never would have said that."

The historical record shows, along with Anna Mae Aquash, Leonard was one of the AIM members to first suspect Douglas Durham was an FBI infiltrator. Anna Mae raised these concerns with AIM leadership, including Vernon Bellecourt and Dennis Banks, who, for whatever reason, dismissed them. Her threat to Douglas Durham’s cover, initiated a "bad-jacketing" campaign by the FBI. Dennis Banks targeted Anna Mae as a result of actions taken by the FBI who ultimately led him to believe she was an informant.

An examination of the facts ineluctably lead to certain conclusions. Banks told us, for instance, that after Anna Maes murder was made public that Vernon Bellecourt flew to California to meet with Dennis Banks, Clyde Bellecourt and John Trudell. At my trial in Cedar Rapids in 1976, John Trudell, gave damning testimony, stating under oath, "I was sitting in a car with Dennis [Banks] when he said, "You know that body they found? That is Anna Mae." I didn’t know about a body..." According to Trudell this information was provided by Banks before the body had been identified. He gave similar testimony at the Looking Cloud Trial, but couldn’t remember the date, as clearly as he had in my trial.

John Trudell’s “friend” Anna Mae, sitting in jail in Vale, Oregon had sent him a letter about informants “A” and “B”. John Trudell, who had also picked Banks up during his escape, was a close confederate of Bank’s group. There is evidence to show that he had been working closely with the group since the FBI raid on Crow Dogs on September 5,1975. An FBI affidavit, (we know today to be another fabrication) for the purposes of legally stopping their vehicles in Oregon, and Indicting Dennis Banks, who had been the only one not identified by State Troopers. There had never been any FBI informants.

"A government affidavit that two informants placed Banks in the Oregon caravan, although he was not seen by state troopers," writes KcKiernan, "Some AIM members thought one of the informants was Ms. Aquash, who was not charged immediately in that incident and was able to escape prosecution by disappearing just before the indictments were handed down."

Bernie Lafferty said in a taped conversation, that Kamook and she had left the group in Washington State to attend a hearing in Wichita, Kansas. “I decided to stay home, Kamook flew back.” This explains two things: one why Bernie was no longer with the group when the group was arrested in Oregon; two their movements had lead the FBI to Banks and Leonard in Washington, ultimately to the groups arrest in Oregon. The surveillance of Bernie and Kamook was not reviled because it would not have been sufficient evidence to put out an all points alert, let alone give them legal justification for stopping the two vehicles. Nor would it have allowed them to indict Banks with the others. The FBI fabricated affidavit of informants “A” and “B” gave them legal power to do all them.

On November 24, 1975, Anna Mae decided to go to Denver, Colorado. “She knew she was going to get indicted on the Oregon charges no matter what, and she knew there was no chance she would receive justice, so she split," Nilak said. Anna Mae also believed that she would, as she had done on two other occasions from Denver, re-join Dennis Banks. Evelyn Bordeaux and Ray Hand Boy took Anna Mae to Denver at her own request.

After Anna Mae arrived at Troy Lynn's home she was free and made several phone calls during her two days of freedom. She made them to her family in Canada and three to Mathalene White Bear. Then on November the 28, Mathalene said, “Anna Mae sounded scared. She knew something was going wrong," the "phone went dead" . Mathalene said she never heard from Anna Mae again. This is because, in that moment, Anna Mae had been taken prisoner by her “friends”.

The telling revelation appeared on the Fifth Estate program. John Trudell said, “Troy Lynn Called me from Denver and told me that Anna Mae had been at her house and these people had come and taken her away as prisoner.” Then I recalled that he had told me in 1994 “I was called and told that Anna Mae had been taken to a protected area.” It became clear that John knew not only that Anna Mae had been at Troy Lynn’s, a safe house in Denver; he also knew the same day that she had been taken from Troy Lynn‘s “tied up” a prisoner. A lawyer, had been called in the middle of the night,asked to "come to the WKLD/OC committee office without explaination, told me, “when they brought Anna Mae in, she was tied up and I told them to untie her.”

Trudell also knew through Troy Lynn why Anna Mae had been taken to the WKLD/CO in Rapid City. John Trudell, a close confederate of Banks did call to make inquires about his “friend”. Many of those that confronted Anna Mae at the WKLD/OC were in constant contact with Trudell during this period. There is no evidence that he took steps to stop the process that lead to her execution. It is not surprising that John Trudell has spent the better part of the 28 years covering up for her murder.

There has been unity, contrary to appearances of disunity reported in the media since 1993. Why? Because he, along with his other “friends” know perfectly well each step, and why each step had been taken to kill Anna Mae. Trudell had to have known about the dead body of Anna Mae, at the same time Banks knew.

John’s convoluted accusation implicating Dennis Banks to the murder of Anna Mae in the Arlo Looking Cloud trial, sparked a counter response from Dennis Bank, who wrote in, Ojibwa Warrior,  "It was during a meeting in Los Angeles, California, that John Trudell came over to me and said, "Annie Mae’s body has been found." The news devastated me. It was only the presence of so many people that prevented me from bursting into tears."

I sent the above expression of Dennis Banks, in an e-mail, to John Trudell, who wrote back stating, "Dennis (Banks) is lying about this. He is not mistaken, he is lying. If there were all these people in this committee room why is it no one has stepped forward before this to state that what I said is untrue. Also there never was any meeting at that time in Los Angeles, California that I attended. This email is the first that I've heard about Dennis (Banks) revising his role in this. Why would he wait more then 25 years to say this, reality is Dennis would have spoken out in 1976 if I was lying about this but he didn't. Let this play out we'll see who's telling the truth and who's not telling the truth. I haven't read Dennis's book but I figure the whole reason for his book is to try and clean himself up because during those times he got very very dirty and I want nothing to do with his mess. We'll see what happens."

Kevin McKiernan writes, in his article, “Indian Woman’s Death Raises Many Questions“,  written May 30,1976, "AIM didn’t kill her," one well known AIM leader said in an interview who asked not to be identified.

"The pigs got there first.

"They knew we knew who she was, and they wanted to blame AIM with her death."

Despite fact that Banks, with the help of John Trudell, had made good his escape from Oregon with out being identified, he too was indicted on November 26,1975, two days before Anna Mae had been taken prisoner by AIM members in Denver.

In 2005 an attorney revealed to me that Corky Gonzales, who was dieing at the time, told him that the Affidavit regarding the two informants was "passed around during the meeting" about Anna Mae at Troy Lynn Yellow Wood’s house in 1975. (Ernesto Viji was named by both Troy Lynn Yellow Wood and Angie Begay Janis ( Mother of one of Dennis Bank’s children) as being one of the two members of the Crusade for Justice who took part in that meeting.) The FBI fabricated affidavit became an effective weapon against Anna Mae.

I am confident that John Trudell will eventually reveal his knowledge of the those in AIM leadership that were responsible for the death of Anna Mae Aquash.

During the Farmington, N.Mex., AIM Convention, Banks and Vernon Bellecourt expressed their concerns to Mr. Peltier, whom they then had interrogate her in an effort to discover the truth. Their suspicions sparked a series of accusations and confrontations by other AIM members which Anna Mae suffered and endured. But, she refused to be driven out of the Movement that she had come to embrace. Despite these accusations, Anna Mae remained a member of our group throughout the aftermath of the Oglala firefight up until the time she was executed.

Here, it is worth noting the continued involvement of Banks and Bellecourt in the Looking Cloud and Graham cases, consistent with their ongoing support for the FBI’s campaign to frame Leonard Peltier for the murder of Anna Mae, a campaign that includes accusing Peltier representatives, including myself and Ward Churchill, of being FBI agents.

Leonard felt obligated to withdraw his support from John Graham when it became clear that Graham, who has acknowledged having a role in Anna Mae’s murder, was attempting to establish a connection between himself and Leonard, specifically claiming that following the Oglala firefight he hooked up with "Leonard and them , and they were in the hills there. Anna Mae and all of us stayed..." As I was one of the people with Leonard at that time, I can unequivocally state that this is a lie.

False statements by Mr. Graham and lies by Kamook (Banks) Ecoffey [a/k/a Darlene Nichols] have been embraced by the media, which is reporting these outrageous accusations against Leonard. In the case of Kamook, who said that Leonard "...believed [Anna Mae] was a fed, and he was going to get some truth serum and give it to her so that she would tell the truth," her own sister, Bernie Lafferty, said in a taped interview that she knew this to be a lie.

Kamook also made claims that the group was watching Anna Mae and had her make bombs to get her fingerprints on them. Bernie said," Well, the bombing stuff, we were all there when that was going on. All I feel is that nobody was concerned about getting her finger prints or anything. At that time there were other things more important to worry about then that." Bernie said that Leonard treated Anna Mae no different than the rest of us, “I never once heard Leonard accuse Anna Mae of being an informant.” Bernie said further, “ We was always real close to Anna Mae…well, we had to be…I know deep in my heart that she was no FBI agent. She would never say anything to anybody.”

Further, there is no association official or otherwise between John Graham and the LPDC. In fact, we have requested repeatedly, both privately and publicly, that Mr. Grahams support committee remove Leonard’s statements and links to the LPDC website from their website, to no avail.

We know today that Anna Mae was killed, not for what AIM members who participated in killing thought. She was killed because of one AIM leaders fear of going to prison. Banks had expressed concerns to lawyers about the Bombings on the Pine Ridge Reservation; he had been in the motor home and faced big time. All the old suspicions about Anna Mae came back to haunt him.

In a personal reprimand, Banks expressed, in his recent book Ojibwa Warrior, doubt's about himself, "Did I do the right thing? DID I ABANDON MY PEOPLE JUST TO SAVE MYSELF? Kamook, in one e-mail bitterly expressed, “And when John picked Dennis up I know that Dennis' answer to John's question of "how are Ka-Mook and the rest of them?" Dennis' response was "it's every man for himself," or something to that effect.”

 Finally, it is necessary to underline the continuing attacks against Leonard Peltier and his support network by the FBI and their affiliated websites, as well as the on going attacks on leading AIM members connected to the LPDC by Vernon Bellecourt and Dennis Banks. Their well documented participation in these efforts is echoed here as an attempt to destroy the on going work to raise the consciousness for justice and freedom for Leonard Peltier.

There are still many unanswered questions about John Trudell, who photo identified John Graham in Canada, and Dennis Banks who calls many of us FBI agents in our search for the truth. One truth is that there still is unity between John Trudell, Dennis Banks, and some of the rest of those leaders involved, hidden in the guise of disunity. One thing is for sure all are forced to play the game to save their own ass, including the FBI.

Yes, the FBI were responsible for the murder of Anna Mae Aquash too. The FBI had attempted to cover up the killing and had not investigated it for a decade, and still are not seriously investigating it. They willfully created the paranoia with the now infamous informant, Douglas Durham. Resulting in the paranoia that ran ramped throughout the movement. The FBI’s counter intelligence program’s most important tactic to plant distrust to create dissention, with the aim of fragmentizing and destroying activist movements. FOI FBI documents show they advocated and practiced these tactics against AIM.

Those AIM member who participated in taking care of Anna Mae believed that they were doing it to save the movement, were politically correct, should be supported and defended. But John Boy Graham, Dennis Banks, John Trudell and others who have chosen to use Leonard Peltier as a scape goat for their freedom must be condemned.

Zigrossi knowingly commented, "I'm sure they suspected her of being an informer and that's probably what caused her demise." Then he callously commented, "She was really a victim of circumstance." What he meant was that Anna Mae, courageous to the very end… was, 'A Misfortune of War.'

This bad decision was driven by  paranoia injected by the FBI  informant Durham; fear drove him to take care of Anna Mae,  . The reason self preservation. I do not accept his action politically motivated as some want us to believe.  Banks was simply prepared, willing and ready to sacrifice a fellow AIM patriot, A true "warrior" rather then go to prison, this is unforgivable. 

The host of the fifth estate, “Some people say that you ordered the death of Anna Mae”. Banks, head down, several seconds at a lose for words, finally says, “That is an interesting speculation, I would have died with her.” Dennis Banks knew he had the authority.

When I phoned Dennis Banks to inform him I was releasing the statement currently on Colorado AIM’s website, I told Dennis I knew that not only the FBI was setting Leonard up but also you [Dennis Banks] had set him up. His response was, "That is a pretty strong statement Bob. Who is going to believe you Bob."

Robert Robideau AIM

Note: This statement also appears as the initial contribution of article Robert Robideau, at (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Robideau&oldid=15815633). --Ascánder 23:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latest edit

What is a 'defensive wound'? Did the FBI report this?.. Users Bearcat , TDC? -- max rspct leave a message 00:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A defensive wound is one in which the victim atampts to "defend" himself during a fight. During a stabbing, for example, a person might try and block the knife using thier hands, and hence would recieve a "defensive" wound. When Peltier walked up to Williams and shot him, Williams put his hand up to stop the bullet. Futile as it is, its a natural reaction.
From the FBI:
There is no eyewitness testimony of what happened at the Agents' cars. However, the physical evidence showed that Agent Williams had received a defensive wound through his right hand. The same bullet then traveled through his head killing him instantly. Agent Coler was lying on the ground, unconscious or near unconscious, when he was shot once in the top of his head, but the wound was not fatal. Agent Coler was then shot a second time near the jaw. This wound was fatal.
This was established during the trial. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 01:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Political Prisoner

I reinserted the Political Prisoner category. He is considered a Political Prisoner by Amnesty International and he is also mentioned by example in Political prisoner. The category is indeed appropriate.

Oyvind 17:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would be inclined to support the inclusion if I could find a link from AI's website that Peltier is a "political prisoner", but I cannot find a citation on AI's website. The closest I can find is the following:
Amnesty International has not adopted Leonard Peltier as a prisoner of conscience[1].
Please provide a source. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 18:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt you will find a direct link stating he is a "political prisoner". However a political prisoner is not necessarily the same as a prisoner of conscience. In the case of Peltier, he would likely be automatically excluded from the status of POC, due to the fact that he has used or advocated violent means. If you read the Political prisoner entry however, it mentions qualifications such as unfair trial, false criminal charges etc. In the links below you will find some more information where AIUSA states "The organization has consistently voiced concerns about the fairness of the legal proceedings that led to his original conviction and sentence and believes that political factors may have influenced the way in which the case was conducted." and "Native American activist Leonard Peltier, who remains in prison after 23 years despite Amnesty's serious concerns about the fairness of his trial and sentencing and lack of proper medical attention.".
USA: Amnesty International will attend Leonard Peltier hearing[2]
USA: APPEAL FOR THE RELEASE OF LEONARD PELTIER[3]
AIUSA Annual General Meeting 1999 - April Update[4]
Oyvind 18:45, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I will not find a direct link stating that he is a political prisoner because AI, contrary to what you wrote above, does not consider him to be one.
The qualifications you mentioned for a political prisoner, as given in the Wikipedia article, are minor and ancillary ones. The primary defining characteristic of a political prisoner has nothing to do with how fair the trial was or how fair the charges were, its about why those charges were brought forth in the first place: namely to imprison someone critical of the government: A political prisoner is someone held in prison or otherwise detained, perhaps under house arrest, because their ideas or image are deemed by a government to either challenge or threaten the authority of the state. AI has not made this comparison, and therefore it should not be in the article attributed to them. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 19:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You make a good point as to what constitutes a political prisoner, and I agree that what you mention are the main reasons... Based on that reasoning, it still seems clear that he’s a political prisoner. The reasoning might be more complex than what we started out with, but here’s some information that I believe supports it:
Amnesty mentions the following (which is the closes I’ve come to actually finding it on their website, although keep in mind that the archives on their websites are limited, not exhaustive):
* Amnesty mentions that the organization remains concerned about the fairness of the proceedings leading to his conviction and believes that political factors may have influenced the way in which the case was prosecuted.. Amnesty does not ask for peoples release from prison lightly, especially not in such a civilized society as the US, and even though the wording is somewhat cautious, the fact that they’re even mentioning political reasons would indicate that they have a lot of information pointing to the fact. [5]
* The books 'In the spirit of Crazy Horse' by Peter Matthiessen and 'Agents of repression' by Ward Churchill (I'm certain you love him) have provided good testimony to the fact that Leonard Peltier got caught in the dragnet of the COINTELPRO operations against the American Indian Movement. This was a highly political operation, and the FBI clearly saw AIM and their members as a threat to the authority of the state. This combined with the fact that the FBI clearly put everything into putting Peltier behind bars, including forging evidence, perjury etc. would quality Peltier as a political prisoner.
Oyvind 07:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All of this is irrelevant as to the definition. Even had Peltier been involved in COINTELPRO somehow, it would still not change the fact the he was tried and convicted of shooting two injured and unarmed FBI agents at close range with an assault rifle. He is not in jail for what he thinks or believes or says, rather he is in jail for murder. Peltier has had numerous times in front of the bench to dispute his conviction and he most certainly has not lacked for adequate legal representation. Every appeal he has filed has been denied by multiple courts and judges. What the FBI is alleged to have done perjury forging evidence, clearly has not been established outside the minds of Peltier’s most ardent supporters. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 16:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What first you're stating might've been relavant had he not been a Native American, nor a member of AIM, a group of people and an organization that the US government persecuted and felt greatly threatened by. As it is, the fact that he IS those two things makes him qualified as a political prisoner combined with the evidence of perjury, forging evidence, coercing witnesses etc., not necessarily what he thinks or says, because the government considers him a threat for whom he is. Further down, you're basically asserting the infallability of the United States courtsystem, and that they can have no political prisoners, a flawed argument at best. Lastly, the perjury, forging evidence etc. has been very well documented and has very little to do with being a Peltier supporter or not. It has for instance been established by the US court system itself, Canadian authorities as well as the books mentioned above. These are some of the things that make Amnesty and others call for his release, due to the fact that justice has indeed in this case not been served. I would suggest you read a bit further what for instance Amnesty has to say about their concerns regarding the case, and if you feel so inclined also books, court decisions etc.. Like I've tried to convey before, it was not like Amnesty one day saw a picture of Leonard Peltier and said "Hey, dude... This native american has a nice beard...Let's front his case to get him released." Your arguments fail this time, but I do however enjoy the discussion. :) It would be nice if other people would chime in to present some pros and cons as well.