Letter to Red Nation

Former FBI Agent in Charge Joseph H. Trimbach awaits a response from the group, Red Nation, following its decision to award Leonard Peltier their first ever humanitarian award. The Trimbachs would like Red Nation and its founder, Joanelle Romero, to explain how Peltier has, in the words of the group, "...helped focus world attention on government repression of Native resistance throughout the Americas." Here is the letter from Trimbach:

December 3, 2009

Joanelle Romero, Founder - Red Nation
9420 Reseda Blvd PMB 352
Northridge CA, 91324-2974

Dear Ms. Romero,

I was the FBI Agent in charge of South Dakota when, on June 26, 1975, Leonard Peltier gunned down two young Agents under my supervision. I have recently learned that your organization, Red Nation, has awarded Peltier your first annual humanitarian award. I can only surmise that your group is unaware of the facts of this double murder and Peltier’s continued efforts to deflect attention from his crimes by masquerading as an American Indian victim of persecution. My book, American Indian Mafia, sets the record straight regarding Peltier’s made-up persona as a political prisoner and exposes the true legacy of Peltier’s crime bosses, leaders of the American Indian Movement (AIM).

I was there that day, responding to the frantic radio calls from 27-year-old Ron Williams after he and his partner, 28-year-old Jack Coler, came under fire from shooters well outside the range of their service revolvers. Exposed in an open field, the men were caught virtually defenseless. Peltier, at the time a wanted fugitive, later admitted that he mistakenly believed the Agents were there to arrest him. The evidence shows that Peltier fired from a distance of over 200 yards from the cover of a large elm tree. At least a hundred shell casings matching Peltier’s assault rifle were found at the scene. Other shooters joined in, all aiming at Ron and Jack as they sought cover behind their vehicles. Over 125 bullet holes were found in their Bureau cars.

After both men were wounded, Peltier and two of his accomplices went down to the injured Agents and shot them both at point-blank range. We know this because of the evidence presented at Peltier's trial and because Peltier later bragged about shooting Ron Williams in the face as he sat pleading for his life. The autopsy report confirms that Ron died with his right hand raised in front of his face to ward off the blast from Peltier’s weapon. We learned about Peltier’s boast from testimony given at the 2004 trial of AIM member Arlo Looking Cloud, who was found guilty of murdering AIM activist Anna Mae Aquash. I attended that trial, where the former common-law wife of AIM founder Dennis Banks, Ka-Mook Nichols, recalled under oath how Peltier reenacted his crime with gestures and boasted, “The motherf—ker was begging for his life but I shot him anyway.”

Six months after the Agents’ murders, Peltier’s leaders ordered the execution-style murder of Aquash, the mother of two young girls, because they thought she was an FBI informant. She was never an informant. Once again, AIM thugs had acted on faulty assumptions. Looking Cloud and his accomplice dragged Anna Mae from a car, shot her in the head, and pushed her off a cliff. Peltier had earlier interrogated Anna Mae by putting a loaded gun in her mouth. He called this administering “truth serum.” Peltier may have sealed Anna Mae’s fate because she was also present when he boasted about shooting Agent Williams. Peltier had given his leaders another reason to eliminate her.

In July of this year, I sat a few feet away from inmate Peltier at his parole hearing, where I urged him to accept responsibility for his crimes and ask for forgiveness from his victims’ families. As I read my statement, he could only stare at the floor. The parole board found him to be undeserving, defiant, and completely without remorse. Like every judge who has reviewed the Peltier murder case, the board saw through his phony cloak of victimhood. Every one of Peltier’s alibis has been exposed as a cynical ruse directed against his supporters, whom he must surely regard as mindless tools.

For over 30 years, Peltier has relied on the ignorance of political organizations and well-intentioned human rights activists to sustain the myth of his innocence and the success of his illicit defense fund, now operating under a fraudulent non-profit corporation. Your group is just the latest to fall victim to the same old conspiracy theories and shameless lies of Peltier and his chief falsifiers, Peter Matthiessen, the author of In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, and Robert Redford, the producer of the documentary, Incident at Oglala. As my book documents, both of these media productions are full of distortions, falsehoods, and Peltier’s well-rehearsed fables.

It is time for all people who have been fooled by the Peltier propaganda machine to educate themselves on the facts and join Native American groups who rightly condemn Peltier and his misguided defenders. I urge Red Nation to rescind the award given this unrepentant killer and take a stand for Native American truth and virtue. It is not too late to restore dignity and honor to your humanitarian award. There are plenty of American Indians deserving of your accolades, but the pathetic manipulator who now serves two consecutive life sentences in a federal penitentiary is certainly not one of them.

Sincerely,


Joe Trimbach
www.americanindianmafia.com

Letter asks the National Museum of the American Indian to Support Truthful Indian History and Exposes Leonard Peltier Fund Fraud

In a letter to the Director of the National Museum of the American Indian, former FBI Agent in Charge Joseph H. Trimbach asks for the Director's help in supporting truthful Native American history. The letter also raises questions about the legality of Leonard Peltier's legal defense funds. On April 28, 2008, Peltier's sister, Betty Ann Solano, filed articles of incorporation for the Leonard Peltier Defense Offense Committee. The fund was previously known as the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee. Peltier's funds are filed under nonprofit corporations in possible violation of IRS tax regulations and disclosure requirements. Peltier has thus far refused to publicly disclose his financial records.

October 7, 2009

Mr. Kevin Gover, Director
National Museum of the American Indian
PO Box 23473
Washington, DC 20026

Dear Mr. Gover,

Congratulations on the fifth anniversary of the National Museum of the American Indian. The museum showcases a masterful display of Indian culture and artistry and has become a wonderful addition to the Smithsonian. It has come to my attention, however, that the museum bookstore sells a book that falsifies Indian history by depicting a murderer as an Indian hero. Peter Matthiessen’s In the Spirit of Crazy Horse glorifies convicted killer Leonard Peltier and places him on a pedestal alongside the brave and noble Chief Crazy Horse. My account of what happened, American Indian Mafia, takes issue with this attempt to portray Peltier’s cowardice and evil as Indian heroism and virtue. I cite several Native Americans who honor the truth and who contributed to setting the historical record straight. Award-winning Native journalist Tim Giago wrote that American Indian Mafia “takes apart” In the Spirit of Crazy Horse “and exposes it for the fraud that it is. It is refreshing to finally hear the other side of the story.” Paul DeMain, editor of News from Indian Country, says that my book helps expose Peltier’s foggy alibis and false cry for human rights.

Mr. Gover, I was the FBI Agent in Charge when, on June 26, 1975, Peltier gunned down two of my Agents on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. After the men were injured and disarmed, Peltier executed both of them with his assault rifle. We know this because of the evidence presented at his trial and because Peltier later boasted about shooting 28-year-old Ron Williams in the face at point-blank range as he sat pleading for his life and trying to save Jack Coler, his injured partner. Peltier’s recent parole board concluded that he is undeserving of parole based on his behavior behind bars. I read a statement to Peltier at his July 28 hearing; and I can assure you that he remains defiant, manipulative, and utterly unrepentant.

Despite losing all his appeals, Peltier and his lawyers have fooled many people into believing that he was framed for the murders. Rather than accept responsibility for his crimes, Peltier exploits his Indian ancestry by sponsoring a fraudulent defense fund under the shelter of a tax-exempt organization. Over the last 30 years, Peltier has collected millions of dollars abusing the charitable instincts of people who care about genuine Indian suffering and hardship. Donors have no idea that this money is doled out to Peltier’s friends and supporters. Proceeds from the sale of In the Spirit of Crazy Horse also go directly to Peltier’s not-for-profit corporation, with no accountability.

Mr. Gover, the National Museum of the American Indian is a cultural gem that has enlightened and educated millions of visitors, but having Matthiessen’s book on display in your bookstore is a conspicuous blot on an otherwise fine collection of Indian literature. It is bad enough to invoke the spirit of Crazy Horse in defense of a murderer, but it is even worse to profit from this charade under the guise of authentic Indian history.

I am not in favor of censorship, but I believe you owe it to your patrons to present “both sides of the story.” Please consider making my historical account available in your bookstore so that people will have access to a fact-based rebuttal to Peltier’s lies. I hope you will take the occasion of the museum’s gala celebration to allow me, as well as the Indian witnesses in American Indian Mafia, the opportunity to counter Peter Matthiessen’s unconscionable depiction of Leonard Peltier as an Indian hero.

Regards,

Joseph H. Trimbach

AmericanIndianMafia.com
Expertclick.com keyword: Trimbach

10 Reasons Why Leonard Peltier Should Never Be Freed

July 26, 2009 - For the last 33 years, Leonard Peltier supporters have called for his release from the confines of the federal penitentiary. That is where Peltier has resided all these years, save for a brief moment of freedom when Peltier engineered an armed escape in which another inmate was shot dead by prison guards. Peltier got away but was captured a few days later after his big white tennis shoes highlighted his hiding place in the bushes of Santa Maria, California. After being convicted of escaping and using a firearm to do so, Peltier received another seven years tacked on to his two consecutive life sentences.

For the record, Peltier objects to serving time for the execution-style murders of FBI Agents Jack Coler and Ron Williams on June 26, 1975. Peltier has always claimed that the truth of his innocence has never had a chance to blossom. While truth, no doubt, plays a reassuring role in the quest for justice, it is not something that has been a friend to the infamous Native American cause célèbre. The truth is particularly harmful to Peltier this year because he comes up for a truth-detecting parole board hearing in two days, on July 28, his first since 1993. Some say this is his last chance to bamboozle the board with his version of the truth.

Nevertheless, Peltier's fans, at one time numbering in the millions, remain hopeful; people like Robert Redford, Bishop Desmond Tutu, and the fact finders at Amnesty International, all of whom have never been impressed by the mountain of evidence against their favorite felon. Even those who say Peltier may be guilty as charged argue that he should be freed for "humanitarian" reasons because he'll soon be 65-years-old.

Though most Peltier supporters are loath to admit it, the truth has never failed to surface about Peltier's role in the executions; first during his trial, and ever since, through old secrets revealed. Moreover, the evidence has always beaten a path to Peltier's cell door, most often by way of his own flawed thinking and verbal admissions. Peltier thought the Agents were there to arrest him (they weren't), that he was justified in shooting two men in the face at point-blank range (he wasn't), and that he can now lie his way to freedom before a parole board (he can't.)

But because Peltier says he didn't do it, his followers simply believe him. Not only do they believe him, they issue astounding proclamations in support of his innocence, his make-belief persona as "political prisoner," and his "human rights activist" nonsense. As one blogger recently swore, "Leonard Peltier is not in prison for killing the two Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) Agents as is alleged, he has been incarcerated for 33 years because he belonged to a group (American Indian Movement) that dared to challenge the federal government and their lies. When one has the audacity to challenge the fedgov, he/she becomes a target for malicious prosecution, fabricated evidence, witness tampering and illegal imprisonment. Leonard Peltier has experienced all of these in the extreme. "

"Extreme" is certainly a word Peltier pushers are familiar with. "Extreme," as in not allowing the facts to get in the way of regurgitating fables and falsehoods. "Extreme," as in ignoring the Federal Register, the Federal Record, and the court testimony, all of which place Peltier at the scene of the crime, at the moment the killing shots were fired. And so in the spirit of Coler and Williams, here are ten truthful reasons why an unrepentant Peltier should never see the light of day as a free man:

1. Peltier was fairly tried and fairly convicted. This is the conclusion of every single federal judge who's reviewed the case. Since his conviction in 1977, the evidence against Peltier has been repeatedly confirmed, expanded, and corroborated. [See: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/585.html (Note FN 15: "The two witnesses testified outside the presence of the jury that after their testimony at trial, they had been threatened by Peltier himself that if they did not return to court and testify that their earlier testimony had been induced by F.B.I. threats, their lives would be in danger")]

2. Facts of the case prove that Peltier opened fire on the Agents from a distance of over 200 yards. Armed with only their side arms, both young men were soon wounded. After the initial shooting ended, Peltier, along with two other men, walked down to the wounded Agents and finished them off, shooting them both in the face at point-blank range.

3. A few months after the murders, Peltier bragged about killing Agent Ron Williams, as recalled by a witness in a separate murder trial in 2004. Under oath, the witness recalled Peltier's exact words: "The motherfu—er was begging for his life but I shot him anyway." (See: http://www.jfamr.org/doc/kmtest1.html.)

4. Peltier has parlayed his Native American ancestry into a successful defense fund, bilking millions of people out of their time and money. He has fooled Amnesty International, Mikhail Gorbachev, Nelson Mandela, the Dali Lama, and people all over the world. Peltier is supported by Hollywood heavyweights such as David Geffen, Barbra Streisand, and Oliver Stone, all of whom have fallen prey to his propaganda machine. Robert Redford produced and narrated a documentary that relies on politics and propaganda to explain away Peltier's guilt, such as the Mr. X alibi concocted by Peltier's friends. The X story, promoted by author Peter Matthiessen in an effort to sell his book about Peltier, was later exposed as a complete hoax.

5. Freeing an unrepentant murderer runs contrary to all principles of parole and rehabilitation. A free Peltier would undermine law enforcement efforts, subvert the rule of law, and compound the anguish of the victims' families. Freeing the killer of two FBI Agents would be particularly devastating to other Federal Agents who risk their lives every day in pursuit of criminals. Parole to a remorseless killer would also be detrimental to American interests by giving ammunition to our enemies. They will point to our system of justice as obviously flawed, thus confirming their argument that Peltier was wrongfully convicted and that our court system is unfair. Worldwide media will parrot these conclusions as if they are fact-based.

6. Freeing a guilty killer like Peltier would undermine efforts to investigate crimes on Indian reservations. Many Indians would view his freedom as a sign that the FBI and the Justice Department had always tried to mislead Indian Country about the facts of the case. Many Indians would be more reluctant to cooperate with current investigations.

7. Peltier claimed his prison break in July 1979 was in response to being targeted for assassination by evil FBI Agents. The truth is that inmate Peltier had planned his escape for several years, and counted on help from outside contacts such as actor Max Gail. Peltier must be held responsible for the needless death he caused during his escape and for threatening a man from whom he stole a truck during his getaway.

8. If Peltier is freed, it will be more difficult to indict him on other murders in which he may have been involved. In one of these cases, Peltier interrogated a young woman, Anna Mae Aquash, by putting a loaded gun in her mouth. Aquash's execution was ordered by leaders of the American Indian Movement (AIM) because they mistakenly believed that she was an FBI informant. (See www.americanindianmafia.com/audio/GunInHerMouthReMix.wmv.)

9. Contrary to his claims, Peltier has always put himself above the welfare of Native Americans. One of his recent newsletters opened with the words, "May Death Be Upon You, FBI." These are not the thoughts of an innocent man, but rather the wish of someone wanting to incite violence. Even if Peltier did not author the message, he has not disavowed it, either. The truth is, Peltier would like nothing better than to agitate for criminal acts against Indians who oppose his freedom and who count on the FBI to apprehend evildoers on the reservation. Peltier has nothing but contempt for our system of justice.

10. Peltier's 1993 Parole Board recognized that he was convicted of aiding and abetting the murders. But then the Board went on to say: "... the greater probability is that you yourself fired the fatal shots... It would be unjust to treat the slaying of these F.B.I. agents, while they lay wounded and helpless, as if your actions had been part of a gun battle. Neither the state of relations between Native American militants and law enforcement at the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation prior to June 26, 1975, nor the exchanges of gunfire between individuals at the Jumping Bull Compound and the law enforcement agents who arrived there during the hours after Agents Coler and Williams were murdered, explains or mitigates the crimes you committed... Your release on parole would promote disrespect for the law in contravention of 18 U.S.C..."

There is no question that Leonard Peltier is guilty. He has done nothing to earn his freedom. He has done nothing to show that he accepts responsibility for his crimes. To this day, he remains defiant, manipulative, and completely remorseless. Freeing this ruthless killer would be a terrible travesty of justice.

PBS Accused of Distorting Indian History; Falls Prey to Propaganda

Sometimes you have to take a stand against widely-accepted propaganda and defend unpopular truths. The last place we thought we would encounter resistance to the truth is the taxpayer-funded Public Broadcasting System. But now it appears that the bigwigs at PBS intend to dig in their heels. They insist that their recently released film, “Wounded Knee,” is a fair and balanced account of the takeover and destruction of the historic village in 1973. We beg to differ. To make our point, we formed a group, the Wounded Knee Victims and Veterans Association (WKVAVA.) Our group includes people who have either studied Wounded Knee or else have documented knowledge of what happened there. We stack up well against PBS’s “prominent scholars.” Unlike them, some of us were actual participants in the occupation and the efforts to end it peacefully. We therefore carry credibility of the sort that seems to be lacking at PBS HQ. Included in our group is JoAnn Gildersleeve Feraca (Chippewa), daughter of Agnes and Clive Gildersleeve, owners of the Wounded Knee Trading Post; Romona and Saunie Wilson (Lakota), daughters of Tribal Chairman Richard Wilson; Richard Two Elk (Lakota), Wounded Knee Veteran and former member, American Indian Movement; Patrick LeBeau, (Cheyenne River Sioux, Chippewa), Professor of Indian Studies, Michigan State University; Paul DeMain (Oneida-Ojibwe), Editor, News from Indian Country; and Shawn White Wolf (Northern Cheyenne), CEO, White Wolf Media Group. In addition to protecting the true story of Wounded Knee, our mission is to correct the historical record wherever we find evidence of distortion and propaganda with regard to the legacy of the American Indian Movement (AIM.) And we find much distortion and propaganda (and some backpedaling) from the folks at PBS. Here are excerpts from our first and second letters (May 10 and July 10, 2009) to PBS’s CEO, Paula Kerger.

Dear Ms. Kerger,

We wish to express our concerns about the PBS-backed production of “Wounded Knee,” the final installment of the “American Experience - We Shall Remain” series, which is scheduled to air on May 11, 2009. We believe that the producer, Stanley Nelson of Firelight Media, violates PBS’s own guidelines for editorial integrity, honesty, and fairness. PBS guidelines state: “When editing, producers of informational content must not sensationalize events or create a misleading or unfair version of what actually occurred” and that “(p)roducers must assure that edited material remains faithful in tone…” and is presented “…in a manner that fairly portrays reality.” “Wounded Knee” fails on all counts. This production employs distorted editing, deceptive statements, audience manipulation, and a propagandistic narrative that rationalizes the terror, violence, and murders perpetrated by members of the American Indian Movement (AIM) during the 1973 occupation of the historic Indian village of Wounded Knee.

This film attempts to explain away the destruction of the village by invoking historical issues (broken treaties, Indian boarding schools, government-sponsored relocation, etc.) and by rationalizing the criminality of the perpetrators. One of the film’s worst transgressions is its contemptible disregard for the real victims of Wounded Knee, the villagers who lived there. Aside from a brief statement from one of the Indian hostages, Agnes Gildersleeve, the villagers’ stories are virtually absent from this film. “Wounded Knee” does not even show how AIM systematically tore the village apart and reduced it to complete devastation. The film does not mention that AIM looted the town, stole people’s personal possessions, slaughtered cattle in their bedrooms, fire-bombed their homes and vehicles, and desecrated their churches. AIM occupiers stole or destroyed a collection of priceless Indian artifacts when they pillaged the Wounded Knee museum. Rather than condemn AIM violence, “Wounded Knee” serves as a mouthpiece for the perpetrators who spew their distortions and lies without challenge. To glorify AIM in this way is not only deceitful, it is offensive. This film cheapens genuine Indian valor and heroism.

For a documentary that purports to be about the armed takeover of a community and its consequences, these are serious shortcomings that demand a response. From a philosophical point of view, the argument that the terror, violence, theft, and loss of life associated with the razing of an Indian village were somehow justified is an argument that is fundamentally flawed and must be exposed.

Producer Nelson went to great lengths to tell only the perpetrators’ side of the story. He misled interviewees, such as Wounded Knee resident Walter Littlemoon, about what would be in the film. Nelson reneged on his agreement to interview Wounded Knee veteran Richard Two Elk, a condition agreed to in exchange for Joe Trimbach’s participation. Nelson used Trimbach’s interview anyway. Nelson or his surrogates omitted American Indian Mafia from the PBS bibliography. This book, which is supported by thorough documentation, is arguably the most complete and factual account of Wounded Knee’s destruction. After Joe Trimbach registered a complaint with your legal department, Mafia was added to the PBS list. One wonders if Mafia was initially excluded simply because it exposes several of the books in the same list as falsified and fraudulent accounts of AIM history and of Wounded Knee. Nelson relies on these falsified books to support his distorted version of what happened in the village. To reference only the falsified accounts is inexcusable. To use this tainted information to construct leading questions for the PBS-endorsed school curriculum is equally scandalous and must also be exposed. There is not one question, for example, that asks how the villagers lost everything they owned.

We believe that Nelson’s failure to interview Two Elk was partly due to the fact that he witnessed the Wounded Knee murder of Perry Ray Robinson, a topic Nelson shows no interest in pursuing. Robinson, the only black man seen inside the village during that period, was a civil rights activist and a colleague of Martin Luther King. Robinson was shot by an AIM leader during a heated argument. His death and burial near the village ruins is one of many AIM secrets that Nelson’s production has now helped cover up.

Another example of deception is the conspicuous absence of any footage showing Anna Mae Pictou Aquash, a prominent and highly visible AIM member at Wounded Knee. Aquash was murdered by AIM leaders in 1975 because they mistakenly believed that she was an FBI informant. Ironically, Wounded Knee warrior Madonna Thunder Hawk, featured throughout the film, is also implicated in Aquash’s murder and its subsequent cover-up. Carter Camp, another featured AIM leader, has been repeatedly caught in a lie about knowing Ray Robinson. Today, Camp denies ever meeting him. On camera, Camp has nothing to say about Anna Mae either. In fact, most of the AIM leaders interviewed for this film have been implicated in the Aquash and Robinson murders. Anna Mae likely knew about the Robinson shooting and her leaders’ attempts to keep his death a secret, and now it appears Nelson has joined the effort to write her out of existence as well. AIM leaders must surely approve.

Instead of documenting Indian history, "Wounded Knee" denigrates genuine Indian sacrifice and makes a mockery of true Indian heroism shown in previous segments. We intend to pursue every means available to expose this film for its dishonesty, its revisionist agenda, and its abject failure to tell a fact-based and fair-minded story of Wounded Knee. This production abuses the public trust by recycling and legitimizing what can only be described as vintage AIM propaganda. A PBS-sanctioned curriculum that indoctrinates our children must also be challenged. We therefore demand redress. We want equal time for rebuttal, balance, and clarification. The American public deserves better from our publicly-funded programming. We ask for your immediate response to our concerns.

PBS responded a few days later with a letter from PBS Executive Producer Mark Samels and with comments from some of their paid consultants. Here is our reply:

Dear Ms. Kerger,

This is in response to your letter of May 15 and to comments from the June 5 PBS mailbag in support of the American Experience film, “Wounded Knee.” In our letter of May 10, we expressed misgivings about the film and the manner in which it was produced. We believe that the points we raised deserve consideration and debate because they identify issues this film does not address but that are nevertheless central to its integrity and historical accuracy. As you know, we drew attention to a range of issues producer Stanley Nelson took pains to avoid, all of which would have undermined the credibility of AIM leaders Nelson interviewed for the film and whom he portrays as reliable sources. Our concerns focus on the film’s tendency to cover up serious crimes committed by these same AIM leaders during the occupation of Wounded Knee. We were also troubled by the explanation for why American Indian Mafia, the only book that mentions these crimes in detail, was initially dropped from the PBS bibliography. We had hoped PBS officials would respond in an honest and objective manner and perhaps offer insights unknown to us. After reading PBS’s official response, however, our concerns remain.

We do not agree with Executive Producer Mark Samels’s assessment that the film is “even-handed in the portrayal of the siege,” primarily because the film almost completely ignores the Indian victims of Wounded Knee. Nor is Samels correct when he claims that archival footage “clearly shows” the village devastation. In fact, the film does not show any of the fire-bombed homes or the mass vandalism that left most Indian residences completely uninhabitable. Tribal Chairman Dick Wilson was never the mayor of Pine Ridge, as Samels asserts, nor does the film follow through with what Samels says is its intent to show the effect the takeover had on Indians across the county. The film’s argument that Wounded Knee had a positive effect on Native Americans is almost entirely anecdotal and is offered by AIM supporters. There is hard evidence, as well, that suggests the takeover had a negative effect on Indians nationwide and on AIM. Just after Wounded Knee, AIM leaders drew less than 200 Indians to their national convention. The National Tribal Chairman’s Association condemned AIM for destroying the historic village; and when AIM took over a manufacturing plant in New Mexico the following year, hundreds of Navajos lost their jobs. Nelson’s film mentions none of this. On an empirical basis, it is easier to show that the destruction of an Indian village spelled the end of AIM as a credible organization formed to help other Indians. The producers are left with the shaky proposition that legal defense costs explain why AIM’s demise coincided with AIM’s greatest achievement.

Mr. Samels claims that American Experience has responded to our concerns “fully and responsibly,” but then he seems to contradict himself by saying that he does not feel it is “necessary or prudent” to respond point by point to our objections. It may not be prudent to admit the film’s shortcomings, but it is definitely necessary in the interest of portraying true Indian history. We are not persuaded by his assurances that the film was reviewed by “prominent scholars of Native American history,” especially when it appears that our first-hand insights into what really happened at Wounded Knee address the very questions these experts are unable to answer.

Film advisor Paul Chaat Smith admits he is unfamiliar with many of the issues we raised. That is understandable, but it is not a basis upon which to label them “extreme.” Reporting a myriad of sourced facts, as was done in American Indian Mafia, may be ground-breaking, even provocative; but it is surely not extreme. Furthermore, if Mr. Smith is going to make our argument for us, we wish he would do so accurately. Our concerns have always been with the corruption and criminality of the AIM leadership, not, as Mr. Smith suggests, with the membership or the ideals the Movement espoused. We do not accept the notion that “Wounded Knee” presents the “Native American perspective.” Rather, the film presents, very effectively, a dishonest “AIM leadership perspective”; and there’s a huge difference between the two. Then, as today, the leadership preyed on the membership, as evidenced by the distortions in this film. We agree with film adviser Robert Warrior’s assessment that, “…where AIM goes chaos often follows,” if “chaos” means violence, destruction, and murder perpetrated by the leaders. We do not see the need to parse words, however, or to provide cover to those who still wield power through fear and intimidation.

“Wounded Knee” strongly suggests that AIM “is responsible for many positive changes in Indian Country”; yet, like Mr. Smith, the film is short on evidence, aside from a hazy reference to Indians feeling good about being Indian and a hard-to-prove correlation to the revitalization of Indian culture. For example, the argument that the National Museum of the American Indian would not exist without AIM’s influence is more than problematic, especially considering that AIM is virtually absent from all exhibits. Mr. Smith raises some interesting issues, however, such as the phenomenon of an annual Pine Ridge celebration of the 1973 occupation, an event that left the reservation worse off in countless ways. How did the local history become so perverted? And how did national media coverage of the occupation color the way the history was recorded?

We find Professor R. David Edmunds’s comments particularly disappointing. He insists that a response to our concerns would be too lengthy to be of much use. How odd for an academic to make such an argument. He further states that he lacks a law degree that might otherwise enable him to answer a few questions of the sort that can be found through honest research. The professor might simply be unqualified to address the issues we raised. Perhaps this is why he fails to mention our primary complaint about the film, which is of course the lack of information about the real victims of Wounded Knee: the people who lived there and the people who died there. Why is it so difficult to address the charge that this film runs roughshod over the Oglala perspective in favor of AIM criminality?

Professor Edmunds concludes by referencing his vast experience as a basis for belittling our point of view as “the perspective of a very small group of people with a particular agenda, and will be generally ignored by almost everyone else.” He may hope so, but it appears the professor has an agenda of his own. We challenge him to debate us on the AIM lies and distortions in his book, The People: A History of Native America. A number of this book’s characterizations of AIM are easily exposed as propaganda that originated with AIM leaders and their lawyers. While there may be many fine attributes to the professor’s research in other areas, his AIM expertise is suspect; he seems threatened by the facts, especially the facts with which he is unfamiliar. This gets to the heart of our objections and the weaknesses inherent in the film’s premise of presenting AIM leaders as reliable sources and as righteous pioneers. This approach tied the hands of “Wounded Knee” producer, Stanley Nelson, as he avoided certain issues at all costs in order to advance his agenda of sanitizing the Wounded Knee historical record. We maintain that a more objective approach to Wounded Knee realities would have led to some very interesting questions.

Consider, for example, the death of Viet Nam veteran Buddy Lamont on April 27 of the occupation. As alluded to in the film, challenging AIM leader Dennis Banks’s authority was a very dangerous thing to do at Wounded Knee, even for a local Oglala leader like Lamont. The film has AIM member Beau Little Sky saying that, to him, Lamont’s death was a murder. It may very well have been a murder, since Lamont was shot in the back, and apparently from a much shorter range than the hundreds of yards that separated militant bunkers from government roadblocks. Why didn’t AIM leaders immediately call for a ceasefire when Lamont was hit, as they did when Frank Clearwater (the only other “official” death) was struck by a stray bullet ten days earlier? In fact, Dennis Banks rejected a government-offered ceasefire at about the time Lamont was shot, and AIM leader Carter Camp admits he left Lamont’s body where it lay for over two hours before staging a rescue. Why?

The same Carter Camp extolled in the film as he speaks of the “horror” of the 1890 massacre is not asked about murder victim Ray Robinson or the horror he surely experienced. Robinson bled to death after being shot by an AIM leader a few days before Lamont was killed. Why did Camp once claim that he had to leave Robinson after he was “shot through both legs” at Wounded Knee? Why does Camp now say he never met the man? What does Camp have to say about Robinson’s friend, Al Cooper, who was chained to a bed while Camp and other AIM leaders pondered his fate as a possible snitch? And what happened to the people who didn’t pass the spy test? We would like to see a film where narrator Benjamin Bratt asks these questions with the same serious tone as he uses when misstating what happened at Wounded Knee Creek in 1890. At the very least, these issues would lend new meaning to the PBS questions designed to “challenge students,” such as: “Who are some of the most successful Native American leaders at the beginning of the 21st century?”

To summarize, we are not satisfied by the responses to our concerns from the PBS experts and their paid consultants. We believe that any impartial examination of this film must acknowledge its tendency to promote distortions injurious to true Indian history. We will continue to press for a fair, impartial, and informed response to our concerns. PBS viewers should be presented a fuller picture of what happened at Wounded Knee than only the perspective of AIM leaders engaged in cover-up and the massaged story of a doomed village with no victims. That is why we are encouraged by the words of PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler. We agree with his conclusion that further discussion is warranted; the public interest is not well served by stifling debate and undercutting honest inquiry. We applaud his call for a group of scholars not connected to the program to take a second look at the film and possibly debate its merits. We can suggest a panel of experts such as Native publisher Tim Giago and former government administrator Dr. Jim Wilson, both of whom will challenge many of the film’s premises and claims. In the spirit of fairness and historical accuracy, we ask you to schedule a roundtable discussion of the issues we have raised. We look forward to PBS following through with what Mr. Getler agrees is the quintessential mandate of PBS: the pursuit of historical “authenticity.”

Who is Leonard Peltier?

Hint: His Handlers Do Not Want You To Know

“May death be upon you FBI.” So begins a threat posted a few months ago on a Leonard Peltier blog site and attributed to the incarcerated felon himself. Peltier was convicted in the 1975 shooting deaths of two wounded FBI Agents, Jack R. Coler and Ronald A. Williams. Both men were shot in the face at point-blank range. Recently, Peltier and his lawyers launched a new charm offensive with the goal of persuading President Obama to grant him his freedom. But surely a convicted murderer who is trying to ingratiate himself to a new President should sound a bit more conciliatory. One would think someone must have advised Peltier that a defiant reference to the crime he was convicted of committing is not the best way to win friends and influence parole boards. Nor do Peltier’s terroristic rants help his chances of being granted a pardon from a newly-pressured President. Perhaps Peltier should explain that the death wish was inserted by one of his propaganda surrogates and claim—as he did during his trial for double murder—that he was not involved. Should that assertion be likewise refuted, Peltier might concede that, okay, he may have authored the heading, but a “political prisoner” who’s had to put up with over 30 years of prison life is entitled to a little payback. In any event, issuing murderous edicts against the FBI from the confines of a federal penitentiary is the act of a real knucklehead, which is why it seems likely Peltier authored the message. Like every other miscalculation he has made, beginning with his decision to become a “cop killer,” this one will surely backfire.

In fact, like all the contradictory alibis Peltier and his lawyers have conjured up over the years, this latest outburst, delivered with the usual malice, only underscores his unmitigated guilt. Look for his next parole board to conclude, with more certainty than ever, that Peltier is undeserving, that Peltier is unrepentant, that Peltier is unquestionably guilty. Hence, his lawyers must press for the last-ditch ploy of Presidential intervention. What they may not want their client to know, however, is that President Obama is unlikely to pardon a vindictive killer-turned-victim who spouts fatwahs from his prison cell. Peltier must hope that the Commander-in-Chief, charged with keeping us safe from terrorists and killers, would risk letting a terrorist-killer go free. Moreover, President Obama would be opposing the judgments of Presidents Clinton and Bush, both of whom were convinced of Peltier’s guilt, and both of whom Peltier now holds in contempt for seeing through his routine. If this is the best strategy this felon and his lawyers can dream up, perhaps he should seek new legal counsel.

The most reasonable conclusion is that Peltier’s ugly missive merely telegraphs his true feelings, as he has been known to do in his defense fund newsletter, now posted under the revamped feel-good title, “Who is Leonard Peltier?” Hint: his handlers do not want you to know the answer. They would have you buy into his pious sermons of self-devotion and an assortment of martyrdom claims his misinformed followers have been trained to disassociate from his crimes at the Jumping Bull compound. Sadly, the Peltier faithful are programmed to deny the reality of a cause célèbre that represents the extreme opposite of true Indian bravery and sacrifice. The required ignorance is truly astounding and no doubt attributable to Peter Matthiessen’s highly falsified Peltier story, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, and Robert Redford’s documentary, “Incident at Oglala.” As described in the book, American Indian Mafia, these accounts were produced by people unmercifully duped by Peltier’s lies.

For many years, Peltier’s number one alibi was that the murders were committed by an apparition known only as Mr. X. The X story was widely promulgated by the aforementioned propaganda pieces, each of which used the X ghost as the centerpiece of Peltier’s defense. None of the people who produced these deceitful stories, by the way, have ever been called to account for their misleading efforts, even after the offending productions were exposed as a series of fabrications. The first clue that something was awry was that Peltier often spoke glowingly of the mysterious phantom who executed two disarmed and injured men. (See americanindianmafia.com/audio/InTheSpiritofColerandWilliams.wmv). Mr. Peltier assured us that Mr. X was a very brave fellow, basically a nice guy, and always respectful of others. The problem was that Mr. X did not exist. Once the X angle was exposed as a complete hoax (by one of Peltier’s accomplices), Peltier had to change his story. And he’s been changing his story ever since. Today, he would tell you he has no idea who committed the murders, although he admits shooting at the Agents and—minutes later—viewing their dead bodies. (The murder timeline places Peltier at the scene, at the exact moment the killing shots were fired.) Every now and then, Peltier lapses back into his alibi alter-ego and alludes to the brave spirit he imagines he once was. Peltier has said he feels very close to this X dude, understandable given their common surroundings in federal prison. Who knows, maybe X wrote the opening line. How else to explain the stupidity of announcing to the world the desire to become a repeat offender?

There’s more. Peltier assures his followers that the carnage at Jumping Bull was a “sacrifice” that was “paid for with someone’s (his) life.” Never mind that he took two lives in the process of self-immortalization. Or that another life was taken in the shooting aftermath. The point we’re supposed to focus on is that Peltier sacrificed his freedom for the benefit of future generations. You see, it really is all about him. Peltier thus offers himself up as the symbolic poster boy for victimized Native Americans dating back to Christopher Columbus; therefore, he is not guilty. That he opened long-distance fire on two men armed with only pistols and finished them off minutes later at close range is of little historical significance; there were larger issues in play. Some Peltier supporters bolster this argument by saying that Peltier-style activism (read violence) is a necessary ingredient in service to Indian Country ideals. Sounds a bit like today’s Muslim fanaticism, doesn’t it? The fact is, most Peltier pushers are non-Indian radicals who simply use him as their political flunky.

Another debatable contention is how well the political prisoner myth has served the man. Had Peltier taken responsibility for his crimes and repented, he might not have spent most of his adult life behind bars. He could have been a free man by now, traveling throughout Indian Country and delivering a message of hope and salvation. Instead, he has frittered away his years presiding over a victimhood scam that merely exploits collective white guilt and rakes in atonement dollars for the sins of our forefathers. While it may have been difficult to resist buckets of money pouring in from all over the globe, Peltier’s quest for celebrity has been a fool’s errand. All the money in the world cannot change the facts. Furthermore, no one familiar with the truth can be happy that a small fortune that could have been used to alleviate genuine hardship on the reservations was shamefully wasted on a grand lie.

In the face of consecutive life sentences (plus seven years for an armed escape in 1979), Peltier can only seek comfort in the consolation prize of recent recruits: disaffected members of the socialist left and newbies culled from protected sanctuaries of academic fraud. Most people, however, are open to hearing the other side of the story. And when they have access to truthful information, they abandon the cause in droves, convinced that a guilty killer was rightfully convicted. Even Peltier’s former attorney, Barry Bachrach, ran for the hills when he realized that his client is an angry and patently guilty megalomaniac. Many of the original Peltier supporters have left as well, once they were forced to confront the reality of a man who says he feels “joy” in believing his “efforts were not in vain.” How long did they endure before these words made them ill?

What always gets lost in the propaganda are the actual heinous acts for which Peltier, a member of the American Indian Movement (AIM), refuses to take responsibility. Ron Williams and Jack Coler had worked hard to become FBI Special Agents. Dedicated to protecting the innocent and apprehending the guilty, they were murdered while attempting to carry out their sworn duty of serving Indians on the reservation. They left behind devastated young wives, parents, and fatherless children. They were each 28 years old. The deaths of these young men and the sad aftermath of AIM violence on the Pine Ridge reservation endangered Indian residents for years to come. Just six months after Peltier’s murderous rampage, his AIM leadership ordered the execution of fellow member Anna Mae Aquash, partly because they feared she had revealed to the FBI Peltier’s boast about executing Ron Williams as he pleaded for his life. AIM leaders had Anna Mae murdered and then made a martyr out of her, too. The extreme hypocrisy, typical of the AIM leadership, rivals that of Peltier’s claimed victim status. Add this to the list of revulsions from 1975: an AIM tough guy in his 30s shoved a loaded gun in Anna Mae’s mouth during one of her pre-death interrogations. His name? Leonard Peltier. Of course, his disciples must deny this reality as well because it so thoroughly exposes the underbelly of evil that comprises the heart of his propaganda machine, not to mention AIM’s legacy of destruction.

In the fight of good versus evil, one looks for signs of hope. Despite the recent inmate repackaging, open-minded believers have begun to notice that certain aspects of the myth do not add up, and the shocking depravity of a young, violent Peltier from long ago slowly sinks in. Former supporters resent being played for fools, all those years. The costumed performer who used to wow the crowds now stumbles and leaks sawdust across the stage, no longer convincing in the role of perpetual victim. Defense fund donations have slowed to a trickle compared to what they were in the 1980s, when America’s “prisoner of conscience” was often favorably mentioned by clergymen, statesmen, and Indian wannabes. One wonders if inmate #89637-132, in quiet moments of mandatory rest time, realizes that three decades of myth-making were all for naught. While his past lawyers may have been able to send their kids to college on the blood money they earned, none of their efforts have actually helped their client gain his freedom. Not even a little bit. Perhaps they believed that a sociopathic killer who could never be released was better used as a symbol of Indian persecution. If pity is due Peltier, pity him for having lawyers who don’t give a whit about his future and whose legal counsel has merely sealed his fate. Pity him for not being smart enough to figure that out, not even after 30 years of being exploited for purely political reasons. And so it is perhaps understandable that a frustrated, thickheaded killer might vent with a “death to the FBI” curse. For on June 26, 1975, Leonard Peltier certainly brought death to the FBI.

Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

9-Year Old Report Exposed as Anti-American Propaganda

The true history of the American Indian Movement (AIM) leadership is one of violence, mayhem, and the despicable efforts to blame criminal activity on others. And so bringing the perpetrators to justice and telling the true story of the American Indian Movement’s crimes against the people of the Pine Ridge Reservation is good news for Indian Country. American Indian Mafia has arguably provided Indian America with the first truthful account of AIM’s rise and fall. But not everyone is happy that the truth is finally seeing the light of day. Particularly bothered are the self-anointed “historians” of the AIM legacy who appear indignant when challenged by the facts. Over the last three decades, the revisionists have come to expect agreement, or at least tacit assent with, a history built on sham research based on conspiracy threads and overt lies. They do not like their version of Pine Ridge history questioned by anyone, even by people who were there.

A good example of adulterated scholarship was provided by Washington-based attorney Paul Wolf. In 2001, Wolf oversaw a report presented to the U.N. Human Rights Commission about alleged civil rights violations against AIM and other dissident groups. Central to Wolf’s arguments were his accusations regarding COINTELPRO, the FBI’s counter-intelligence program originally designed to disrupt the Communist Party’s infiltration of America. While there were some abuses of COINTELPRO in its final years, Wolf’s presentation has proven to be a distinctly unreliable source of information for telling us about it. After reading American Indian Mafia, you’ll see that all of Wolf’s assertions regarding COINTELPRO and the American Indian Movement, for example, are either distortions or outright lies. Also telling, Wolf’s report overlooks the fact that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover formally terminated all COINTELPRO operations on April 28, 1971, well before AIM violence attracted the attention of federal investigators.

Not surprisingly, Wolf blogged that the facts in American Indian Mafia should be dismissed as the non-specific remarks of an old former FBI Agent. You gotta love that, a civil-rights lawyer in favor of age discrimination. Curious as well, Wolf chose to post his views at Native American blog sites, where Indian Country readers are often critical of fat-cat, white lawyers. (Note to the red-haired attorney from the authors: We know Indians. Indians are our friends. Mr. Wolf, you’re no Indian!)

The problem with Wolf’s report, as he surely must have figured out by now, is that it is mostly propaganda designed to advance a political agenda. Wolf’s credibility is not helped by virtue of his co-authors, among them John Conyers, Cynthia McKinney, and Sheila Jackson Lee, all members of Congress conned into believing in Wolf’s assertions. These politicians take the position that there were massive government abuses enacted against the Black Panthers, a group of extremists from the violent 1960s. Again, while there may have been some truth to the allegations, it is impossible to tell from this highly falsified report.

Want more proof that Wolf’s rant is political horse hockey? Consider that defrocked Professor Ward Churchill lent his expertise in research, and that Left-wing ideologue Noam Chomsky is listed as an unbiased contributor. Wolf howls about everything from the assumed subversion of the press to the plight of “political prisoner” and convicted killer Leonard Peltier. Even Jimmy Carter is implicated in a vast conspiracy to deprive citizens of their rights under the guise of promoting American security. The unsuspecting reader is thus treated to the usual mantra of an all-powerful government subverting the rights of the common man, with solutions founded in rank socialism.

Wolf’s report also proved to be the perfect vehicle from which attorney Bruce Ellison could construct plausible alibis for the murder of AIM member Anna Mae Aquash. This is the same Bruce Ellison who, for over 30 years, has been in the business of blaming the FBI for the crime while skillfully diverting attention away from his own alleged involvement in Anna Mae's murder—nice work if you can get it. Do you suppose the U.N.’s High Commissioner, Mary Robinson, to whom the report was presented, had a clue about any of this? Of course, the real travesty of justice was not the actions of government Agents who faithfully and legally did their jobs. It is rather the legitimacy granted those who practice the same type of dishonesty and recklessness in print they accuse others of having committed in upholding the law.

Wolf did not get very far before another blogger pointed out that he failed to note numerous references to COINTELPRO in American Indian Mafia all of which demolish his arguments. No wonder. Referencing the inconvenient truths in Mafia would have exposed Wolf’s report as the fraud that it is. Wolf and his political bedfellows cannot afford to analyze American Indian Mafia on its merits; that would require far too much honesty and integrity. It appears that so far, Native Americans who are not fooled by the usual AIM smoke and mirrors are among the book’s strongest supporters. They know the truth and they see through Wolf’s sheepish attempts to run from it.

Peter Matthiessen's Dirty Little Secret

What’s in a name? For some people, apparently, the difference between having basic knowledge and being basically uninformed. The “Mafia” in American Indian Mafia has made a few readers positively apoplectic with concerns over slighting American Indians. If only they would flip a few pages to the Introduction, and the origin of the term: Congress’s reasoned conclusions after evaluating the criminal history of the American Indian Movement:

“The American Indian Movement is a revolutionary organization which is committed to violence… has cached explosives and illegally purchased arms… and whose opponents have been eliminated in the manner of the Mafia.”

Since that hearing in September 1976, evidence that the AIM leadership indeed operated “in the manner of the Mafia” has become too much to ignore. In fact, in a few weeks the leadership will be put on trial, in a sense, because one of their former lieutenants must defend himself against murder charges. John Graham is the alleged triggerman in the murder of AIM member Anna Mae Aquash. Anyone familiar with the case will tell you that Graham was just following orders. Again, the book’s Introduction and our last blog bear repeating:

“Anna Mae Aquash was executed by a single gunshot to the back of her head on orders from the American Indian Movement because they believed her to be an informant for the F.B.I.”

This statement is also borrowed. It is quoted, word for word, from the Supreme Court of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. On June 26, 2007, the Court stated the above as fact and as more than sufficient to extradite Graham from his home country back to South Dakota. If found guilty, he will join his accomplice, Arlo Looking Cloud, in a life sentence. But that is far from the end of the story.

On August 20, 2008, AIM leader Russell Means’s former bodyguard, Richard Marshall, was indicted for aiding and abetting the Aquash murder. This tends to implicate Means far more than the whispered conversations that have floated around the Pine Ridge Reservation for the last 33 years. This time, it appears the big fish might fall. Means’s role in the murder is less clear than that of his former colleague, Dennis Banks, the AIM leader who allegedly made the final call to end Anna Mae's life. Banks spoke too soon, when on February 24, 1976, he informed his wife that "They found Anna Mae." Trouble was, the body had been left in a canyon for over ten weeks, and it took the FBI until March to indentify the remains. Banks has never been able to explain his forensic insight. Very soon, he may have to in front of a jury.

So, what’s in a name? Well, possibly a lot when there is evidence of genuine dishonesty. And when a name is shamelessly denigrated. Take for instance, author Peter Matthiessen’s use of the name “Crazy Horse.” Matthiessen’s book, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, seeks to elevate another AIM criminal, convicted killer Leonard Peltier, to the status of the great warrior chief. Peltier was found guilty in the 1975 murders of two FBI Agents. As is the case with his former leadership, the evidence against Peltier has only grown since his incarceration in 1976. Peltier is, in fact, the antithesis of every principle attributed to the noble and brave Crazy Horse.

That leaves Matthiessen with a problem of accountability. Not only did he receive accolades for his book, much of it falsified in support of Peltier, he has never had to answer for the abomination of comparing a genuine Indian warrior to a ruthless, cowardly thug. Matthiessen has gotten away with truly astounding effrontery against all Indians.

Peltier will stay in prison because he is guilty and because he is completely without remorse. Justice has been served. Matthiessen's abomination, however, remains. Native Americans should be outraged. Peltier’s chief defender needs to come clean and apologize to all of Indian Country, and perhaps, the entire country. Until then, he should expect ridicule and derision for dishonoring what many consider the greatest Indian name in history. Some people really do judge a book by its cover, or in this case, misjudge.