Columbus Day Protest Trials Update
January 11th, 2008
You’ve probably heard this elsewhere, but the fucking idjits at the Denver DA’s office have dropped the ball again, failing to produce evidence against key defendants. God love their ample incompetent asses.
Meanwhile, according to a recent press release from the TCD alliance, the consolidated trial of defenders Julie Todd, Koreena Montoya, Glenn Morris and possibly Russell Means begins next Wednesday, January 16, 8:30 AM, in Courtroom 117M at the Denver City and County Building. The first day will be taken up with jury selection and the prosecution’s opening.
And, if Patricia Calhoun can be believed — always a tenuous prospect – Try-Works favorite David Lane’s already been having a ball.
Friday was David Lane’s birthday, and the criminal defense attorney gave himself a present by wreaking some legal havoc. When Claudia Jordan, the Denver County Court judge presiding over a hearing for some of the 83 Columbus Day protesters, announced that potential witnesses should be sequestered, Lane asked which potential witnesses she meant, exactly, since there were some fifty people in the courtroom — including Jared Jacang Maher, the Westword staffer who’d covered the Columbus Day protest (”Taking It to the Streets,” October 25, 2007). If she needed to, Jordan responded, she’d take attendance.
“So I stand up and start the revolution,” Lane says. After arguing that the judge did not have the authority to do that — that recording names would violate the Constitution — he proceeded to exercise more constitutional rights by calling Maher to the stand, throwing the First Amendment into the mix.
“Do you believe that as a reporter you have a constitutional right to sit here in this courtroom and listen to the testimony in this hearing?” Lane asked.
“As a reporter and this being a public hearing, I do.”
“You also understand that as a citizen, you are subject to subpoena just like anyone else?”
“Yes…”
“So you just heard the judge tell everyone in this courtroom that if you are going to be called as a witness at this trial, then you are going to have to get up and leave the proceedings today.”
“I did…”
“Do you think Westword magazine would have a First Amendment interest in getting counsel over here right now to see if their reporter can be constitutionally thrown out of the courtroom or not?”
Prosecution: “Objection, your honor. That calls for legal conclusion.”
Judge: “Sustained.”
“Do you know whether or not Patty Calhoun, who is the editor of Westword…has expressed to you in the past a concern about maintaining Westword’s rights under the First Amendment?”
Prosecution: “Objection. It calls for speculation.”
Judge: “I wasn’t trying to preclude Westword from being in the courtroom. I’m only precluding witnesses.”
And so it went for a few more minutes (you can read the full transcript at blogs.westword.com). After Maher left the stand — and the courtroom, since by now he’d been officially designated as a witness — Lane called Rocky Mountain News reporter Sue Lindsay.
At that point, the judge decided the day’s hearing was done — but the case is far from over. While charges have been dismissed against three of the protesters, including Russell Means, eighty defendants are still awaiting their day in court. One, perpetual protester Glenn Morris, is set for trial on January 16.
January 12th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
They are necessarily clutzy or dumb. Maybe they are being friendly. I don’t know what the motivations would be. Perhaps they know they couldn’t win.
January 12th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
[Deleted.]
January 12th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 12:11 am
What’s the source of the second 1996 quote, Snapple?
January 13th, 2008 at 12:14 am
And, BTW, what does it have to do with the 2008 Columbus Day trial?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:55 am
I think she cited her website.
You’re ethically challenged, Snapple. Please work on that.
Again, Snapple, can you describe what events started the standoff where the FBI surrounded the little village with battle tanks and machine guns? Why had they gathered there?
January 13th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Hilda, I’m just reading and drinking my coffee, so I hope you don’t mind that I answered your questions instead of leaving them for Snapple.
“Even more directly parallel to the performance of U.S. covert agencies abroad is physical repression conducted at another level, that of outright cadre liquidation. For example, in the post-Wounded Knee context of South Dakota’s Pine Ridge Lakota Reservation, independent researcher Candy Hamilton established that at least 342 AIM members and supporters were killed by roving death squads aligned with and supported by the FBI. (The death squads called themselves GOONs, “Guardians of the Oglala Nation.”) This was between 1973 and 1976 alone.”
THE COVERT WAR AGAINST NATIVE AMERICANS- by Ward Churchill
Repression And Liquidation, para. 2
http://www.sisis.nativeweb.org/sov/covert.html
According to Russell Means, AIM went to Pine Ridge first and foremost because he believed Dick Wilson was corrupt. Means had just lost an election to Wilson by about 200 votes. Pine Ridge was to be a media event. He now describes the action as “idiocy” and assures it won’t be repeated over the Lakotah treaty withdrawals.
“the FBI surrounded the little village with battle tanks and machine guns? Why had they gathered there?”
This is inaccurate. The area, with a 5 mile perimeter, was not a “little village”. AIM came in, took over the residents’ homes for their own use and held hostages. Originally, US Marshals, BIA and the FBI came to fortify the BIA building thinking there would be an attack on the BIA such as the one just made in Washington. Once the hostage situation was known, they surrounded the area to apprehend the criminals and keep tourists out.
Both sides had automatic weapons and Trimbach says the government officials were fired on first. The tanks were not armed but were used defensively for protection from small arms fire. There is no question that had it been the government’s intent to overpower, they could have called in the Army to tear gas the entire community and end the stand-off immediately.
That’s not how the FBI wanted it to play out. They wanted a peaceful agreement negotiated to end the seizure of the village by AIM. AIM wanted media exposure and fouled the negotiations many times, prolonging the stand-off to gain that exposure.
What does it have to do with Columbus Day protests? Russell Means and AIM. They have taken a rational political view (Columbus is not a cause for celebration for American Indians)and used it to create a media event for AIM and Means. The lives and futures of budding activists and sympathetic citizens are expendable. The protest could have happened with no arrests but the arrests keep Means and AIM in the news.
The cause gains no ground but the young people who sacrificed themselves make AIM and Russell Means appear to be important leaders. They are not. They cannot gain a following to be elected to any office, so they are violent, women-hating, old man beating, power seeking thugs.
In the end, AIM accomplished nothing for Pine Ridge or the Columbus Day awareness. Their methods enraged those they would persuade and there is still in-fighting and suffering at Pine Ridge today. People were inspired to commit crimes, people were maimed and killed but the only result is Means and AIM are famous while their followers and innocents caught in the cross-fire suffer by their actions. In Mean’s own words, “That’s the cost of doing business.”
January 13th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
I think it’s interesting that many of the murdered AIM members and supporters were in the homes of the “murderers”. One would expect the murderers to go to the home of the victims rather than to implicate themselves by waiting for the victim to come to them and then murdering them in their own homes. Doesn’t it suggest that perhaps AIM members were the aggressors?
January 13th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Trimbach’s site:
Myth: The takeover of Wounded Knee village was a “liberation.”
Fact: Once the bona fide residents were kicked out of their homes, armed militants vied for power and enforced heavy penalties against assumed traitors. In the process, several people were allegedly murdered, including Ray Robinson, the only black male occupier seen in the village. His remains, along with the bodies of several others, are said to be buried near the village ruins. Robinson’s friend, Al Cooper, has publicly corroborated his near-death experience after AIM leaders accused him of being a snitch. One woman reported being raped, while several young, white females are believed to be among the dead. These murders have never been solved because the bodies, including Robinson’s, remain undiscovered.
http://www.americanindianmafia.com/library.html
January 13th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Good Christ, Snapple, you’re a full-time job.
And just to begin, Laurie, what exactly were the “automatic weapons” that AIM was using, and where’d you get that line of shit? Your lie or Trimbach’s?
January 13th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
[Deleted.]
January 13th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
[Deleted. And I have an AK. But it ain’t automatic.]
January 13th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
[See above. And again, you can get an AK at any gun shop for 300-400 dollars. None of them are select fire. None are automatic.]
January 13th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Just because you are ignorant doesn’t make make my statement a “line of shit”, Ben. For all the thousands of rounds fired from AIM bunkers, your questioning the kind of weapons used by AIM members is silly. Even Russell Means admits they had automatic weapons, Molotov cocktails and long range rifes. How about getting to the meat of these issues instead of arguing nonsense.
Be careful about what you say. Check to make sure you aren’t contradicting what Means or Churchill have already said. Check all sources because they contradict themselves.
January 13th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Russell Means admits they had an AK. See above. Again, what automatic weapon did AIM have?
January 13th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
I’m not a weapons expert, but wouldn’t “bursts” from a weapon described as an AK-47 indicate it’s the automatic variety? You aren’t moving off this as long as I don’t provide a list and it had better be from someone like Means or Churchill and include serial numbers. Should I succeed at that, you’ll be on about the molotov cocktails. Then the long range rifles. All to avoid answering WHY Means did this thing. You know it’s all about him, personal revenge and power.
January 13th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
A burst means nothing of the sort. It means more than one shot. Automatic weapons have been regulated since 1934. Where’s Trimbach’s evidence? Were there Federal weapons charges filed? The prison time’s pretty steep. What does he cite to make that charge? Y’all troll around here posting recaps from the vanity-press dribblings of a nearly illiterate lunatic, where’s the fucking evidence?
As to long range rifles, that means any bolt-action rifle with a scope. They’re on the gun rack of every midwesterner during deer season. Yeah, as I understand it there were a few of those around Wounded Knee on the Indian side.
But only an absolutely cynical shitbag would attempt to compare either of those to the weapons available on the other side.
An absolutely cynical shitbag who knew he could rely on the equally absolute ignorance of his readership.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
This entire argument that the Feds were “unfair” because they had better weapons is ridiculous. A .22 can kill. What did AIM members use to take over the homes of residents and hold them hostage?
The Feds relied on negotiations, time and weapons for self defense to resolve the standoff. They never tried to overpower AIM. The entire town could have been tear gassed at any time.
“Yeah, as I understand it there were a few of those around Wounded Knee on the Indian side.” There was no “Indian side”. There was AIM and then there was everyone else inside the perimeter, who were also Indians. Now get off it and answer the tough questions.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Hey, there’s another question that you said you would answer and never did:
Why weren’t you arrested at the Columbus Day Protest? Did you have the flu and spend the entire time on the toilet? Fine. Just say so. Otherwise, why did you encourage kids to do what you wouldn’t?
January 13th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
“I think it’s interesting that many of the murdered AIM members and supporters were in the homes of the ‘murderers’.”
That’s a very interesting piece of information, Laurie.
The only thing is, I can’t find anything—including the FBI’s own publication detailing every AIM-related murder on around the Pine Ridge Reservation during the period at issue—that even comes close to corroborating it. Quite the contrary, in fact.
Still, I’d like to give you the benefit of the doubt on this, so, could you please provide a reference on this? And perhaps the names of of a few of the AIM members who were allegedly killed at the homes of their assailants?
January 13th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Law Professor:
“Dennis LeCompte
Allegation:
AIM member killed at Pine Ridge by GOONs.
No investigation.
Finding:
On 09/07/74, the Pine Ridge, South Dakota, Police Department officers responded to a fight at the Glenn Three Stars residence, Pine Ridge, South Dakota. Upon arrival, police found children in living room and Dennis LeCompte dead in the northwest bedroom. Three Stars admitted shooting Dennis LeCompte during a struggle after LeCompte stabbed Three Stars’ son with a knife. On 06/23/75 Three Stars was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. On 10/15/75, his trial commenced in U.S. District Court, Deadwood, South Dakota. On 10/17/75, Three Stars was acquitted of the charge Voluntary Manslaughter.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Howard Blue Bird
Allegation:
AIM supporter killed at Pine Ridge by GOONs.
No investigation.
Finding:
On 09/04/75, the Pine Ridge, South Dakota Police Department received a telephone call from an unknown female who reported a fight and stabbing at the Le Roy Apple residence in Pine Ridge, South Dakota. Pine Ridge Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) police officers found the victim, Howard Blue Bird, lying in the kitchen. On 09/05/75, a Federal Grand Jury, Rapid City, South Dakota returned a true bill charging Le Roy Apple with violation of Title 18, USC, Sections 1153 and 1112. On 09/10/75, Apple was interviewed and admitted stabbing Blue Bird. On 10/15/75, Apple appeared in U.S. District Court, Deadwood, South Dakota, and pled guilty to violation Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 113(c), Assault with a Deadly Weapon to Commit Bodily Injury. He was sentenced to one year in the custody of the Attorney General.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Edward Standing Soldier
Allegation:
AIM member killed near Pine Ridge by “party or parties unknown.”
No investigation.
Finding:
On 02/18/74, Edward Joseph Standing Soldier died of a gunshot wound to the abdomen. Investigation by the FBI revealed Standing Soldier died of a .22 caliber gunshot wound fired by Gerald Janis.
Investigation revealed that three juvenile subjects, including Standing Soldier, were involved in an armed robbery in Janis’ residence at Pine Ridge, South Dakota. Janis shot Standing Soldier with a .22 caliber rifle as a result of this armed robbery. The matter was presented to a U.S. Grand Jury on 2/22/74, and a no bill was returned resulting in no prosecution and the FBI investigation being closed.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Law Prof:
There’s 3 in less than 10 minutes. Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt so I could find some for you to read for yourself. That’s so much better than saying “I don’t believe it!” and remaining ignorant. Again, sincere thanks!
January 13th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Adopted and standardized in 1947, it was designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov and originally produced by Soviet manufacturer Izhevsk Mechanical Works.[3] Compared with most auto-loading rifles of World War II, the AK-47 is compact, of comparative range, moderate power, and capable of selective fire. It was one of the first true assault rifles and, due to its durability and ease of use, remains the most widely used assault rifle. More AK-type rifles have been produced than any other assault rifle type.[3]
Rate of fire 600 rounds/min
Yours must be modified, Ben.
Nice job of deleting the important information on Snapple’s post quoting Means about AIM’s AK-47 at Pine Ridge. Do you teach your students to omit information which conflicts with their claims? Speaking of “cynical shitbags”….
January 13th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
I’m not refusing to answer the tough questions, dear. You, Snapple and Trimbach have made the statement that AIM was as well armed as the other side. That’s a lie. You know nothing about firearms and Trimbach’s playing on that.
What was the automatic weapon that AIM had? Hell, even if you come up with one that proves nothing as regards your larger point because fucking everyone on the law enforcement side had access to automatic weapons. But, shit, go ahead and name one, and quit trying to divert the issue to my arrest record.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Ha! Arrest record! They must be saving you for something bigger.
You already know what Means said they had and how they used it, but you deleted that. And yes, the Feds had access to far more than automatic weapons. So you see some point to this parity issue? I don’t. How did you feel when Russell Means said the Pine Ridge action was “idiocy”?
Quit playing games and give some honest views that you really believe in your heart. I’ll respect that. I’m about to give up on you as a decent human being. Then you’ll be back to blogging an echo chamber.
January 13th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
I deleted Snapple’s comments, yep. And I’ll continue to do so. He posted about an AK, and I’ve been through that. There are next to no AKs in the US capable of select fire. Walk into any gun shop and confirm that.
But, please, give up on me. And save the “from the heart” comments for Hallmark.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
So you are saying Means lied. Okay. I’ll buy that.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Laurie, you are being unforgivably stupid. You looked up AK-47 on wikipedia? Yes, the gun was originally designed as a selectable assault rifle. But, as Ben pointed out, civilians can’t buy automatic weapons in the US. Ben’s AK isn’t modified, that’s how general sales AK’s are made. If one were to purchase the automatic firing block and install it illegally oneself, THEN one would have a modified AK. The standard issue these days is semi-automatic, unless you’re a military or government purchaser.
As an aside… you’re of the camp that says Churchill’s work isn’t trustworthy in spite of his credentials because of one supposedly erroneous claim about how some Indians got a hold of some blankets, and yet you’re willing to cite Trimbach, a biased and completely un-credentialed source who paid to publish a book that could have contained anything he possibly could have dreamed up presented as fact? Your hypocrisy is absolutely mind numbing. Your standards for knowledge are absolutely depressing.
January 14th, 2008 at 3:25 am
Did a bunch of his students go and get arrested?
January 14th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Laurie, I respect the fact that you aren’t a gun expert. I respect that it is easy to confuse the military issue AK-47 with the civilian issue AK-47 (the first IS automatic, the second most definitely isn’t).
But it is now time for you to state that you were mistaken to assume that ownership of an AK-47 automatically means that Means owned an automatic.
Respectfully, I’m letting you know that you are wrong on the facts this time.
January 14th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
This is very interesting, Laurie.
Without providing a source or sources, as I requested, you offer three examples to support your contention that “many of the murdered AIM members and supporters were in the homes of the ‘murderers’.”
Even if everything about the your descriptions—actually, you seem to be quoting directly from an unidentified source—of the cases were accurate in their own right, your casting of “three” examples as “many” would appear to have been deliberately deceptive.
Not least disturbing in this regard is your insinuation that since “many of the murdered AIM members and supporters were in the homes of the ‘murderers,’” such circumstances were reflective of a pattern representing the whole series of murders at issue.
Your three examples, however, amount to something less than 5 percent of total. They are thus facially anomalous at best. Any pattern would obviously reside in the remaining 95 of the cases. It therefore seems that your argument was designed to turn reality inside out.
The more so, since there are serious problems in the case descriptions you present. You say, for instance, that one of the victims, Edward Standing Soldier, was “involved in an armed robbery” at the home of Gerald Janis at Pine Ridge, South Dakota, and that “Janis shot Standing Soldier with a .22 caliber rifle as a result of this armed robbery.”
There is nothing in the information you offer indicating that Standing Soldier was shot at Janis’ home, or even on the same day the alleged “armed robbery” occurred. For all we know—or you, apparently—Janis shot and killed Standing Soldier at a completely different location, and on a different date altogether.
Does it matter? Absolutely. Among other things, such details might well constitute the difference between a possible acquittal on grounds of self-defense and conviction on a charge of premeditated murder.
The upshot is that one of your three examples doesn’t even come close to demonstrating what you claim it does.
What is clearly demonstrated by your examples, however, is the extent to which those who murdered AIM members and supporters on the Pine Ridge Reservation during the mid-1970s did so with virtual impunity. Witness the fact that the three murders you summarize resulted in a single plea bargain and a sentence of only one year (less than nine months of which was actually served).
Witness as well the fact that in two of the three cases, the “investigating agency” is listed as being local police. In other words, although the FBI holds primary investigative authority with regard to major crime committed on Indian reservations, it conducted no investigation at all.
In the third case, the FBI conducted an investigation so perfunctory that, in an almost unheard of turn of events, a federal grand jury was presented with insufficient evidence to indict the murderer.
Lest I’m mistaken—and do correct me where I’m wrong on this, Laurie—this pattern of noninvestigation of AIM murders by the FBI is one of the things that Churchill and Vander Wall emphasized most powerfully in their book. I’m certain they will appreciate your efforts to confirm the accuracy of their material.
To conclude, allow me to offer what I trust you will find to be a useful suggestion: The next time you wish to quote verbatim and at length from “Report of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Minnapolos Division: Accounting for Native American Deaths, Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota” (2000), cite your source.
Otherwise you might find yourself accused of plagiarism.
January 14th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
The Scrunt is really scrunting for all she’s worth on this one.
First of all, the only mention in the federal radio logs during the 1973 seige of Wounded Knee of automatic weapons fire coming from AIM perimeter concerned what the U.S. Marshals thought was a .50 caliber machine gun.
A .50 has a very distinctive sound, much deeper and with a noticeably slower rate of fire than an AK. Any combat vet would know the difference just by listening, and quite a few of the feds on the scene—not to mention U.S. Army Colonels Volney Warner and Jack Potter—were combat vets.
The “full automatic AK-47″ story is something concocted by Joe Trimbach decades after the fact and without a shred of evidence (if there’d been any at the time, you can be sure that Russell Means, for one, would have been charged with illegal possession of automatic weapons charges; after all, the FBI lodged more than 50 other Wounded Knee-related charges against him).
It’s worth mentioning the Trimbach ran very much the same scam immediately after the 1975 Oglala Firefight, claiming that AIM had been firing automatic weapons there, too.
FBI Director Clarence Kelly actually had to make a public statement to the effect that there was no evidence supporting that or several others among Trimbach’s various claims about Oglala (as examples, that the two agents who were killed there had been “lured into an ambush,” that AIM had constructed a “sophisticated bunker complex” around the “kill zone,” that the agents had been “riddled with bullets,” then “stripped” and, in one version, “scalped”).
In other words, Trimbach was a liar even then, as the FBI itself officially admitted.
Confirmation will be easily found in the fact that when the FBI finally got around to presenting its evidence in court, during the Peltier trial, the closest thing to an “automatic weapon” it attributed to AIM was an AR-15 rifle, i.e.: the SEMI-automatic civilian counterpart to the military-issue, select-fire, M-16 assault rifle.
As always, the Scrunt isn’t simply “mistaken.” She’s busily lying through her rectal oriface.
Small wonder she’s so attracted to Trimbach, whom she apparently considers to be a “decent human being.” That being so, it would behoove you to ensure that she stop viewing you as such as quickly as possible, Benny. After all, one is sometimes judged by the company one keeps (or is placed).
Bring on that fucking echo chamber.
January 14th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Pablo,
I didn’t refer to Trimbach for the information about automatic weapons. I think the agents believed that AIM had them and asked for M-16s to defend themselves. Furthermore, Russell Means had this to say:
“The siege lasted until May 8. Firefights and skirmishes abounded during that time. To make our limited firepower appear more impressive, we would take our one Kalashnikov Ak-47- with its distinctive and respected bark - and periodically run it from bunker to bunker, shooting off a quick burst at each spot”
Not all weaponry owned in America is legal. Really, I don’t think this was a big deal. Law inforcement shouldn’t need to check the criminal activity (hostage taking) and then match their weapons to those of the criminals. Tear gas could have been used.
Law Professor, you said you checked the FBI reports and didn’t find any examples of what I’d described. Therefore, I thought you would recognize the FBI report. Need a link?
January 14th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
not to mention - didn’t that AK come from a Vietnam veteran? People from this area had been oppressed for many decades. Their economy crushed, kids seized and adopted out, most children sent to boarding schools against their will, involuntary sterilizations after childbirth are widespread, the land allotments are forceably managed and revenue lost, there is widespread racism in the rest of Nebraska and South Dakota.
A bunch of men are drafted to go to Vietnam to help inflict our system on others, and they see all sorts of death. Concurrently, the CIA has been assassinating and ousting presidents and party leaders in Iran, Greece, Argentina, Angola, Brazil, Indonesia etc etc. to help spread the system more and effectively take over the task of colonialism from Europe. The soldiers return home and everything is just as depressing as when they left it. The FBI, who like to act like the CIA pretty much, have been harrassing and phone tapping Martin Luther King, even sending him letters instructing him to commit suicide or vicious rumors would be released in the press (see Ward’s book for document).
Several murders take place in Rapid City and the police decide, yet again, not to press charges. This is what precipitated Wounded Knee. It was not some random kids at an art school who decided to do a poser-revolutionary project. I can’t believe how you people keep acting like change was just naturally about to happen of its own accord around 1970. That’s pretty ridiculous. People petitioned for changed all through the 10s, 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s. Why do you think nothing happened earlier? Secondly, you act like the lack of greater success in South Dakota is Russell Means fault for his intense personality. There have been several real attempts at assassinating him, by the way. In fact, most people wouldn’t be aware of the conditions on reservations anywhere if it weren’t for his skill at PR and oratory. Most people have heard of Pine Ridge and the Mohawk situation at the border, but could barely name five more reservations.
Also, why are you acting like they were so violent. In the quote just above, you are aware they barely had any guns. And it doesn’t occur that it’s hypocritical to require that all patriotic boys go to vietnam and shoot, but just owning a similar rifle at home is psychotic or something? I guess it would suck not to be an american.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
No link needed, Laurie, or at least not by me. There are, however, a few other readers on this string, any one or all of whom might well benefit.
In any case, what I actually said in response to your assertion that “many of the murdered AIM members and supporters were in the homes of the ‘murderers’” was that “I can’t find anything—including the FBI’s own publication detailing every AIM-related murder on [or] around the Pine Ridge Reservation during the period at issue—that even comes close to corroborating it. Quite the contrary, in fact.”
Your multi-part reply, taken verbatim directly from the FBI publication I mentioned, simply confirmed my point.
Altogether, you were able to muster three examples, one of which was invalid. That leaves two. Assuming for the sake of argument that both of these are entirely valid, there is no possible interpretation of the word “two” by which it can be understood to mean the same as “many.”
That being so, your source doesn’t “even come close to corroborating” your statement. This in turn means that either you’re guilty of “fabricating an historical incident,” or you’re guilty of “misrepresenting your source,” or both.
I will leave it to other readers to decide which of the three alternatives seems most likely. As for myself, by the nature and tone of your last response, you’ve convinced me that you are a conscious liar.
January 15th, 2008 at 7:37 am
[Deleted.]
January 15th, 2008 at 8:01 am
[Deleted.]
January 15th, 2008 at 8:18 am
Law Professor wrote: ‘To conclude, allow me to offer what I trust you will find to be a useful suggestion: The next time you wish to quote verbatim and at length from “Report of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Minnapolos Division: Accounting for Native American Deaths, Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota” (2000), cite your source.
Otherwise you might find yourself accused of plagiarism.’
LOL!
Isn’t it ironic whenever detractors of Ward Churchill plagiarise for the world to see?
Good catch!
January 15th, 2008 at 9:40 am
Funny how often they get hoisted by their own petard, ain’t it, Daisy?
January 15th, 2008 at 10:05 am
When I get paid, I’ll worry that someone might think that was my own writing. When I publish and make people buy my books, I’ll try very hard to site my sources with accuracy. Anyone who reads Churchill knows from where those statements came. And I don’t agree with LP’s twisted logic that the third one doesn’t match the description. The three people came to her home to rob her. She shot one, who died. There is nothing there that says she shot them sometime after the armed robbery.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:06 am
When I worked as a grader for an introductory science class with 200 students, I realized that a bunch of them would plagiarize the textbook. I’m convinced they thought we wanted them to do that. They were supposed to write short paragraphs to answer questions, and a bunch of papers would have nearly identical wording. This made me wonder if they were all in some study group or online forum, until I noticed they were going to the textbook and copying sentences. Sometimes adjectives and commas were changed, implying that most people receive a shallow explanation of plagiarism - citing an idea or fact is even more complicated.
January 15th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
It is pretty funny when it happens, Ben.
Would you change the spelling to plagiarise in my previous post?
Here’s a useful definition of plagiarise along with the MLA citation for it:
plagiarise
verb
take without referencing from someone else’s writing or speech; of intellectual property
“plagiarise.” WordNet® 3.0. Princeton University. 15 Jan. 2008. .
January 15th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
This part of the citation should appear between the two periods at the end, but was removed due to the html code:
Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plagiarise.
January 15th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Thank you, Ben!
January 15th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
[Deleted.]
January 15th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Hilda: As regards Russell Means, I also always wonder about those who express his sincerity or commitment. As I heard it, the joke on Pine Ridge was that he didn’t have any internal organs. Y’know, ’cause the news releases kept coming back that the bullet or knife kept missing them.
He ain’t cuddly. That’s for sure. But when the middle-aged upper-crust at PB criticize him, one has to wonder what the fuck world they inhabit.
That said, I imagine if Jim Paine or folks were ever to stand face-to-face with him, we’d have to mop their quivering remains out from under the nearest shitter.
January 15th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
They’re turds floating in the shitter already, Benny m’boy.
Comin’ face to face with Means might well cause them to whimper and beg not to be flushed, tho…
An’ Scrunt? Thanks for finally admitting that you pretend to have ethics only when you’re paid to.
Dare I ask what else you’re willing to do for the right price?
On second thought—(shudder)—please don’t answer that last one.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
I came across this while doing a little bedtime reading last night, Laurie. Since you profess such concern with lies and the lying liars who tell them, I thought you’d be interested. It’s based on the trial transcript for U.S. v. Dennis Banks and Russell Means (374 F. Supp. 321, 331 (S.D., Feb 12-Sept. 16, 1974), and will be found in Rex Wyler, Blood of the Land (1982) at pages 114-115. I’ve added emphasis at certain points, for what will be obvious reasons.
“The first government lie was not discovered until a year after the trial, but was suspected throughout: because of apparent government knowledge of supposedly secret defense strategy, the defense began to suspect that one or more of the volunteer defense aides was an FBI informer. On March 24, 1974 lawyer Mark Lane asked witness JOSEPH TRIMBACH, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI for Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota, if…FBI…informers had infiltrated the defense camp, TRIMBACH said: ‘The answer is no.’ Judge Nichol ordered that prosecutor [Richard] Hurd check FBI informer files against a list of defense team personnel, and to report any material that might indicate government infiltration of the Banks/Means defense. On March 28, Hurd met with Attorney General William, Saxbe and FBI Director Clarence Kelley, and then submitted an affidavit to the court claiming that FBI files contained no material ‘which would arguably be considered as evidence of an invasion of the Legal Defense Camp.’ Both TRIMBACH and Hurd had lied to the court, although the truth was concealed behind FBI ‘top secret’ status, not to be revealed until [February 1975].”
What was the lie, you ask? That the FBI had not infiltrated the Banks/Means defense team, when in fact Trimbach’s office was paying Douglass Durham—Dennis’s Banks’s personal bodyguard and AIM’s nominal “Security Director”—$1,000 per month as a “key informant.” Durham attended every defense strategy meeting before and during the Banks/Means trial, and met regularly with Trimbach’s agents to report what he’d heard.
It’s marginally possible that Hurd was not deliberately providing false to Judge Nichol in his affidavit, but this would be true only if Trimbach had lied to him as well as the court about Durham.
Either way, Trimbach himself unquestionably lied under oath.
Okay, Laurie, that’s one very well-documented example of Trimbach’s dishonesty. There’s more, but I find it appropriate to follow your lead and dribble the examples out, one post at a time.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Round 2, Laurie, using the same citations and with the same emphasis as last time.
“Other lies…were discovered by the defense. On March 12, [1974] TRIMBACH assured Judge Nichol that there had been no illegal FBI wiretaps during the Wounded Knee occupation or investigation. On March 20 he testified on the stand that no such wiretap interceptions had taken place. But on March 29 the defense obtained from FBI agents Gerald Bertinot and Susan Rolley-Malone an affidavit signed by TRIMBACH which outlined conversations illegally monitored by Bertinot and Rolley-Malone. It was further discovered that prosecutor Hurd’s secretary had notarized a wiretap affidavit signed by TRIMBACH…”
There’s a legal term for this sort of lie, Laurie. It’s called perjury.
January 16th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Round 3, Laurie, again relying on the same sources.
“Following TRIMBACK’s lies…the court learned that the FBI had worded a teletype to its agents warning them to tailor responses to court questions so as not to provide a basis for a motion to dismiss. Nichol considered this a green light to the agents to shade the truth. The court also discovered that the prosecution and the FBI had mislead the court by earlier denials that there were paid informers assigned to AIM prior to the Wounded Knee seige, and that there was a general FBI Wounded Knee File” (facts which TRIMBACH, for one, had denied under oath—although, once again, at least some of the paid informants reported to Trimbach’s Minneapolis Field Office).
Having fun yet, Laurie?
January 16th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Hi, Laurie, ready for Round 4?
Bearing in mind that there’s more than one way of lying, consider the fact that the FBI, as the Justice Department’s investigative arm, is responsible for locating and vetting the credibility of witnesses whose sworn testimony is then elicited by federal prosecutors before a jury. Remember as well that, in the Wounded Knee cases, the FBI’s responsibilities were carried out under the direct authority of Joseph Trimach.
With those things in mind, it is quite revealing to discover that, “a sixteen-year-old youth, Alexander Richards, was given immunity from prosecution on Wounded Knee charges in exchange for testimony against Banks and Means. Under cross-examination, Richards admitted that he had lied on the stand, and documents surfaced showing that he had been in jail during the time of events which he claimed to have witnessed at Wounded Knee. It was later revealed that Richards had signed three affidavits for the FBI prior to his release from prison,” only one of which was introduced at trial, mainly because the other two directly contradicted it (and each other, for that matter).
This is called subornation of perjury, Laurie, and, like perjury itself, it’s a crime. It is, moreover, hardly the only time Trimbach and his agents resorted to such tactics during the Banks/Means trial.
“By late August, six months into the trial, the prosecution had yet to connect either Banks or Means to any of the alleged crimes. Hurd, however, produced a surprise witness, Louis Moves Camp, who testified that he’d witnessed virtually every crime with which the defendants had been charged… If Moves Camp’s testimony was true, the defendants could be found guilty of every charge contained in the eleven-point indictment presented by the government” (Weyler, Blood of the Land, p. 118).
Rather convenient, wouldn’t you say? Here’s the reason.
“The witness’s mother, Ellen Moves Camp…told the court that her son Louis had left Wounded Knee about March 12, 1973, not on May 1 as he had testified. She said he had traveled to California, had not returned, and could not have witnessed some of the events which he had described to the court. Further investigation revealed that a BIA employee had seen Moves Camp in California from March 17 through the end of June. Records from the Monterey Peninsula Cable Television Company revealed that Moves Camp had appeared on a television show there on April 23 and 26, days that he supposedly witnessed events at Wounded Knee. Other witnesses testified that he had been on the San Jose State College campus in April.” (Weyler, pages 119-119).
Ready for the best part?
“Investigation further revealed that legal aides for the proosecution had suggested that, prior to his court appearance, Moves Camp be given a polygrap (lie detector) test, but that FBI Special Agent TRIMBACH hard ordered that the test not be given.” (Weyler, p. 119).
Getting the picture yet, Laurie?
January 16th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Whatsamatta Scrunt? Cat gotcher tongue?
January 17th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Naw, Billy. The Scrunt’s busy “thinking” about how the feds “probably” requested M-16s at Wounded Knee after being confronted by AIM’s dazzling array of firepower.
It would never occur to her to stop telling the world what she “thinks” long enough to find out what the fuck she’s babbling about.
Like there having been a 60-man U.S. Marshal SOG unit deployed on Pine Ridge weeks before AIM went to Wounded Knee. The standard shoulder weapon carried by all SOG personnel was the M-16. The outfit on Pine Ridge also had at least three M-60 machine guns, and sniper rifles.
So, contrary to what the Scrunt “thinks” might have happened, the feds at Wounded Knee didn’t need to request more potent weaponry once the seige began. The weapons she was speculating about were already in place, as were the personnel who put them to use.
The Scrunt may, of course, may well have been perfectly aware of this. In which case rather than merely displaying her ignorance, she was once again lying through her rectal oriface.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:34 am
Laurie: With regard to your point about the FBI summary you quoted not saying that Edward Standing Soldier was murdered at some place other than his killer’s home, or on another date than that on which he was allegedly a participant in an armed robbery at that location.
True enough. Nor does it say that he wasn’t killed at another place and on another date, however, and THAT’S the point.
All the summary actually conveys is the fact that the killer claimed the alleged robbery as a motive. There’s absolutely nothing in that to preclude the killing itself having occurred elsewhere and on a later date.
Based on the evidence you’ve provided, any other “interpretation” is pure conjecture. You, however, have twice presented such conjecture as “fact.” Hence, if there’s a “twisted logic” at work here, it is yours.
So, too, the lie such misrepresentation embodies.
January 17th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
We repeat: Whatsamatta Scrunt? Cat gotcher tongue?